The proceedings were presided over by Judge Clarissa Superable-Develos.
Duterte’s counsel waived the reading of the Information. However, the defense did not enter a plea, citing its continuing jurisdictional challenge against the case and the Information.
“Upon advice of my counsel, I refuse to enter a plea consistent with our jurisdictional challenge over this case and the Information," Duterte said.
The case traces its origins to an alleged confrontation at Hearsay Gastropub in Barangay Obrero, Davao City, at around 3 a.m. on February 23, 2025.
Patria, a 37-year-old Davao City businessman, initially filed a complaint before the Department of Justice in April 2025 alleging physical injuries and grave threats against Duterte. DOJ
The case now before RTC Branch 52, however, is for grave threats, based on the Information subject of Thursday’s proceedings.
Patria's credibility and circumstances also became a subject of public scrutiny after he himself was arrested in an entrapment operation and subsequently faced charges for qualified trafficking in persons under the Expanded Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act.
Court and media reports identified Patria as the subject of a complaint alleging that he recruited and arranged women for paying male clients.
The prosecution alleged that he acted as a pimp, offering women for sexual services and profiting from the arrangements. His trafficking case was filed before the Davao City RTC and proceeded separately from the complaint against Duterte. City& Local Guides
Another issue surrounding the case is the timing of the release and widespread circulation of the CCTV footage purportedly showing the confrontation between Duterte and Patria.
The alleged incident occurred on February 23, 2025, but the video only became widely circulated publicly in early May 2025, just days before the May 12 midterm elections.
Reports on the complaint and the video appeared beginning May 2, with the footage spreading widely over the following days.
The timing has raised questions about why footage of an incident that occurred more than two months earlier was released and circulated during the final stretch of the election campaign.
The Philippine National Police, for its part, specifically said it did not release the CCTV footage and had no official role in disseminating it.
The video nevertheless became a major political talking point during the campaign. Then, as now, the central legal question remains whether the prosecution can establish the elements of grave threats against Duterte with admissible and credible evidence.
Vice President Sara Duterte's presence at the arraignment underscored her support for her brother as he faces the criminal case before the Davao City court. State& Local Government