ISLAND VOICES
'Bong Bong' didn't deserve Isle reception
By Sherry Broder and Jon Van Dyke
The gracious welcome our state officials gave last week to Ferdinand R. "Bong Bong" Marcos is totally insensitive to the victims of the grave human rights abuses committed during the martial law regime of his father, Ferdinand E. Marcos, from 1972 to 1986.
Deborah Booker • The Honolulu Advertiser
The father came to Honolulu after he was finally forced out of office by the "people power" revolt in Manila in 1986. Shortly after his arrival, numerous claims based on gross violations of fundamental human rights were filed against him.
Gov. Linda Lingle and Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona welcomed Ferdinand "Bong Bong" Marcos at the state Capitol last Tuesday.
He died here in 1989, but the cases continued against his estate.
After a hotly contested and emotional trial held in three separate sessions during 1992, 1994 and 1995, a jury in Hawai'i's federal court awarded the class of 9,531 individuals (and their heirs) who had suffered torture, murder or disappearance $1.2 billion in exemplary damages and $766 million in compensatory damages.
Ferdinand E. Marcos (the father) had ruled the Philippines by autocratic decree, issuing almost daily lists of individuals who were to be rounded up. Many of those detained were subject to "tactical interrogation," the code phrase used to refer to the various torture techniques. Judge Manuel Real, who presided over the trial, listed the techniques utilized as including:
• Beatings while blindfolded by punching, kicking and hitting with the butts of rifles.
• The "telephone," where a detainee's ears were clapped simultaneously, producing a ringing sound in the head.
• Insertion of bullets between the fingers of a detainee and squeezing the hand.
• The "wet submarine," where a detainee's head was submerged in a toilet bowl full of excrement.
• The "water cure," where a cloth was placed over the detainee's mouth and nose, and water poured over it, producing a drowning sensation.
• The "dry submarine," where a plastic bag was placed over the detainee's head, producing suffocation.
• Use of a detainee's hands for putting out lighted cigarettes.
• Forcing a detainee while wet and naked to sit before an air conditioner often while sitting on a block of ice.
• Electric shock where one electrode is attached to the genitals of males or the breast of females and another electrode to some other part of the body, usually a finger, and electrical energy produced from a military field telephone is sent through the body.
• Solitary confinement while handcuffed or tied to a bed.
The human rights victims have been trying to collect their judgment from the assets of the estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos (the father) during the past decade. Ferdinand R. Marcos (the son), along with his mother, Imelda, serves as executor of this estate and has been systematically attempting to thwart these efforts.
Judge Real has found both Ferdinand R. Marcos (the son) and Imelda Marcos to be in contempt of court for failing to appear and produce documents at scheduled depositions and for violating the injunction prohibiting any disposition or distribution of the assets in the estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos (the father).
He has fined them $100,000 for every day that they continue to refuse to cooperate, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld this finding of contempt in 1996.
A decision Friday by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, while a setback, does not undermine the basic conclusions of law in Honolulu that led to the $2 billion verdict. It simply impacts access to $683 million in Marcos' assets that were transferred from a Swiss bank to the Philippine government.
Efforts to gain access to other Marcos assets are ongoing and the 9th Circuit decision may also be appealed
In light of this continuing refusal of Ferdinand R. Marcos (the son) to address and resolve the outstanding debt owed to the Filipinos who suffered severe violations of their human rights, it is simply bizarre for our Island leaders to honor him and to treat him as a legitimate political leader.
Along with Philadelphia lawyer Robert A. Swift, Sherry Broder and Jon Van Dyke have been representing the class of human rights victims against Ferdinand E. Marcos and his estate since 1986.
