Duterte to raise Lapu-Lapu as national hero_REFERENCE

image credit: annoyz view.wordpress.com Duterte to raise Lapu-Lapu as national hero  Friday, May 20, 2016  By  DARYL D. ANUNCIADO NOW that the country's presumptive president is a Bisaya, Lapu-Lapu, a "Bisaya" hero who fought the Spanish forces who landed on the island of Mactan over 300 years ago, will be included in the list of national heroes. Presumptive president Rodrigo Duterte, in an interview with Sun.Star Media Group on Wednesday dawn, May 18, said he will raise Lapu-Lapu as a national hero. "I will raise Lapu-Lapu as a national hero... He was the first guy to resist imperialism. He not only resisted imperialists, he killed imperialists," Duterte said. During his campaign speeches, Duterte reminded the crowd about how Lapu-Lapu fought Spanish colonizers who landed in Mactan Island in 1521. Lapu-Lapu, who was one of the datus or ruler in Mactan Island, eventually killed Ferdinand Magellan, the Portuguese explorer who led the Spanish expedition to the East Indies in search of the Spice Island. Though Lapu-Lapu is regarded as the first Filipino hero as he was the first native to resist Spanish colonization, he is not included in the list of national heroes recommended by the National Heroes Committee (NHC). On March 28, 1993, then President Fidel V. Ramos issued Executive Order 75 entitled “Creating the National Heroes Committee Under the Office of the President,” according to the National Commission for Culture and the Arts' (NCCA) website at ncca.gov.ph. On November 15, 1995, the NHC, based on its criteria, selected nine Filipino historical figures to be recommended as national heroes. The committee listed Jose Rizal, Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Aguinaldo, Apolinario Mabini, Marcelo H. del Pilar, Sultan Dipatuan Kudarat, Juan Luna, Melchora Aquino, and Gabriela Silang as national heroes. "What the Manila people did was, instead of raising him (Lapu-Lapu) to the level and dignity of a hero, pu--ng-ina, he was demoted. Isda na lang, escabeche (They named a grouper fish after him)," Duterte told Sun.Star on Wednesday. "I will assign this to the proper office. I will issue a decree that Lapu-Lapu should be included in the listings of the national heroes," Duterte added. (Sunnex) shared from

Selection And Proclamation Of National Heroes And Laws Honoring Filipino Historical Figures_REFERENCE

image credit:filipino first.wordpress.com Selection And Proclamation Of National Heroes And Laws Honoring Filipino Historical Figures Posted on May 18, 2015 Executive Summary No law, executive order or proclamation has been enacted or issued officially proclaiming any Filipino historical figure as a national hero. However, because of their significant roles in the process of nation building and contributions to history, there were laws enacted and proclamations issued honoring these heroes. Even Jose Rizal, considered as the greatest among the Filipino heroes, was not explicitly proclaimed as a national hero. The position he now holds in Philippine history is a tribute to the continued veneration or acclamation of the people in recognition of his contribution to the significant social transformations that took place in our country. Aside from Rizal, the only other hero given an implied recognition as a national hero is Andres Bonifacio whose day of birth on November 30 has been made a national holiday. Despite the lack of any official declaration explicitly proclaiming them as national heroes, they remain admired and revered for their roles in Philippine history. Heroes, according to historians, should not be legislated. Their appreciation should be better left to academics. Acclamation for heroes, they felt, would be recognition enough. 1. Selection and Proclamation of National Heroes 1.1 National Heroes Committee On March 28, 1993 , President Fidel V. Ramos issued Executive Order No.75 entitled “Creating the National Heroes Committee Under the Office of the President”. The principal duty of the Committee is to study, evaluate and recommend Filipino national personages/heroes in due recognition of their sterling character and remarkable achievements for the country. 1.2 Findings and Recommendations of the National Heroes Committee In compliance with Executive Order No. 75 dated March 28, 1993 , the National Heroes Committee submitted its findings and recommendations. 1.2.1 Criteria for National Heroes The Technical Committee of the National Heroes Committee held a series of meetings on June 3, 1993 , August 19,1993 , September 12, 1994 and November 15, 1995 , defining, discussing and deliberating upon the merits of the various definitions and criteria of a hero. The Committee adopted the following criteria as basis for historical researchers in determining who among the great Filipinos will be officially proclaimed as national heroes: Criteria for National Heroes (Adopted by the Technical Committee of the National Heroes Committee on June 3, 1993 , Manila . Members of the Committee included Drs. Onofre D. Corpuz, Samuel K. Tan, Marcelino Foronda, Alfredo Lagmay, Bernardita R. Churchill, Serafin D. Quiason, Ambeth Ocampo, then known as Dom Ignacio Maria, Prof. Minerva Gonzales and Mrs. Carmen Guerrero-Nakpil) 1. Heroes are those who have a concept of nation and thereafter aspire and struggle for the nation’s freedom. Our own struggle for freedom was begun by Bonifacio and finished by Aguinaldo, the latter formally declaring the revolution’s success. In reality, however, a revolution has no end. Revolutions are only the beginning. One cannot aspire to be free only to sink back into bondage. 2. Heroes are those who define and contribute to a system or life of freedom and order for a nation. Freedom without order will only lead to anarchy. Therefore, heroes are those who make the nation’s constitution and laws, such as Mabini and Recto. To the latter, constitutions are only the beginning, for it is the people living under the constitution that truly constitute a nation. 3. Heroes are those who contribute to the quality of life and destiny of a nation. (As defined by Dr. Onofre D. Corpuz) Additional Criteria for Heroes (Adopted by the Technical Committee of the National Heroes Committee on November 15, 1995, Manila) 1. A hero is part of the people’s expression. But the process of a people’s internalization of a hero’s life and works takes time, with the youth forming a part of the internalization. 2. A hero thinks of the future, especially the future generations. 3. The choice of a hero involves not only the recounting of an episode or events in history, but of the entire process that made this particular person a hero. (As defined by Dr. Alfredo Lagmay) 1.2.2 Historical Figures Recommended as National Heroes On November 15, 1995 , the Technical Committee after deliberation and careful study based on Dr. Onofre D. Corpuz’ and Dr. Alfredo Lagmay’s criteria selected the following nine Filipino historical figures to be recommended as National Heroes: a. Jose Rizal b. Andres Bonifacio c. Emilio Aguinaldo d. Apolinario Mabini e. Marcelo H. del Pilar f. Sultan Dipatuan Kudarat g. Juan Luna h. Melchora Aquino i. Gabriela Silang 1.2.3 Status of the Report/Recommendations Submitted by the National Heroes Committee. Since the submission of the report/recommendations by the National Heroes Committee to then Secretary Ricardo T. Gloria of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports on November 22,1995 , no action has been taken. This was probably because this might trigger a flood of requests for proclamations. Another possibility is that the proclamations can trigger bitter debates involving historical controversies about the heroes. 2. Laws Honoring/ Commemorating Filipino Historical Figures 2.1 Heroes 2.1.1 Jose Rizal 2.1.1.1 Decree of December 20, 1898 , issued by General Emilio Aguinaldo, declared December 30 of every year a day of national mourning in honor of Dr. Jose Rizal and other victims of the Philippine Revolution. 2.1.1.2 Act No. 137, which organized the politico-military district of Morong into the Province of Rizal , was the first official step taken by the Taft Commission to honor our greatest hero and martyr. 2.1.2 Andres Bonifacio 2.1.2.1 Act No. 2946, enacted by the Philippine Legislature on February 16, 1921 , made November 30 of each year a legal holiday to commemorate the birth of Andres Bonifacio 2.1.2.2 Act No. 2760, issued on February 23, 1918 , confirmed and ratified all steps taken for the creation, maintenance, improvement of national monuments and particularly for the erection of a monument to the memory of Andres Bonifacio 2.1.3 Other Heroes 2.1.3.1 Act No. 3827, enacted by the Philippine Legislature on October 28, 1931 , declared the last Sunday of August of every year as National Heroes Day. 2.1.3.2 Proclamation No. 510, issued by Pres. Fidel V.Ramos on November 30, 1994 , declared the year 1996 as the year of Filipino Heroes as a tribute to all Filipinos who, directly and indirectly, gave meaning and impetus to the cause of freedom, justice, Philippine independence and nationhood. 2.1.3.3 R.A. No. 9070, April 8, 2001, declaring the eighteenth of December of every year as a special working public holiday throughout the country to be known as the Graciano Lopez-Jaena Day 2.2 Other Historical Figures 2.2.1 R.A. No. 6701, February 10, 1989, declaring September One of every year, the death anniversary of Gregorio Aglipay y Labayan, as Gregorio L. Aglipay Day and a special non-working holiday in the Municipality of Batac, Province of Ilocos Norte 2.2.2 R.A. No. 7285, March 24, 1992, declaring February Nineteen of each year as Doña Aurora Aragon Quezon Day a special nonworking holiday in the Province of Aurora in order to commemorate the birth anniversary of Doña Aurora Aragon Quezon, the first President of the Philippine National Red Cross, and Foundation Day of the Province 2.2.3 R.A. No. 7805, September 1, 1994, declaring January 28 of every year as a non-working special public holiday in the City of Cavite to be known as Julian Felipe Day 2.2.4 R.A. No. 7950, March 25, 1995, declaring December Eighteen of every year as “Araw ng Laguna” and a special working day in the Province of Laguna and the City of San Pablo to commemorate the memory and death of the late Governor Felicisimo T. San Luis 2.2.5 R.A. No. 9067, April 8, 2001 , declaring April 15 of every year as President Manuel A. Roxas Day which shall be observed as a special working public holiday in the Province of Capiz and the City of Roxas *From the Reference and Research Bureau Legislative Research Service, House of Congress SHARED FROM

LIVE: Anti-Marcos rally in Luneta, 25 November 2016

Started streaming 57 minutes ago Get live updates from protest rallies against Marcos to be held in Metro Manila and provinces in the Philippines on Friday, November 25, 2016.: rappler.com/antimarcosrally WHERE IS FREDDIE AGUILAR NOW??????? NASAAN ANG MGA LUMABAN KAY MARCOS NOON ?????BAKIT HINDI NA SILA MAKITA NGAYON? BAKA PATAY NA RIN SILA ? PEOPLE POWER REVOLUTION 1986

DR. JUAN ESCANDOR_ COMMUNITY DOCTOR VICTIM OF MARTIAL LAW

FROM VP LENNY ROBREDO'S FACEBOOK PAGE Dr. Juan Escandor worked as an oncologist and radiologist in the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) in the years leading up to the declaration of Martial Law. There, he worked with urban poor communities and organized the workers of PGH. Because of his frustration with the injustice prevailing in the country, he founded the militant student organization Kabataang Makabayan. Upon the declaration of Martial Law, Escandor left PGH to go underground, volunteering his medical services in the rural communities of Cagayan Valley. The Marcos regime issued a P180,000 reward for the “NPA doctor.” Escandor was killed in 1983, at the age of 42. The military announced that he was shot dead in an armed encounter with constabulary officers, but an autopsy performed on his body told a completely different story: Bruises covered parts of his face and body. His face was full of cigarette burns. Patches of his mustache were plucked. His right eye was gouged out. Trash, plastic bags, dirty rags, and a pair of briefs were found shoved inside his skull. Brain matter was found inside his abdominal cavity. His internal organs showed he suffered from hemorrhage and hematoma, and x-ray results showed fractures in his bones.

EDGAR JOPSON_NOT A PUSHER NOR A DRUG USER BUT AN ATENEO HIGH SCHOOL VALEDICTORIAN

FROM VP LENNY ROBREDO'S FACEBOOK PAGE CREAM OF THE YOUTH Edgar Jopson, more commonly known as “Edjop,” was one of the most well-known faces of the student movement prior to the declaration of Martial Law. Well-educated and bright, Edjop was an Ateneo High School valedictorian, but it was in college where he truly bloomed. He was part of the Ateneo Student Council, and later on was elected president of the moderate National Union of Students of the Philippines (NUSP), then the largest inter-college student organization. It was with NUSP that Edjop participated in a massive rally held on January 1970, in front of the Congress as Marcos made his second State of the Nation Address. Soon after the rally, Edjop and other student leaders went to Malacanang for a dialogue with President Ferdinand Marcos. In that meeting, Edjop demanded that Marcos promise—on a piece of paper—that he would not run for a third term. Marcos, offended at the youth’s cheekiness, snapped, “Who are you to tell me what to do? You're only a son of a grocer!” Edjop responded: “Honest grocer naman.” Edjop’s moderate and peaceful political views soon changed, and he became a member of the Communist Party. He was arrested in 1979, and tortured by Rodolfo Aguinaldo during interrogation. Aguinaldo, who was known as one of the most brutal intelligence officers during the Marcos era, gravely misread Edjop, and planned on having Edjop rejoin the underground movement as a government spy—Edjop took this as his chance to escape. Edjop documented everything he experienced and his observations of his captors in a document entitled “Open Letter to the Filipino People,” which was extremely useful in the campaign for human rights in the Philippines during the Marcos era. In 1981, two years after his arrest, a P180,000 bounty was placed on the capture of Edjop—making him one of the most wanted persons in the country. He was captured a year later during a military raid in Davao city. He was shot while trying to escape, and died a day later, 10 years after the declaration of Martial Law.

MARTIAL LAW SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN

Fr. Zacarias Agatep did not only preach about serving the less fortunate

FROM VP LENNY ROBREDO'S FACEBOOK PAGE Fr. Zacarias Agatep did not only preach about serving the less fortunate, he lived it as well. Even as a seminarian, he spent his summers working with poor families in their farms in Ilocos Sur. After his ordination, he served as a full-time chaplain of the Northern Luzon Chapter of the Federation of Free Farmers (FFF) where he helped them set up cooperatives, raised their awareness about their rights—particularly their right to own the land they till. He helped mobilize the farmers in campaigns for fair prices and fair practices. When the leadership of the FFF aligned themselves with President Marcos’ declaration of Martial Law, Agatep left and returned to parish work in Caoayan, Ilocos Sur. It was in Caoayan that he also joined the Christians for National Liberation, and began to secretly support the fight against Marcos’ dictatorial regime. Agatep was arrested and charged with subversion and illegal possession of firearms in in 1980. He was incarcerated for four months, and during those months, he continued to minister to his fellow prisoners. He was released in December 1980 as part of the regime’s preparations for the visit of Pope John Paul II—who visited the Philippines in February 1981. After his imprisonment, he wrote a letter to President Marcos: “If this is the kind of justice we get from the so-called guardians of the New Society, then there is no wonder why there are some people who go to the hills to fight the government,” he wrote He added, “If it is a crime to love the poor and support them in their just struggles against injustice, then I am ready to face the firing squad.” True enough, he was killed together with Alfredo Cesar, a former deacon who had been assisting him. The military claimed that they died in an armed encounter with constabulary soldiers. Agatep’s body showed that he was shot four times, from behind

HOW WOULD YOU LIKE THIS HAPPENED TO YOUR BROTHER?

FROM LENNY ROBREDO'S FACEBOOK PAGE Boyet Mijares was the son of Primitivo Mijares, the president of the National Press Club during Marcos’ regime. Primitivo was a close confidant of Marcos, and served as the chief propagandist of the government. Boyet’s father was sent to the United States in 1974, and his disenchantment with the regime began there: Primitivo testified before the US Congress on the human rights violations occurringunder Marcos’ rule, and he later wrote “The Conjugal Dictatorship,” a tell-all which exposed the lavish lifestyle the Marcoses lived. This sealed Primitivo’s fate. Little did he know that it would also seal that of his son’s. Boyet was 16 when he received a call form his father, who was lured back to the Philippines from the safety of the United States by Marcos’ men. One day, Boyet asked his mother if he could watch a movie with his friends in Ali Mall, and his mother strictly told him to wait for the car to bring him there. Instead, he asked their maid for 20 Pesos, and said to her, “I’m going to see my daddy today. So I will not wait for mommy. I will just use a bus in going to the place.” The next time they saw Boyet, he was dead. Boyet’s body was riddled with stab wounds, his skull bashed in. His genitals were mangled, and his eyes were protruding. Boyet’s mother, then judge of Manila, was able to obtain information that Primitivo was made to watch while men tortured his son. Primitivo has never been found.

LILIOSA HILAO_ first female casualty and martyr of Martial Law.

FROM VP LENNY ROBREDO'S FACEBOOK PAGE   When Martial Law was declared, Liliosa Hilao started wearing black. She wrote in her diary: “Democracy is dead.” Liliosa was the Associate Editor for the school paper at the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila. There, she wrote essays entitled: “The Vietnamization of the Philippines” and “Democracy is Dead in the Philippines under Martial Law.” She could not join rallies due to her poor physical condition and asthma, but she made sure that her dissatisfaction with the Marcos regime was known nonetheless. On April 5, 1973—barely a year after the declaration of Martial Law—troops from the Constabulary Anti-Narcotics Unit (CANU) appeared at her family’s doorstep looking for her brother, who the regime had tagged as a communist. Liliosa demanded that they show a search warrant or arrest order, but they had none. Instead, they slapped and beat her. Later, she was handcuffed and taken in for questioning. Liliosa’s family members were able to visit her the next day, and could see the effects of beating: Her eyes were bulging and her face was swollen. Liliosa told her visitors that she was being tortured. The next day, Liliosa was dead. According to the official CANU report, Lilli committed suicide by drinking muriatic acid. Her autopsy said otherwise: Her face was severely swollen, her lips bore cigarette burns. Her arms had numerous injection marks, possibly from “truth serum,” a torture method used on victims. Her torso was mottled with finger marks and gun-barrel marks. It was also possible she was sexually abused. Two weeks after her death was her batch’s graduation from the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila. As a sign of protest, her batch mates wore black arm bands and left a vacant, symbolic seat for their absent classmate. She was also awarded posthumous cum laude honors. Liliosa Hilao is considered to be the first female casualty and martyr of Martial Law.

VP LENNY ROBREDO'S EXPRESSIONS OF DISAPPROVAL ON THE HIDDEN MARCOS BURIAL

SILENT NO MORE...This is something the Millenials can ponder on

FAST FACTS | Swiss accounts ni Marcos

EDITORIAL | Make them regret it By: InterAksyon.com November 23, 2016 8:17 PM InterAksyon.com The online news portal of TV5 On the burial of Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, President Duterte is responsible and he will ultimately be proven wrong. But that is not to say that his allowing it was impeachable. It is not. It was political prerogative - a gamble, a gambit, maybe even a deal - exercised on legal footing. The Supreme Court assures him so. The President had the right. Which is not to say that either of them was right. Indeed, worse than risking being wrong, nine justices voted to merely make the High Court irrelevant. Marcos is not only NOT a hero, in 1987 his despotism became the very basis for an entire new Constitution, a wholly rebooted republic reconsecrated not to national independence or republican trends, but to human rights, democracy, and good government. The arguably paranoid Constitution under which we now strive was hammered out not only with those ideals in mind, but with bloodied survivors doodling on the margins: #NeverAgain. The Supreme Court says there is no law (and Duterte says there is no movie) that calls out Marcos as a criminal unworthy of anything. The government has written out checks to thousands in reparation for human rights victims, specifically human rights victims of the Marcos regime. Our Bill of Rights was reformulated and strengthened so that only courts can issue warrants. Just between and among us Filipinos, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is now nearly impossible to suspend, Duterte's blithe musings notwithstanding. And the PCGG was created specifically to recover billions of dollars in Marcos' ill-gotten wealth. There is no mention of Marcos in the Constitution not because he was out of mind. Search not the Constitution for his name, but scour instead the minutes of every committee of the Commission that drafted the charter. There reminders of Marcos' atrocities will have been intoned with such frequency and degree as to make it obvious: the omission is the actual recognition of the evil by which that name is officially denounced. As Lady Sansa said to Ramsay Bolton: "Your words will disappear. Your house will disappear. Your name will disappear. All memory of you will disappear." Except that Sansa  - raped, tortured, mocked, her home pillaged, but ultimately the survivor and victor - then made sure she fed her tormentor to the dogs. In stark contrast, our government - our governments - struck deals for the Marcos clan to come home before any apology, without acknowledging any sins, much less returning any loot and doing justice by their human rights victims. We let Imelda run for President. Elected her children to Congress. Leaders, legislators, politicians signed resolutions endorsing Marcos to the LNMB long before Digong came into the picture. Then the Supreme Court voted to keep itself out of it. It was into this pathetic history that Duterte, first as a candidate and then as President, finally stepped in to say: "Let's just do this and move on." So we know how we got here. Duterte was not alone in leading. But he was still misguided. Where his avowed goal is national healing, his action in fact only reopened very deep, painful wounds. Where Duterte joins Bongbong Marcos in urging people to move on, they have only succeeded to rouse the marchers. Where they insist this is a petty fight among political families of the past, they have only woken the youth who evidently somehow learned - as Duterte's own mother railed - that Marcos' rule is about tens of thousands of human rights victims, a nation stunted and still handicapped by decades of unparalleled kleptocracy, about values and direction of a whole nation. Make no mistake, President Duterte must be held accountable for whatever comes next. Discord, disunity... violence? But what if Filipinos do in fact move on? If even those most outraged today run out of stamina tomorrow; if the protests do not grow and in fact never make it out of Facebook; if this insult does not disrupt nor even interrupt talks with the Left for whom "a just and lasting peace" is a pillar of negotiation; if, as Bongbong has exhumed his father, there is no effort to breathe new life into the cases against their entire clan… In other words, if there is no political price to pay... then Duterte deserves the chance to prove that there is progress worth the perilous path of denial and apathy that we all will have paved. As a politician, the President must be persuaded that burying Marcos at the LNMB is not only a mistake, it is not worth it. Appealing to his political sensibilities may seem a long shot or wishful thinking. But it is no more delusional than counting on the SC Justices to take away the President's options after they gave it to him. It is certainly no more delusional than insisting that underneath the anti-Marcos movement is a silent anti-Duterte majority. Duterte, as Father of the Nation, can take it as tantrums of temperamental brats, or he can it take as well-meaning warning: If he wants the nation to heal, listening to Bongbong will only be damaging. The Marcoses, too, must be made to regret. In wanting us to forgive, Bongbong should meet a people decidedly more unforgiving. We are asked to unite behind indifference to atrocities; let us be more obnoxious about justice. Bongbong would bury his father. Let us unearth everything we have forgotten or may have overlooked, particularly over the quarter century that Marcos Sr. was lying peacefully in a private mausoleum in Batac. The son thinks it a triumph to have transferred his father to a public cemetery imbued with higher public purpose? He should see, everyday, what exactly he wished for. Two dates, two rallies, two venues - neither of which is anywhere near the LNMB - frankly make for ridiculous, comical scenes when both purport to make a point about how Bongbong's making a political pawn of his father's corpse will unite those who #NeverForget. But we suspect – and any truly loving Marcos child should fear - that there will be not a few moments when beyond the rallies, groups and individuals will indeed be visiting LNMB and paying Marcos the respect they think he deserves. Nothing can stop them. Nothing should stop them. The LNMB is a public place. No Filipino should be denied entry, nor even be so much as questioned as to why he or she is there. Force the Supreme Court to explain that to Duterte, so he can shrug when Bongbong requests for round-the-clock security for their plot. Just saying: It will be an impossible task keeping that tomb spotless. If Marcos taught Filipinos that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, Filipinos will likely prove to Bongbong that that too is the price he and his siblings will pay just to convince themselves they did not unearth their father to subject him to… what? For as long as the Marcoses insist that Ferdinand Sr. deserves a hero's spot in land that we all own, his resting place will be anything but. Around that plot will erupt a battle to create a symbol. Of what? Of moving on or of refusing to budge? When the day comes, will you go to the gravesite? What will you bring? Flowers? Candles? Or things less fragrant? Filipinos will move on, one way or another. The question is, to what? Whether the Marcoses will regret or gloat, whether we move on or march forward, will be determined by each Filipino's completing this sentence: "One day I will visit that grave and ____________." shared from

SC defers petition to exhume Marcos

SC defers petition to exhume Marcos  0 BY JOMAR CANLAS, TMT ON NOVEMBER 23, 2016 The Supreme Court (SC) has deferred action on the petition seeking the exhumation of the remains of former President Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani. During the deliberations of the SC en banc, the justices decided to postpone action on the case because the ponente, Justice Diosdado Peralta, was on leave. The tribunal will tackle the petition next week. On Monday, separate petitions were filed before the SC en banc by martial law activists who asked the high court to cite in contempt the Marcos family and some military officials for the unannounced interment of Marcos. Many people were caught by surprise on Friday when the remains of Marcos was flown from Ilocos Norte to the heroes’ cemetery. The petitioners asked the court to order the detention of Marcos’ heirs and military officials involved “until they have satisfactorily cleansed themselves of the contemptuous act or until such further orders of the Court.” Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman said Marcos’ remains should be exhumed because the decision of the high court allowing the burial of the former leader at the heroes’ cemetery is not yet final and executory. shared from

Lagman: Nothing unchristian in move to exhume Marcos remains

Lagman: Nothing unchristian in move to exhume Marcos remains There is nothing unchristian in exhuming the remains of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani because jurisprudence allows it in cases of litigation, Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman said on Tuesday. In the press briefing of the “Magnificent Seven” minority bloc at the House of Representatives, Lagman, a petitioner against Marcos’ burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, said the Supreme Court has made decisions allowing the exhumation of one’s remains. Lagman said the Supreme Court earlier allowed the wife of a deceased lawyer to exhume the remains of her the husband after the common-law wife managed the burial. “They are most likely unaware of Supreme Court decisions which have ruled that exhumation in proper places is allowed. There was one case where the legal wife was separated from the deceased husband a long time, and the common-law wife managed the burial,” Lagman said of those criticizing their move to exhume the Marcos body as “unchristian.” “The legal wife filed the petition, it was initially denied by the trial court but consequently the Supreme Court ruled that the legal wife has the right to … determine where the deceased husband should be buried. So the Supreme Court ordered the exhumation,” he added. READ: Lagman: Ask SC to exhume Marcos’ body to check if wax or not Lagman said there are several more Supreme Court decisions allowing the exhumation of a body in cases of litigation which do not describe the exhumation as unchristian. “The Supreme Court did not consider that unchristian, because such a Supreme Court decision to order the exhumation of the deceased in proper cases. And this case is a proper case, because the implementation of the decision of the Supreme Court is not valid and executory,” Lagman said. Lagman filed a motion to exhume the body before the Supreme Court in order to determine if the interred remains were the bones or the wax figure of the dictator. WATCH: Marcos buried at Libingan ng mga Bayani Lagman also said the hasty secret burial was “premature, void and irregular” because the Supreme Court decision was “indubitably not final and executory, and the lifting of the status quo ante order, an accessory directive, was also not yet final.” Lagman also sought the Supreme Court’s agreement to have the Marcos family cited in contempt for conspiring with the military and police in preparing the “premature and clandestine Marcos burial.” RAM/rga shared from