Supreme Court facade. — PHILIPPINE DAILY INQUIRER
The Supreme Court has ordered Malacañang, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the heirs of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos to comment on the appeal and contempt case filed by human rights advocates and martial law victims.
Ordered to comment were respondents to the petitions, namely, Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana, AFP and Marcos heirs Ilocos Norte Governor Imee Marcos, former Senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. and Ilocos Norte Representative Imelda Marcos.
READ: SC to continue deliberation on Marcos burial petitions next Tuesday
High court Information Chief Atty. Theodore Te said respondents have 10 days from notice of the resolution to submit their comments.
Former Bayan Muna Representative Satur Ocampo, through the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL), and Albay Representative Edcel Lagman filed separate motions for reconsideration seeking a reversal of the Nov. 8 decision dismissing the petitions against Marcos’ burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LNMB).
In a motion for reconsideration, Ocampo, through NUPL, said Duterte’s action violated Article II, Section 27 of the 1987 Constitution which requires the State to take positive and effective measure against graft and corruption.
As proof, NUPL said the Supreme Court itself, on several instances including the Sandiganbayan vs Republic case, has forfeited $638 million in favor of the government.
“Thus, allowing Marcos the Dictator who has already been judged by the Filipino people in 1986 and even the Supreme Court as a plunderer in many cases to be interred at the LNMB on the mere reason that he, like the others, is listed as qualified in AFP Regulation G 161-375, disregards and violates not only the public purpose standard under Proclamation 86 (S 1954) but is a direct contravention and a violation of said provision of the Constitution,” the motion for reconsideration stated.
They reminded the high court that respect for human rights and human dignity is a fundamental principle under the 1987 Constitution.
“The President and the public respondents (Marcos heirs and the military) cannot—by any reason or logic, by any invocation of purported official powers, more so by a promise to a single family at the height of the election campaign—justify their decision without violating this very constitutional principle,” they added.
Lagman, on the other hand, said the sneaky Marcos burial at the LNMB last November 18 was a “gross distortion, a malevolent revision and a wanton derogation of Philippine history.”
READ: Marcos laid to rest in ‘sneaky’ rites at Libingan ng mga Bayani
Contrary to the court’s ruling and President Rodrigo Duterte’s claim, Lagman said the late President’s burial at the LNMB would not lead to closure and national healing.
“The burial of a condemned dictator, confirmed plunderer and censured violator of human rights in the Cemetery of Heroes will not lead to closure because it sanctifies evil and installs a despot and oppressor in the venerable memorial for good men,” Lagman said
The contempt case which was filed by Ocampo has been consolidated to the motions for reconsideration. RAM/rga