THE UNFULFILLED
PROMISE OF THE
FUTURE.
In any of President Ferdinand Marcos’s key
speeches, he was most inspiring when he would talk
about his vision of the New Society, or Bagong Lipunan,
in which every individual Filipino could be free to fulfill
their potential as human beings. In such a society, no
longer would Filipinos live in poverty, hunger, corruption,
mass deception, and violence. After centuries of colonial
oppression, Marcos would declare in his speeches, it was
time for Filipinos to finally live in a way that was worthy
of their dignity. In his declaration of Martial Law, Marcos
made many specific promises in order to achieve his
dream of the New Society. A brilliant statesman and
orator by many accounts, his vision represented a great
aspiration for the Filipino people to enjoy happy and
fulfilling lives.
Martial law refers to the replacement of civil rule
by military rule. This may be characterized by curfews,
the dispensation of military tribunal rulings on civilians,
and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus. The writ of habeas corpus, which in Latin refers
to “having the body”, is a citizen’s protection against
unlawful imprisonment. This is suspended in times of
crisis to expedite justice. In the Philippine Constitution,
the President may exercise his role as Commander-in-
Chief of all Philippine armed forces and act accordingly
to protect the safety of the Filipino people. In cases of
lawless violence, invasion, and rebellion, he may suspend
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or declare
martial law in any part of the nation. To declare martial
law is thus a legal course of action the Chief Executive
may take. Such a power is granted unto the President for
cases where it becomes truly necessary, when the
people’s lives are being threatened and these powers
facilitate the process of securing their safety.
On the night of
September 23, 1972,
Ferdinand Marcos spoke
to the nation by
television and by radio
to make it known that
he had declared Martial
Law in the Philippines.
Marcos even compared
the current state of the
nation to a war, one
which he intended to put
a stop to.
In response, Marcos declared that he would
place the Philippines under a state of
MARTIAL LAW
MARTIAL LAW
Martial Law, as according to the president’s
powers described in the 1935 Philippine
Constitution. Such powers included
command over the Armed Forces of the
Philippines to maintain law and order, as
well as exclusive decision-making powers
for whether or not a person would remain
detained for any crime. Furthermore,
Marcos promised that he would use the
special powers he was given in Martial Law
to lead reforms that would lead the
Philippines to prosperity and peace. Those
who did not oppose his vision would live to
see it come to fruition; on the other hand,
those who dared to offend his rule would
suffer just as any rebel would.
An important feature of any democracy is
the free circulation of information. For
people to properly assess what is
happening in the country, what their
leaders are doing, and how all these affect
them, they have the fundamental right to
obtain and engage this information. Forms
of media like the newspaper, radio, and
television play a vital role in ensuring that
key information reaches the people. This is
also important to democracy: freedom of
information also entails freedom to criticize.
This allows citizens to make better choices
when it comes to selecting their leaders,
and it even challenges leaders to perform
their duties better with competence and
integrity, knowing they will be held
accountable to their people for what they
say and do.

FERDINAND MARCOS
FERDINAND MARCOS
Ferdinand Marcos
FERDINAND MARCOS
FERDINAND MARCOS
FERDINAND MARCOS
In his ascent to power, Marcos was well-aware of
the role that the media played in society, and he exerted
considerable effort to exercise control over it. By shutting
down competing voices and setting up a media outlet
that was under his control, Marcos silenced public
criticism and controlled the information that the people
had access to. By doing so, Marcos had the final say in
whatever passed for the truth.
On September 28, 1972, Marcos issued Letter of
Instruction No. 1, authorizing the military to take over the
assets of major media outlets including the ABS-CBN
network, Channel 5, and various radio stations across
the country. This was within the first week of his
declaration of Martial Law. As justification for this mass
sequestration of media assets, the Letter of Instruction
cited the involvement of these media outlets with the
Communist movement. Specifically, Marcos accused
mainstream media of discrediting the administration, by
propagating news that exposed its weaknesses to feed
the flames of the Communist movement.
Some argue that though abuses were indeed
committed during Martial Law, life was good for those
who did not try to fight the government. In fact, there are
those who claim that the Marcos era was a Golden Age
for the Philippines, characterized by booming
infrastructure and a tiger economy.
Considering how poverty increased, wages for
workers decreased, and prices of goods increased
significantly, one gets a clearer picture of the changes in
lifestyle experienced by the ordinary Filipino.
Progressively earning less while all around them, food
and other basic needs were getting more and more
expensive, one can imagine concretely the real economic
impact that the supposed Golden Age had brought upon
the nation. Our assessment is exacerbated by an
appraisal of the corresponding impacts the Marcos
regime had both on the environment and our economic
standing with other countries. Massive deforestation and
accumulation of international debt plunged the nation’s
resources into peril in more ways than one, leading to
effects we continue to feel and pay for to this day.
No account of Martial Law would be complete
without mention of Cory Aquino’s journey to
presidency. It was Cory’s victory that marked the end
of Marcos’ rule, and for many, it also represented the
triumph of democracy over dictatorship. It was under
the Aquino administration that the 1987 Constitution
was ratified; the constitution limited the presidential
power to declare martial law. For many, Aquino’s
administration signified the restoration of democracy
in the country as it attempted to restore civil liberties
and released the political detainees of Martial Law.
The trouble with Martial Law is that although it
has only one true father, Ferdinand Marcos, it has
many godparents, in the form of those who conspired
to set it in motion, and later, those who kept it
growing stronger and more terrible, encouraging it
with hubris and entitlement, and letting it gorge on
the bodies of the innocent and victimizing thousands
more with torture, rape, and trauma. And amidst the
silence and fear of the ordinary Filipino, Martial Law
became a weapon of abuse against the weak, an
opportunity for self-enrichment for the greedy, and a
channel of disinformation for those who wished to
keep their crimes hidden. But even when Martial Law
was nominally ended in 1981, and more properly
dismantled in 1986, Martial Law has never quite left
our midst. It is hard to speak of the exile of the
monster, much less the slaying of the ghost, when the
architects still remain in our midst, and the
beneficiaries continue to live off the the wealth that
never rightly belonged to them.
This is why we beg the question if Martial Law ever
truly left, or remains lurking in our midst, not just the
bogeyman told to frighten children, but a true beast
waiting to be summoned by its followers and high
priests, to once more prey on the unwary, and if we
are all not careful, devour us all for good. The tragedy
facing us today is that we never understood what
Martial Law really did to us thirty-one years ago,
because we were too afraid to really face the beast.
Perhaps this is so because we did not want to see the
beast among us and within us. Perhaps we were too
afraid to remember, and in so doing, if we are not
careful, allow it to creep back, in new subtle forms,
taking out one-by-one those who could prevent its
return, while convincing the majority that it had never
brought harm before, but only the facade of law and
order. What I fear the most, and the anniversary has
come upon us once more, is that if Martial Law were
to be unleashed upon us once more, we will all be to
blame the second time around.
For we refused to listen to the cries of those we have
lost, refused to learn to the stories that needed to be
told, refused to remember the story of us, the
nightmare that was Martial Law.