Two surveys, the results of which were released one after the other by OCTA Research and Social Weather Stations last week, seemed to paint complementary pictures: The narrative being foisted on the public is that Filipinos are growing increasingly supportive of the country rejoining the International Criminal Court, or ICC, so it could investigate and try the alleged state-sponsored killings of purported drug personalities during the Duterte administration.

Not so fast, though. A closer look at the surveys reveals a gaping chasm between the numbers they want people to digest as gospel truth in this Lenten season, raising questions about their validity and ultimately the possibility that hidden agendas may lurk beneath the surface of the contrasting polls.

SWS, an institution known for its conservative methodology, reported that its December 2023 poll showed a 5-percent increase in those “strongly approving” of the ICC investigation into Duterte’s “war on drugs,” getting the nod of 25 percent of those surveyed.

Then there’s OCTA, a Johnny-come-lately in the polling world, painting a dramatically different landscape for its survey conducted in the same month, claiming that a staggering 59 percent of Filipinos are in favor of the country rejoining the ICC.

One survey may have asked about approval of the ICC probe, while the other quizzed respondents on the Philippines rejoining the ICC. Would the differing questions have resulted in a big difference between the 25 percent of SWS and OCTA’s 59 percent?

We think not because, in approving the ICC investigation, there would be a supposition that the country has rejoined the ICC. Inversely, for the Philippines to rejoin the ICC presently, it presupposes the underlying reason as the need to prosecute former President Rodrigo Duterte and his generals who carried out his anti-narcotics campaign.

Considering this, there’s such a disconnect between the two surveys for one or both to be believable. The fact is, this statistical discrepancy is jarring. Supposedly conducted in the same period and geographical areas, how can the surveys yield such divergent results? Does the answer lie in the nuances of their methodologies (face-to-face versus online) or the inherent subjectivity of public opinion?

Either way, all surveys can be susceptible to self-selection and manipulation because this enterprise of taking polls is a big business. Further skepticism arises when analyzing the specific questions posed. SWS delved into nuances, asking about approval for investigation and government cooperation, while OCTA presented a binary choice: Rejoining the ICC or not. Framing can significantly influence responses, potentially inflating support in OCTA’s case.

But beyond the technicalities, the true concern lies in the possibility of vested interests working in the background. Both surveys may be assumed to have been commissioned by private entities, and their motivations have remained opaque. Could they be seeking to sway public opinion in favor of a specific outcome? The potential for agenda-driven manipulation, especially in such a politically charged climate, cannot be ignored.

Furthermore, the surveys paint a rosier picture of public awareness than reality might suggest. While SWS reports a rise in “extensive knowledge” of the ICC, it still sits at a paltry 14 percent. This begs the question: Are Filipinos truly informed about the complexities of the ICC process, or are they responding based on emotional cues and media narratives?

Ultimately, these surveys leave more questions than answers. While they offer a snapshot of public sentiment, their stark differences cast a shadow of doubt on their accuracy and objectivity. Are we witnessing a genuine shift in public opinion, or are we being manipulated by unseen forces? Only time, and perhaps further investigations, will reveal the truth behind these vastly diverse numbers.

It is imperative, therefore, to approach these surveys with a critical lens. We must delve deeper into their methodologies, question the motives of their sponsors, and acknowledge the limitations of public opinion research. Only then can we make informed judgments about the true sentiments of the Filipino people and the future of the ICC investigation, if any.

The fate of justice hinges not just on the numbers, but on our collective ability to discern truth from manipulation in this complex and contested political landscape.