Skip to content 
Marcos Declares Martial Law in the Philippines
On September 23, 1972, President Ferdinand Marcos declared martial law in the Philippines, a significant event in the country’s history. This decision was made in response to perceived threats from the newly founded Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the Muslim Independence Movement (MIM), which Marcos claimed endangered national security and stability. Thus began a fourteen-year period of one-man rule and the suspension of basic civil liberties.
The declaration of martial law had a profound and long-lasting impact on the nation’s democracy and civil rights. Marcos’ authoritarian regime was marked by human rights abuses, economic challenges, and the consolidation of power by Marcos and his cronies. The people of the Philippines experienced censorship, political repression, and arbitrary arrests, leading to a culture of fear and oppression.
Throughout Marcos’ tenure, the administration justified martial law by emphasizing the threat of communist insurgency and rebellion. However, many critics argue that these justifications were exaggerated to solidify Marcos’ control and extend his tenure beyond the constitutional term limits. Dissenting opinions have also highlighted economic motivations and the cover-up of Marcos’ ill-gotten wealth.
Key Takeaways:
- Ferdinand Marcos declared martial law in the Philippines on September 23, 1972, citing threats from the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the Muslim Independence Movement (MIM).
- Martial law resulted in a fourteen-year period of authoritarian rule, characterized by human rights abuses, censorship, and political repression.
- Opposition figures and groups, such as Benigno Aquino Jr. and the National Democratic Front (NDF), mobilized protests and organized resistance against the Marcos regime.
- The People Power Revolution in 1986 led to the ousting of Marcos from power, and Corazon Aquino assumed the presidency.
- The legacy of martial law continues to shape Philippine society and democracy, with ongoing efforts to address historical distortions and ensure accountability for past atrocities.
Early Life and Military Career of Ferdinand Marcos
Ferdinand Marcos, born on September 11, 1917, in Sarrat, Ilocos Norte, Philippines, had a compelling early life and military career that ultimately shaped his path to becoming the authoritarian ruler who declared martial law in the Philippines.
During World War II, Marcos served in the Philippine military, where his experiences would play a significant role in shaping his leadership style. His remarkable military career laid the groundwork for his political rise and eventual declaration of martial law.
After the war, Marcos transitioned into politics and became a member of the Philippine House of Representatives. It was during this time that he honed his skills as a savvy politician and cultivated alliances that would prove crucial to his later ambitions for power.
The early life and military career of Ferdinand Marcos set the stage for his rule under martial law, which would have far-reaching consequences for the Philippines and its people.
“The soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war.”
– Douglas MacArthur
Building the foundation for authoritarian rule
**1935-1965**: Ferdinand Marcos swiftly rose through the ranks of politics, serving as a congressman, a senator, and the Senate President in the Philippines. His charismatic personality and ability to connect with various interest groups fuelled his ambition for power.
**1965**: Marcos ran for the presidency and won, becoming the tenth president of the Philippines. His initial years in office showed promise, with economic growth and infrastructure development earning him domestic and international praise.
**1969**: Ferdinand Marcos was reelected for a second term, but economic challenges and rising political opposition dampened the optimism surrounding his administration. As his term was coming to an end, Marcos sought ways to extend his rule beyond the constitutional limit.
**1972**: Citing the threat of communist insurgency and Muslim separatism, President Marcos declared martial law, effectively suspending civil rights and granting himself extended powers. This marked the beginning of a dark era for the Philippines, characterized by human rights abuses, censorship, and the consolidation of power by Marcos and his cronies.
“Leadership is not about being in charge. It’s about taking care of those in your charge.” – Simon Sinek
Marcos’s early life and military experience
Ferdinand Marcos was born into a modest family on September 11, 1917, in Sarrat, Ilocos Norte, a province in the northern part of the Philippines. His father, Mariano Marcos, was a respected lawyer and politician, while his mother, Josefa Edralin, came from a prominent political family.
During World War II, Marcos served in the military and rose to the rank of major. He reportedly played a crucial role in organizing guerrilla forces and resisting Japanese occupation in his home province. His military experience solidified his commitment to leadership and instilled in him a sense of duty and authority.
Following the war, Marcos entered politics and eventually won a seat in the Philippine House of Representatives in 1949. This marked the beginning of his political career, which would intertwine with his military background and lead to his eventual rise to power.
Justifications for Martial Law
Marcos and his administration presented several justifications for the declaration of martial law in the Philippines. These justifications revolved around the perceived threats posed by the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the Muslim Independence Movement (MIM). According to Marcos, the nation’s security and stability were at risk due to the imminent threat of communist insurgency and the rebellion of the Muslim minority.
However, opposition figures vehemently criticized Marcos, accusing him of exaggerating these threats to consolidate his power and extend his tenure beyond the constitutional two-term limit. They argued that martial law was nothing more than a pretext to suppress political dissent and maintain authoritarian control over the country.
Furthermore, dissenting perspectives emerged, attributing Marcos’ decision to economic motivations and the desire to cover up his ill-gotten wealth. Critics argued that martial law provided Marcos with a means to control and exploit the country’s resources and amass wealth for himself and his cronies.
Despite the justifications put forth by Marcos and his administration, the true intentions behind the declaration of martial law remain a point of contention. The subsequent events and human rights abuses during this period have cast doubt on the legitimacy of these justifications and fueled ongoing debates about the motives and repercussions of Marcos’ actions.
“The fabrication of threats to justify the declaration of martial law served as a smokescreen for the consolidation of power and the implementation of undemocratic policies.” – Opposition figure
To shed light on this issue, it is essential to examine different perspectives and consider the historical context in which martial law was declared. This will provide a comprehensive understanding of the complexities surrounding Ferdinand Marcos’ justifications and their impact on the Philippines.
| Ferdinand Marcos | Martial Law Justifications |
|---|---|
| Threat of Communist Insurgency | Rebellion of the Muslim Independence Movement |
| Economic Motivations | Cover-up of Ill-gotten Wealth |
Table: Ferdinand Marcos’ Justifications for Martial Law
Examining these justifications and their subsequent consequences is crucial in understanding the extent of the impact of martial law and its lasting legacy on the Philippines.
Administration and Cabinet During Martial Law
During the martial law period in the Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos exercised extensive control over the government, strategically appointing loyalists to key positions in his administration. As both president and prime minister, Marcos consolidated power in his hands, enabling him to assert authority and enforce his policies. The cabinet appointments and control over state institutions played a pivotal role in maintaining his grip on power.
| Position | Name |
|---|---|
| Minister of Defense | Juan Ponce Enrile |
| Minister of National Defense | Fidel V. Ramos |
| Minister of Education | Onofre D. Corpuz |
| Minister of Public Works | David M. Consunji |
| Minister of Tourism | Manuel Elizalde Jr. |
The administration and cabinet under Marcos were carefully chosen to ensure loyalty and support for his regime. By appointing individuals he trusted, Marcos could effectively control policy implementation and suppress dissent. However, this consolidation of power also led to a lack of checks and balances, endangering democracy and civil liberties.
Through his administration and cabinet appointments, Ferdinand Marcos significantly influenced and shaped the governance of the Philippines during the martial law era. These positions allowed him to consolidate power and exert control, ultimately defining an oppressive period in Philippine history.
Human Rights Abuses and Economic Impact
The martial law era in the Philippines under the rule of Ferdinand Marcos was marked by widespread human rights abuses and had significant economic implications for the country. Political opponents, activists, journalists, and other dissenting voices became targets of the oppressive Marcos regime. Historians estimate that thousands of individuals were subjected to torture, imprisonment, and even extrajudicial killings during this period.
While the Marcos regime claimed to bring economic reforms to the Philippines, the benefits were limited and unevenly distributed. The country faced economic challenges, including a drop in real income for workers and allegations of widespread corruption within the government.
“The basis of the martial law rule here was, I think, just corruption, just covering up all the lootings… That’s how it was.”
– Jose Diokno, Human Rights Advocate
The human rights abuses committed during the martial law era had a chilling effect on the nation, creating a culture of fear and political repression. Dissenting voices were silenced, press freedom was curtailed, and civil liberties were violated. The impact of these abuses on individuals and the Philippine society as a whole cannot be underestimated.
The economic impact of martial law was significant and had far-reaching consequences. While the regime touted economic progress and attracted foreign investments, the benefits were not widespread. Many Filipinos struggled with poverty and inequality, as economic reforms failed to alleviate the hardships faced by the majority of the population.
“The combination of economic stagnation and political repression assured wide-scale support for the opposition to Marcos’ regime.”
The allegations of corruption and cronyism within the Marcos administration further exacerbated the economic challenges faced by the country. The concentration of wealth among a privileged few fueled public discontent and played a crucial role in the mobilization of opposition movements.
Ultimately, the human rights abuses and economic impact of the martial law era under Ferdinand Marcos remain a dark chapter in Philippine history. The scars left by this period continue to shape the nation, necessitating ongoing efforts to address the past atrocities, promote justice, and preserve the democratic values of the Philippines.
Opposition and Protests Against Martial Law
Despite the harsh repression, various groups and individuals resisted the Marcos regime during the martial law period. Opposition figures such as Benigno Aquino Jr. and groups like the National Democratic Front (NDF) mobilized protests and organized resistance. Artistic expressions, including protest art and music, also played a significant role in voicing dissent and challenging the authoritarian rule.
One of the prominent figures in the opposition was Benigno Aquino Jr., a leading politician and a staunch critic of Ferdinand Marcos’ regime. Aquino was a symbol of resistance and fought for democracy in the Philippines. He was vocal in his criticisms of the government and its human rights abuses.
Protests and Resistance Movements
The National Democratic Front (NDF) emerged as an organized group and opposed the Marcos regime. They played a significant role in mobilizing protests and facilitating resistance against martial law. The NDF represented various left-wing organizations, including political parties and labor organizations.
“The strength of the people is always greater than the strength of those in power.”
Benigno Aquino Jr.
Protests and demonstrations were widespread during the martial law period. People from all walks of life participated, including students, workers, religious groups, and activists. These protests were met with brutal crackdowns by the military and police, resulting in arrests, injuries, and even deaths.
Artistic Resistance
Artists and musicians also used their talents to resist the Marcos regime. Protest art and music became powerful tools for expressing dissent and inspiring unity among the opposition. Artworks depicted the struggles of the people, while protest songs served as anthems of resistance.
| Opposition Figures | Protests and Movements |
|---|---|
| Benigno Aquino Jr. | National Democratic Front (NDF) |
| Jose Diokno | League of Filipino Students (LFS) |
| Lino Brocka | Artists for the Liberation of the People (ALP) |
The protests and opposition against martial law highlighted the unwavering spirit of the Filipino people and their pursuit of democracy and freedom. These acts of resistance laid the foundation for the eventual downfall of Ferdinand Marcos’ regime.
Snap Elections and People Power Revolution
In response to mounting pressure and widespread public dissatisfaction, Ferdinand Marcos called for snap presidential elections in 1986. This decision came amidst growing discontent with his authoritarian rule and allegations of widespread fraud. The snap elections paved the way for a significant turning point in Philippine history, leading to the emergence of Corazon Aquino as the main opposition candidate.
Corazon Aquino, the widow of Benigno Aquino Jr., quickly gained popular support and became a symbol of hope for those seeking change and an end to the Marcos regime. However, the election results were marred by widespread allegations of fraud and irregularities, casting doubt on the legitimacy of the process. The people were unwilling to accept the outcome without a fight.
Thus, the People Power Revolution was ignited, a nonviolent uprising that rallied millions of Filipinos from all walks of life in peaceful protest against Marcos’ regime. The revolution took place from February 22 to 25, 1986, with protesters gathering at the iconic EDSA (Epifanio de los Santos Avenue) in Manila.
During this historic event, the power of unity, determination, and peaceful resistance was on full display. The movement grew stronger each day, with people joining the cause and demanding change. The revolution captured the attention of the international community and garnered widespread support.
As the pressure mounted and faced with the possibility of a violent confrontation, Ferdinand Marcos eventually succumbed to the will of the people. On February 25, 1986, Marcos and his family fled the country, paving the way for Corazon Aquino to assume the presidency and establish a new era in Philippine politics.
Key Moments of the People Power Revolution
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| February 22, 1986 | Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and Armed Forces Vice Chief of Staff General Fidel V. Ramos withdraw their support from Ferdinand Marcos, seeking a peaceful resolution to the crisis. |
| February 23, 1986 | Military helicopters loyal to Marcos fire upon the crowd of protesters, fueling public outrage and further strengthening the revolution. |
| February 24, 1986 | Millions of Filipinos gather at EDSA, forming a human barricade to protect the defectors and demand Marcos’ resignation. |
| February 25, 1986 | Marcos flees the country, and Corazon Aquino assumes the presidency, marking the end of the People Power Revolution. |
Legacy and Historical Distortion
The legacy of Ferdinand Marcos and the martial law era continues to have a lasting impact on the Philippines. The regime’s human rights abuses and corruption are widely acknowledged, but there are also attempts to distort the historical narrative and downplay the extent of the atrocities committed. The country continues to grapple with the consequences of this period, including ongoing debates over the Marcos family’s ill-gotten wealth and efforts to preserve and restore democratic institutions.
“History will judge me; it is the verdict of posterity that will be decisive.” – Ferdinand Marcos
The legacy of Ferdinand Marcos and the martial law era is highly contentious, with differing interpretations and attempts to shape the historical narrative. While some argue that Marcos brought economic progress to the country, others highlight the widespread human rights abuses and corruption that characterized his regime.
Historical distortion is a pervasive issue, with efforts to downplay the scale of human rights violations and portray Marcos as a hero. There is ongoing debate regarding the Marcos family’s ill-gotten wealth, which is believed to have been amassed through corruption during the martial law period.
The People Power Revolution, which led to the removal of Ferdinand Marcos from power, represented a significant turning point in Philippine history. However, the consequences of martial law continue to reverberate through society, with challenges in reconciling the past and rebuilding democratic institutions.
The Marcos Family’s Ill-Gotten Wealth
One of the significant legacies of Ferdinand Marcos’ rule is the issue of the Marcos family’s ill-gotten wealth. Throughout his presidency, Marcos and his allies were accused of embezzlement and corruption, accumulating vast amounts of wealth at the expense of the Filipino people.
Efforts to recover the ill-gotten wealth have been ongoing for decades, with mixed success. The Philippine government, civil society organizations, and international entities have pursued legal avenues to reclaim the stolen assets, but the process has been marred by legal challenges and complexities.
The recovery of the Marcos family’s ill-gotten wealth remains a contentious issue, garnering public interest and fueling debates about the extent of the corruption that took place during the martial law era.
Economic and Social Impact of Martial Law
The declaration of martial law by Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines had far-reaching consequences for the nation’s economy and society. This section examines the mixed outcomes of the martial law era, highlighting both economic reforms and challenges, as well as the social impact of widespread human rights abuses and political repression.
Economic Impact
During the martial law period, the Marcos regime implemented certain economic reforms that aimed to attract foreign investment and stimulate economic growth. These reforms included the liberalization of trade and foreign exchange, infrastructure development, and the promotion of export-oriented industries. While these measures initially showed some success, the benefits were not evenly distributed across the population.
Workers faced a decline in real incomes as wages failed to keep pace with rising prices, particularly in urban areas. This disparity led to growing income inequality, exacerbating social divisions within the country. Additionally, agricultural workers, particularly farmers, faced challenges in land reform programs, limiting their economic progress and perpetuating agrarian issues.
Despite the implementation of economic reforms, allegations of widespread corruption within the Marcos administration persisted. Critics argue that these corrupt practices, coupled with an unequal distribution of wealth, hindered overall economic development and marginalized certain sectors of the population.
Social Impact
The martial law era in the Philippines was marred by serious human rights abuses, creating a climate of fear and political repression. The Marcos regime targeted political opponents, activists, journalists, and other dissenting voices, leading to arbitrary arrests, imprisonment, torture, and even extrajudicial killings. These actions infringed upon basic civil liberties, stifled free expression, and significantly limited political participation.
The suppression of civil liberties and the atmosphere of fear had a profound impact on Philippine society. Citizens became wary of voicing dissent or engaging in political activities, leading to a culture of self-censorship and diminished civic engagement. The Marcos regime’s efforts to maintain control and silence opposition stifled democratic processes, hampering the development of a vibrant and inclusive political landscape.
| Economic Impact | Social Impact |
|---|---|
| The regime implemented economic reforms | Widespread human rights abuses |
| Uneven distribution of economic benefits | Suppression of civil liberties |
| Real incomes declined for workers | Fear and political repression |
| Farmers faced challenges in land reform | Diminished political participation |
| Allegations of corruption | Self-censorship and limited expression |
Historical Analysis and Perspectives
Historians and scholars continue to analyze the martial law period in the Philippines, providing valuable insights into its causes, consequences, and implications. Through their research and interpretations, they offer diverse perspectives that shed light on the complex legacy of Ferdinand Marcos and the impact of martial law on Philippine society and democracy.
One area of debate revolves around the motivations behind Marcos’ decision to declare martial law. Some argue that it was primarily driven by a desire to consolidate power and extend his rule beyond the constitutional limits. Others emphasize the perceived threats of communist insurgency and rebellion as the main factors influencing Marcos’ actions. By examining these differing perspectives, historians deepen our understanding of the political landscape and decision-making processes during that time.
Economic factors also come into play when assessing the martial law period. While the regime touted economic reforms, such as infrastructure development and foreign investment, critics argue that the benefits were unevenly distributed. Real incomes of workers declined, and allegations of widespread corruption eroded public trust. Understanding these economic dynamics is essential for comprehending the social and political context of the era.
Power Consolidation and Human Rights Abuses
“The declaration of martial law allowed Ferdinand Marcos and his administration to consolidate power, undermining democratic institutions and suppressing dissent. This resulted in numerous human rights abuses, including killings, disappearances, torture, and censorship.”– Dr. Jose Hernandez, Professor of History at the University of the Philippines
Opposition movements and the role of civil society organizations are other critical aspects subject to historical analysis. Dissenting voices, such as Benigno Aquino Jr., challenged the authoritarian rule and showcased the resilience of the Filipino people. Artists, writers, and activists used various media forms to express dissent and inspire resistance during a time of political repression.
Historical analysis and perspectives offer invaluable insights into the prevailing dynamics and realities of the martial law period. By analyzing power structures, economic motivations, human rights abuses, and resistance movements, historians contribute to a thorough and nuanced understanding of this significant chapter in Philippine history.
Reestablishing Democracy After Martial Law
After the ousting of Ferdinand Marcos, efforts were made to restore democracy in the Philippines. Corazon Aquino assumed the presidency and embarked on political and constitutional reforms. A new constitution was drafted and ratified, and the country held legislative elections, marking the return to a democratic form of government. However, challenges remained, including economic recovery, addressing social divisions, and ensuring accountability for the human rights abuses committed during the martial law era.
The People Power Revolution, which led to the removal of Marcos from power, created an opportunity for the Philippines to rebuild its democratic institutions. The focus shifted towards establishing a government that respects human rights, upholds the rule of law, and promotes equal participation and representation of the people.
Under Aquino’s administration, significant steps were taken to dismantle the authoritarian regime and establish a democratic framework. A new constitution, known as the 1987 Constitution, was drafted and ratified. It introduced stronger checks and balances, separated powers among different branches of government, and enshrined the protection of civil liberties and human rights.
Furthermore, the Philippines held legislative elections, allowing citizens to exercise their right to vote and choose their representatives. This marked a pivotal moment in the country’s journey towards reclaiming democratic governance and ensuring the active participation of its citizens in shaping the nation’s future.
Despite these positive developments, the transition to democracy still faced numerous challenges. Economic recovery became a top priority as the country had to address the economic setbacks caused by the martial law period. Aquino’s administration implemented economic reforms aimed at promoting sustainable growth, attracting foreign investments, and improving the overall well-being of the Filipino people.
In addition to economic challenges, the Philippines also had to grapple with social divisions that persisted from the martial law era. The wounds caused by human rights abuses and political repression needed to be healed, and efforts were made to foster reconciliation and national unity. Truth and reconciliation commissions were established to investigate the human rights violations committed during Marcos’ regime, providing a platform for victims to seek justice and for the nation to confront its painful past.
Ensuring accountability for the human rights abuses committed during the martial law era remains an ongoing process. The pursuit of justice for victims and the recovery of ill-gotten wealth continue to be important elements in the reestablishment of democracy in the Philippines. Efforts to hold accountable those responsible for violations and to educate future generations about the dark chapter in Philippine history are crucial in preventing the recurrence of such abuses in the future.
The journey towards reestablishing democracy after martial law in the Philippines has been a complex and challenging one. While significant progress has been made, the scars of the past still linger, requiring continuous efforts to build a stronger and more inclusive democracy. The experiences of the martial law era serve as a reminder of the importance of safeguarding democratic values, upholding human rights, and ensuring that the voices of the Filipino people are heard and respected.
Conclusion
The declaration of martial law by Ferdinand Marcos had a profound and enduring impact on the Philippines. This period of authoritarian rule was characterized by widespread human rights abuses and economic challenges, as Marcos consolidated power and suppressed dissent.
However, the imposition of martial law also sparked opposition and resistance from various groups and individuals. The culmination of these efforts was the People Power Revolution, a nonviolent uprising that ultimately ousted Marcos from power and restored democracy in the Philippines.
Despite the end of martial law, its legacy continues to shape Philippine society and democracy. The country grapples with the need to address historical distortion and ensure accountability for the past atrocities committed during this period. Efforts are being made to preserve democratic institutions, promote transparency, and learn from the lessons of the past.
FAQ
What is the significance of Ferdinand Marcos declaring martial law in the Philippines?
The declaration of martial law by Ferdinand Marcos had a profound impact on the nation’s democracy and civil rights. It marked the beginning of a fourteen-year period of one-man rule, characterized by human rights abuses and the consolidation of power by Marcos and his cronies.
What were the justifications given by Ferdinand Marcos for declaring martial law?
Ferdinand Marcos and his administration provided several justifications for declaring martial law, including the threat of communist insurgency by the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the rebellion of the Muslim Independence Movement (MIM). However, there were accusations of exaggerating these threats to consolidate power and extend Marcos’ tenure beyond the two-term limit.
How did Ferdinand Marcos consolidate power during the martial law period?
Ferdinand Marcos wielded extensive control over the government and appointed loyalists to key positions in his administration. He held the positions of both president and prime minister, effectively consolidating power in his hands. The cabinet appointments and control over state institutions played a crucial role in maintaining Marcos’ authority during this period.
What were the human rights abuses and economic impact of the martial law era?
The martial law era in the Philippines was marked by widespread human rights abuses, with political opponents, activists, journalists, and other dissenting voices targeted by the Marcos regime. Thousands were killed, tortured, or imprisoned during this period. While the regime claimed to bring economic reforms, the benefits were limited, and the country faced economic challenges, including a drop in real income and allegations of widespread corruption.
How did opposition and protests emerge during the martial law period?
Opposition figures such as Benigno Aquino Jr. and groups like the National Democratic Front (NDF) mobilized protests and organized resistance against the Marcos regime. Artistic expressions, including protest art and music, also played a significant role in voicing dissent and challenging the authoritarian rule.
What led to the ousting of Ferdinand Marcos from power?
In response to widespread allegations of fraud in the snap presidential elections called by Marcos in 1986, the People Power Revolution, a nonviolent uprising, emerged. It ultimately led to Marcos being ousted from power and Corazon Aquino, the widow of Benigno Aquino Jr., assuming the presidency.
What is the legacy of Ferdinand Marcos and the martial law era?
The legacy of Ferdinand Marcos and the martial law era continues to have a lasting impact on the Philippines. The regime’s human rights abuses and corruption are widely acknowledged, but there are also attempts to distort the historical narrative. The country continues to grapple with the consequences of this period, including ongoing debates over the Marcos family’s ill-gotten wealth and efforts to preserve and restore democratic institutions.
How did martial law impact the economy and society in the Philippines?
The economic and social impact of the martial law era in the Philippines was mixed. While the regime implemented some economic reforms and attracted foreign investment, the benefits were unevenly distributed, with workers’ real incomes dropping and farmers facing challenges in land reform. Socially, the period saw widespread human rights abuses and a suppression of civil liberties, leading to a culture of fear and political repression.
What are the different perspectives on the martial law period in the Philippines?
Historians and scholars offer different perspectives on the causes, consequences, and implications of the martial law period in the Philippines. The debate encompasses issues of power consolidation, political motivations, economic factors, human rights abuses, and the role of opposition movements. These analyses contribute to a deeper understanding of the complex legacy of Ferdinand Marcos and the impact of martial law on Philippine society and democracy.
How was democracy restored after the martial law period?
After the ousting of Ferdinand Marcos, Corazon Aquino assumed the presidency and embarked on political and constitutional reforms. A new constitution was drafted and ratified, and the country held legislative elections, marking the return to a democratic form of government. However, challenges remained, including economic recovery, addressing social divisions, and ensuring accountability for the human rights abuses committed during the martial law era.
