My understanding is that without acceleration the "movement" of a body is a relative concept, i.e. we can choose an inertial frame of reference where the body is at rest and there is no property or experiment that can tell us that the body is in movement, because it's a meaningless question.

In the same way, can I say that the movement of earth is arbitrary, just choosing a non-inertial frame of reference? The fact that I need to include fictitious forces to explain for example the movement of a Foucault pendulum, means that the earth rotation is "absolute"? The law of physics should stay the same if I choose the earth as frame of reference, but does that mean that there is nothing absolute about the movement of the earth?