Professional Documents
Culture Documents
RESEARCH PAPER
IN
HISTORY I
SUBMITTED BY:
Romarie R. Badilla
BSED 2 (Math)
SUBMITTED TO:
Sir Calinawan
HISTORY
INSTRUCTOR
THE
MARTIAL
LAW
This began almost 10 years of military rule in the country. Marcos formally
ended Martial Law on January 17, 1981, but it was not until 1986 when democracy
was restored – after the dictator and his family were forced into exile, overthrown
by a popular uprising that came to be known as the People Power Revolution.
When Marcos signed Proclamation 1081 on September 21, 1972, he cited the
communist threat as justification. His diary, meanwhile, said the proclamation of
Martial Law became a "necessity", following the supposed ambush of then defense
secretary Juan Ponce Enrile.
There were subsequent reports that said the ambush was staged, with the
Official Gazette citing Enrile's admission in 1986 that it was faked to justify the
imposition of Martial Law. (READ: Martial Law 101: Things you should know)
There were also indications that the plan to declare Martial Law had long
been in the works. According to the Official Gazette, several people had received
prior information about Marcos' plan. The late dictator had also hinted at it in his
address to the Philippine Military Academy Alumni Association as early as May 17,
1969 – more than 3 years before the actual declaration.
Through various general orders, Marcos effectively put the entire power of
government under the rule of one man: his own. He was to lead the nation and
direct the operation of the entire government. He ordered the armed forces to
prevent or suppress any act of rebellion. Curfew hours were enforced, group
assemblies were banned, privately-owned media facilities shuttered. (READ:
Marcos’ Martial Law orders)
There are those who hail the discipline and supposed order of the New
Society, as Marcos called it, and considered that period as among the "best years"
of the Philippines.
Among the myths: that the Philippines enjoyed a golden age under the
Marcoses. Various reports and historical accounts debunk this; while it is true that
infrastracture spending increased during that period, it came at a staggering cost:
plunging the Philippines in billions of dollars in debt. From $8.2 billion in 1977, the
country's debt ballooned to $24.4 billion in 1982 – or within a period of just 5
years. (READ: Marcos years marked 'golden age' of PH economy? Look at the data)
The Marcoses also plundered the country's coffers, with various estimates
putting the amount at between $5 billion to $10 billion.
The Presidential Commission on Good Government, the body going after the
Marcoses' ill-gotten wealth, is still recovering this money; over the past 30 years,
at least P170 billion have been recovered.
Aside from the billions in illegally amassed wealth, human rights abuses were
rampant during those days. (READ: #NeverAgain: Martial Law stories young people
need to hear)
Historian Alfred McCoy wrote about Marcos' elite torture units, whose
specialty was psychological torture and humiliation aside from the physical pain.
It has been many years since then, but the victims have not forgotten –
especially as the Marcoses have neither acknowledged their crimes nor made
reparations for their sins.
At the Supreme Court hearing on the proposed Marcos burial at the Heroes'
Cemetery, victims were asked to speak before the Court to recount their
horrifying ordeals.
After their defeat in San Juan del Monte, Bonifacio's troops regrouped near
Marikina, San Mateo and Montalban, where they proceeded to attack these areas.
They captured these areas but were driven back by Spanish counterattacks, and
Bonifacio eventually ordered a retreat to Balara. On the way, Bonifacio was nearly
killed shielding Emilio Jacinto from a Spanish bullet that grazed his collar.[2]
Despite his reverses, Bonifacio was not completely defeated and was still
considered a threat.[1]
North of Manila, the towns of San Francisco de Malabon, Noveleta and Kawit
in Cavite rose in rebellion.[2] In Nueva Ecija rebels in San Isidro led by Ivan Pilien
attacked the Spanish garrison on September 2–4; they were repulsed. [3]
José Laurel
Ferdinand Marcos
In a privilege speech before Senate, Benigno Aquino, Jr. warned the public
of the possible establishment of a “garrison state” by President Ferdinand Marcos.
President Marcos imposed martial law on the nation from 1972 to 1981 to suppress
increasing civil strife and the threat of a communist takeover following a series of
bombings in Manila.[18][19] However, Aquino himself rubbed elbows with leaders of
Communist Party of the Philippines — first with founder Jose Maria Sison, and
later with Rodolfo Salas, CPP chair at the height of Martial Law. In an interview
with Ateneo De Manila University Professor Lisandro Claudio, Salas said not only
did he bring wounded New People's Army (NPA) soldiers to Aquino’s houses, but he
received guns and cash from Aquino himself. He also said Aquino had a significant
contribution to the expansion of NPA in the country. In another communication to
the State Department dated September 21, the US Embassy sheds further light
on what Ninoy told the American officials. On September 12, Ninoy had a “lengthy
luncheon conversation" with two embassy officers about the “growing strength of
Communist dissidence in the Philippines." In this luncheon, the senator “readily
admitted his past ties with the several Communist factions in the Philippines." He
claimed that maintaining links with Huk rebels was a “fact of life" for a Tarlac
politician.[20][21]
On 21 August 1971, while the opposition (Liberal Party) was having their
miting de avance in Plaza Miranda, 2 fragmentation grenades exploded.[citation needed] It
took 9 lives and left more than 100 people seriously wounded. [citation needed] Some
Liberal Party candidates were seriously injured including Jovito Salonga, who nearly
died and was visually impaired. Suspicion of responsibility for the blast initially fell
upon Marcos, whom the Liberals blamed for the bombing; however, in later years,
prominent personalities associated with the event have laid the blame on the
Communist Party of the Philippines under José María Sison.[22] In his autobiography,
Salonga states his belief that Sison and the CPP were responsible. [23] Based on
interviews of The Washington Post with former Communist Party of the Philippines
Officials, it was revealed that "the (Communist) party leadership planned -- and
three operatives carried out -- the attack in an attempt to provoke government
repression and push the country to the brink of revolution... (Communist Party
Leader) Sison had calculated that Marcos could be provoked into cracking down on
his opponents, thereby driving thousands of political activists into the
underground, the former party officials said. Recruits were urgently needed, they
said, to make use of a large influx of weapons and financial aid that China had
already agreed to provide."[24]
Martial law was ratified by 90.77% of the voters during the Philippine
Martial Law referendum, 1973 though the referendum was marred with
controversy.[27][28]
The declaration of martial law was initially well received by some segments
of the people but became unpopular as excesses and human rights abuses by the
military emerged. Torture was used in extracting information from their enemies.
There was some controversy whether the ambush on Enrile used as one of
the justifications[29] to declare Martial Law was staged. However, Enrile himself
denied that it was staged in his memoir and defended the declaration of martial
law:[30]
“ Did I stage and fake my ambush to justify the declaration of martial law? ”
I said, “No! I did not!”... There was no need for me to do that to justify
the declaration of martial law. There was no need for other facts to
justify the imposition of martial law. Proclamation No. 1081 [19] of 21
September 1972 recited fully and faithfully all the facts that President
Marcos needed and used to justify the declaration of martial law in the
country. I drafted and prepared the documents that President Marcos
used to declare martial law. I checked the facts contained in those
documents. I had no doubt of their authenticity, veracity, and sufficiency
to support and justify the declaration of martial law. Those facts were
more than enough to justify the declaration of martial law.
The enormous shift in the mood of the nation showed from within the
government after martial law was imposed. The testimonies of officials of private
chambers of commerce and of private businessmen dictated enormous support for
what was happening. At least, the objectives of the development were now being
achieved…”.[33]
Martial law was lifted by President Marcos on January 17, 1981. [37]
After the lifting of Martial Law, the CPP-NPA was able to return to urban
areas and form relationships with legal opposition organizations, and became
increasingly successful attacks against the government throughout the country. [38]
The violence inflicted by the communists reached its peak in 1985 with 1,282
military and police deaths and 1,362 civilian deaths. [39]
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
Marcos used several events to justify martial law. Threat to the country’s security
was intensifying following the re-establishment of the Communist Party of the
Philippines (CPP) in 1968. Supporters of CPP’s military arm, the New People’s Army,
also grew in numbers in Tarlac and other parts of the country. The alleged attempt
to the life of then Minister of Defense Juan Ponce Enrile gave Marcos a window to
declare Martial Law. Marcos announced the emergency rule the day after the
shooting incident. Marcos also declared insurgency in the south caused by the clash
between Muslims and Christians, which Marcos considered as a threat to national
security. The Muslims were defending their ancestral land against the control of
Christians who migrated in the area. The minority group organized the Moro
National Liberation Front (MNLF) in Malaysia and pushed for the autonomy of
Mindanao from the national government.
The move was initially supported by most Filipinos and was viewed
by some critics as a change that solved the massive corruption in
the country. Martial law ceased the clash between the executive
and legislative branches of the government and a bureaucracy
characterized by special interest. Marcos started to implement
reforms on social and political values that hindered effective
modernization. To match the accomplishments of its Asian
neighbors, Marcos imposed the need for self-sacrifice for the
attainment of national welfare. His reforms targeted his rivals within the elite
depriving them of their power and patronage but did not affect their supporters
(US Library of Congress, Martial Law and the Aftermath).
Better late than never, as they always say. It is better to bury President
Marcos now 27 years after his death than just letting his corpse freeze in Ilocos
Norte. Call it poetic justice if you want, the late president will now get what he is
due: a burial befitting a former Commander-in-Chief and a soldier who risked his
life in the line of duty during the Second World War.
And why should we not bury President Marcos at the Heroes’ Cemetery? The
AFP has already explained the rules for a person to be qualified for burial in the
Heroes’ Cemetery. Marcos fits the qualifications set by the Department of
National Defense. Marcos was a soldier who served in the Second World War,
awarded the Medal of Valor. He is one of only around 40 Filipinos to have even
received the award. He received the award when he was still only a Congressman of
Ilocos Norte, and Gen. Douglas MacArthur also personally recognized Marcos’
services during the war.
Being the United States’ mainstay in Asia, Marcos made sure the Philippines
performed its part to make sure that the communists would not emerge victorious
in the Cold War. First, by allowing America to use the country as a jump-off point
towards Vietnam. Second, by suppressing the communist rebellion and preventing
them from taking over the state apparatus and wreak havoc upon the entire nation
as they did in China and North Korea.
When duty called, Marcos answered and performed his job as executive by
declaring martial law to quell the rebellion. Martial law ushered in an era of
stability after years of uprisings by the communists. When human rights abuses
were reported, Marcos took responsibility and did what he had to do: 8,800
military officers were fired from the AFP during martial law due to complaints of
human rights abuses. Regardless of how one looks at it, Marcos dutifully performed
his job as President of the Republic. It was thanks to his government’s policies that
the Philippine state remains standing and whole, not under a communist government
nor is it one region smaller.
His loyalists would say he is a hero, his detractors would call him an evil
dictator. But what I would say is this, Ferdinand E. Marcos was a man who served
his country nobly as a soldier, and as President, made the right decisions when duty
called. Marcos was a man who knew how to deal with the circumstances of his time.
He is not the evil man that the left and the oligarchs accuse him of being. I am
glad that on September 1972, at a time of global crisis and national instability, it
was Ferdinand Marcos in Malacanang and not anyone else.
The Marcos detractors have emerged again ahead of his burial. Those people
are promoting hate, they’re promoting instability, they’re promoting national
fragmentation, they’re promoting bigotry, they’re promoting violence, the very
things they accused Marcos of. Millennials are scapegoated as Marcos apologists,
but when I saw the Bongbong Marcos rallies, I saw old people, not young people.
Those were middle-aged people, many were already senior citizens.
Perhaps it is difficult for them to accept the end of the status quo, that
President Ferdinand E. Marcos would be viewed in a more favorable light, not as
dictated by the dishonest media and twisted history books. Part of me honestly
wants to hold the burial on September 21, just to watch the reaction of the
radicals, but I believe the late President deserves it on his birthday.
So, I laud the decision of President Rodrigo Duterte to allow the burial of
President Ferdinand Marcos at the Heroes’ Cemetery. I laud him for making the
right decision without being influenced by the detractors. The Marcos burial will
begin a new chapter in our nation’s history, and it is up to us to write what will be in
that chapter.