Biyernes, Oktubre 14, 2016

WHY MARCOS DECLARED MARTIAL LAW?

Source: https://ricelander.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/why-marcos-declared-martial-law/

September 21.  On that day, forty years ago this month,  in 1972, President Ferdinand Marcos declared Martial Law,  an event that to this day never fails to generate passionate recriminations and abrasive discourses.
Why did he declare Martial Law?  To the anti-Marcos elements, it was due to his immense greed for power and wealth.  Nothing more, nothing less.
I wish to contribute my little understanding of this part of our recent history, distilled from innumerable readings of the subject matter over the years.
Marcos declared Martial Law because of Ninoy Aquino.
Ninoy Aquino was the new political superstar of the time.  In all likelihood, he was going to be the next President.  But Ninoy was perceived rightly or wrongly as a communist, or at least sympathetic to the communist movement that was leading the social unrest threatening to engulf the country.
The constitutional option for Marcos had run out.  The explosive bribing scandal that exposed his attempts to influence the delegates to the  Constitutional Convention of 1972  to allow him to run again killed that alternative.
It was at the height of the communist movement’s popularity.  For a society beset by severe social inequity and grinding poverty like the Philippines, communism certainly provided a stark alternative, with its own powerful mass appeal, to challenge the unjust status quo.    In fact, Southeast Asia then, in particular Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, ( as in Korea), was fast being run over by the Communists,  due to the huge support of the people.
The US, the world leader of the anti-communist bloc, was understandably distraught.  The prospect of a Ninoy Aquino presidency in one of its closest ally-nations was an added worry.   So Washington must have cajoled Marcos to stay on as did other leaders, especially the leaders of the Church, who were fearful of the communists, assuring him of their support.   Marcos must have also estimated that if he stepped down indeed, Washington would instigate a coup instead and install a military junta if only to forestall the inevitable, that of a Ninoy presidency.  Indeed, if his military background be any guide, Marcos himself must have shared the same apprehensions.
So  why not Martial Law, the one last option left?  He had nothing to lose.  In fact, great opportunities beckoned.

MARTIAL LAW YEARS UNDER FERDINAND MARCOS


Source: http://factsanddetails.com/southeast-asia/Philippines/sub5_6b/entry-3844.html

MARCOS IMPOSES MARTIAL LAW IN 1971

 Marcos declared martial law in the form of Proclamation 1081 over the entire country on September 21, 1972, using the activity of leftist student groups and insurgent groups such as the New People's Army (NPA), anti-Vietnam-War demonstrations and a series of bomb explosions in downtown Manila as an excuse. He dissolved Congress; suspended rights of habeas corpus, freedom of speech, press and assembly; and imprisoned the opposition Liberal Party leaders. Normally a constitutional last resort designed to protect the masses, martial law was declared by Marcos to keep himself in power and to protect his cronies. Asia's most vibrant democracy was no more.
 Under the president's command, the military arrested opposition figures, including Benigno Aquino, journalists, student and labor activists, and criminal elements. A total of about 30,000 detainees were kept at military compounds run by the army and the Philippine Constabulary. Weapons were confiscated, and "private armies" connected with prominent politicians and other figures were broken up. Newspapers were shut down, and the mass media were brought under tight control. With the stroke of a pen, Marcos closed the Philippine Congress and assumed its legislative responsibilities. During the 1972-81 martial law period, Marcos, invested with dictatorial powers, issued hundreds of presidential decrees, many of which were never published. *
 Like much else connected with Marcos, the declaration of martial law had a theatrical, smoke-and-mirrors quality. The incident that precipitated Proclamation 1081 was an attempt, allegedly by communists, to assassinate Minister of National Defense Enrile. As Enrile himself admitted after Marcos's downfall in 1986, his unoccupied car had been riddled by machinegun bullets fired by his own men on the night that Proclamation 1081 was signed. *
 Many people believe that Marcos ordered the planting of the bomb that gave him the excuse to declare marital law. After wards he held a series of meeting and plebiscites which drew up new constitution declaring the that Marcos would remain the President and Prime Minster indefinitely, ruling over a rubber-stamp parliament.

Marcos: Martial Law Prelude to a "New Society"

 Marcos claimed that martial law was the prelude to creating a "New Society" based on new social and political values. He argued that certain aspects of personal behavior, attributed to a colonial mentality, were obstacles to effective modernization. These included the primacy of personal connections, as reflected in the ethic of utang na loob, and the importance of maintaining in-group harmony and coherence, even at the cost to the national community. A new spirit of self-sacrifice for the national welfare was necessary if the country were to equal the accomplishments of its Asian neighbors, such as Taiwan and the Republic of Korea (South Korea). Despite Marcos's often perceptive criticisms of the old society, Marcos, his wife, and a small circle of close associates, the crony group, now felt free to practice corruption on an awe-inspiring scale. [Source: Library of Congress *]
 Political, economic, and social policies were designed to neutralize Marcos's rivals within the elite. The old political system, with its parties, rough-and-tumble election campaigns, and a press so uninhibited in its vituperative and libelous nature that it was called "the freest in the world," had been boss-ridden and dominated by the elite since early American colonial days, if not before. The elite, however, composed of local political dynasties, had never been a homogeneous group. Its feuds and tensions, fueled as often by assaults on amor proprio (self-esteem) as by disagreement on ideology or issues, made for a pluralistic system. *
 Marcos's self-proclaimed "revolution from the top" deprived significant portions of the old elite of power and patronage. For example, the powerful Lopez family, who had fallen out of Marcos's favor (Fernando Lopez had served as Marcos's first vice president), was stripped of most of its political and economic assets. Although always influential, during the martial law years, Imelda Marcos built her own power base, with her husband's support. Concurrently the governor of Metro Manila and minister of human settlements (a post created for her), she exercised significant powers. *

Land Reform Under Marcos

 Land reform has been a concern since independence. Spanish and American rule left arable land concentrated in the hands of 2 percent of the population and those owners will not give up their land without compensation. Attempts made to provide land, such as the resettlement of Christian farmers in Mindanao in the 1950s, have not provided enough land to resolve the problem. Until land reform takes place, poverty will be the nation's primary social problem. [Source: everyculture.com]
 In September 1972, the second presidential decree that Marcos issued under martial law declared the entire Philippines a land reform area. A month later, he issued Presidential Decree No. 27, which contained the specifics of his land reform program. On paper, the program was the most comprehensive ever attempted in the Philippines, notwithstanding the fact that only rice and corn land were included. Holdings of more than seven hectares were to be purchased and parceled out to individual tenants (up to three hectares of irrigated, or five hectares of unirrigated, land), who would then pay off the value of the land over a fifteen-year period. Sharecroppers on holdings of less than seven hectares were to be converted to leaseholders, paying fixed rents. [Source: Library of Congress *]
 The Marcos land reform program succeeded in breaking down many of the large haciendas in Central Luzon, a traditional center of agrarian unrest where landed elite and Marcos allies were not as numerous as in other parts of the country. In the country as a whole, however, the program was generally considered a failure. Only 20 percent of rice and corn land, or 10 percent of total farm land, was covered by the program, and in 1985, thirteen years after Marcos's proclamation, 75 percent of the expected beneficiaries had not become owner-cultivators. By 1988 less than 6 percent of all agricultural households had received a certificate of land transfer, indicating that the land they were cultivating had been registered as a land transfer holding. About half of this group, 2.4 percent, had received titles, referred to as emancipation patents. Political commitment on the part of the government waned rather quickly, after Marcos succeeded in undermining the strength of land elites who had opposed him. Even where efforts were made, implementation was selective, mismanaged, and subject to considerable graft and corruption. *

Life Under Martial Law in the Philippines in the 1970s

 Under the provisions of martial law, Marcos shut down Congress and most newspapers, jailed his major political opponents, assumed dictatorial powers, and ruled by presidential decree. During the early years of martial law, the economy improved, benefiting from increased business confidence and Marcos's appointment of talented technocrats to economic planning posts. But over the next few years, major segments of the economy gradually were brought under the control of the Marcos crony group. Monopolies controlled by Marcos cronies were subsidized heavily, seriously depleting the national treasury. The previously apolitical, professional armed forces were used by Marcos to enforce martial law and ensure his political survival. Even after Marcos rescinded martial law in January 1981, he continued to rule with virtual dictatorial powers. Thus, it came as no surprise that Marcos won an overwhelming victory in the June 1981 presidential election, an election that was boycotted by most opposition forces. [Source: Library of Congress *]
 Most Filipinos--or at least those well positioned within the economic and social elites--initially supported the imposition of martial law. The rising tide of violence and lawlessness was apparent to everyone. Although still modest in comparison with the Huk insurgency of the early 1950s, the New People's Army was expanding, and the Muslim secessionist movement continued in the south with foreign support. Well-worn themes of communist conspiracy--Marcos claimed that a network of "front organizations" was operating "among our peasants, laborers, professionals, intellectuals, students, and mass media personnel"--found a ready audience in the United States, which did not protest the demise of Philippine democracy.
 But as the years wore Filipinos found little if anything positive to say about martial law or Marcos. During the Marcos era, the Philippines had one of Asia's worst human rights records. The army and police were notorious for their use of torture. Victims—which included political dissidents and suspected drug dealers— were beaten, flogged, given electric shocks. Victims. Marcos also muzzled the press, and banned strikes. Marcos claimed that demonstrations against him were staged by "subversives and people under the influence of drugs." An estimated 50,000 people were detained for alleged political crimes under Marcos in the first five years after martial law was declared.
 According to Lonely Planet: “With martial law imposed, the Philippines was plunged into a darkness reminiscent of the Japanese occupation - only this time it was at the hands of a fellow Filipino. A curfew was imposed, the media was silenced or taken over by the military, international travel was banned and thousands of anti-government suspects were rounded up and thrown into military camps. An estimated 50, 000 of Marcos' opponents were jailed, exiled or killed. Marcos then set about raising revenue by handing over great tracts of prime land to foreign investors and imposing heavy taxes on those who could least afford them.”

Martial Law a Lost Opportunity to Improve the Philippine Economy?

 Amando Doronila wrote in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, “Martial law was an epochal event, a turning point in the history of the country. It marked the dismantling of a political system, a democratic polity, albeit a seriously flawed one. Remembrance has been refocused to some of the more appalling aspects of the martial law years, for example, the atrocities of the regime, human rights violations, the disappearances of targets of repression, the economic plunder perpetrated by the dictatorship, the economic disaster stemming from economic policies determined by crony capitalism, and the unprecedented scale of corruption. These are the more obvious landmarks and legacies of dictatorship, which basically is a system that fosters abuse of power leading to other disastrous consequences. [Source: Amando Doronila, Philippine Daily Inquirer, September 22, 2004 \=\]
 “It is lost to us that Ferdinand Marcos demolished democracy in 1972 to make way for the introduction of authoritarianism that was riding a wave sweeping most of Asia in that decade-to mention the more outstanding models, the People's Republic of China under the Communist Party, Lee Kuan Yew's soft authoritarianism in Singapore, Suharto's dictatorship in Indonesia, and the authoritarian regime in Malaysia. We were a latecomer to Southeast Asia's authoritarian club. \=\
 “In most of these Asian countries with authoritarian regimes, authoritarianism was not just a weapon for stifling democratic impulses but even more so it was a tool for economic expansion and development. When Marcos declared martial law, he was not just concerned with crushing the communist insurgency and destroying the political infrastructure of democracy, which allows the political opposition to obstruct government initiatives and to check its corruption and abuses. Marcos had a larger purpose than these. The larger purpose was to use martial law as the facility and stage for economic takeoff and development, emulating the models of economic success of our neighbors. Park Chung-hee's South Korea and Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore were shining examples of economic growth taking place under a climate of political stability and unhindered by political opposition in a democratic ambience. \=\
 “The point to remember is that martial law was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity given to a Filipino leader to build the economy and make it march with the pace taken by other authoritarian regimes in Asia. Because of his excesses, abuses and corruption, Marcos squandered that opportunity. Martial law in the Philippines was a failed political experiment as an engine to drive radical change and economic growth and development. The 14 years from Sept. 21, 1972 to the restoration of democracy in February 1986 were years of squandered opportunities and wasted national resources.” \=\

Impact of Marcos on the Philippine Democracy

 Democratic institutions were introduced to the Philippines by the United States at the beginning of the twentieth century. The apparent success of these imported practices gave the Philippines its reputation as "the showcase of democracy in Asia." Before 1972 the constitutional separation of powers was generally maintained. Political power was centralized in Manila, but it was shared by two equally influential institutions, the presidency and Congress. The checks and balances between them, coupled with the openness of bipartisan competition between the Nacionalista and Liberal parties, precluded the emergence of one-person or one-party rule. Power was transferred peacefully from one party to another through elections. The mass media, sensational at times, fiercely criticized public officials and checked government excess. [Source: Library of Congress *]
 Marcos inflicted immeasurable damage on democratic values. He offered the Filipino people economic progress and national dignity, but the results were dictatorship, poverty, militarized olitics and a politicized military, and greatly increased dependence on foreign governments and banks. His New Society was supposed to eliminate corruption, but when Marcos fled the country in 1986, his suitcases contained, according to a United States customs agent, jewels, luxury items, and twenty-four gold bricks. Estimates of Marcos's wealth ran from a low of US$3 billion to a high of US$30 billion, and even after his death in 1989, no one knew the true value of his estate, perhaps not even his widow. *
 If Marcos had been merely corrupt, his legacy would have been bad enough, but he broke the spell of democracy. The long evolution of democratic institutions, unsatisfactory though it may have been in some ways, was interrupted. The political culture of democracy was violated. Ordinary Filipinos knew fear in the night. An entire generation came of age never once witnessing a genuine election or reading a free newspaper. Classes that graduated from the Philippine Military Academy were contemptuous of civilians and anticipated opportunities for influence and perhaps even wealth. Marcos's worst nightmare came true when Corazon Aquino used the power of popular opinion to bring him down. *

Economy Under Marcos After Martial Law was Imposed

 During the first years of martial law, the economy benefited from increased stability, and business confidence was bolstered by Marcos's appointment of talented technocrats to economic planning posts. Despite the 1973 oil price rise shock, the growth of the gross national product (GNP) was respectable, and the oil-pushed inflation rate, reaching 40 percent in 1974, was trimmed back to 10 percent the following year. Between 1973 and the early 1980s, dependence on imported oil was reduced by domestic finds and successful energy substitution measures, including one of the world's most ambitious geothermal energy programs. Claiming that "if land reform fails, there is no New Society," Marcos launched highly publicized new initiatives that resulted in the formal transfer of land to some 184,000 farming families by late 1975. The law was filled with loopholes, however, and had little impact on local landowning elites or landless peasants, who remained desperately poor. *
 After Marcos was ousted the Philippines owed about US$28 billion to foreign creditors. Borrowed money had not promoted development, and most of it had been wasted on showcase projects along Manila Bay, or had disappeared into the pockets and offshore accounts of the Marcos and Romualdez families and their friends and partners. Many Filipinos believed that they would be morally justified in renouncing the foreign debt on grounds that the banks should have known what the Marcoses were doing with the money. Even Cardinal Jaime Sin declared it "morally wrong" to pay foreign creditors when Filipino children were hungry. Aquino, however, resolutely pledged to pay the debt. Otherwise, the nation would be cut off from the credit it needed. Although the Philippines could pay the interest on the debt every year, it could not pay the principal. This never-ending debt naturally inflamed Filipino nationalism. A Freedom From Debt Coalition advocated using the money to help the unemployed instead of sending the hard currency abroad. *

Corruption and Crony Capitalism Under Marcos

 Eric Pace wrote in the New York Times, “Mr. Marcos's aura was also tarnished by accusations and problems concerning his country's business and economic life. Under his rule, the Philippines was afflicted with widespread corruption and vast unemployment. There was widespread poverty, along with a few sectors of great wealth.” [Source: Eric Pace, New York Times, September 29, 1989]
 The largest, most productive, and technically most advanced manufacturing enterprises were gradually brought under the control of Marcos's cronies. For example, the huge business conglomerate owned by the Lopez family, which included major newspapers, a broadcast network, and the country's largest electric power company, was broken up and distributed to Marcos loyalists including Imelda Marcos's brother, Benjamin "Kokoy" Romualdez, and another loyal crony, Roberto Benedicto. Huge monopolies and semimonopolies were established in manufacturing, construction, and financial services. When these giants proved unprofitable, the government subsidized them with allocations amounting to hundreds of millions of pesos. Philippine Airlines, the nation's international and domestic air carrier, was nationalized and turned into what one author has called a "virtual private commuter line" for Imelda Marcos and her friends on shopping excursions to New York and Europe. [Source: Library of Congress *]
 Probably the most negative impact of crony capitalism, however, was felt in the traditional cash-crop sector, which employed millions of ordinary Filipinos in the rural areas. (The coconut industry alone brought income to an estimated 15 million to 18 million people.) Under Benedicto and Eduardo Cojuangco, distribution and marketing monopolies for sugar and coconuts were established. Farmers on the local level were obliged to sell only to the monopolies and received less than world prices for their crops; they also were the first to suffer when world commodity prices dropped. Millions of dollars in profits from these monopolies were diverted overseas into Swiss bank accounts, real estate deals, and purchases of art, jewelry, and antiques. On the island of Negros in the Visayas, the region developed by Nicholas Loney for the sugar industry in the nineteenth century, sugar barons continued to live lives of luxury, but the farming community suffered from degrees of malnutrition rare in other parts of Southeast Asia. *

Impact of Marcos on the Philippines Military

 Ferdinand Marcos was responsible for making the previously nonpolitical, professional Armed Forces of the Philippines, which since American colonial times had been modeled on the United States military, a major actor in the political process. This subversion occurred done in two ways. First, Marcos appointed officers from the Ilocos region, his home province, to its highest ranks. Regional background and loyalty to Marcos rather than talent or a distinguished service record were the major factors in promotion. Fabian Ver, for example, had been a childhood friend of Marcos and later his chauffeur, rose to become chief of staff of the armed forces and head of the internal security network. Secondly, both officers and the rank and file became beneficiaries of generous budget allocations. Officers and enlisted personnel received generous salary increases. Armed forces personnel increased from about 58,000 in 1971 to 142,000 in 1983. Top-ranking military officers, including Ver, played an important policy-making role. On the local level, commanders had opportunities to exploit the economy and establish personal patronage networks, as Marcos and the military establishment evolved a symbiotic relationship under martial law. *
 A military whose commanders, with some exceptions, were rewarded for loyalty rather than competence proved both brutal and ineffective in dealing with the rapidly growing communist insurgency and Muslim separatist movement. Treatment of civilians in rural areas was often harsh, causing rural people, as a measure of self-protection rather than ideological commitment, to cooperate with the insurgents. The communist insurgency, after some reverses in the 1970s, grew quickly in the early 1980s, particularly in some of the poorest regions of the country. The Muslim separatist movement reached a violent peak in the mid1970s and then declined greatly, because of divisions in the leadership of the movement and reduced external support brought about by the diplomatic activity of the Marcos government. *

Relations with the United States After Marcos Imposed Martial Law

 Relations with the United States remained most important for the Philippines in the 1970s, although the special relationship between the former and its ex-colony was greatly modified as trade, investment, and defense ties were redefined. The Laurel-Langley Agreement defining preferential United States tariffs for Philippine exports and parity privileges for United States investors expired on July 4, 1974, and trade relations were governed thereafter by the international General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). During the martial law period, foreign investment terms were substantially liberalized, despite official rhetoric about foreign "exploitation" of the economy. A policy promoting "nontraditional" exports such as textiles, footwear, electronic components, and fresh and processed foods was initiated with some success. Japan increasingly challenged the United States as a major foreign participant in the Philippine economy. [Source: Library of Congress *]
 The status of United States military bases was redefined when a major amendment to the Military Bases Agreement of 1947 was signed on January 6, 1979, reaffirming Philippine sovereignty over the bases and reducing their total area. At the same time, the United States administration promised to make its "best effort" to obtain congressional appropriations for military and economic aid amounting to US$400 million between 1979 to 1983. The amendment called for future reviews of the bases agreement every fifth year. Although the administration of President Jimmy Carter emphasized promoting human rights worldwide, only limited pressure was exerted on Marcos to improve the behavior of the military in rural areas and to end the death-squad murder of opponents. (Pressure from the United States, however, did play a role in gaining the release of Benigno Aquino in May 1980, and he was allowed to go to the United States for medical treatment after spending almost eight years in prison, including long stretches of time in solitary confinement.)

The Positive Effects of the Marcos Regime in the Philippines

Oct 4th, 2013


Read more: http://www.bukisa.com/articles/769588_the-positive-effects-of-the-marcos-regime-in-the-philippines#ixzz4N5KzAQ7Y
Follow us: @bukisa on Twitter | bukisa on Facebook


Source: http://www.bukisa.com/articles/769588_the-positive-effects-of-the-marcos-regime-in-the-philippines

In the Philippines, the Marcos regime is considered as one of the darkest period of its history. This article will tackle the "goodness" brought about by the regime.

Ask an old Filipino citizen about Marcos regime and he may just start to talk about the negative effects of the regime and the horror of the memory it brought on the country. Filipinos consider his regime as a dark period in the Philippine History. Not only were thousands of people killed in the long protest, the Filipinos were also robbed of the freedom and will they deserved. However, despite the awful memory of the crooked administration of Marcos, Filipinos should still regard the positive effects of this period. The Marcos regime has made Philippines a disciplined country and has even placed the nation on the map. Aside from that, because of what the Filipinos experienced during that time, they actually learned how to fight and be zealous for freedom.
When the Martial Law was implemented, the whole country became extremely disciplined. One notable change that the Filipinos would never forget was the strict observation of curfew. Just walk along the sidewalk past the curfew time and the police would make some disciplinary actions. That is why once the curfew time starts, the streets are as quite as a mouse and everybody is stuck in their respective homes, safe and sound. With this strict policy, crime rates totally went down the brink. In fact, during the time of Marcos, cases of murders, theft and other similar offenses became so rare since the military was visibly present and on guard all the time. This kind of discipline, although bad in its nature, has given Filipinos the opportunity to compare what it was before and what it is now. If people compare the kind of discipline the Filipinos experienced during the Marcos regime to the present, the big difference might just make one think again. Truth be told: Filipinos of today have become extremely undisciplined.
During the Marcos regime, not only discipline was deeply propagated. The Philippines was also actually placed in the map of the world. During the first terms of Marcos, the economy was at its finest and Filipinos were living a so-called contented life. Prior to the change in the way of administration, our country was one of the most envied nations in Asia. Many companies invested in the country’s business sector and the country was considered an ideal one. Unemployment was substantially low and the peso-dollar rates were closely tied to each other. The country before wasn’t as poor as it is compared now and truth be told again: the Philippines has now been sidelined and overshadowed by other mightier countries.
However, it is still important to note that during this period, the Filipinos, once again—and this time, more bravely—wanted freedom. When the abuse of the military and the immoral handling of Marcos took its toll upon the people, the Filipinos knew what they wanted and needed: that sweet scent of democracy. Amidst the terror that the Marcos regime has implanted on the mind of each Filipino, the people learned how to be zealous for freedom. It made them realize how much they needed democracy. With no other people to depend on, they gripped onto one another and treaded their way towards EDSA. During that one historic day, the new generation of Rizals and Bonifacios went as one nation in ousting the famous dictator. Had that precious freedom not been taken away from the Filipinos, they would have never fought hard to get it back.
                The Marcos has inflicted a lot of pain and trauma in the minds and hearts of Filipinos who experienced the regime first-hand. It is irrefutable that Marcos has brought great damage in the Philippines which the newer generations have continued to suffer from. However, Filipinos could not deny the fact that his administration was one of the most notable and distinguished regime among all. While it is common for people to say that his time was the worst, it is still truthful to say that his was the best. Filipinos now know the essence of democracy and what it really means for a country. Most of all, they have now started to become competitive to reestablish the order and prominence we once had before, only in a much civilized and more democratic way.


Martial Law, the dark chapter in Philippine history

Source: http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/146939-martial-law-explainer-victims-stories

MANILA, Philippines – On the evening of September 23, 1972, the late president Ferdinand Marcos appeared on national television to formally announce that the Philippines was under Martial Law.
This began almost 10 years of military rule in the country. Marcos formally ended Martial Law on January 17, 1981, but it was not until 1986 when democracy was restored – after the dictator and his family were forced into exile, overthrown by a popular uprising that came to be known as the People Power Revolution.
On the 44th anniversary of the declaration of Martial Law, we take a look back at some of the lingering questions behind the declaration, and the consequent events that shaped Philippine history.


Why was Martial Law declared?
When Marcos signed Proclamation 1081 on September 21, 1972, he cited the communist threat as justification. His diary, meanwhile, said the proclamation of Martial Law became a "necessity", following the supposed ambush of then defense secretary Juan Ponce Enrile.
There were subsequent reports that said the ambush was staged, with the Official Gazette citing Enrile's admission in 1986 that it was faked to justify the imposition of Martial Law. (READ: Martial Law 101: Things you should know)
There were also indications that the plan to declare Martial Law had long been in the works. According to the Official Gazette, several people had received prior information about Marcos' plan. The late dictator had also hinted at it in his address to the Philippine Military Academy Alumni Association as early as May 17, 1969 – more than 3 years before the actual declaration.
What happened under Martial Law?
Through various general orders, Marcos effectively put the entire power of government under the rule of one man: his own. He was to lead the nation and direct the operation of the entire government. He ordered the armed forces to prevent or suppress any act of rebellion. Curfew hours were enforced, group assemblies were banned, privately-owned media facilities shuttered. (READ: Marcos’ Martial Law orders)
Those considered threats to Marcos – such as prominent politicians and members of the media – were rounded up and arrested by members of the military and the notorious Philippine Constabulary. (LOOK BACK: The Philippine Constabulary under Marcos)
What did the Martial Law years look like?
There are those who hail the discipline and supposed order of the New Society, as Marcos called it, and considered that period as among the "best years" of the Philippines.
Among the myths: that the Philippines enjoyed a golden age under the Marcoses. Various reports and historical accounts debunk this; while it is true that infrastracture spending increased during that period, it came at a staggering cost: plunging the Philippines in billions of dollars in debt. From $8.2 billion in 1977, the country's debt ballooned to $24.4 billion in 1982 – or within a period of just 5 years. (READ: Marcos years marked 'golden age' of PH economy? Look at the data)
The Marcoses also plundered the country's coffers, with various estimates putting the amount at between $5 billion to $10 billion.
The Presidential Commission on Good Government, the body going after the Marcoses' ill-gotten wealth, is still recovering this money; over the past 30 years, at least P170 billion have been recovered.
Aside from the billions in illegally amassed wealth, human rights abuses were rampant during those days. (READ: #NeverAgain: Martial Law stories young people need to hear)
About 70,000 people were imprisoned and 34,000 tortured, according to Amnesty International, while 3,240 were killed from 1972 to 1981. During this dark chapter of Philippine history, thousands of people were subject to various forms of torture. Prisoners were electrocuted, beaten up, and strangled. They were burned with a flat iron or cigars. Water was poured down their throats, then forced out by beating. Women were stripped naked and raped, various objects forced into their genitals.
Historian Alfred McCoy wrote about Marcos' elite torture units, whose specialty was psychological torture and humiliation aside from the physical pain.
It has been many years since then, but the victims have not forgotten – especially as the Marcoses have neither acknowledged their crimes nor made reparations for their sins.
At the Supreme Court hearing on the proposed Marcos burial at the Heroes' Cemetery, victims were asked to speak before the Court to recount their horrifying ordeals.
The Chief Justice told them: "The Court is listening." – Rappler.com

Declaration of Martial Law

Source: http://www.gov.ph/featured/declaration-of-martial-law/

The anniversary of the declaration of martial law is on September 23 (not September 21) 

“FM Declares Martial Law”—the headline of the September 24, 1972 issue of the Sunday Express, which was the Sunday edition of Philippines Daily Express. The Daily Express was the only newspaper allowed to circulate upon the declaration of Martial Law
President Ferdinand E. Marcos signed Proclamation No. 1081 on September 21, 1972, placing the Philippines under Martial Law. Some sources say that Marcos signed the proclamation on September 17 or on September 22—but, in either case, the document itself was dated September 21.
Throughout the Martial Law period, Marcos built up the cult of September 21, proclaiming it as National Thanksgiving Day by virtue of Proclamation No. 1180 s. 1973 to memorialize the date as the foundation day of his New Society. The propaganda effort was so successful that up to the present, many Filipinos—particularly those who did not live through the events of September 23, 1972—labor under the misapprehension that martial law was proclaimed on September 21, 1972. It was not.
The culmination of a long period of preparation
The facts are clear. A week before the actual declaration of Martial Law, a number of people had already received information that Marcos had drawn up a plan to completely take over the government and gain absolute rule. Senator Benigno S. Aquino Jr., during a September 13, 1972 privilege speech, exposed what was known as “Oplan Sagittarius.” The Senator said he had received a top-secret military plan given by Marcos himself to place Metro Manila and outlying areas under the control of the Philippine Constabulary as a prelude to Martial Law. Marcos was going to use a series of bombings in Metro Manila, including the 1971 Plaza Miranda bombing, as a justification for his takeover and subsequent authoritarian rule.
In his own diary, Marcos wrote on September 14, 1972 that he informed the military that he would proceed with proclaiming Martial Law. Even the U.S. Embassy in Manila knew as early as September 17, 1972 about Marcos’ plan.
This was indeed the culmination of a long period of preparation: As early as May 17, 1969, Marcos hinted the declaration of Martial Law, when he addressed the Philippine Military Academy Alumni Association:
One of my favorite mental exercises, which others may find useful, is to foresee possible problems one may have to face in the future and to determine what solutions can possibly be made to meet these problems.
For instance, if I were suddenly asked, to pose a given situation, to decide in five minutes when and where to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, I have decided that there should be at least five questions that I would ask, and depending on the answers to these five questions, I would know when and where to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
The same thing is true with the declaration of martial law […] It is a useful mental exercise to meet a problem before it happens.
In his memoir, then Justice Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile recalled that on a late afternoon in December 1969, Marcos instructed him to study the powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief under the provisions of the 1935 Constitution. Marcos made this instruction as he “[foresaw] an escalation of violence and disorder in the country and [wanted] to know the extent of his powers as commander-in-chief.” The President also stressed that “the study must be done discreetly and confidentially.”
At about the same time, Marcos also instructed Executive Secretary Alejandro Melchor and Jose Almonte to study how Martial Law was implemented in different parts of the world. Marcos also wanted to know the consequences of declaring Martial Law. The result of their study stated that, “while Martial Law may accelerate development, in the end the Philippines would become a political archipelago, with debilitating, factionalized politics.” Almonte recalled that their findings led to the conclusion that “the nation would be destroyed because, apart from the divisiveness it would cause, Martial Law would offer Marcos absolute power which would corrupt absolutely.”
By the end of January 1970, Enrile, with the help of Efren Plana and Minerva Gonzaga Reyes, submitted the only copy of the confidential report on the legal nature and extent of Martial Law to Marcos. A week later, Marcos summoned Enrile and instructed him to prepare the documents to implement Martial Law in the Philippines.
In his January 1971 diary entries, Marcos discussed how he met with business leaders, intellectuals from the University of the Philippines, and the military to lay the groundwork that extreme measures would be needed in the future. On May 8, 1972, Marcos confided in his diary that he had instructed the military to update its plans, including the list of personalities to be arrested, and had met with Enrile to finalize the legal paperwork required.
On August 1, 1972, Marcos met with Enrile and a few of his most trusted military commanders to discuss tentative dates for the declaration of Martial Law—to fall within the next two months. All of the dates they considered either ended in seven or were divisible by seven, as Marcos considered seven his lucky number.
On September 21, 1972, democracy was still functioning in the Philippines. Senator Benigno S. Aquino Jr. was still able to deliver a privilege speech—what would be his final one—in the Senate. Primitivo Mijares, among others, recounted the functioning of the House of Representatives and the Senate, with committee meetings scheduled for that night. Senate and House leaders agreed not to adjourn on this day, as earlier scheduled. They decided to extend their special session to a sine die adjournment on September 23.
That afternoon, a protest march in Plaza Miranda was sponsored by the Concerned Christians for Civil Liberties. The rally was attended by more than 30 “civic, religious, labor, student, and activist groups […] [and] a crowd of 30,000,” and received coverage from newspapers, radio, and television.
In his diary, Marcos wrote that he, together with members of his Cabinet and staff, finished the preparation of Proclamation 1081 at 8 PM, September 21.
On September 22, 1972, a day after the final speech of Ninoy Aquino, newspapers still came out: they featured the rally held the previous day in Plaza Miranda. Mijares recounted that Marcos was agitated by a statement reported in the Daily Express that if Martial Law were declared, Aquino said he would have to be arrested soon after or he would escape to join the resistance.
The Enrile ambush as pretext for Martial Law
The pretext for Martial Law was provided later in the evening of Friday, September 22, 1972, the convoy of Secretary of Defense Juan Ponce Enrile was ambushed in Wack-Wack as he was on his way home to DasmariƱas Village in Makati before 9 p.m. Enrile recalled his convoy was driving out of Camp Aguinaldo when a car opened fire at his convoy and sped away.
A contrasting account came from Oscar Lopez, who lived along Notre Dame Street, Wack Wack Village, stated that he heard a lot of shooting and that when he went out to see what was happening, he saw an empty car riddled with bullets. Lopez’s driver, who happened to see the incident, narrated that “there was a car that came and stopped beside a Meralco post. Some people got out of the car, and then there was another car that came by beside it and started riddling it with bullets to make it look like it was ambushed.”
This ambush, as Enrile later revealed in 1986, was staged by Marcos to justify Martial Law.
Excerpt from the diary of Ferdinand E. Marcos on September 22, 1972. From the Philippine Diary Project.
Excerpt from the diary of Ferdinand E. Marcos on September 22, 1972. From the Philippine Diary Project.
Marcos, in his diary entry for September 22, 1972 (time-stamped 9:55 p.m.) wrote, “Sec. Juan Ponce Enrile was ambushed near Wack-Wack at about 8:00 pm tonight. It was a good thing he was riding in his security car as a protective measure… This makes the martial law proclamation a necessity.” His diary entry for September 25, 1972 mentions conditions after two days of Martial Law, also indicating martial law in reality is dated to September 23, 1972.
Primitivo Mijares—a former journalist for Marcos who would later write against Marcos and disappear without a trace in 1973—claimed that the Enrile ambush was fake as it was made as the final excuse for Marcos to declare Martial Law.[11] Mijares also claimed that the ammunition planted by the Presidential Guard Battalion in Digoyo Point, Isabela—which was later confiscated by the Philippine Constabulary on July 5, 1972—was used to connect the ambush with alleged Communist terror attacks.
In the biography of Chino Roces, Vergel Santos questioned the elements of the Enrile ambush: “Why inside a village and not on a public street, and why in that particular village? Possibly for easier stage-managing: the family of Enrile’s sister Irma and her husband, Dr. Victor Potenciano, lived there, in Fordham, the next street in the Potenciano home and got the story straight from him, as officially scripted.”[12]
September 21 or September 23?
When Marcos appeared on television at 7:15 p.m. on September 23, 1972 to announce that he had placed the “entire Philippines under Martial Law” by virtue of Proclamation No. 1081, he framed his announcement in legalistic terms that were untrue. This helped camouflage the true nature of his act to this day: it was nothing less than a self-coup.
Marcos announced that he had placed the entire country under Martial Law as of 9 p.m. on September 22, 1972 via a proclamation which, he claimed, he’d signed on September 21, 1972.
Yet accounts differ. David Rosenberg, writing in the Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars (“The End of the Freest Press in the World,” Vol. 5, 1973) chronicled that about six hours after the ambush, Marcos signed Proclamation No. 1081, placing the entire country under Martial Law, placing the signing at around 3 a.m. on September 23. Raymond Bonner, in his book Waltzing with the Dictator, narrated his interview with Enrile, during which the former Defense Secretary recalled that he and Acting Executive Secretary Roberto Reyes witnessed Marcos sign Proclamation No. 1081 in the morning of September 23, 1972. The Bangkok Post asserted in a series of articles called “The Aquino Papers,” published from February 20 to 22 of 1973, that Proclamation No. 1081 had been signed even earlier, on September 17, 1972, postdated to September 21. Mijares also mentioned in his book that Marcos said as much in an address to a conference of historians, in January 1973.
Two things emerge: first, whether they conflict or not, all accounts indicate that Marcos’ obsession with numerology (particularly the number seven) necessitated that Proclamation No. 1081 be officially signed on a date that was divisible by seven. Thus, September 21, 1972 became the official date that Martial Law was established and the day that the Marcos dictatorship began. This also allowed Marcos to control history on his own terms.
Day one of the Marcos dictatorship
The second is that the arbitrary date emphasizes that the actual date for Martial Law was not the numerologically-auspicious (for Marcos) 21st, but rather, the moment that Martial Law was put into full effect, which was after the nationwide address of Ferdinand Marcos as far as the nation was concerned: September 23, 1972. By then, personalities considered threats to Marcos (Senators Benigno S. Aquino Jr., Jose Diokno, Francisco Rodrigo and Ramon Mitra Jr., and members of the media such as Joaquin Roces, Teodoro Locsin Sr., Maximo Soliven and Amando Doronila) had already been rounded up, starting with the arrest of Senator Aquino at midnight on September 22, and going into the early morning hours of September 23, when 100 of the 400 personalities targeted for arrest were already detained in Camp Crame by 4 a.m.
In the meantime, the military had shut down mass media, flights were canceled, and incoming overseas calls were prohibited. Press Secretary Francisco Tatad went on air at 3 p.m. of September 23 to read the text of Proclamation No. 1081. The reading of the proclamation was followed by Marcos going on air at 7:15 p.m. to justify the massive clampdown of democratic institutions in the country.
Marcos would subsequently issue General Order No. 1, s. 1972, transferring all powers to the President who was to rule by decree.
[View our infographic: The Day Marcos Declared Martial Law]
The New York Times reported about these events in an article titled “Mass Arrests and Curfew Announced in Philippines; Mass Arrests Ordered in Philippines” in their September 24, 1972 issue. The Daily Express itself announced in its September 24 issue that Marcos had proclaimed martial law the day before, September 23, 1972.
“Never again”
After the declaration and imposition of Martial Law, citizens would still go on to challenge the constitutionality of Proclamation No. 1081. Those arrested filed petitions forhabeas corpus with the Supreme Court. But Marcos, who had originally announced that Martial Law would not supersede the 1935 Constitution, engineered the replacement of the constitution with a new one. On March 31, 1973, the Supreme Court issued its final decision in Javellana v. Executive Secretary, which essentially validated the 1973 Constitution. This would be the final legitimizing decision with on the constitutionality of Martial Law: in G.R. No. L-35546 September 17, 1974, the Supreme Court dismissed petitions for habeas corpus by ruling that Martial Law was a political question beyond the jurisdiction of the court; and that, furthermore, the court had already deemed the 1973 Constitution in full force and effect, replacing the 1935 Constitution.
Martial Law would officially end on January 17, 1981 with Proclamation No. 2045. Marcos, however, would reserve decree-making powers for himself.
Today, the 1987 Constitution safeguards our institutions from a repeat of Marcos’ Martial Law regime. The Supreme Court is empowered to review all official acts to determine if there has been grave abuse of discretion. Congress cannot be padlocked. Martial Law is limited in duration and effects, even if contemplated by a president. Section 18 of Article VII of the current Constitution provides:
Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress may, in the same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.
The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours following such proclamation or suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without any need of a call.
The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.
A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ.