Of course, Mr. Duterte should be condemned first and foremost for his blatant violations of human rights. But the ability of a democracy to repair the damage caused by bad leaders requires the survival of critical democratic institutions, a free press among them.

Like other populists sitting in presidential palaces around the world, and there are lamentably many today, Mr. Duterte had, at least until recently, enjoyed solid support, in his case from an electorate that has endured too much crime and corruption. An independent press is essential to explain why mass extrajudicial killings cannot be the right answer and to prepare the way for the restoration of the rule of law.

The action against Rappler is only the tip of Mr. Duterte’s assault on his media critics. His supporters have also made the Philippines a swamp of fake news, conspiracy theories and online harassment. Mr. Duterte has refused to condemn the flood and has denied any involvement in its creation. Predictably, he also denied that the revocation of Rappler’s license was political, and he said he didn’t care whether or not Rappler continued to operate.

Yet the S.E.C. decision followed Mr. Duterte’s claim that Rappler had “American ownership,” which is the core of the case against the site (the Philippine Constitution bars foreign ownership of Philippine media). Rappler notes that it has reported that it has two foreign investors, but it says that they have no ownership stake and no control of the website.