On May 31, Press Secretary Atty. Trixie Cruz-Angeles made a claim saying established facts about Martial Law should be open for debate and questioning. She added there is no need “to come to a conclusion” regarding the matter.

The presidential spokesperson made these statements during ABS-CBN’s Teleradyo exclusive interview with Angeles where they discussed the media’s role in battling disinformation.

CLAIM:

Facts about Martial Law should be open for debate and there is no need to conclude the issue

RATING:

FALSE

FACTS: 

Facts about Martial Law have already been established, and actual past events should be recognized as part of the country’s historical account.

Three court rulings with the decision of finality state that the Marcoses did amass ill-gotten wealth and were ordered to repay the specified amounts. A law was also legislated in recognition of the human rights violations of the late strongman’s dictatorial regime.

The first decision, dated July 15, 2003, the Supreme Court en banc forfeited in favor of the Philippine government the Swiss bank deposits with the aggregate amount of $658 million including interest as of January 31, 2002.

The Marcoses filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied with the finality of the Supreme Court in November 2003.

The second decision, issued by the High Tribunal’s 2nd division on April 25, 2012, forfeited in favor of the Philippine government all assets, properties, and funds worth $3 million, plus interest of Arelma Foundation, a Panamanian firm by the late dictator.

Then-Ilocos Norte Representative, Imelda Marcos and her son, then-Senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr., filed an appeal for reconsideration, however, the High Court upheld its 2012 decision denying their appeal.

The third ruling was issued by the Supreme Court’s first division on January 18, 2017, forfeiting in favor of the Philippine government the pieces of jewelry also dubbed as the ‘Malacañang Collection’. The collection’s worth is estimated to be between $110,055 to $153,089.

All three decisions state that the Marcoses failed to show that these properties were legally acquired. The Supreme Court also noted that the said properties and assets were “manifestly and patently disproportionate” to their lawful salaries as public officials.

Republic Act 10368 or the Human Rights Victims Reparation and Recognition Act was passed during the presidency of Benigno Aquino III. The said law recognizes that there “were victims of summary execution, torture, enforced or involuntary disappearance and other gross human rights violations” under the Marcos regime. The said law also contains provisions for reparations to the victims of human rights abuses during Martial Law.

Amnesty International estimates that 72,000 were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured, 3,240 were killed, and 77 reports of desaparesidos were accounted for during the late dictator’s regime.

WHY THIS MATTERS:

Angeles’ statement is consistent with seeming attempts of the Marcos camp to question and revise long-established and unassailable facts of Martial Law. Proven facts, historians have emphasized, are not open for discourse.

Critics have denounced the rampant internet-based propaganda and historical revisionism used by the Marcos camp even before the elections, as part of its apparent campaign for the political restoration of the late dictator’s family. -Adrian Pulgo  

Altermidya Network is part of #FactsFirstPH which brings together various sectors that are committed to promoting truth in the public space, and exacting accountability on those who harm it with lies. For those interested to join the initiative, email info@factsfirst.ph.

Read more articles here