It matters to cut through the spin. When something as big as the forced extradition of a former president happens, and yet no one will admit who gave the order, something’s off.

The 11 March arrest and forced transport to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, of former President Rodrigo R. Duterte was like watching a crime drama. It was real life, though, and the implications are scary.

During the 3 April Senate Committee on Foreign Relations second hearing on the controversial arrest, officials kept saying the Department of Justice was involved, but that was like telling the system worked without explaining how.

Justice Secretary Boying Remulla later admitted to having given the clearance to Philippine National Police Chief Gen. Rommel Marbil, then to Criminal Investigation and Detection Group Brig. Gen. Nicolas Torre III to surrender FPRRD to The Hague.

“Has the PNP’s chain of command changed as a new hierarchy emerged at the hearing?” asked retired Police General Filmore Escobal.

He went on to say that a new apparent chain of command has surfaced: 1) The Secretary of Justice grants clearance; 2) the Secretary of Interior relays this to the Chief PNP; and 3) the Chief PNP gives the order to the CIDG Director.

This differs from the traditional military-style chain where orders flow directly from:

The President as Commander-in-Chief to the Chief PNP, to subordinate commanders, and then to local chiefs.

When Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was arrested in 2011, we knew then Justice Secretary Leila de Lima had signed the order. When the US raided Osama bin Laden’s compound, President Obama publicly took responsibility. But here? Silence. And silence in politics usually means someone’s hiding something.

There may be three bad possibilities for the secrecy.

First, the President may not have actually ordered it. If Marcos Jr. did approve it, why not just say so? Unless he didn’t, and someone else gave the green light. That’s a huge problem because in our system, the President is supposed to be the boss. If police and DoJ officials acted without his say-so, who’s really running things?

Second, foreign pressure may have played a role. The ICC wanted Duterte. If someone in the Philippine government quietly helped enforce its warrant (later found out to be just a diffusion order from Interpol), that’s a major sovereignty issue. Remember when the US pressured Thailand to extradite Viktor Bout, the “Merchant of Death”? That’s how powerful countries flex on weaker ones. Are we letting outsiders dictate on our justice system?

Third, shadow powers may be in charge. Maybe it wasn’t the President, or even the DoJ. Maybe someone outside government — a political kingmaker, a business tycoon, or even foreign intelligence — pulled the strings. Sounds like a conspiracy theory? Maybe. But remember when Duterte himself admitted that a “Chinese oligarch” had tried to bribe him? Power in the Philippines doesn’t always flow through official channels.

Then there is the scariest part — if the PNP or Armed Forces of the Philippines acted on orders of someone other than the President, then our government institutions are broken. Imagine if tomorrow a general decides to arrest a senator because a “private citizen” told him to. That’s how coups start.

In 2006, Thailand’s military staged a coup because they claimed the Prime Minister was “controlled by outsiders.” Sound familiar? If our own forces take orders from unnamed figures, we’re in trouble.

Let’s assume, for argument’s sake, that the PNP acted on orders from someone other than the President. That’s a crisis in itself. The police and military answer to civilian authority — specifically the Commander-in-Chief. If they took directives from an unofficial source, then our institutions are compromised. It would mean that loyalty isn’t to the Constitution, but to whoever has the most leverage.

This isn’t about Duterte’s guilt or innocence — this is about democracy itself. When officials refuse to name who ordered a former president’s boarding, they’re hiding something and exposing how broken our system is.

If the government can’t (or won’t) say who authorized the move, how can we trust anything else they do?

Think about this: in January 2001, the military withdrew support from then president Joseph Estrada based on people power, not constitutional process.

Now history might repeat itself. If no one admits to the Duterte boarding order, it means someone is avoiding accountability, which is unacceptable in a democracy.

The public demands an answer. Because if we don’t, we’re accepting a dangerous precedent: that power can be exercised in the dark, that institutions can be weaponized without oversight, and that the people no longer have the right to know who governs them.

Who gave the order? The refusal tells us everything we need to know — and none of it is good.

If they won’t tell us who’s in charge, it’s because the truth is worse than the speculation. And that is terrifying.