IMEE MARCOS—A MURDERER AND A THIEF
OPINION:
IMEE MARCOS TOLD US COURT – YES, ARCHIMEDES TRAJANO WAS TORTURED AND KILLED BUT
IT’S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS
By
Raïssa Robles
ABS-CBN
News
Posted
at Nov 16 2016 08:22 PM
If
Mapua Institute of Technology student Archimedes Trajano had been killed today
and Ferdinand Marcos was still the President, newspaper headlines would be
screaming –
College
student snatched and found dead after questioning the President’s daughter
But
no such headline came out after Archimedes Trajano’s lifeless body, bearing
obvious signs of torture, was found on a road.
His
parents were told he had gotten into a fight with dorm mates. Beyond his
immediate family, friends and school – few knew the actual events that caused
his murder and torture by military bodyguards of Imee Marcos.
It
would take years before his extra-judicial execution would reach public
attention.
Briefly,
here is an excerpt from my book Marcos Martial law: Never Again on what really
happened to Archimedes Trajano:
On
August 31, 1977, Archimedes Trajano, a 21-year-old student of Mapua Institute
of Technology, attended an open forum with Imee Marcos, 21-year-old daughter of
the dictator. Her father had appointed her National Chairman of the Kabataang
Barangay youth organization.
When
Trajano questioned her about her appointment, Imee apparently became irritated.
Her guards seized Trajano and dragged him away. His body was found hours later:
he had been severely tortured and beaten to death.
His
mother later recalled: “He was covered in a white sheet, lying on a table. And
when I opened the sheet…I saw him blue-black…I could not talk…nothing…but I
think my heart hardened. I said, my God, why him?”
What
I’m about to tell you next is not in my book because I didn’t have enough space
to go into the details of the Trajano case. But the document I’m about to share
with you were among those I had collected during research.
Before
I go on, I would like to tell you more about Imee Marcos. She was the
equivalent of Kris Aquino during the dictatorship. Imee was a precocious
daughter. Like Kris, she loved acting. I remember that Manila’s wealthy 100 all
turned out for her debut onstage in the play “Mother Courage”.
Even
then, Imee was a natural politician. She reminded me of a wild colt with her
mane of hair. To fully appreciate what Imee was all about and how much power
her father the dictator had bestowed on her, watch this video below which
historian Manolo Quezon unearthed from the archives of the Associated Press.
Now,
picture Imee traveling around the streets of Manila in scruffy designer jeans,
surrounded by heavily armed military bodyguards. Picture her addressing a
student forum inside Mapua. Where suddenly this upstart of a student boldly
questions her why she was appointed KB chair by her father.
Hours
later, the same student turns up dead and beaten black and blue.
If
that kind of murder had happened today, Trajano’s mother Agapita could have
filed murder charges against the military bodyguards. But it was not possible
during Martial Law to charge the president’s daughter and her bodyguards of
conspiracy to murder. The country was under a dictatorship which ruled by
terror and violence.
It
therefore took Agapita Trajano nine years before she was able to file a case in
a Hawaii court against Imee Marcos and General Fabian Ver – President Marcos’
spy chief who was then in all but title the real Armed Forces Chief of Staff.
Agapita
charged them for “false imprisonment, kidnapping, wrongful death, and a
deprivation of rights” of her son.
Agapita
chose Hawaii as the venue since the Marcoses and Vers had fled there in 1986.
And apparently, Agapita happened to have migrated there, too.
Agapita
won the damage suit in Hawaii. The case was the reason why Imee Marcos
transferred her residency to Singapore.
The
Hawaii court ruled in Agapita’s favor. Its decision stated in part:
“…judgment
was entered based on the court’s findings that Trajano was tortured and his
death was caused by Marcos-Manotoc. The court concluded that this violation of fundamental
human rights constitutes a tort in violation of the law of nations under 28
U.S.C. § 1350, and awarded damages of $4.16 million and attorneys’ fees
pursuant to Philippine law.”
Now
reading the court judgment, which I am reprinting in full below, two things
struck me about Imee Marcos. Before I go into it, let me first explain that
Imee Marcos knew the law because she studied at the University of the
Philippines College of Law but could not get the degree nor take the bar. It
turned out she did not have the necessary prerequisite – a college degree.
But
her UP law professors, whom I personally knew, spoke admiringly about her. She
was one smart cookie. One of her professors was my father.
What
is interesting – and shocking as well – about the Trajano case is the legal
argument that Imee Marcos and her lawyers used before the Hawaii court to try
to get the case thrown out.
I
use the word “shocking” because last week, Imee Marcos said on national TV that
she knew nothing about the human rights abuses going on during her father’s
dictatorship. She argued that she was “too young” to know.
However,
before a Hawaii court over two decades ago, Imee Marcos and her lawyers gave
the following arguments to counter a civil lawsuit accusing her of “wrongful
death”.
Imee
Marcos argued that –
-
Yes, Trajano was tortured by her military bodyguards.
-
Yes, Imee Marcos knew all about the torture.
-
But the case against Imee Marcos should not proceed before the Hawaii Court
because this court only has jurisdiction for torture acts that happen in the
US.
Neat,
huh.
I
based my conclusions on the sixth paragraph of the court decision, which
stated:
Marcos-Manotoc
argues that the Philippine Military Intelligence is an “instrumentality” of a
foreign state within § 1603(b) of the FSIA, and that the tortious acts were
brought about by persons acting pursuant to the authority of Marcos,
Marcos-Manotoc, and Ver such that the liability of Marcos-Manotoc is expressly
premised on her authority as a government agent. She further contends that,
regardless of whether she acted within the scope of her employment, she is
entitled to absolute immunity under § 16047 because a foreign state and its
agents lose sovereign immunity only for tortious acts occurring in the United
States.
FSIA
referred to the Foreign Services Immunities Act, which was approved in 1976 – a
year before Trajano’s murder. The FSIA codified all US laws which granted or
waived the immunity of anyone invoking “sovereign immunity”.
The
Hawaii court decision explained the impact of the FSIA on the tort or damage
lawsuit that Agapita Trajano filed against Imee Marcos. I have highlighted the
most important sections of the decision in bold:
We must first determine whether
Marcos-Manotoc is entitled to immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities
Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1330, 1602-11. The FSIA “must be applied by the
district courts in every action against a foreign sovereign, since
subject-matter jurisdiction in any such action depends on the existence of one
of the specified exceptions to foreign sovereign immunity.” Verlinden B.V. v.
Central Bank of Nigeria, 461 U.S. 480, 493, 103 S.Ct. 1962, 1971, 76 L.Ed.2d 81
(1983); see also Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp., 488 U.S.
428, 109 S.Ct. 683, 102 L.Ed.2d 818 (1989); Liu v. Republic of China, 892 F.2d
1419, 1424 (9th Cir.1989), cert. dismissed, 497 U.S. 1058, 111 S.Ct. 27, 111
L.Ed.2d 840 (1990). A “foreign state” under the Act includes “an agency or
instrumentality of a foreign state.” 28 U.S.C. § 1603(a).5 We have, in turn,
held that an “agency or instrumentality of a foreign state” for purposes of the
FSIA includes individuals acting in their official capacity. Chuidian v.
Philippine Nat’l Bank, 912 F.2d 1095, 1099-1103 (9th Cir.1990).
Therefore,
because Marcos-Manotoc’s default concedes that she controlled the military
police [BOLD], the FSIA is implicated and we must be satisfied that it does not
bar jurisdiction, even though the issue was not raised in the district court.
The
Court concluded that it had jurisdiction of the case, not under the FSIA, but
under a different law – the Alien Tort Statute.
The
Court said Agapita Trajano’s “suit as an alien against Marcos-Manotoc for
having caused the wrongful death of her son, by official torture in violation
of a jus cogens norm of international law, properly invokes the subject-matter
jurisdiction of the federal courts under § 1350.”
Next
time you see a Marcos loyalist post on Facebook or Twitter that no Marcos has
ever been convicted in court, you can point out to them that the Marcoses have
lost at least FOUR landmark cases in court –
-
the case in Switzerland involving their Swiss loot;
-
the mother case in Manila forfeiting the Swiss money and other stolen assets in
favor of the Philippine government (the decision was penned by the late Chief
Justice Renato Corona when he was still an Associate Justice);
-
the class action suit filed by human rights victims in Hawaii;
-
and the separate tort case filed by Agapita Trajano over the torture and murder
of Archimedes.
What
happened after Agapita Trajano won her damage suit in Hawaii is tragic, thanks
to the Philippine Supreme Court.
The
1991 Hawaii Court judgment has never been enforced because the Philippine
Supreme Court barred it.
The
Trajano family tried collecting from Imee Marcos by filing a civil case with
the Pasig Regional Trial Court since Imee Marcos, by then, was said to be
living in the Alexandra condominium in Pasig.
The
RTC judge actually issued the summons for Imee to appear. When Imee snubbed the
summons, the judge declared her in default.
But
Imee Marcos ran to the Supreme Court. In 2006, the SC ruled that the service of
summons on her was invalid.
The
ponente who ruled in Imee Marcos’ favor was Associate Justice Presbitero
Velasco. Last week, Justice Pesbitero was also among those who ruled in favor
of burying Marcos in Libingan ng mga Bayani.
…Just
last week, Imee Marcos told Karen Davila on national TV:
“I
feel in my heart that if in any way you have hurt someone, you should say sorry
even if it’s not intentional. Even if it was not policy.”
Governor
Imee, how about saying sorry to the family of the late Archimedes Trajano, whom
you knew all these years was tortured and killed by your own bodyguards? And
you told the Hawaii court so?
And
pay the damages of US$4.4 million with interest you owe to the Trajano family
for the “wrongful” slay.
And
give back all the wealth stolen from the Filipino people that you, Irene,
Senator Bongbong and your mom Imelda continue to hide and hold on to here and
abroad.
That’s
the only way you, your children, and grandchildren will get peace of mind. And
our nation can start healing.
“Twenty-one
years old, I asked one question too soon, too late—too soon to confront the
daughter of a tyrant, too late to take it back. Must the National Youth Council be headed by the president’s daughter?
Bodyguards forcibly detained me, beat me, tortured me. Tossed me out a
second-story window. I no longer ask questions.”
COA
FINDS ILOCOS NORTE HAS MILLIONS WORTH OF DOUBTFUL PURCHASES, FABRICATED
DOCUMENTS
By
Regine Cabato, and Ver Marcelo, CNN Philippines
Updated
18:27 PM PHT Tue, July 17, 2018
Metro
Manila (CNN Philippines, July 4) — The Ilocos Norte provincial government has
millions in questionable transactions and fabricated bid documents, according
to the Commission on Audit (COA).
The
discrepancies were detailed in an annual audit report. They include the
supposed fabrication of bid documents worth ₱21 million and doubtful purchases and
deliveries worth ₱154 million.
The
COA asked Governor Imee Marcos to address their concerns within 60 days from
receipt of its letter, dated June 21.
CNN
Philippines has reached out to Marcos for comment.
Marcos,
whose brother Bongbong is pushing his bid for the vice presidency, was also
previously under scrutiny for the alleged misuse of ₱66.45 million
in tobacco funds to purchase 40 minicabs and 70 mini trucks.
ILOCOS
NORTE GOV’T FABRICATED BID DOCUMENTS; MADE DOUBTFUL PURCHASES, DELIVERIES: COA
By
Adrian Ayalin, ABS-CBN News
Posted
at Jul 04 2018 11:40 AM
MANILA
- The Commission on Audit has flagged bid documents which appeared to be
fabricated as well as doubtful purchases and deliveries of supplies made by the
provincial government of Ilocos Norte, currently headed by Gov. Imee Marcos.
In
the 2017 audit report on the provincial government, the COA noted 28 items
which included fabricated bid documents for supplies which were discovered from
2017 and 2016 disbursement vouchers with a total amount of P21.76 million.
“The
Invitation to Bid reference numbers stated in the PhilGEPS (Philippine
Government Electronic Procurement System) printouts belong to other government
agencies, a clear manifestation of the fabrication of documents to support the
disbursements/payments of the suppliers/contractors, thus affecting the
legality, validity, and propriety of the disbursements/payments,” the COA said.
I’ve
seen this movie before.
Photo courtesy of Ilocos Norte
ReplyDeletePhoto link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ilocosnorte/6304812499
Gonzalinho
[On Imee and Bongbong being beneficiaries of illegal Swiss foundations] The money they stole from the filipino people is the same money they are using to get back to power…
ReplyDeletePhilip Lustre, Jr., @IpeLustre
November 14, 2018
Gonzalinho
ALL CAPS MINE
ReplyDeleteMurderer, Thief, and LIAR—just like her father.
#Imeekwento
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:28 AM February 28, 2019
…The senatorial candidate and daughter of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos has spent the last weeks dodging questions and/or giving the most fantastically weird answers to questions about her academic qualifications.
This after her campaign website uploaded an official biography that claims SHE “IS ONE OF THE FIRST FEMALE GRADUATES FROM AN IVY LEAGUE SCHOOL — PRINCETON UNIVERSITY, GRADUATING WITH HONORS.”
But SHE DID NOT — GRADUATE FROM PRINCETON, THAT IS, MUCH LESS WITH HONORS. Princeton deputy university spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss himself confirmed they have no record showing “that Ms Marcos was awarded a degree.”
One may very well see this as a FAMILY TRAIT. The father, after all, had claimed to have earned a trunkful of medals for extraordinary valor in World War II. Fake, every one of them, according to a US government study.
Then it was the MARCOS SON AND NAMESAKE, IMEE’S BROTHER and losing vice presidential contender in the 2016 elections, who SAID HE HAD EARNED A DEGREE FROM OXFORD UNIVERSITY. FAKE, TOO — his “special diploma” was actually for a two-year [master’s] coursework, and not for a completed degree.
And now here’s Imee, bizarrely insisting on name-dropping an institution that has unambiguously disavowed her claims.
“As far as I know, I graduated from Princeton,” she said; the original Filipino statement sounds even more daft: “Pumasok ako sa Princeton at sa pagkakaalam ko, nag-graduate ako.” (I entered Princeton and, as far as I know, I graduated.)
…When Imee says “sa pagkakaalam ko,” does she mean she remembers having participated in some solemn Princeton graduation rite, dressed in toga, surrounded by school dignitaries and beaming batchmates? (Perhaps even her mother Imelda — would Imelda pass up the chance to sashay in Princeton?) Where are the pictures?
About her SO-CALLED UP LAW DEGREE, on the other hand, she did provide pictures: Imee in graduation robes, her cum laude medal being pinned on her by no less than the First Couple, in a ceremony in Meralco Theater. Unfortunately, this, too, was a sham — her purported graduation from the UP College of Law in 1983 was a special production cooked up by her parents.
Imee’s picture appears nowhere in the 1983 Philippinensian, the University of the Philippines yearbook. And UP executive vice president Dr. Teodoro Herbosa said the UP REGISTRAR HAS NO RECORD OF IMEE GRADUATING FROM UP, only of her taking nondegree courses from 1976 to 1977.
As to why she was admitted to the College of Law despite not having presented an undergraduate diploma, UP College of Law dean Froilan Bacungan admitted: “It was a little bit [of] PR that, strictly speaking, we should not have participated in.”
To be continued
Gonzalinho
#Imeekwento
ReplyDeletePhilippine Daily Inquirer / 05:28 AM February 28, 2019
Continued
…Doubts cast on the Marcoses’ school records, however, point to a bigger issue than just scholastic standing. Fudging grades, degrees, and diplomas should be seen as TROUBLING CHARACTER FLAWS in a candidate, not least of them INDOLENCE, A SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT, AND A LACK OF INTEGRITY.
Why did the Marcos children, for instance — so privileged they could afford to be sent to such prestigious universities abroad — fritter away their chance to shine, or, for heaven’s sake, even the bare minimum of finishing their studies?
Revising one’s academic records to spruce up one’s image speaks of the BIGGER ISSUE OF INTEGRITY AND TRANSPARENCY IN PUBLIC SERVICE.
That these two Marcos scions can so blithely fake their college records explains why they can also lie through their teeth about so many other things — from the unreturned ill-gotten wealth of their family to the unacknowledged abuses of the martial law period their power-drunk parents had inflicted on the country.
Living a fact-free life bleeds into public service; look at how Imee refused to face a congressional inquiry on the allegedly anomalous use of tobacco funds during her gubernatorial tenure — corruption suffered by her own Ilocano constituency.
…no matter how desperately or weirdly or battily one spins it, A LIE IS A LIE IS A LIE.
Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/119836/imeekwento#ixzz5oiOFNDbB
Gonzalinho
It is always worth noting who gets to escape justice, and who never gets a second chance.
ReplyDeletePhil Dy @philbertdy
Philippine Daily Inquirer (August 28, 2019)
Gonzalinho
POLITICAL MORALITY
ReplyDeleteThe moral dimension of politics is poorly addressed in our education system, yet political actions have the capacity to inflict grave and far-reaching moral evil affecting millions and millions. Morality that is taught in our private Roman Catholic schools in particular focuses on the moral actions of the individual and generally neglects to take up the morality of political actions that affect many millions. Politics has far-reaching, dramatic, life-altering effects on masses of people so that political morality demonstrates a structural character. Politics is the enabler and perpetrator of social sin. It is according to this aspect that politics strikes at the very core of our moral life, competing directly with individual allegiance to God's law.
Link:
https://oddsandendsgonzalinhodacosta.blogspot.com/2019/06/placeholder-2-of-4.html
Gonzalinho
Marcos did not eradicate corruption, contrary to what Duterte implied. Marcos centralized it: he decided who can steal with impunity among his officials and cronies, but he made sure he got the lion’s share. He stole enough to make it to the Guinness Book of World Records.
ReplyDeleteLuis V. Teodoro, @luisteodoro
Philippine Daily Inquirer (June 19, 2019)
Gonzalinho
THE CONTINUING MARCOS REVISIONISM
ReplyDeleteBy: Ambeth R. Ocampo - @inquirerdotnet
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 04:06 AM May 27, 2020
Finance Secretary Sonny Dominguez correcting Sen. Imee Marcos online regarding the failure of her father’s Masagana 99 (M-99) program has marked him out for roasting at a future privilege speech. …In a Senate press release dated May 21, 2020, Marcos declared: “Contrary to Dominguez’s claim, the Philippines did export rice to neighboring countries when farmers under Masagana 99 produced a surplus of some 89,000 metric tons in 1977 to 1978, according to Dr. Emil Q. Javier, an agronomist and former president of the University of the Philippines.”
A simple Google search will lead you to the 2016 Javier article that said of Masagana 99: “Contrary to detractors’ claims, the program actually achieved its avowed objective of growing more rice and achieving self-sufficiency, albeit for only a brief period immediately after the program was launched in 1973. (Italics underscore what was conveniently left out of the Marcos “praise release.”)
While Javier did admit that M-99 significantly increased palay yield and produced a rice surplus that was exported in 1977, he advised against its repeat. His conclusion goes against the Marcos revision of history: “…Sadly, Masagana 99 proved to be short-lived and unsustainable mainly due to the costly subsidies and failure of many farmers-borrowers to repay the loans… Giving away seeds, fertilizers, pesticides and dryers, while politically attractive, is temporary, wasteful and prone to graft. We have been doing that all these years with little to show for the expense and the effort.”
A more detailed account is in UP Professor Ed Tadem’s 1986 paper, “Grains and Radicalism: The Political Economy of the Rice Industry in the Philippines, 1965-1985.” It has been three decades since Ferdinand Marcos died, disgraced and exiled in Honolulu—high time that an objective evaluation of his legacy be undertaken by history and historians. There is a mountain of information that needs to be mined and validated. Stories are not always easily fact-checked, like the conflicting claims on Masagana 99.
…In 2022, it will be 50 years since Marcos declared martial law in September 1972; a martial law museum is scheduled to open in UP Diliman that year. It should contain more than horror-show exhibits on human rights violations in this dark period; a library is also essential to counter the ongoing historical revision that seeks to make us move on and forget.
Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/130196/the-continuing-marcos-revisionism#ixzz6P8jOYcmW
Imee Marcos—murderer, thief…LIAR, too.
Gonzalinho
Let us now pass on to the consideration of the third great gate of hell by which so large a portion of the damned enter; I mean THEFT. Some, so to speak, adore money as their God, and look upon it as the object of all their desires. The idols of the Gentiles are silver and gold (Ps. ciii. 12). …It is true that theft is not the most enormous of sins, but St. Antoninus says that it very much endangers salvation.
ReplyDeleteThe reason is because for the remission of other sins true repentance only is required; but repentance is not enough for the remission of theft: there must be restitution, and this is made with difficulty.
…My brethren, see that you take not the property of your neighbor, and if during the past you have ever failed in this respect, make restitution as soon as possible. If you cannot at once make full restitution, do it by degrees. Know that the property of another in your possession will not only be the means of bringing you to hell, but will make you miserable even in this life.
…Some persons take the property of their neighbor, and then are fain to quiet their consciences by alms-deeds. Christ, says St. John Chrysostom, will not be fed with the plunder of others. …These are descriptions of theft which require perfect restitution, and a restitution most difficult of all to make, and most likely to be the cause of one's damnation.
—Saint Alphonsus Liguori (1696-1787), The Four Principal Gates of Hell
Gonzalinho
House Bill 7137 declaring Sept 11 as Marcos holiday is a gross disrespect to all victims of the dictator’s atrocities, including the rape survivors under his regime. This legislature (save for the 9 who voted against) will go down in history as traitors to the Filipino people.
ReplyDelete@jeanenriquez
Philippine Daily Inquirer (September 4, 2020)
AN INSULT TO ILOCANOS
By: Solita Callas-Monsod - @inquirerdotnet
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:06 AM September 05, 2020
Our Congress is passing a bill declaring Sept. 11 as President Ferdinand Edralin Marcos Day in Ilocos Norte. And with no debate whatsoever. Words fail me. Do the Germans/Austrians celebrate an Adolf Hitler Day anywhere in Germany, or in Braunau am Inn in Austria? Do the Italians celebrate a Benito Mussolini in Predappio, Italy?
We not only will be the LAUGHINGSTOCK OF THE WORLD, [all capitals mine] which held us in the highest respect when we overthrew the dictator peacefully and became a role model for all other similar movements to follow, including the fall of the Berlin Wall, but we will also have pissed on the face of Ninoy Aquino and all the victims of martial law, as well as on our faces—the victims of Marcos’ plunder—for which we had to suffer for almost 16 years before we could regain our former per capita income.
…Now, about this “he is a hero to Ilocos Norte and to most Ilocanos all over the world”: What is the basis of that statement of Senator Sotto? It actually is an insult to Ilocanos. Are they not Filipinos first? Did they not see the devastation that Marcos brought on the Philippines? Did they not witness how he tried to keep himself in power even after 20 years?
So, the dictator Marcos did a lot for Ilocos while he was president. Does that more than compensate for what evil he wreaked on the Filipino people? The Ilocanos are not dumb. And I am sure they are Filipinos first.
My father was an Ilocano (born in Abra, raised in Sta. Maria, Ilocos Sur) who thought the world of Ferdinand Marcos. He was a journalist with the Philippines Free Press and wrote articles defending the young Marcos who was accused of killing his father’s opponent (Julio Nalundasan). He was struck by Marcos’ brilliance and his potential, and was his personal friend. He chose then Senate President Marcos to be a principal sponsor at my wedding (he came, and charmed me, too).
But when President Marcos declared martial law, my father brought me every day to the Supreme Court to hear the martial law case against Marcos. And I remember him sighing, and saying, “if I knew then that he would do this to the Filipino people, I would never have defended him.”
That’s the kind of Ilocano I know. A Filipino first. And someone who would evaluate Marcos not just on the basis of a few, or even many, scraps thrown his way. And I am half-Ilocano. And proud of it. But I am a Filipino first. As I said, Senator Sotto insults the Ilocanos.
Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/133322/an-insult-to-ilocanos#ixzz6teyuHYuR
When I was 18, I was tortured and imprisoned by Marcos for 4 years because I criticized him for banning student councils. Many Ilocanos were also imprisoned then. We cannot celebrate the birth of a man who imprisoned and tortured Filipinos. This is adding injustice to our pain.
Neri Colmenares,
@ColmenaresPH
Philippine Daily Inquirer (September 7, 2020)
Gonzalinho
SALN AND ‘BLACKMAIL’
ReplyDeletePhilippine Daily Inquirer / 05:35 AM October 02, 2020
Sen. Imee Marcos let loose a steaming mouthful on Saturday in support of Ombudsman Samuel Martires’ controversial position restricting access to the statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) of government officials.
“Totoo naman. Madalas nakikita natin, iniskandalo ka sa dyaryo tapos parang tine-terrorize na, wine-weaponize na itong SALN,” said the eldest daughter of deposed dictator Ferdinand Marcos in a radio interview.
Of course, Marcos’ disdain for the SALN law and her profuse commiseration with Martires’ decision—deemed by many sectors as practically subverting the mandate of the Ombudsman’s office to promote honesty and accountability in government—has more than a touch of self-interest to it. The woman, after all, is one of the heirs to what Transparency International estimates is some $5 billion to $10 billion that the Marcos conjugal dictatorship had embezzled from Philippine coffers from 1972 to 1986 through shell corporations, real estate properties, and money in numerous offshore banks.
A simple check of the older Marcos’ SALN would readily show that his assets were ill-gotten, since the ousted President’s salary never rose above $13,500 a year, according to a May 2016 article by The Guardian. That judgment on the nature of the Marcoses’ unexplained wealth has been affirmed as well by rulings of the Supreme Court. Imee, according to a 2013 report by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, was herself the beneficiary of the Sintra Trust fund in the British Virgin Islands, which she, however, did not declare in her SALN.
It is easy to understand why shady politicians consider the SALN a dreaded enemy, one that raises doubts about their integrity when the document shows a gross mismatch between their assets and legitimate income. But isn’t that precisely the intention of the law—to expose malfeasance and dishonesty with figures cited or omitted in the sworn document? Why fear it when one has nothing to hide?
The Marcos daughter parrots Martires’ beef against the SALN requirement—that it has been “weaponized” against politicians.
…But, really, the SALN law IS a weapon—against corruption and plunder and wrongdoing in public office. The reality of deceit and misconduct in government is such that a vast machinery of offices, agencies, and institutions emanating from the Constitution itself—the Office of the Ombudsman, the Sandiganbayan, the Commission on Audit, etc.—is in place, empowered by a raft of laws and mandates and huge budgets, to fight and contain the never-ending scourge. Upright politicians would see the SALN law and similar regulations demanding basic integrity in government as valuable tools, making their job of accounting for their conduct before the people much easier. Only those whose interests stand to be adversely exposed by the SALN would be deathly afraid of it.
To be continued
SALN AND ‘BLACKMAIL’
ReplyDeletePhilippine Daily Inquirer / 05:35 AM October 02, 2020
Continued
That much is clear from the rest of Marcos’ remarks, in which she complained that “Lahat ng mga public officials parating tinatakot sa ganyan… ’Yung problema naman talaga ’yung nagiging instrument ’yung blackmail naman. Ibang usapan kasi kapag ganun.”
Does the woman hear herself? One is vulnerable to blackmail only when he or she has something embarrassing that needs to be kept from public view.
…“Blackmailing” powerful public officials on their SALNs is a preposterous idea—what is there to shake down if the document is truthful and accurate? If, however, the politician draws up a spurious, fraudulent declaration that can result in scandal, then she has only herself to blame for engaging in unlawful conduct in the first place.
To repeat: The SALN, and the overall Constitutional direction toward transparency and accountability in governance at all times, will come off as a nuisance, a set of inconveniences to be disregarded on the flimsiest of grounds (the “vagueness” of longstanding law, for instance), only by those in the business of trying to hoodwink the people about their affairs while in office.
Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/134101/saln-and-blackmail#ixzz712hVYqlg
The rotten apple does not fall far from the rotten tree.
Gonzalinho