Marcos burial as ‘bayad utang’
President Duterte wants the Supreme Court to rule on the Marcos burial based on law and not on emotion, even while his own motive in pushing the issue is based on emotion and not on law.
“I hope that the Supreme Court decides not on emotion,” he said in a press conference last Oct. 16. One wishes that the high court would respond and say: “Practice what you preach, Mr. President.”
In formal speeches, Mr. Duterte cites Ferdinand Marcos as a former president and soldier to justify the burial of his remains in the Libingan ng mga Bayani. But in informal speeches, Mr. Duterte unveils his real motive in pushing the issue.
First, he reveals that he treasures sentimentality and nostalgia because of the closeness of his father to then President Marcos, being a member of the latter’s Cabinet.
Second, he takes pride in his close friendship with former senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., as evidenced by his initial refusal to give Vice President Leni Robredo a Cabinet post, lest he hurt the feelings of Marcos Jr. who had lost to her. He even recently expressed excitement at the possibility that Marcos Jr. would become his vice president if the latter wins his election case against Robredo.
Third, he revealed his debt of gratitude to Ilocos Norte Gov. Imee Marcos who, according to him, helped fund his presidential campaign, with the latter even borrowing money to fuel his run, and at a time when almost nobody else wanted to support him.
Thus, the President is clearly motivated by “utang na loob” (debt of gratitude) and “bayad utang” (payback) in pushing for the Marcos burial in the Libingan ng mga Bayani.
It will be a travesty of justice if he succeeds in convincing the Supreme Court to shackle itself to the lifeless words of the law, even if he merely uses the cold letters of the law as instrument to attain his emotion-driven objective to both repay and demonstrate filial allegiance to the Marcoses.
It will be a travesty of justice if he convinces the Supreme Court to take “emotion” out of the equation even when pure “emotion” impels his own action. In fact, what he calls “emotion”—which he wants the high court to reject—is in reality the all-important spirit of the law, which is what infuses life into what otherwise would be the cold cadaver of the law.
The cold cadaver of the law that governs burial in the Libingan ng mga Bayani provides that soldiers, presidents, and a variety of public officials can be buried there. But the spirit of the law requires these officials to be deserving heroes. Being a hero is the common denominator that animates the intent to congregate the bodies of different public officials in the Libingan.
If the lifeless carcass of the law is merely applied, then a Pol Pot, Hitler, or Stalin can be buried in the Libingan just because they were soldiers or presidents. If the spirit of the law is applied instead, then soldiers and presidents must qualify as heroes of the nation to deserve such burial honors.
The spirit of the law is not written in our laws but we decipher it from the laws’ soul and essence. Not less than our Constitution, and many of our laws, are animated with a spirit that treats Marcos as a villain and not a hero.
The Bill of Rights’ prohibition on torture and inhuman punishment, the creation of a Commission on Human Rights, the restrictions on martial law powers, among others, were made necessary in our Constitution because of our experience of Marcos as a villain and not a hero.
The law creating the Presidential Commission on Good Government, the law that gives compensation to the victims of the Marcos regime (Republic Act No. 10368), as well as the Supreme Court’s decisions on the sequestration of the ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses and their cronies, are all animated by the same spirit of the law that considers Marcos a villain and not a hero.
The Supreme Court is faced with a choice: Apply the cold cadaver of the law, or uphold the spirit of the law. The nation awaits its decision with bated breath.
Comments to [email protected]
RELATED VIDEO
