PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE: Since 1997 © Copyright (PHNO) http://newsflash.org



HEADLINES NEWS THIS PAST WEEK...
(Mini Reads followed by Full Reports below)

PALACE: WITHOUT HALT ORDER FROM SC, MARCOS BURIAL 'TO PROCEED AS PLANNED
[RELATED: Hero’s burial for Marcos violates Charter, SC told]


AUGUST 18 -
Plans for the burial of former President Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani will push through unless a temporary restraining order (TRO) is issued by the Supreme Court (SC), Malacañang yesterday said. Presidential spokesman Ernesto Abella, however, stressed no date has been set for the burial.“The process is ongoing, nobody is rushing anything. People will respond as appropriately as possible,” he told a press briefing.The Palace official said everything is starting to move according to arrangements “so unless there is a TRO or anything like that, it will proceed as planned.” Petitions have been filed before the High Tribunal questioning the government’s decision to allow the burial of the late strongman at the Libingan and oral arguments are set for next week. But if the SC comes out with a decision before the burial, Abella said President Rodrigo Duterte will respect it. “Any motions and cases that have been filed, let it proceed and the President will respond as he sees fit. The President will abide with the decision of the court,” he stressed. Amnesty International has estimated that during martial law, 70,000 people were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured, and 3,240 were killed. Bringing back dark memories of martial law At the lower chamber, Buhay Partylist Rep. Lito Atienza also yesterday warned that the dark days of martial law are now creeping into the present administration, noting that the increasing number summary killings of suspected drug pushers is similar to the deaths, torture and disappearances that occurred during the Marcos era.RED MORE...RELATED, FROM THE INQUIRER: Hero’s burial for Marcos violates Charter, SC told...

ALSO:
Orals scheduled on Marcos burial suit
[RELATED FROM RAPPLER.COM: SC sets oral arguments on Marcos burial]
(The Supreme Court also orders the military and former First Lady Imelda Marcos to respond to the petition vs the planned burial of the late dictator at the Libingan ng mga Bayani)


AUGUST 17 -SC GIVES AFP, PNP 5 DAYS TO REPLY TO SUIT ON FM’s BURIAL Oral arguments on the burial at the Libingan ng Mga Bayani (LNMB) of the late President Ferdinand Marcos have been scheduled by the Supreme Court, which has been challenged with a suit by at least two militant groups who claim to be Marcos’ martial law victims. At the same time, the High Court ordered the military and police officials to answer the petition seeking to stop the burial of the late strongman.SC spokesman Theodore Te said the Court en banc gave respondents five days or up to Monday to file their reply to the petition filed by former Bayan Muna Partylist Rep. Satur Ocampo and several others though the National Union of People’s Lawyes (NUPL).The Court likewise directed the parties to appear for a preliminary conference at the SC Division Hearing Room on August 22 at 2 p.m. prior to the holding of an oral arguments on August 24.The burial of Marcos is reportedly scheduled for September 18. Named respondents in the petition were Rear Admiral Ernesto Enriquez, Deputy Chief of Staff for Reservist and Retiree Affairs of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP); General Ricardo Visaya, AFP Chief of Staff; Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, and the heirs of Ferdinand Edralin Marcos.The petitioners are seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the Marcos’ burial at the LNMB for being contrary to the Constitution and violative of existing laws as well as jeopardizing their $2 billion claim for damages against the Marcoses for their human rights violations. READ MORE...RELATED FROM RAPPLER.COM: SC sets oral arguments on Marcos burial (The Supreme Court also orders the military and former First Lady Imelda Marcos to respond to the petition vs the planned burial of the late dictator at the Libingan ng mga Bayani)...

ALSO Binay: Noynoy fumbles chance to end Marcos controversy
[Noynoying on burial issue-“The Aquino administration missed an opportunity to lay the Marcos burial issue to rest when it did not act on former VP Binay’s recommendation made as early as 2011 to allow the burial of Marcos in Batac, Ilocos Norte,” Salgado added. Last Monday, victims of Martial Law had asked the Supreme Court not to allow Marcos’ burial at LNBM.]
[RELATED: Former deputy presidential spokesman Valte denies Aquino’s supposed inaction on Marcos burial]
(Valte said that Aquino made it clear that he was opposed to burying Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani. “‘Not on my watch.’ That is as categorical as one can get,” Valte said quoting an interview Aquino gave the Associated Press in June 2011. She said the former president was also consistent on his stand during the campaign.)


AUGUST 17 -Former President Aquino blew an opportunity to end the divisive issue on the burial of the remains of former President Ferdinand Marcos as he failed to act on an already sealed agreement to have the burial in Batac City, former Vice President Jejomar Binay said yesterday. Binay spokesman Joey Salgado said the Marcos family had approved Binay’s recommendation that the former President be buried in Batac City in Ilocos Norte with military honors. Aquino has designated Binay to look into a 2011 resolution of the House of Representatives seeking the burial of Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LNMB) in Taguig City. The Office of the Vice President (OVP) then held consultations with various sectors and relatives of the late President that resulted in a recommendation for the Aquino government to allow a burial in Batac. Binay said Aquino failed to act on his recommendation mainly due to the honors that will be rendered Marcos which was a chief political rival of his parents, former Sen. Benigno”Ninoy” Aquino and former President Cory Aquino. The Aquino family also blamed Marcos for the assassination of the former senator in 1983. “In June 2011, VP Binay submitted to Aquino his recommendation to allow the burial of Marcos in Batac, Ilocos Norte. The former VP noted that the burial of Marcos in Batac had the approval of the Marcos family,” Salgado said in a statement. “However, Aquino did not act on the recommendation. That’s why the nation is once again torn by debates over a contentious issue that could have been buried a long time ago,” he added. Earlier, former Interior Secretary Rafael Alunan claimed former First Lady Imelda Marcos signed an agreement in 1992 where she agreed to bury the remains of the former President without a hero’s burial. Alunan, who acted as former President Fidel Ramos’ designated negotiator in talks between the Marcoses and the government concerning the return of Ferdinand Marcos’ remains from Hawaii to the Philippines, presented a four-point agreement to Mrs. Marcos at her temporary residence in Forbes Park, an agreement she later signed. READ MORE...RELATED, Former deputy presidential spokesman Valte denies Aquino’s supposed inaction on Marcos burial...

ALSO: Third petition filed vs Marcos burial
[RELATED: Palace says Duterte to abide by court action on Marcos burial]


AUGUST 19 -Protesters light candles around stones with the names of victims of Martial Law during a rally to protest the burial of the late Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Heroes Cemetery Thursday, Aug. 18, 2016, in suburban Quezon city northeast of Manila, Philippines. Various civic and anti-Marcos groups have revived their protests after President Rodrigo Duterte ordered Marcos' burial with full military honors next month. AP/Bullit Marquez MANILA, Philippines — Victims of human rights violations under the regime of the late President Ferdinand Marcos filed a petition against his burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani in Taguig City. Former Commission on Human Rights Chairperson Loretta Ann Rosales, Philippine Entertainment Portal editor-in-chief Jo-Ann Maglipon and 12 other Martial Law victims sought for a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the burial of the late dictator. "To honor a dictator is to dishonor his victims. To bury him at the Libingan is to honor a plunderer and a thief found guilty of ill-gotten wealth by no less than this honorable court," Rosales said at a televised press conference, reading the petition the filed before the high court. Rosales, a former teacher at the Jose Rizal College, suffered torture under martial law. She was brought to a safe house in Pasig City where she was stripped naked, suffered the Russian Roulette, electric shock, strangulation and candle burns. "To bury Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani is to dishonor the survivors of torture, unlawful arrest, arbitrary detention, dehumanization, forced exile, physical and psychological abuse. To accord him the pomp and pageantry of a hero's burial is to dishonor the victims of murder, summary executions, forced disappearances and massacres whose only memorials are the courage and patriotism or the lives they gave up," the petition read. READ MORE...RELATED, Palace says Duterte to abide by court action on Marcos burial...

ALSO: Sandigan drops suit vs Imelda siblings
[OPINION: Who or what is Duterte honoring with a hero’s burial?]


AUGUST 20 -IMELDA MARCOS
The Sandiganbayan has dismissed the lawsuit against the siblings of former First Lady Imelda Romualdez-Marcos as part of the government’s sequestration efforts in connection with the alleged ill-gotten wealth of the Romualdez clan, although Mrs. Marcos and the late former President Ferdinand Marcos and two others are not yet “off the hook” on the case. Marcos Sr., however, can no longer be sued, since hehas been dead for a long time, and no court can continue with cases against thre late president.The anti-graft court’s First Division ordered the dismissal of the civil case this week against spouses Armando Romualdez and Vilma Romualdez and Alfredo Romualdez. But the Marcos couple, former Agriculture Secretary Nelia Gonzales, and businessman Ricardo Quintos were not included in the dismissed lawsuit.Armando and Alfredo Romualdez are the brothers of Imelda while Quintos and Gonzales were majority stockholders and directors of companies supposedly created by Armando allegedly to conceal and prevent the government’s recovery efforts on the assets suspected of being illegally obtained by the accused during the Marcos regime.The government is seeking the forfeiture of more than 60 properties, including ranches, pastureland, beach side properties, such assets as Golden Farms Inc., Highway Builders Inc., Dipudo Industries Inc., Maconacon Airways Inc., and Isabela Gas and Power Development Corp., from the accused, plus moral and exemplary damages on the factual, nominal, and temperal damages that the court may determine upon the resolution of the case.In the decision, the anti-graft court said that with regard to the Maconacon Airways, the State has made a sweeping conclusion that the company was a repository of the defendants’ ill-gotten wealth just because spouses Romualdez were incorporators of the firm.READ MORE...
ALSO ABS-CBN OPINION OPINION: Who or what is Duterte honoring with a hero’s burial?...

ALSO:
TRIBUNE EDITORIAL - Cost of vindictiveness
[ALSO OF GENERAL INTERES: THE UNTOLD STORY - MARCOS & NINOY WERE MORE THAN FRIENDS]


AUGUST 19 -The divisive issue on the burial of former President Ferdinand Marcos should have been a thing of the past if not for the poor leadership quality of Noynoy who injects destructive politics in every decision he makes. Former Vice President Jejomar Binay said that Noynoy held off on the Marcos burial despite public consultations made by the Office of the Vice President resulting in a proposal to have the remains of Marcos interred at Batac, Ilocos Norte with full military honors given to a former President. According to Binay’s spokesman Joey Salgado, Noynoy did not act on the former Vice President’s recommendation after he ordered Binay to review a 2011 House proposal to bury Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LNMB). “The OVP solicited the comments of various political parties, sectors, organizations and the general public. The Office also held consultations with the Marcos family on the issue. The OVP received over 3,000 responses through text, e-mail and letters,” Salgado said. Rody has allowed the burial of Marcos at the LNMB and the family of the former President wanted it held on September 18, a week after his birthday, but the yellow mob of Aquino and the red comrades of Rody are up in arms and raised the dictator tag to oppose the plan. The debate on the issue will now have to be tackled in the Supreme Court (SC) through oral arguments which is expected to crank up the friction as a result of the Duterte decision. Martial law victims, including the camp of former Bayan Muna Rep. Satur Ocampo and Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana or their lawyers. Victims of human rights under martial law and several militant groups are expected to argue their cases during the forum set by the SC. Duterte earlier said that there is nothing that can change his decision to allow the Marcos burial at the LNMB since Marcos is not only a former President but was also a soldier. Noynoy is dripping with vindictiveness each time the Marcos burial question is brought before him. READ MORE... ALSO OF GENERAL INTEREST, THE UNTOLD STORY: MARCOS AND NINOY WERE MORE THAN FRIENDS...


READ FULL MEDIA REPORTS HERE:

Sans halt order, Marcos burial ‘to proceed as planned’ — Palace



MANILA, AUGUST 22, 2016
(TRIBUNE
Written by Tribune Wires Thursday, 18 August 2016 00:00  -By Ted Tuvera and Gerry Baldo  - Plans for the burial of former President Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani will push through unless a temporary restraining order (TRO) is issued by the Supreme Court (SC), Malacañang yesterday said.

Presidential spokesman Ernesto Abella, however, stressed no date has been set for the burial.

“The process is ongoing, nobody is rushing anything. People will respond as appropriately as possible,” he told a press briefing.

The Palace official said everything is starting to move according to arrangements “so unless there is a TRO or anything like that, it will proceed as planned.” Petitions have been filed before the High Tribunal questioning the government’s decision to allow the burial of the late strongman at the Libingan and oral arguments are set for next week.

But if the SC comes out with a decision before the burial, Abella said President Rodrigo Duterte will respect it.

“Any motions and cases that have been filed, let it proceed and the President will respond as he sees fit. The President will abide with the decision of the court,” he stressed.

Amnesty International has estimated that during martial law, 70,000 people were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured, and 3,240 were killed.

Bringing back dark memories of martial law

At the lower chamber, Buhay Partylist Rep. Lito Atienza also yesterday warned that the dark days of martial law are now creeping into the present administration, noting that the increasing number summary killings of suspected drug pushers is similar to the deaths, torture and disappearances that occurred during the Marcos era.

READ MORE...

“I cannot agree with the summary killings in the same manner that I rejected martial law because of the abuses. The abuses under Martial Law and the abuses happening now are the same,” Atienza said during a press briefing at the office of Quezon Rep. Danila Suarez-led minority bloc.

He lamented that few people are speaking up against the glaring abuses as “the suspects were killed without a fight.”

Atienza stressed the drug campaign is admirable but he would like to find out how suspects are being killed every day.

The lawmaker warned that the abuses, if left unchecked, could ruin the efforts of the President.

Let’s study the police action on the ground. This could spread around, the problem would deteriorate and the President will fail,” Atienza said.

He added Duterte may not know what’s happening on the ground like what happened with the late strongman.

“Going back, I’m sure Marcos did not order the killings. He probably did not. He declared martial law legally, with the best intentions and ordered the neutralizing effort on certain sectors,” Atienza claimed.

“The killings, he might not even be aware of that. In the same manner today, President Duterte issued policy direction and orders. What is being done at the implementation level, he probably doesn’t know.”

“That’s why we keep on reminding him, you better check Mr. President, in the same way that Mr. Marcos failed, you may fail if you are not able to correct the well-intentioned and legal orders given,” the lawmaker said.

-------------------------

RELATED FROM THE INQUIRER

Hero’s burial for Marcos violates Charter, SC told SHARES: 1343 VIEW COMMENTS By: Vince F. Nonato @inquirerdotnet Philippine Daily Inquirer 04:52 AM August 20th, 2016


INQUIRER FACEBOOK PHOTO

TRANSFERRING the remains of the strongman Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani would violate the country’s “anti-dictatorship Constitution,” according to the latest legal challenge by victims of martial law on Friday.

Ibarra M. Gutierrez III, lawyer of the Coalition Against Marcos Burial, said that they raised new issues in their 74-page petition that were not covered by two cases filed before the Supreme Court this week.

The coalition is composed of 14 former victims, led by Loretta Ann Rosales, a former activist who was tortured and raped during martial law but later became the country’s human rights commissioner.

They asked the court for an injunction, saying there was an “urgent need” to stop the planned burial that has divided the country nearly three decades since Marcos died in Hawaiian exile in 1989.


Commission on Human Rights Chairwoman Loretta Ann Rosales. INQUIRER.net FILE PHOTO Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/693579/etta-quietly-leaves-commission-on-human-rights#ixzz4HyKJGyi0 Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook 

“Indeed, respondents have already and repeatedly stated that they will implement the burial of Marcos at the Libingan despite the various issues plaguing the same,” the petition read.

Gutierrez stressed that the 1987 charter itself was characterized as an “anti-dictatorship Constitution” by its framers.

“An indictment implicit in the Constitution states that Marcos is a criminal who must not be emulated,” Gutierrez said. “He is a criminal, a plunderer and a human rights violator.”

Gutierrez also cited that pertinent laws and jurisprudence have already recognized the atrocities under the Marcos regime, when thousands of activists were killed or went missing as the Marcos family raided government coffers to enrich itself.

Among others, he said these include the Human Rights Victims Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013 and the creation of a Presidential Commission on Good Government, he said.

“Our constitutional order, our policy for the past 30 years is being twisted. This is no mere technical matter on who should be buried; it hits the heart of the Constitution,” Gutierrez said.

“How would his victims fare, how could they claim their rights have been violated, that it was Marcos’ fault they were raped, tortured, and lost their loved ones, if the one responsible for everything is now suddenly a hero?,” he added.

THOSE WHO SUFFERED

Apart from Rosales, other petitioners who suffered torture under the Marcos dictatorship are Philippine Entertainment Portal editor-in-chief Jo-Ann Q. Maglipon; Claimants 1081 Inc. executive director Zenaida S. Mique; former National Historical Commission of the Philippines board member Fe B. Mangahas; Claimants 1081 board member Hilda B. Narciso; teacher Ma. Cristina P. Bawagan; essayist Mila D. Aguilar; former activist Minerva G. Gonzales; and former detainees Ma. Cristina V. Rodriguez, Aida F. Santos-Maranan, and Francisco E. Rodrigo, Jr.

Petitioners Louie G. Crismo and Liwayway D. Arce meanwhile lost their loved ones during the brutal period. Petitioner Abdulmari de Leon Imao, Jr. meanwhile says giving Marcos a hero’s burial would desecrate the honor of his father, National Artist for Sculpture Abdulmari Asia Imao, and others also interred there.
The Supreme Court ordered the consolidation of all the petitions filed against the burial. The second and third set of petitioners were given a few hours to serve a copy of their petitions to government respondents and the Marcos family by Friday afternoon.

The high court kept the original deadline of Monday morning for the responds to reply to the petitions. It also set a preliminary conference to determine what issues are to be tackled for the oral arguments set on Wednesday.

The other petitions were jointly filed by the Campaign Against the Return of the Marcoses to Malacañang (Carmma) and Samahan ng Ex-Detainees Laban sa Detensyon at Aresto (Selda) and separately by the Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance (Find).

These two petitions argued that allowing the burial would run counter to Republic Act No. 289, which reserved the cemetery for heroes for the “inspiration and emulation” of succeeding generations.

They also cited the Marcos family’s agreement with the government of former President Fidel Ramos, which allowed the remains to be flown to the country on the condition that he would only be buried in his hometown of Batac City, Ilocos Norte. TVJ


TRIBUNE

Orals scheduled on Marcos burial suit Written by Benjamin B. Pulta Wednesday, 17 August 2016 00:00

SC GIVES AFP, PNP 5 DAYS TO REPLY TO SUIT ON FM’s BURIAL

Oral arguments on the burial at the Libingan ng Mga Bayani (LNMB) of the late President Ferdinand Marcos have been scheduled by the Supreme Court, which has been challenged with a suit by at least two militant groups who claim to be Marcos’ martial law victims.

At the same time, the High Court ordered the military and police officials to answer the petition seeking to stop the burial of the late strongman.

SC spokesman Theodore Te said the Court en banc gave respondents five days or up to Monday to file their reply to the petition filed by former Bayan Muna Partylist Rep. Satur Ocampo and several others though the National Union of People’s Lawyes (NUPL).

The Court likewise directed the parties to appear for a preliminary conference at the SC Division Hearing Room on August 22 at 2 p.m. prior to the holding of an oral arguments on August 24.

The burial of Marcos is reportedly scheduled for September 18.

Named respondents in the petition were Rear Admiral Ernesto Enriquez, Deputy Chief of Staff for Reservist and Retiree Affairs of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP); General Ricardo Visaya, AFP Chief of Staff; Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, and the heirs of Ferdinand Edralin Marcos.

The petitioners are seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the Marcos’ burial at the LNMB for being contrary to the Constitution and violative of existing laws as well as jeopardizing their $2 billion claim for damages against the Marcoses for their human rights violations.

READ MORE...

“The said judgment is pending execution and the burial of Marcos in LNMB could affect the already difficult search for Marcos hidden wealth and the full execution of the judgment,” the petitioners said.

The respondents, according to the petitioners, committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in ordering and allowing Marcos’ burial at the LNMB through a memorandum issued on August 7, 2016 by Lorenzana.

They added that the memorandum with the subject “Interment of the late Former President Ferdinand Marcos Sr. at LNMB” and the directive on the interment of the latter issued by Enriquez by AFP Chief of Staff Visaya, reportedly resulting from a verbal order of President Duterte, is illegal and contrary to public policy.

The petitioners also insisted on the validity of the 1993 agreement between then President Fidel Ramos and the Marcos family that the late strongman will be buried in Ilocos Norte.

Furthermore, the petitioners noted that existing laws prohibit Marcos’ burial at the LNMB such as AFP Regulations G 161-373, which states that “those who have been dishonorably discharged from service, or personnel convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude, no not qualify for interment.

The petitioners also said Marcos’ burial at the LNMB violates Republic Act 289 or “An Act Providing for the Construction of a National Pantheon for Presidents of the Philippines, National Heroes and Patriots of the Country.”

“The burial of Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani simply mocks and taunts Section 1 of RA 289,” the petition read.

The petitioners stressed that the country’s experience under the Marcos dictatorship “should not be emulated and cannot serve as an inspiration to this generation and to the next generation of Filipinos.”

They recalled that then President Marcos unleashed his brutal dictatorial by ordering the arrest of more than 50,000 people during the first three years of Martial Law.

Thousands more were tortured, summarily executed and disappeared also during the Martial Law.

Erap: Marcos must be buried in Libingan or in Ilocos”



Former President and now Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada on his take on the issue of Marcos burial in the Libingan ng Bayani said it is not a problem with him should Macos be buried in the LNMB or in Batac, Ilocos Norte, as long as he is laid to rest.
During an interview at the Manila Hotel, Estrada said that dead should be respected and burying former President Marcos is now a big issue and for him. he must be buried.

Estrada said that if a protest rally in Manila will be held, he is willing to grant a permit as long as it is peacefully done and traffic flow will be respected.

“To me, the dead should be respected and it has long been overdue whether buried in heroes burial site or in Batac in Ilocos. He must be laid to rest.

Lack of outrage admitted


AQUINO

Despite street demonstrations and legal action to block the impending interment of the late President Marcos, those protesting yesterday admitted the lack of public outrage on Duterte’s decision to have him buried at the LNMB.

Sen. Bam observed Aquino that there is not much needed public support to drum up calls on Duterte to reconsider his decision allowing the burial of the late strongman in LNMB, even amid efforts bringing the debate on the issue – whether the disgraced former president is eligible to be buried there.

“To be frank, if you look at the surveys, there are many Filipinos who are comfortable with the idea of burying the late president in LNMB. What this means is that those groups like ours need to double our efforts to explain to the people what happened during martial law and why we oppose this,” he said in an interview with reporters.

“It’s the reason those opposing Palace’ moves, himself included, along with rights advocate groups and martial law victims are organizing various activities as September 18 draws near.

Aquino, who is a first cousin of former President Noynoy Aquino, said he is hoping for a favorable decision from the Supreme Court on the petition filed disallowing the burial of Marcos.

“Of the 70,000 individuals who were detained (during the martial rule, the late Sen. (Benigno) Ninoy Aquino is just one of the 70,000. Of the 30,000 who were tortured or placed in solitary confinement, he’s just one of them. And out of the 3,000 killed, he’s just one of them. This is not just the fight of the Aquinos. Too many Filipinos suffered,” he added.

“We hope that the SC will intervene...there are enough grounds to oppose the burial of Marcos saying that their position on this matter is backed up by the existence of laws such proving the supposed guilt or offenses committed by the late strongman which makes him ineligible for even a slot at the LNMB.

Whether the SC will rule in favor of the petitioners, Aquino said he has taken the initiative to look into how martial law period is being taught in schools or whether teachings modules on this matter has been based on factual information.

Some lawmakers have no convictions


BAGUILAT

Meanwhile, in a resolution filed during the 15th Congress, some 216 lawmakers co-authored a resolution urging the administration of President Noynoy Aquino to allow the burial of the remains of former President Marcos, but some are now turning their backs on the resolution they signed over five years ago.

One of those who signed House Resolution 1135 filed during the 15th Congress is Ifugao Rep. Teddy Brawner Baguilat. He is now opposing a similar resolution that was recently filed by allies of President Duterte who promised that he would allow the burial of the late strongman at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.

Baguilat is now one of the more vocal lawmakers who is opposing the burial.

In a statement, Baguilat said that burying the late dictator would be an insult to the heroes now buried in the same place.

“Burying the late dictator in such hallowed ground would dishonor the memory of the National Artists, former presidents, war heroes and Filipinos who performed exemplary deeds in the name of the country,” Baguilat said.

Baguilat said that the LNMB is hallowed ground for people who have done so much for the nation.

“There is a reason it is called Libingan ng mga Bayani. It is for us to remember the people who sacrificed for their country, people like my brother. He died young but he died a hero. To put the former dictator in the same place where he is resting is an insult to his memory and an insult to the memory of the other families whose loved ones made similar sacrifices in the service of their country,” Baguilat said.

HOUSE RESOLUTION 1135

But in House Resolution 1135 which was principally authored by the late Sorsogon Rep. Sonny Escudero and co-authored by Baguilat, Marcos “was a well-decorated soldier, a veteran of World War II and a survivor of the Bataan Death March.”
The same resolution, said Marcos was one who “gave invaluable service to his country as a soldier, writer, statesman, President and Commander-in-chief.

“The Libingan ng mga Bayani is the most fitting place of burial for the former soldier…,” the resolution, which Bagulat co-authored, stated.

Since the resolution was filed on March 23, 2011, some co-authors have withdrawn their signatures from the resolution.
Among those who withdrew their co-authorship were then Laguna Rep. Maria Evita Arago, current Marikina Rep. Miro Quimbo, then Masbate Rep. Antonio Kho, and then Bulacan Rep. Maria Victoria Sy-Alvarado. With Angie M. Rosales, Pat C. Santos and Gerry Baldo

-----------------------

RELATED FROM RAPPLER.COM

SC sets oral arguments on Marcos burial
[The Supreme Court also orders the military and former First Lady Imelda Marcos to respond to the petition vs the planned burial of the late dictator at the Libingan ng mga Bayani] 
Rappler.com Published 5:14 PM, August 16, 2016 Updated 5:27 PM, August 16, 2016


THROWBACK. The Marcos family upon the arrival of the remains of the late president Ferdinand Marcos in Laoag City on Sept 7, 1993. File photo by AFP

MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) – The Supreme Court set oral arguments on the petition opposing the burial of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos on Wednesday, August 24.

In an en banc order on Tuesday, August 16, the Supreme Court also directed the respondents in the case – Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), as well as former First Lady Imelda Marcos – to attend a preliminary conference at 2 pm on Monday, August 22.

They were also given until Monday to respond to the petition filed by Martial Law victims asking the SC to stop the burial of Marcos at the Libingan next month.

Named respondents in the petition were Mrs Marcos, representing the heirs of Marcos; Lorenzana; Rear Admiral Ernesto Enriquez, deputy AFP chief of staff for reservist and retiree affairs; and General Ricardo Visaya, AFP chief of staff.

In their petition, Martial Law victims asked the Court to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Marcos’ burial at the Libingan. They argued that it is contrary to the Constitution and violates existing laws.

If the planned burial is allowed, the petitioners said, this would likely jeopardize their US$2- billion claim for damages against the Marcoses for their human rights violations.

“The said judgment is pending execution and the burial of Marcos in LMB could affect the already difficult search for Marcos hidden wealth and the full execution of the judgment,” said the petitioners led by former Bayan Muna representative Neri Colmenares and Satur Ocampo.

They said Lorenzana committed "grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction" when he ordered Marcos' burial at the Libingan through a memorandum on August 7, 2016. Visaya later sent the same order to the military.

The order, emanating from a verbal directive of President Rodrigo Duterte, is illegal since Marcos does not meet the qualifications of a soldier who ought to be buried there, according to the petitioners.

The petitioners also insisted on the validity of the 1993 agreement between then President Fidel Ramos and the Marcos family that the late strongman will be buried in Ilocos Norte, where his remains are. – Rappler.com


TRIBUNE

Binay: Noynoy fumbles chance to end Marcos controversy Written by Jason Faustino Wednesday, 17 August 2016 00:00



Former President Aquino blew an opportunity to end the divisive issue on the burial of the remains of former President Ferdinand Marcos as he failed to act on an already sealed agreement to have the burial in Batac City, former Vice President Jejomar Binay said yesterday.

Binay spokesman Joey Salgado said the Marcos family had approved Binay’s recommendation that the former President be buried in Batac City in Ilocos Norte with military honors.

Aquino has designated Binay to look into a 2011 resolution of the House of Representatives seeking the burial of Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LNMB) in Taguig City.

The Office of the Vice President (OVP) then held consultations with various sectors and relatives of the late President that resulted in a recommendation for the Aquino government to allow a burial in Batac.

Binay said Aquino failed to act on his recommendation mainly due to the honors that will be rendered Marcos which was a chief political rival of his parents, former Sen. Benigno”Ninoy” Aquino and former President Cory Aquino. The Aquino family also blamed Marcos for the assassination of the former senator in 1983.

“In June 2011, VP Binay submitted to Aquino his recommendation to allow the burial of Marcos in Batac, Ilocos Norte. The former VP noted that the burial of Marcos in Batac had the approval of the Marcos family,” Salgado said in a statement.

“However, Aquino did not act on the recommendation. That’s why the nation is once again torn by debates over a contentious issue that could have been buried a long time ago,” he added.

Earlier, former Interior Secretary Rafael Alunan claimed former First Lady Imelda Marcos signed an agreement in 1992 where she agreed to bury the remains of the former President without a hero’s burial.

Alunan, who acted as former President Fidel Ramos’ designated negotiator in talks between the Marcoses and the government concerning the return of Ferdinand Marcos’ remains from Hawaii to the Philippines, presented a four-point agreement to Mrs. Marcos at her temporary residence in Forbes Park, an agreement she later signed.

READ MORE...

The signed agreement stated that Ferdinand Marcos’ remains will only be returned to the Philippines under the conditions that he will be directly returned to Ilocos Norte; will not be paraded in Metro Manila; will only be buried in Ilocos and not in LNMB; and will only be given military honors befitting a major in the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).

Salgado said the more recent agreement for Marcos’ burial in Batac was the outcome of consultations with various stakeholders, including the Marcos family.

Salgado added that the OVP then received over 3,000 responses through text, email, and letters pertaining to the question on the Marcos burial.

“In June 2011, VP Binay submitted to Aquino his recommendation to allow the burial of Marcos in Batac, Ilocos Norte,” Salgado said.

Noynoying on burial issue

“The Aquino administration missed an opportunity to lay the Marcos burial issue to rest when it did not act on former VP Binay’s recommendation made as early as 2011 to allow the burial of Marcos in Batac, Ilocos Norte,” Salgado added.

Last Monday, victims of Martial Law had asked the Supreme Court not to allow Marcos’ burial at LNBM.

The victims, led by former Bayan Muna party-list Reps. Satur Ocampo, Neri Colmenares, and Bonifacio Ilagan, said the government committed “grave abuse of discretion” by allowing the burial.

In their petition, the victims said, “This will not achieve the purpose of closure espoused or accepted by others. While Marcos rests in peace in LNMB, his victims who continue to cry out for justice, can never rest in peace.”

Marcos was ousted from office through a popular uprising, the 1986 People Power Revolution.

He died in 1989 while in exile in Hawaii. His remains were brought to the Philippines in 1993. As his burial was not allowed at LNBM, his remains have been kept at the Marcos mausoleum in Batac.

Aquino has been adamant against giving Marcos a state burial using the excuse that it “would be an injustice to martial law victims.”

“It really would be the height of injustice to have any honors to the person who was the direct mastermind of all of their sufferings,” Aquino said before members of the Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines (FOCAP) during a 2011 forum.

Aquino added a Marcos state burial will not happen under his watch.

“Being buried at the Libingan ng mga Bayani is a privilege for those who have served the country,” Aquino said.

----------------------------------

RELATED FROM PHILSTAR

Former deputy presidential spokesman Valte denies Aquino’s supposed inaction on Marcos burial By Rosette Adel (philstar.com) | Updated August 17, 2016 - 6:03pm 23 620 googleplus0 0


Former deputy presidential spokesman Abi Valte defended former President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III's supposed inaction to the Marcos burial issue. Malacañang Photo Bureau

MANILA, Philippines – A former Aquino spokesperson on Wednesday denied a claim by former Vice President Jejomar Binay’s spokesperson Joey Salgado that the past administration failed to act on a proposal that could have closed the door on burying former President Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.

Lawyer Abigail Valte posted a statement on Facebook responding to Salgado’s claim that Binay was able to convince the Marcos family to have the late president buried in Batac, Ilocos Norte but the plan did not push through because of President Benigno Aquino III's inaction.

Salgado said the Aquino administration missed the opportunity to lay the Marcos burial debate to rest by failing to act on the recommendation or on the proposal to bury Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.

READ: Can Leni sway Rody on FM burial?

Valte said that Aquino made it clear that he was opposed to burying Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.

“‘Not on my watch.’ That is as categorical as one can get,” Valte said quoting an interview Aquino gave the Associated Press in June 2011. She said the former president was also consistent on his stand during the campaign.

The former deputy presidential spokesperson also chided Salgado for having a “selective memory.”

Valte said that Binay’s May 27, 2011 letter to Aquino on the Marcos burial, said : "1) That we allow the burial of the remains of the late President Ferdinand Marcos in a site of their choice in the province of Ilocos Norte. The representatives of Marcos family interpose no objection to such a burial.”

She said that the so-called agreement between Binay and the Marcos family to bury the late president's remains "in a site of their choice in the province of Ilocos Norte" was rejected by former Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., who reiterated the family's wish for a burial at the national heroes’ cemetery.

“Furthermore, assuming for the sake of argument that an agreement had truly been reached between VP Binay and the Marcoses to bury the remains in a site of the family's choosing in Ilocos Norte, would such burial still require presidential action? It does not,” Valte said.

“I hope this clarifies and debunks Salgado's sordid attempt to throw shade on PNoy on this issue,” she added.

Valte urged Salgado to clarify the agreement with former Sen. Marcos.

On Aug. 7, President Rodrigo Duterte reaffirmed his decision to allow the burial of Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani saying the latter was a former soldier and former president. He said the decision would unite the nation.

Duterte also said last week that the Aquino administration could have passed a law to prohibit Marcos' burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani since they were in power then.

 
http://dai.ly/x4oessp Duterte explains his decision to allow Marcos... by philstarnews

—Video edited by Efigenio Toledo IV


PHILSTAR

Third petition filed vs Marcos burial By Patricia Lourdes Viray (philstar.com) | Updated August 19, 2016 - 2:06pm 2 14 googleplus0 0


Protesters light candles around stones with the names of victims of Martial Law during a rally to protest the burial of the late Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Heroes Cemetery Thursday, Aug. 18, 2016, in suburban Quezon city northeast of Manila, Philippines. Various civic and anti-Marcos groups have revived their protests after President Rodrigo Duterte ordered Marcos' burial with full military honors next month. AP/Bullit Marquez

MANILA, Philippines — Victims of human rights violations under the regime of the late President Ferdinand Marcos filed a petition against his burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani in Taguig City.

Former Commission on Human Rights Chairperson Loretta Ann Rosales, Philippine Entertainment Portal editor-in-chief Jo-Ann Maglipon and 12 other Martial Law victims sought for a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the burial of the late dictator.

"To honor a dictator is to dishonor his victims. To bury him at the Libingan is to honor a plunderer and a thief found guilty of ill-gotten wealth by no less than this honorable court," Rosales said at a televised press conference, reading the petition the filed before the high court.

Rosales, a former teacher at the Jose Rizal College, suffered torture under martial law. She was brought to a safe house in Pasig City where she was stripped naked, suffered the Russian Roulette, electric shock, strangulation and candle burns.

"To bury Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani is to dishonor the survivors of torture, unlawful arrest, arbitrary detention, dehumanization, forced exile, physical and psychological abuse. To accord him the pomp and pageantry of a hero's burial is to dishonor the victims of murder, summary executions, forced disappearances and massacres whose only memorials are the courage and patriotism or the lives they gave up," the petition read.

READ MORE...

Akbayan Rep. Barry Gutierrez noted that the main difference of the third petition is that they provided additional grounds against the hero's burial for Marcos.

Gutierrez stressed that a hero's burial for Marcos is unconstitutional and cited that there have been abuses and killings under the late dictator's regime.

The lawmaker argued that Marcos was a criminal, a human rights violator and that burying him at the Libingan ng mga Bayani is an attempt to rewrite history.

"Marcos should not be treated as a hero but a criminal," Gutierrez said.

Malacañang maintained that the burial of Marcos will push through in September unless the Supreme Court issues a TRO against it.

READ: SC sets oral arguments on petition vs Marcos burial

-------------------------

RELATED FROM BUSINESS WORLD ONLINE

Palace says Duterte to abide by court action on Marcos burial By Joseph U. Vizcarra 42 1 Google +0 0 Posted on August 18, 2016


Protesters give the thumbs-down sign as they denounce the planned burial of the late dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (Heroes’ Cemetery) at a rally on Aug. 14.. -- Reuters

PRESIDENT Rodrigo R. Duterte’s spokesman on Wednesday said Mr. Duterte will abide by “The decision of the court” on his approved Heroes’ Cemetery burial for the late Ferdinand E. Marcos. 

Mr. Marcos was the sixth and last president of the country’s postwar Third Republic, before declaring martial law in 1972 and assuming the powers of a dictator until his ouster by a popular revolt in 1986.

Critics of the late dictator, including victims of human-rights violations during his martial-law regime, have petitioned the Supreme Court (SC) to stop the planned Heroes’ Cemetery burial on the grounds of his dictatorship’s track record of murder, torture and forced disappearances -- as memorialized by the Bantayog ng mga Bayani Center in Quezon City in honor of those fallen -- and his alleged plunder of the government coffers during his rule.

“It seems that everything is starting to move according to arrangements, so unless there is a TRO (temporary restraining order) or anything like that, it will proceed as planned,” Presidential Spokesman Ernesto C. Abella said in a press briefing on Wednesday.

“The President will abide by the decision of the court as stated by [his] presidential legal counsel [Salvador S.] Panelo,” he added.

The SC has set oral arguments on the case next week to hear the petitions questioning the government’s decision on the planned burial.

Meanwhile, lawyer Severo L. Brillantes wrote a letter to Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno dated yesterday in support of the legal action being sought in the Supreme Court to stop the planned Marcos burial.

Mr. Duterte and his legal counsel have argued for Marcos’s burial at the Heroes’ Cemetery on the basis of his being a soldier and former president. The late dictator’s critics, on the other hand, have revived the controversy over Mr. Marcos’s much-questioned wartime record and have clamored for his burial in his home province of Ilocos Norte, in keeping with the original conditions for the return of Mr. Marcos’s body in the country during the Ramos administration.

Mr. Brilliantes in his three-page letter said a “plunderer” whose rule is marred by charges of human rights abuses cannot be laid to rest on the “hallowed ground” of the Libingan Ng Mga Bayani (Cemetery of Heroes) as this site is defined by law.

Mr. Brilliantes said Mr. Marcos was “entitled to a decent burial” but not at the Heroes’ Cemetery. He traced the legal origins of this designated site to emphasize the point that only heroes whose actions and salient qualities attracted “the respect and veneration” of fellow citizens were entitled to be laid to rest here.

While a 1948 law says the cemetery was meant to “perpetuate the memory of all the Presidents of the Philippines, national heroes and patriots,” the same law qualifies that these heroes inspire the “emulation of this generation and of generations still unborn.”

In 1954, a proclamation by President Ramon dF. Magsaysay renamed the Republic Memorial Cemetery at the time to the Libingan ng mga Bayani. Mr. Magsaysay, whose wartime record drew praise in his time, is himself not buried there, but at the Manila North Cemetery, where his remains were brought following a massive procession in his honor in 1957 when he died in a plane crash.

“Dictator Marcos has long been dead. He is entitled to a decent burial but not at the Libingan ng mga Bayani,” went Mr. Brillantes’s appeal. -- with Buena Ryline C. Bernal


TRIBUNE

Sandigan drops suit vs Imelda siblings Written by PNA Saturday, 20 August 2016 00:00


MARCOS

The Sandiganbayan has dismissed the lawsuit against the siblings of former First Lady Imelda Romualdez-Marcos as part of the government’s sequestration efforts in connection with the alleged ill-gotten wealth of the Romualdez clan, although Mrs. Marcos and the late former President Ferdinand Marcos and two others are not yet “off the hook” on the case.

Marcos Sr., however, can no longer be sued, since hehas been dead for a long time, and no court can continue with cases against thre late president.

The anti-graft court’s First Division ordered the dismissal of the civil case this week against spouses Armando Romualdez and Vilma Romualdez and Alfredo Romualdez. But the Marcos couple, former Agriculture Secretary Nelia Gonzales, and businessman Ricardo Quintos were not included in the dismissed lawsuit.

Armando and Alfredo Romualdez are the brothers of Imelda while Quintos and Gonzales were majority stockholders and directors of companies supposedly created by Armando allegedly to conceal and prevent the government’s recovery efforts on the assets suspected of being illegally obtained by the accused during the Marcos regime.

The government is seeking the forfeiture of more than 60 properties, including ranches, pastureland, beach side properties, such assets as Golden Farms Inc., Highway Builders Inc., Dipudo Industries Inc., Maconacon Airways Inc., and Isabela Gas and Power Development Corp., from the accused, plus moral and exemplary damages on the factual, nominal, and temperal damages that the court may determine upon the resolution of the case.

In the decision, the anti-graft court said that with regard to the Maconacon Airways, the State has made a sweeping conclusion that the company was a repository of the defendants’ ill-gotten wealth just because spouses Romualdez were incorporators of the firm.

READ MORE...

It further stated that the ownership of the properties and relations of the Romualdezes to former President Marcos alone did not make these properties ill-gotten, especially considering that the government did not substantiate with concrete evidence abuse of power of authority on the part of the Romualdezes.

It is important to prove that the properties were acquired using the resources of the government and their owners were able to illegally obtain them because of their close association to former President Marcos, which the state failed to establish on this aspect.

Generally, from the stipulation of the parties and competent documentary exhibits, what the government has preponderantly established are only the grant of credit facilities to GCF by the government’s financial institutions, such as the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), and GCFI’s failure to meet its obligations which, in themselves, are not irregular. However, there is dearth of evidence linking GCFI’s loan to the properties acquired by it or by the other four incorporators and the defendants.

It further pointed out that the government was unable to prove that Isabela Gas, and all other firms in question were granted foreign loans guaranteed by the DBP and that the firms availed of that loan.

--------------------------

ABS-CBN OPINION BY BUDDY GOMEZ

OPINION: Who or what is Duterte honoring with a hero’s burial? Buddy Gomez
Posted at Aug 19 2016 12:45 AM


BY BUDDY GOMEZ

The waxen mannequin of the deposed dictator, President Ferdinand E. Marcos, still on display in a glass case at his memorial Museum in Batac, Ilocos Norte, is exactly that. A dummy made of paraffin.

As we all know now, it is President Duterte’s wish to have the remains buried with honors at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (Cemetery for Heroes). Perhaps, it is the President’s compliant gesture over a campaign promise to Imelda, merriest of pixilated widows or a matter of settling an electoral quid pro quo between them. Or even simply, a President’s laudatory offering to his fallen idol!

This ensuing needless imbroglio churned by no less than the President has so raised the national hackles that it will now take the Supreme Court to bring calm to a nation so disconcerted.

That dolled-up mannequin is a robust, healthy, rouged, well-coiffed and handsome representation. It is a product of a mortician’s high quality craftsmanship. The subject certainly could never have looked any better in real life. But let’s face it, such artificial facial enhancement is a form of cheating too, don’t you agree? So what else is new with “Ferdie?” You are allowed to say…..”even in death!"

READ: The long burying of Marcos. Here we go again

Later in life, Marcos was really already a physically deteriorated human being, languishing in his months-long hospital confinement at the St. Francis Hospital in Honolulu, periodically shuttling back and forth between his hospital room and the intensive care unit during near death episodes and false alarms, staged or otherwise.

A notable part of the Marcos family spiel was, as anchor of the campaign to be allowed to return to the Philippines, that he was dying. As early as the fall of 1986. And, of course, the punchline was an ardent desire to die in the bosom of his Motherland!

The hospital records, up to the time of his death on September 28, 1989, indicated that this patient’s name was “Antonio Bundoc.” Why on earth would they devise such a scenario is beyond sense.

Honolulu media was anyway awash almost daily with reportage on Marcos’ medical condition. The name “Antonio Bundoc” was once mentioned as an oddity and let alone as such.

During one occasion, with Imelda Marcos even riding on the same ambulance that took Marcos to St. Francis, but not before alerting the TV stations and a friendly journalist from the Honolulu Star Bulletin, to record the event. And beamed to Manila where anxious ‘loyalists’ were ever eager to receive and react to, news from Hawaii. An orchestration!

Only Imelda and her children, for sure, would know what lies underneath that cosmetically wrapped “corpus,” whether it is really her husband’s shriveled and dessicated remains, or a papier-mache doll, formed with chicken wire inside! Only Imelda and her children know where the mortal remains are truly interred, if indeed it was no longer inside that mannequin..

Why do I say this? Because at the time of his death, Marcos was no longer the virile looking lothario that he always comported and projected himself to be. There was a marked incremental deterioration from the time he landed at Hickham Air Base to the various public appearances that were recorded.

About the time of his death, Marcos was emaciated and weighed less than a hundred pounds. His medical records even included an entry that read like “testicular atrophy.” (Would that physical deterioration pass for karmic denouement to a life of celebrated philandering?) And Marcos had lost much of his hair. He was almost completely bald. The man lost his pompadour, once proudly propped with “Tancho Tique” pomade!

When his 4-year-old cadaver was exhumed from its earlier burial plot at Honolulu’s Valley of the Temples Memorial Park in preparation for repatriation to his home province in Ilocos Norte, some video footage was taken. The cadaver showed evidence of inadequate embalming. And perhaps, even mishandling. Marcos had on an ill-fitting wig which had to be repositioned when the open coffin was jarred by clumsy coffin bearers while lifting the same from its hole in the ground. It showed a death face already shrunken.

As I said, the Marcos mummy is a much beautified likeness. But, alas, it was no longer the Ferdinand E. Marcos we were familiar with!

The foregoing is of course trivia. Nonetheless, recalling at this time is apropos and timely. And why does your friendly “wise guy” sound so authoritative?

You see, from the very beginning of the Marcos exile in Hawaii until his demise in 1989, it was my duty and responsibility to watch over Ferdinand E. Marcos, et al (from a safe distance) and report to the government and people of the Philippines through President Cory Aquino. 24/7 was my vigil. Proudly and courageously, I served as our Republic’s Consul General to Hawaii during the epoch we speak of.

What we are witnessing today, incredibly initiated and contentiously promoted by the country’s incumbent president and now even elevated to the Supreme Court for resolution is best described as an exercise in necropolitics.
Necropolitics in its maddened magnitude.

Thank you, President Duterte. Thank you, Imelda.


TRIBUNE EDITORIAL

Cost of vindictiveness
Written by Tribune Editorial Friday, 19 August 2016 00:00

The divisive issue on the burial of former President Ferdinand Marcos should have been a thing of the past if not for the poor leadership quality of Noynoy who injects destructive politics in every decision he makes.

Former Vice President Jejomar Binay said that Noynoy held off on the Marcos burial despite public consultations made by the Office of the Vice President resulting in a proposal to have the remains of Marcos interred at Batac, Ilocos Norte with full military honors given to a former President.

According to Binay’s spokesman Joey Salgado, Noynoy did not act on the former Vice President’s recommendation after he ordered Binay to review a 2011 House proposal to bury Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LNMB).

“The OVP solicited the comments of various political parties, sectors, organizations and the general public. The Office also held consultations with the Marcos family on the issue. The OVP received over 3,000 responses through text, e-mail and letters,” Salgado said.

Rody has allowed the burial of Marcos at the LNMB and the family of the former President wanted it held on September 18, a week after his birthday, but the yellow mob of Aquino and the red comrades of Rody are up in arms and raised the dictator tag to oppose the plan.

The debate on the issue will now have to be tackled in the Supreme Court (SC) through oral arguments which is expected to crank up the friction as a result of the Duterte decision.

Martial law victims, including the camp of former Bayan Muna Rep. Satur Ocampo and Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana or their lawyers.

Victims of human rights under martial law and several militant groups are expected to argue their cases during the forum set by the SC.

Duterte earlier said that there is nothing that can change his decision to allow the Marcos burial at the LNMB since Marcos is not only a former President but was also a soldier.

Noynoy is dripping with vindictiveness each time the Marcos burial question is brought before him.

READ MORE...

Aquino, despite sending Binay to consult the public on the issue, made it known to everybody that he has no open mind on the issue that he will not allow Marcos to be buried at the heroes’ cemetery in Taguig City nor with military honors while he is president.

Of course Noynoy’s father, Sen. Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr., was the bitter political rival of Marcos.

After declaring martial law, Marcos ordered Ninoy arrested and jailed and was detained for nearly eight years before Marcos allowed him to go to the United States for a heart operation.

Senator Aquino returned to the Philippines on August 21, 1983, and was assassinated at Manila’s international airport which is now known as the Ninoy Aquino International Airport.

Although it has never been proven, the Aquino family accused Marcos of masterminding Ninoy’s assassination.
Binay recommended to Noynoy the burial of the late strongman in Batac with full military honors, something which did not sit well with Noynoy.


NINOY AQUINO AND MARCOS BEFORE MARTIAL LAW

Each time his spokesman Edwin Lacierda was asked about Binay’s proposal, the standard reply then was “we’re still studying the recommendation.”

The Marcos family, in turn, was all for the issue to be given a closure saying that the Binay suggestion was a good formula on which it was agreed.

Bongbong Marcos said then the family was agreeable to a compromise.

“We don’t want to create problems. We would just like to bury our father in a way that he deserved,” Bongbong who was then senator said.

The Marcos family prior to the Binay proposal was still fighting for an LNMB burial for the late President citing the case of the late Defense secretary and Armed Forces chief Angelo Reyes who had staged a coup against former President Erap Estrada and committed suicide but was allowed to be buried in the heroes cemetery. Reyes killed himself amid the controversy over purported corruption in the military and the assaults of Noynoy’s Senate attack dog Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV.

Even former Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin agreed with the recommendation of Binay that the former President is entitled to full military honors and even burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, since the rules call for it.

“As per regulation, he (Marcos) is authorized full military honors,” said Gazmin.

As always former First Lady Imelda Marcos has the most convincing of arguments on the Marcos burial at the LNMB: “Dogs have been buried at the Libingan ng mga Bayani. Why not Marcos? He too, is a hero.”

Of course, Noynoy would not have a problem with any creature buried at the LNMB except for those carrying the Marcos name.

----------------

OF GENERAL INTEREST FROM QUEZUNDUAN.WORDPRESS.COM

THE UNTOLD STORY: MARCOS AND NINOY WERE MORE THAN FRIENDS May 2, 2013 in Marcos and Aquino and tagged aquino, brothers, edsa, fraternity, marcos, ninoy, people power | Leave a comment
ninoy


Benigno 'Ninoy' Aquino  and President Marcos before the Martial Law

I have to re-post this article because the original post has been deleted by Facebook. We don’t know if who’s behind the deletion of the article which has been shared for many times.

Here it is:

This article written by Nemenzo, Gemma from Filipinas (August 2008) is very timely and interesting.


Gemma Nemenzo Managing Editor/Columnist at Filipinas Magazine San Francisco Bay AreaPublishing FROM LINKEDin

The title of the article is “A Different Take: An Interview with Rep. Roquito Ablan.” A lot of you may not know him, but during the Marcos Era, he was a “force” back then.


Ablan shaking hands with Pres. Marcos

Filipinos are made to believe that Ferdinand E. Marcos and Ninoy Aquino were really arch nemesis, rivals, and even foes. But from this interview, we can see the a different view on what was really happening during those times. So here it is…

While writing a book about Upsilon Sigma Phi, the fraternity both Ferdinand Marcos and Ninoy Aquino belonged to, Filipinas managing editor, Gemma Nemenzo, did a one-on-one interview with Congressman Roquito Ablan of Ilocos Norte.

Ablan had the unique privilege of being close to both Ninoy, his batchmate in Upsilon (batch 1950), and Marcos, the undisputed lord of Ablan’s province. With such proximity to the two political superstars of that era, the congressman had a ringside view of what was happening behind the scenes of the Marcos-Aquino saga.

Is he credible? People close to Marcos confirm that Roquito Ablan then had a direct line to the former president. Upsilonians also know that he and Ninoy Aquino remained close friends.

Here are excerpts from the interview:

I first met Ninoy at the University of the Philippines (UP) when we were neophytes in 1950. He was a professional absentee from classes. I was working with LUSTEVECO then so I had an open expense account so I would gas up Ninoy’s car.

The two of us were the most hazed neophytes in our batch. Our initiation lasted one year and one semester. We joined Upsilon because it was “the only frat in UP”; to be an Upsilonian, you must be good.

Ninoy and FM (Ferdinand Marcos) were more than friends. When Ninoy was in detention, he and FM would speak with scrambler telephones. During FM’s state visit to the U.S. in 1982, the two of them talked for an hour about good times.

FM was actually considering Ninoy as his successor. He admired Ninoy for his being a courageous fighter and his vigor. They were on the same wavelength.


ON THE SAME WAVELENGTH: When Ninoy was in detention, he and FM would speak with scrambler telephones. During FM's state visit to the U.S. in 1982, the two of them talked for an hour about good times. UNBLOGGED FROM 'OUT OF THE CLOSET INTO THE STREETS' BLOGPOST

In fact, Ninoy’s “Iron Butterfly” speech against Imelda and the Folk Arts Theater was edited by FM. I know because I was the intermediary. From the very beginning, FM gave instructions to the military to be lenient with Ninoy.

I met up with Ninoy in New York on April 22, 1983, which was my birthday. He told me he needed a passport. secretary of Foreign Affairs Collantes had earlier issued a memo stating no renewal for Ninoy’s passport. So I checked with FM on the phone and Joey Ampeso, a consular officer assigned in New Orleans and an Upsilonian, was asked to assist Ninoy, which he did.

During that New York meeting, Ninoy also told me that he went to see his doctor and his medical exam might require him to rest for six months because of some heart complication. In July that year, Ninoy was told by the State Department that FM was sick and that “if I don’t go home, I will not be president.”

In early August, FM and Ninoy talked about the latter returning to the Philippines and FM told him not to come home yet because he (FM) was weak and he couldn’t protect Ninoy.

On August 17, there was an earthquake in Laoag, Ilocos Norte, so I had to be there as acting governor. I sent two planes to meet Ninoy in Taipei but the first plane, which carried a top officer, could not locate him because he was using a passport with a different name.

FM’s instructions were to bring Ninoy to Basa Air Base, load him in the presidential helicopter and bring him here to Manila, to protect him.

On August 20, I left Laoag at 10 in the evening so I could be in Manila in time to meet Ninoy at the airport. I didn’t think much of it then, but my plane was grounded (by someone who knew the chain of command) and the second plane was prevented from taking off.

When I was driving to the international airport, my car was delayed because of a rally of another Upsilonian, Doy Laurel, in front of Baclaran Church.

I arrived at the airport 12 minutes after Ninoy was shot. Someone met me and said “wala na si Ninoy (Ninoy is gone).”

I cried like a baby when I found out what happened. If I arrived on time I could have escorted Ninoy from the aircraft and he would not have been shot, or I would have been shot along with him on the stairs.


Chief News Editor: Sol Jose Vanzi

© Copyright, 2016 by PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE
All rights reserved


PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE [PHNO] WEBSITE