Martial Law was a bold and grandiose plan to steer the Philippines into a developed country in the mold of the East Asian economic tigers
Allow me to give a different view on the Martial Law era. One, Martial Law did not happen in the Philippines alone but also in many parts of the world. Though it happened in the Philippines quite early, others followed suit, notably in Chile in 1973 and Argentina in 1976.
Two, unlike martial law in other countries where generals or military chiefs took over power from civilian leaders, Ferdinand Marcos was a politician for a long time, having been elected to Congress, the Senate, and finally the presidency. Though it may be conceded that he imposed Martial Law with the aid of his top generals (the so-called Rolex 12 with the exception of Danding Cojuangco, who was not part of the military establishment), the military was not the sole power holder. There were equally powerful sectors within the government such as the so-called crony capitalists and the technocrats.
And three, Martial Law, as we know it, was not conceived by Marcos and his close advisers alone. Rather it was a development plan aimed to leapfrog laggard and stagnating economies of many Third World countries into modernity in the mold of East Asian economic tigers like Taiwan and South Korea.
After the Second World War, there were attempts to reconstruct poor countries (LDCs or less developed countries as they were called then) by replicating the Western model. This was the heyday of “modernization” where LDCs were to follow the organizational structures along with the political and social values of the West. Economically, LDCs were to be assisted by international financial institutions and multilateral aid agencies through grants, aid, and loans to make them into attractive havens for foreign investment, for this model required massive doses of capital infusion.
By the mid-60s, however, the reverse was happening. Economic growth was nowhere to be found as the economies of LDCs languished. It was at this point when the Dependency School led by Andre Gunderfrank was gaining currency for they had a very convincing explanation for this phenomenon. As they claimed, the very model of growth prescribed to poor countries was the culprit because it mired them in debt (Development of Underdevelopment).
However, critics and non-believers called attention to a weak state that was being buffeted by strong social forces such as rent-seeking elements (oligarchs) and armed insurgency. The model, so they say, could not thrive on political instability.
What was needed, Samuel Huntington and his colleagues argued, was a strong state that can produce a controlled political environment for the economy to grow. Thus the antidote was the type of capitalism prevalent in East Asia that came to be known as the developmental state.
One important feature of this model is authoritarianism or the presence of one-man or one-party rule.
Bold, grandiose plan
In short, Martial Law was a bold and grandiose plan to steer the Philippines into a developed country in the mold of the East Asian economic tigers. As a highly intelligent person and brilliant lawyer, Marcos was not only well prepared to handle this task, he was the most qualified. Given the violent nature of local politics in Ilocos, Marcos’ propensity to combine outright violence on his opponents (his entry into politics was the Nalundasan murder case) with persuasion and coercion made him a cut above the rest of other postwar presidents. Except the current one.
Marcos addressed the concerns of foreigners wary of the uncertainties of doing business in the country by changing the regulatory regime – in ownership, requirements to do business, repatriation of profits, etc.
At the same time, the government pushed for a strong manufacturing sector with cheap and abundant labor, long working hours and a ban on unionism. The venture paid off.
For example, from a paltry P1.68 million in 1968, Japanese investments ballooned to P639.511 million in 1976. Also, the years of Martial Law coincided with a boom in agricultural prices, as some economists have noted. Sugar prices in the US shot from a mere 2 to 3 US cents per kilo to 67 cents. Coconut, which sold at $120 in 1972, jumped to $223 in 1973 before attaining an all-time high of $535 in 1974.
Even the heavens seemed to cooperate. Good weather conditions in 1974 and 1975 made possible the remarkable entry of high yield varieties (IR8 or the miracle rice) that enabled the Philippines to attain self-sufficiency.
Everything seemed to be going well that it galvanized support for the Martial Law regime. Supporters of the regime were quick to deduce that human rights abuses were a small price to pay for this economic windfall. Many turned a blind eye to the plight of political prisoners, from traditional politicians like Ninoy Aquino to CPP-NPA members, and other victims of human rights violations for they were, after all, a reminder of the anarchy that characterized the old society!
Many, it seemed, were willing to forego political rights for the sake of economic benefits.
MARTIAL LAW MEMORIES. A man stands among photos taken of human rights victims during Martial Law, displayed at an experiential museum inside a military camp in Manila on February 24, 2016. Photo by Ted Aljibe/AFP
Economic hardships
But then the bubble burst. Commodity prices for agricultural export crops suddenly plummeted. Oil prices spiraled out of control, raising the prices of basic goods as well as transportation. These economic hardships only underscored the contradictions of the Marcos regime and its vulnerability.
Take for example the case of land reform. One of the first decrees Marcos promulgated after the declaration of Martial Law was the emancipation of farmers from the bondage of the soil.
A few weeks later, Presidential Decree 27 took effect. It would finally make farmers owners of the land they tilled. Never mind if the law covered only tenanted rice and corn lands, that the retention limit was 7 hectares, later revised to 5 hectares if non-irrigated and 3 hectares if irrigated, that dispossessed land owners were paid in full by the farmers, and the titling process was tedious. The change from share cropping and leasehold systems to ownership was, in itself, a milestone.
But by the late 70s, the contradictions were becoming apparent. The high-yield varieties introduced by the Masagana 99 program were highly dependent on fertilizers and pesticides (derived from both petroleum and chemical derivatives and manufactured by mostly multinational companies and marketed by Filipino partners), so much so that when oil prices spiraled, the cost of production was so high that farming no longer became a profitable enterprise.
The Marcos regime also introduced a cooperative system called the Samahang Nayon, a prerequisite for becoming a beneficiary of land reform. Similar to the Saemaul Undong movement in South Korea, collective action on farming activities was seen as desirable and also necessary for borrowing money from a rural bank, for example.
But a good number of peasants backed out of the program when they learned that each member had to assume the payments of a defaulting member. Soon they realized that while the Samahang Nayon had good intentions, the real objective was to ensure loan payments to banks.
Philippines: ‘devastated, bankrupt’
It may be argued that these are design flaws which could not be blamed on Marcos. But then in 1974, Marcos signed into law General Order 47 and PD 472 which promoted corporate farming. Under the guise of self-sufficiency in rice and corn, big business companies could now involve themselves in farming to feed their employees.
Consequently, they competed for arable lands with farmers and undermined the land reform program. As it turned out, rice and corn farmers were in a better situation than those outside the coverage of land reform. From 1971 until 1982, coconut farmers were taxed 4 types of levies, all with the intent of improving the copra industry.
The levies were however used by Marcos’ cronies to purchase holdings in some of the most profitable companies in the Philippines. Bowing to the sugar barons’ argument that their lands could not be covered by land reform due to the country’s obligation to meet its quota in the international market, the Marcos regime turned a blind eye to the plight of sugar workers. The images of sacadas when sugar prices plummeted became one of the most effective leitmotif against the Martial Law regime.
PD 27 may have ameliorated the plight of peasants in Central Luzon, long the hotbed of peasant revolts. But Marcos’ governance saw the intensification of agrarian unrest in other areas – the coconut producing provinces in Southern Luzon and sugarlands in Negros. These examples point to failures not of design but to the depravity of crony capitalism.
By the time Marcos left Malacañang in 1986, the Philippines was devastated and bankrupt. The legacies that Martial Law left behind still reverberates today. It was not too long ago that a huge chunk of the government’s budget had to be allotted for debt repayment than on needed infrastructure and basic services.
Kleptocracy became the new norm in government service, and when you steal, steal big so you can turn the law in your favor. Extrajudicial killings also became the preferred mode of settling disputes.
In the end, this development plan could have made us an economic tiger. For this was the order of the day and Marcos, with his vast array of powers and resources, was the one leader who could have pulled it off.
We paid a heavy price, and after all the sacrifices, we found ourselves consigned to the dustbin. The Koreans sacrificed a lot too in this quest, paid a heavy price and in so doing, attained First World status.
Rappler puts together a series of video features and interviews about the Martial Law
MANILA, Philippines – On Wednesday, September 21, the Philippines commemorates the 44th anniversary of Martial Law, declared by former president Ferdinand Marcos in 1972. (READ: Martial Law, here we go again)
Rappler looks back at the period characterized by the muzzling of the press, the stifling of basic freedoms, and the arrest of over 30,000 Filipinos.
2. What if martial law were still in effect today?
A lot of people look back to the Marcos years with nostalgia. In this animation video, Rappler explores this possibility – the biggest “what if?” question today. (READ: Martial Law 101)
3. ‘Lucky day’: Surviving torture during martial law
Two torture victims share their horrific experiences during martial law.
Bayan Muna representative Neri Colmenares talks about his torture in a deadly game of chance. Former political detainee Bonifacio “Boni” Ilagan was not only tortured, his activist sister was also raped and executed along with 9 other activists.
4. The People Power Experiential Museum
During the 30th anniversary of the People Power Revolution, the EDSA experiential museum was set up to engage the youth and give them a tactile glimpse into the martial law years. (IN PHOTOS: Inside the powerful EDSA 30 experiential museum)
5. The last session: Serge Osmeña leaves the building
Meet Senator Serge Osmeña III, three-time senator, self-proclaimed liberal and martial law detainee was among a handful of political detainees who had escaped from a Marcos prison. Here, he talks about learning from the past.
6. Nene Pimentel reacts to youth’s views on Martial Law and People Power
A statesman during the Marcos administration, Aquilino “Nene” Pimentel Jr was a political prisoner during martial law. In this video, he gives the lowdown on the Marcos days, the EDSA revolution and democracy.
7. Sr Mary John Mananzan reacts to youth’s views on Martial Law and People Power
Sister Mary John Mananzan, a nun of the Benedictine Order, was a familiar face among street parliamentarians in the prelude to the 1986 People Power uprising. In this video, she banishes some myths about the dark years.
8. Raissa Robles: ‘We never knew extent of repression under martial law’
Journalist Raissa Robles “Marcos Martial Law: Never Again,” says her book is not an exhaustive history but a “short and compact introduction” to the atrocities and torture committed by the Marcos regime.
9. Martial law years the best? Facts, figures prove otherwise – Robredo
Vice President Leni Robredo brings out the ammunition. Let the numbers speak.
10. Former CNN Beijing bureau chief Jaime FlorCruz talk about the Martial Law
We know him as former CNN Beijing bureau chief. But did you know that Jaime FlorCruz ended up living in China for 43 years because of Martial Law?
11. Sandro Marcos: Comparing my father with my grandfather doesn’t make sense
During the election season, Senator Bongbong Marcos’ son Sandro says his father’s message resonates with Filipinos because we want to move forward.
12. Imee Marcos calls for unity
Imee Marcos tells Ilocanos during the celebration of her father’s 99th birthday, “Let’s not make any condemnations now because our only role today is to bury the dead.”
Having served a strongman dictator, the late president Ferdinand Marcos, former Senators Juan Ponce Enrile and Francisco Tatad do not see incumbent President Rodrigo Duterte doing another martial law rule in the country.
Enrile and Tatad were former defense and information Ministers, respectively, during the Marcos’ martial law regime in the country. Both are now retired from politics.
On the other hand, President Duterte has openly expressed his admiration to the late president Marcos who he described demonstrated “brilliant leadership” of the country during his close to 20 years of rule.
Following the Sept. 2 terrorist bombing that killed 15 people and injured 60 others at a night market in Davao City, President Duterte declared the entire country under a state of lawlessness. Fears were raised that President Duterte is eyeing the re-imposition of martial law in the country as a next move.
Enrile, who is regarded as the real architect of the martial law apparatus of Marcos, laughed off such fears as nothing but a figment of imagination. Tatad, who read Proclamation 1081 declaring martial law all over the country on Sept. 21, 1972, shared Enrile’s amusement to such scenario of President Duterte doing a Marcos.
Enrile and Tatad were one in saying the country’s 1987 Constitution has effectively defanged the powers of the President to declare martial law.
With strongman-rule image of President Duterte, Enrile finds funny the claims by sworn enemies of the incumbent administration to stir fears of martial law after state of lawlessness.
“What seems to be is not the reality,” Enrile said and chuckled at his own quip.
Tatad could not agree more at Enrile’s attempt to sound enigmatic as senior elder statesman. Much younger than his former collegue at the Senate, the 67-year old Tatad cited the need to provide light and guidance on a fair account of Philippine history as presented to generations of Filipino people.
The late president Marcos ruled for almost two decades that were marked by widespread human rights abuses by the police and military authorities, not to mention amassing of ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses and their so-called crony businessmen.
Ex-Senators Enrile and Tatad were among the featured guests at Kapihan sa Manila Bay last Wednesday when we also discussed about the renewed national debate on the burial of the late president Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani in Taguig City.
The debate was ignited anew after President Duterte gave the official go-signal to allow Marcos burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani which by its name is reserved for war heroes, that include ex-presidents of the country. The Marcos family originally set the burial rites this coming Sept. 18, Sunday.
However, anti-Marcos groups filed petitions against it before the Supreme Court (SC). Acting on the petition, the SC issued a temporary injunction last month pending resolution of the issue. While still conducting oral arguments against the Marcos burial, the High Court issued another status quo ante order effective until Oct. 18.
In effect, the SC status quo ante order means the waxed remains of the late president would stay at its present site in refrigerated crypt in Batac, Ilocos Norte.
Among the petitioners included the group SELDA, or Samahan ng nga Ex-Detainees Laban sa Detention at Aresto, an organization of former political prisoners convicted and jailed for common crimes during the martial law regime.
Our equally articulate guests at the Kapihan sa Manila Bay led by SELDA national coordinator Aglipayan Fr. Dionito Cabillas and ex-labor leader Danilo Mallari, a human rights (HR) compensation claimant among the HR victims during martial law faced off with Enrile and Tatad.
Mallari narrated in detail how he suffered during the Marcos regime as a 37-year-old labor leader who was among those tortured and detained by the military for their alleged seditious activities. Mallari, now 67 years old, has a pending compensation claims for HR victims he filed in Philippine court in 2001.
Todate, Mallari rued, he has yet to receive a single centavo from the Congress-created HR Victims’ Claims Board headed by the country’s first woman Police General now retired, Lina Sarmiento. Fr. Cabillas, for his part, reiterated SELDA’s stand that the ends of justice for HR victims will not be written off by any compensation from the State. But if Marcos will be buried at the Libingan, Fr. Cabillas pointed out, it would be injustice again for the martial law HR victims.
Naturally, this elicited vehement arguments from both Enrile and Tatad in defense of the late president. The two Marcos ex-ministers chorused the fact that it is the State that pays for the compensation on alleged HR abuses. Therefore, they argued, it was not Marcos but the alleged HR abuses committed were in the performance of the duties of the State to protect the nation from lawless elements during the martial law regime.
Enrile and Tatad reminded Filipinos at the time Marcos issued Proclamation 1081 there was clear and present danger posed by communist insurgents and other heavily armed groups operating all over the country wanting to take over control of the government.
On a lighter note, Fr.mCabillas immediately told us during our breakfast forum that the Aglipayan Church considers Enrile as a member of their flock. The 92-year-old Senator is only too happy to confirm that he was indeed baptized at age five years old in Aglipayan rites at their Church that still stands in Cagayan. But Enrile said he was rechristened in Catholic rites after his adoption.
Other than presiding his own coffee shop talks, what’s keeping Enrile busy these days after his last stint at the Senate? “I’m raising crabs,” Enrile disclosed. He wisecracked he is not promoting the “crab mentality” industry, or pulling down others like crabs do to each other.
Even as they are both already on their twilight years, so to speak, Enrile and Tatad pledged to continue their public service in correcting falsehoods peddled 44 years after martial law was imposed in the country. The two ex-Marcos ministers are speaking for the much-maligned martial law regime be given at least its side of the story for more fair accounts of the country’s history.
UPDATED) Former president Ferdinand Marcos died in 1989 while in exile in Hawaii. How did his remains end up in his hometown of Batac in Ilocos Norte?
MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – President Rodrigo Duterte allowed the transfer of the remains of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos from his home province of Ilocos Norte to the Libingan ng mga Bayani (Heroes’ Cemetery), drawing both criticism and support from Filipinos.
Three months since Duterte’s order and two rounds of oral arguments, the Supreme Court cleared all legal obstacles to a Marcos burial by a vote of 9-5 on Wednesday, November 8. (READ: Supreme Court allows hero’s burial for Marcos)
People who oppose the burial of Marcos cite his 21-year rule as Philippine president, marred by human rights abuses, corruption, and oppression of dissent.
Duterte insists that his decision to allow the transfer and burial was based solely on Marcos being a former soldier. This makes him eligible for interment at the Libingan, according to the guidelines set by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). (READ: Who can be buried at Heroes’ Cemetery? AFP explains rules)
The National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP), however, disputed Marcos’ record as a soldier during World War II, stating in a 26-page pamphlet that the record is “fraught with myths, factual inconsistencies, and lies.” (READ: NHCP objects to Marcos burial at Libingan ng mga Bayani)
Victims of Martial Law also filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to stop the planned hero’s interment while more than a thousand people gathered at the Luneta to express their opposition to Duterte’s plan.
Two rounds of oral arguments were heard by the High Court.
On the first day of oral arguments on August 31, SC justices gave significant attention to human rights, the law creating the national pantheon (RA 289), the rules governing the Libingan ng mga Bayani, and Marcos’ record as a soldier.
On September 7, the oral arguments focused on whether or not public funds should be used to fulfill Duterte’s campaign promise and the totality of laws that should be applied in deciding for or against the burial, among others.
After the second round of oral arguments, the SC ordered both sides to submit their memoranda within 20 days. The justices also extended the status quo ante order to November 8.
People who are for Marcos’ transfer to the Heroes’ Cemetery say it is “time to move on.” It’s been 27 years since his death but the debate continues.
But how did Marcos’ “well-preserved body” end up in Batac, Ilocos Norte if he died while in exile in Hawaii? Here’s how it happened.
Death in Hawaii
After 3 years in exile with his family and allies, the former president died on September 28, 1989 in Hawaii at the age of 72.
Then president Corazon Aquino, who became president following the People Power Revolution in 1986, did not allow Marcos’ body to be flown back to the Philippines for burial.
In a statement, she said that “in the interest of the safety of those who will take the death of Marcos in widely and passionately conflicting ways, and for the tranquility of the state and the order of society, the remains of Ferdinand E. Marcos will not be allowed to be brought to our country until such time as the government, be it under this administration or the succeeding one, shall otherwise decide.”
Monsignor Domingo Nebres (L) reads his benediction in Hawaii as the body of the late Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos is removed 01 September 1993 from the mausoleum where he lay in state since dying in exile in 1989. Marcos’ body is scheduled to be returned to the Philippines on 05 Septtember. / AFP PHOTO / GEORGE LEE
The US Federal Aviation Administration, meanwhile, issued an order preventing the operation of any aircraft carrying Marcos’ body from the United States to the Philippines, then US State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher was quoted as saying in a 1989 Los Angeles Times report.
During the last months of the former dictator’s life, the Marcos family filed a petition to overturn the ban by the administration. The Supreme Court, however, dismissed the petition, stating that Aquino “did not act arbitrarily or with grave abuse of discretion” with her decision.
The High Court decision was released on September 15, 1989 or less than 15 days before Marcos died.
Due to the government ban, Marcos’ body was interred in a private mausoleum at the Valley of the Temples Memorial Park which overlooked the Byodo-In temple in Hawaii.
According to a Chicago Tribune report in 1989, the funeral Mass for Marcos in the state’s largest Roman Catholic church was attended by “more than 1,500 people.”
Former first lady Imelda Marcos surrounded by journalists 09 August 1993 checks the progress on the construction of a concrete mausoleum that will house the remains of her husband, the late-strongman Ferdinand Marcos. Imelda announced that Marcos’ remains will be brought back here to his hometown from Hawaii 07 Sept. Marcos’ body will be placed in a glass coffin designed for public viewing. / AFP PHOTO / MIGUELITO PARCERO
Arrival in Ilocos
Imelda Marcos and her family returned from exile to the Philippines in 1991. The body of the family patriarch, who reportedly wished to be buried in his home country, was left in Hawaii.
In 1992, the Aquino government again barred the return of Marcos’ remains until after the May elections, fearing that it could spark more election-related violence. Imelda was then running for president but placed only 5th out of 7 candidates.
A year after in 1993, then president Fidel V. Ramos gave the go signal for Marcos’ remains to be flown back to the Philippines.
The flag-draped coffin of former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos is carried to a stage by his son Ferdinand Marcos Jr. (R wearing black armband) and retired military generals at Laoag’s airport in Philippines 07 September 1993 after being flown to Laoag, the Philippines from Honolulu. Imelda Marcos with two daughters are seen behind the generals at left. / AFP PHOTO / ROMEO GACAD
He, however, refused to give full state honors to the former president who put the country under Martial Law.
Marcos’ body was flown via a chartered Continental Airlines jet direct to his home province, Ilocos Norte.
On September 7, 1993, 4 years since his death, Marcos’ body inside a “black-lacquered, gold-handled casket” finally returned to the country he ruled for more than two decades.
The direct flight, according to former interior secretary Rafael Alunan III in 2016, was part of the deal signed by the Philippine government and the Marcos family.
School children wave Philippine flags with a portrait of the late Ferdinand Marcos on them as a hearse carrying Mr. Marcos’ coffin travels in a motorcade through his hometown of Batak, in the Philippines, 09 September 1993 before he is taken to his final resting place. Marcos’ remains arrived 07 September from Honolulu where he died in exile in 1989. / AFP PHOTO / ROMEO GACAD
Thousands of supporters, mostly Ilocanos, welcomed the remains of Apo Marcos at the Laoag International Airport in a ceremony described by the New York Times as “a macabre and festive spectacle.”
There was a lot of “singing, dancing, and various rituals,” according to news reports then, as his casket was placed on a platform for all to see.
Aside from the ordinary Marcos supporters, government officials who served during his administration, along with other allies, were also present when his body arrived.
Former first lady Imelda Marcos sprinkles holy water on the flag-draped coffin of her late husband Ferdinand Marcos during memorial mass at the Saint William Cathedral in Philippines while her family watches 07 September 1993 after the late strongman’s remains arrived in his northern Philippine hometown of Laoag from Honolulu. Marcos was deposed by a popular revolt in 1986 and died in exile Honolulu three years later. The government has barred a Manila burial for Mr. Marcos. / AFP PHOTO / STR
The casket was then transported using a horse-drawn caisson to the Laoag Cathedral as huge crowds gathered along the roads leading to the church.
Since the government then refused to allow him to be buried in the Heroes’ Cemetery, Marcos’ body was interred in a glass crypt in the Marcos Museum and Mausoleum in Batac City, Ilocos Norte.
Through the years, tourists and loyalists alike have flocked to the museum to view the body of Marcos.
The embalmed body of former Philippine strongman Ferdinand Marcos is seen through a sealed glass coffin inside a dimly lighted mausoleum 11 September 1993 in his northern Philippine hometown. The government denied a Manila burial to the ousted president who ruled the country for 20 years. Mr. Marcos died in exile in Hawaii in 1989 after he was ousted by a popular revolt in 1986. / AFP PHOTO / ROMEO GACAD
The placement of the late dictator’s embalmed body in a transparent crypt, according to his family, is temporary and only until the government finally decides to allow his burial in the Heroes’ Cemetery.
With the decision finally out, it is a matter of time before the Libingan ng mga Bayani becomes Marcos’ final resting place. – Rappler.com
(3rd UPDATE) The communication channel of the Philippine government is accused of rewriting history and downplaying the dark days of Martial Law under Ferdinand Marcos
MANILA, Philippines (3rd UPDATE) – In just the span of a few hours on Sunday, September 11, the government’s Official Gazette posted a photo of Ferdinand Marcos on Facebook, edited the photo’s caption, deleted the photo altogether, and then reposted the photo with a shorter caption.
The changes were prompted by a barrage of comments from social media users, who accused the Philippine government of historical revisionism and downplaying the Martial Law era under Marcos, which saw rampant human rights abuses and corruption.
The Official Gazette’s photo was meant to be a tribute for the late dictator on his 99th birth anniversary. It featured a quote, taken from Marcos’ inaugural address on December 30, 1965, that read: “There are many things we do not want about our world. Let us not just mourn them. Let us change them.”
It wasn’t the quote, however, that angered social media users.
It was the last part of the original caption, which read: “In 1972, he declared Martial Law to suppress a communist insurgency and secessionism in Mindanao. In 1986, Marcos stepped down from the presidency to avoid bloodshed during the uprising that came to be known as ‘People Power.'” (READ: Martial Law 101: Things you should know)
After receiving negative comments, the Official Gazette then removed 3 words – “to avoid bloodshed.”
Facebook’s Edit History feature showed the difference between the first and the second captions:
The post, however, continued to receive negative comments, with people pointing out that the government seemed to set aside the suffering of Filipinos under the Marcos regime.
The Official Gazette then deleted the photo.
It later reposted the same photo, but with a shorter caption. This shorter caption made no mention of Martial Law or of Marcos’ ouster through the 1986 People Power Revolution. It merely said that the late strongman was “the longest-serving President of the country for almost 21 years.”
This triggered another flurry of comments from social media users.
Very early on Monday, September 12, the caption was edited yet again.
This time, the caption mentioned the declaration of Martial Law in 1972, and that Marcos “went to exile to the United States in 1986 at the height of the People Power Revolution.”
The latest caption ended by saying that Marcos was “succeeded by Corazon Cojuangco Aquino.”
Below is the latest Edit History comparing the most recent version of the caption with the one right before it.
‘Not revising history’
On Sunday, shortly before midnight, the Official Gazette issued a statement, denying it committed historical revisionism.
“The Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines is the repository of government documents as stated by law. We are not in the business of revising history. We only convey what is documented in the official records,” said the statement, attributed to Presidential Communications Office (PCO) Assistant Secretary Ramon Cualoping III.
Cualoping added: “We continually update materials to keep it as historically accurate as possible. The Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines is devoid of any political color and affiliations.”
The statement was met with more negative reactions, with Facebook users saying that the Official Gazette’s photo caption was clearly “pro-Marcos” and “conveniently left out key info” about the dictatorship.
Abuses, corruption
Marcos had cited the increasing threat of communism to justify the declaration of martial law. According to his diary entry for September 22, 1972, the alleged ambush of then defense secretary Juan Ponce Enrile made the “martial law proclamation a necessity.”
According to Amnesty International, about 70,000 people were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured, and 3,240 were killed during Martial Law from 1972 to 1981.
Various estimates also put the Marcoses’ ill-gotten wealth at between $5 billion and $10 billion.
The late dictator’s son and namesake, former senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr, has repeatedly said his family will not apologize for his father’s rule.
The Official Gazette’s controversial Facebook post comes amid heated debate on whether or not Marcos should be buried at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (Heroes’ Cemetery) – a battle that has reached all the way to the Supreme Court.
The Official Gazette of the Philippines drew flak on Sunday evening after posting a graphic commemorating the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos’ 99th birth anniversary, with some social media users accusing the government outfit of historical revisionism.
On the graphic was a photo of Marcos with a quote from his inauguration in 1965 superimposed near the bottom. This image was shared three different times, with the Official Gazette editing the accompanying caption from three paragraphs down to one.
The initial caption read:
Celebrating his 99th birthdate, Ferdinand Marcos started his political career in 1949 as a Representative of the Second District of Ilocos Norte. 10 years thereafter, Marcos was able to secure a seat as a member of the Philippine Senate in 1959 and was elected Senate President in 1963. Ferdinand Marcos became the 10th President of Philippines in 1965. He was the longest-serving President of the country for almost 21 years.
Marcos was the first post-independence president to be re-elected in 1969. In 1972, he declared Martial Law to suppress a communist insurgency and secessionism in Mindanao.
In 1986, Marcos stepped down from the presidency to avoid bloodshed during the uprising that came to be known as “People Power”.
The post was met acerbically by social media users, criticizing the wording used by the Official Gazette as “historical revisionism”. The hashtag #superficialgazette was used to parody its tone.
Shortly afterwards, the Official Gazette revised the post and removed “to avoid bloodshed” in the last paragraph, but the post continued to attract negative comments from social media users.
The Official Gazette ultimately removed the paragraphs containing both Martial Law and People Power, but not before users had the chance to take screencaps.
Ferdinand Marcos started his political career in 1949 as a Representative of the Second District of Ilocos Norte. 10 years thereafter, Marcos was able to secure a seat as a member of the Philippine Senate in 1959 and was elected Senate President in 1963. Ferdinand Marcos became the 10th President of Philippines in 1965. He was the longest-serving President of the country for almost 21 years, declaring Martial Law in 1972 then went to exile to the United States in 1986 at the height of the People Power Revolution. He was succeeded by Corazon Cojuangco Aquino.
On its third revision, people on social media continued to chastise the post.
“Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines, please don’t do this to us. In your earlier post, the term ‘Martial Law’ was there and now it’s not there anymore?” Facebook user Jules Guiang wrote.
He added, “I understand that the loyalists claim that his ‘Martial Law’ wasn’t bad for the country, but with this move, are we erasing it in history that Marcos declared Martial Law and instead just say that he served the longest in history as President. No. Don’t do that.
“Again, we both work in the government, we support CHANGE but not this kind of ridiculous change.”
“This is slightly better because you used facts.. but still. Please don’t omit. You have the moral responsibility AS THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES to inform Filipinos of the truth. You’re not lying, but you’re not being truthful as well. Wag kayong funny funny,” Alecanda Mohica Pascua wrote.
“Damage has been done. Own up to the original text accompanying this post and issue an apology to the Filipino people for twisting the truth, making a mockery of our history, and dishonoring the lives of the thousands of people murdered, tortured, and made to disappear during Martial Law,” chimed Naomi Fontanos.
Late Sunday, Assistant Secretary Ramon L. Cualoping III of the Presidential Communicationa Operations Office responded to the criticisms and released a statement which said that the Official Gazette of the Philippines conveyed “what is documented in the official records” and was not “in the business of revising history”.
