The period spanning from the declaration of Martial Law in 1972 to the ouster of Ferdinand E. Marcos in 1986 represents one of the most transformative, controversial, and debated chapters in Philippine history. For nearly two decades, Marcos held an unprecedented grip on power, fundamentally altering the nation’s political landscape, economy, and social fabric. This era, often referred to simply as the Ferdinand Marcos Era, began with promises of order and reform under the guise of Proclamation No. 1081 and concluded abruptly with the historic People Power Revolution, also known globally as the EDSA Revolution, leading to the Marcos Ouster. This article delves into the complexities of this period, examining the preconditions that led to Martial Law Philippines, the realities of living under an authoritarian regime, the growing resistance, the pivotal events leading to his downfall, and the lasting legacy that continues to shape the nation’s discourse today.
The Path to Martial Law
Ferdinand Marcos first came to power in 1965, winning the presidency on a platform of reform and development. His initial term saw significant infrastructure projects and economic growth. However, as his presidency progressed into his second term (a feat not achieved by any previous Philippine president), the political climate grew increasingly volatile.
Early Presidency and Growing Discontent
By the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Philippines was facing multiple challenges. Social inequality was rampant, and political corruption was widespread. Marcos’s administration, despite its development initiatives, was increasingly criticized for cronyism and a growing concentration of wealth and power.
Student activism surged, fueled by global anti-establishment movements and local grievances against government policies and perceived authoritarian tendencies. This culminated in what is now known as the First Quarter Storm in 1970, a series of violent demonstrations, protests, and marches primarily led by students and activists against the Marcos government. These protests highlighted deep-seated frustrations with the status quo and demanded systemic change.
Simultaneously, the nation faced significant security threats. The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), re-established under Jose Maria Sison in 1968, saw the rise of its armed wing, the New People’s Army (NPA), which launched an insurgency in rural areas. In the south, a separatist movement, the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), intensified its fight for self-determination, leading to armed conflict in Mindanao.
The political tension reached a fever pitch with events like the Plaza Miranda bombing in August 1971. During a political rally of the opposition Liberal Party at Plaza Miranda in Manila, two grenades exploded, killing nine people and injuring dozens, including prominent opposition figures. Marcos immediately blamed communists and used the incident to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, signaling a move towards greater authoritarian control, although the suspension was later lifted due to public outcry. The identity of the perpetrators of the Plaza Miranda bombing remains a subject of historical debate and various theories.
Justification for Proclamation No. 1081
Facing growing unrest, security threats, and an increasingly effective political opposition, Marcos began laying the groundwork for a more drastic measure: martial law. His official justification, articulated upon the declaration, rested primarily on the need to quell the burgeoning communist insurgency led by the New People’s Army, counter the separatist movement of the Moro National Liberation Front in Mindanao, and restore law and order which he argued had broken down completely.
Marcos claimed that a state of rebellion and insurrection existed, threatening the very foundation of the Republic. He cited ambush attempts (including a widely disputed ambush on his then-Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile just hours before the declaration), rising crime rates, and escalating protests as evidence of this breakdown. Proclamation No. 1081, signed on September 21, 1972, though officially announced on September 23, would become the instrument through which Marcos fundamentally restructured the Philippine government and consolidated his power.
Imposition of Martial Law (1972)
The declaration of Martial Law marked a dramatic turning point. Overnight, the democratic institutions that had existed since the country’s independence were dismantled or severely curtailed.
Proclamation No. 1081: The Legal Basis
Proclamation No. 1081, issued by President Ferdinand Marcos, placed the entire Philippines under a state of martial law effective September 21, 1972. The proclamation invoked Article VII, Section 10, Paragraph (2) of the 1935 Constitution, which allowed the President to place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law in cases of invasion, insurrection, rebellion, or imminent danger thereof, when the public safety required it.
However, critics argued that the conditions did not genuinely warrant such a drastic measure nationwide and that Marcos exaggerated the threats to justify extending his stay in power beyond the constitutional two-term limit. The Supreme Court eventually upheld the legality of the proclamation, but the decision was highly controversial.
Initial Impact and Consolidation of Power
The immediate effects of Martial Law were swift and profound. Civil liberties were suspended. Congress was padlocked, effectively dissolving the legislative branch. Mass media outlets critical of the government were shut down. Prominent political opponents, journalists, student leaders, and activists were rounded up and arrested without warrants. Among the most high-profile detainees was Senator Benigno Aquino Jr., Marcos’s staunchest political rival, who was immediately imprisoned and faced trumped-up charges.
With the legislature dissolved and the judiciary effectively cowed, Marcos ruled by decree. He issued presidential decrees, general orders, and letters of instructions that had the force of law. A new constitution, the 1973 Constitution, was ratified under questionable circumstances, replacing the 1935 Constitution and fundamentally changing the structure of government from a presidential to a parliamentary system, albeit one heavily skewed towards the executive. This new constitution allowed Marcos to legally continue in power indefinitely.
Marcos also initiated a sweeping reorganization of the government bureaucracy and the military, placing loyalists in key positions. This consolidation of power effectively transformed the Philippines into an authoritarian state under his personal control.
Life Under Martial Law (1972-1981)
Life under Martial Law was characterized by a mix of perceived order and underlying repression. While the government touted achievements in infrastructure and suppressing dissent, the cost to civil liberties and human rights was immense.
Governance and “Constitutional Authoritarianism”
During this period, Marcos coined the term “Constitutional Authoritarianism” to describe his form of government. He argued that strong, centralized leadership was necessary to effectively implement reforms and national development programs while simultaneously dealing with security threats. The 1973 Constitution provided the legal framework for this system, granting the President expansive powers.
In 1978, a legislative body called the Batasang Pambansa (Interim National Assembly) was established, supposedly to transition towards a parliamentary system. However, it was largely composed of Marcos loyalists from his newly formed political party, the Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL) (New Society Movement), and served primarily to legitimize his decrees and policies rather than act as a genuine check on his power.
Economic Policies and Cronyism
Marcos launched ambitious economic programs, including infrastructure development projects like roads, bridges, and power plants, some of which were funded by significant foreign loans. Initial economic growth figures were positive, and the government claimed success in land reform programs.
However, the Ferdinand Marcos Era became increasingly synonymous with Corruption and Cronyism. Marcos and his wife, Imelda Marcos, along with their close associates and relatives (the “cronies”), gained control over key industries such as sugar, coconut, logging, and banking through state-backed monopolies and preferential treatment. This resulted in massive private enrichment at the expense of public funds and fair market competition. State-owned enterprises ballooned, often serving as conduits for patronage and rent-seeking. The national debt surged dramatically during this period, laying the groundwork for a severe Economic Crisis in the early 1980s.
Examples of prominent cronies included Roberto Benedicto (sugar), Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. (coconut), and Benjamin Romualdez (various industries). Their control over significant sectors of the economy stifled competition and concentrated wealth within a small elite connected to the ruling family.
Human Rights Situation
Perhaps the darkest aspect of the Martial Law period was the systematic Human Rights Violations. The suspension of the writ of habeas corpus and the broad powers granted to the military led to widespread abuses. Thousands of individuals, including political dissidents, students, laborers, and ordinary citizens, were arbitrarily arrested, detained, tortured, disappeared (victims of enforced disappearance), or extrajudicially killed.
Military and police units were implicated in these abuses. Detention centers became sites of torture. While the government denied systematic human rights abuses, countless testimonies and later investigations, such as those conducted after the Marcos Ouster, corroborated accounts of state-sponsored violence and repression. The scale of these violations left deep scars on Philippine society and continues to be a major point of contention when discussing the legacy of the Ferdinand Marcos Era.
A comprehensive report by the Human Rights Violations Victims’ Claims Board, established under the Human Rights Victims Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013, officially recognized thousands of victims of human rights abuses during the Marcos regime, providing concrete evidence of the scale of the repression.
Resistance to the Regime
Despite the repression, resistance to Marcos’s rule persisted and grew over time. This resistance took various forms:
- Armed Insurgency: The New People’s Army (NPA) and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) continued their armed struggles, viewing the Marcos regime as illegitimate and oppressive. While Marcos used these insurgencies to justify Martial Law, his policies often exacerbated the root causes of rebellion. Jose Maria Sison, though imprisoned for a time, remained an ideological figurehead for the communist movement.
- Underground Political Opposition: Many political activists and opposition figures went underground or into exile to continue their fight against the dictatorship.
- Church Resistance: The Catholic Church, initially hesitant, became increasingly critical of the regime’s human rights abuses and corruption. Key figures within the Church provided sanctuary and support to victims of repression.
- Civil Society: Various sectors of society, including students, labor unions (though repressed), and later business groups, quietly or openly expressed dissent as the economic situation worsened and abuses became more apparent.
This multifaceted resistance, though suppressed, kept the flame of opposition alive and would eventually converge during the critical years leading up to Marcos’s fall.
The Shift: From Martial Law to the Early 1980s
By the late 1970s and early 1980s, the domestic and international pressure on the Marcos regime began to mount.
Formal Lifting of Martial Law (1981)
On January 17, 1981, Marcos formally lifted Martial Law via Proclamation No. 2045. This move was partly an attempt to improve his international image before a visit by Pope John Paul II and to project a return to normalcy. However, the lifting was largely cosmetic. Marcos retained many of the powers he had accumulated, including the power to issue decrees, order arrests for national security reasons, and control the military. The Batasang Pambansa remained under KBL control, and the opposition had little real power. The “Constitutional Authoritarianism” structure essentially remained in place.
Following the lifting of martial law, Marcos held a presidential election in 1981, which was widely boycotted by the opposition and seen as a sham to legitimize his continued rule.
The Assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr. (1983)
A pivotal moment that dramatically altered the political landscape was the assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr. on August 21, 1983. After years in exile in the United States, Aquino decided to return to the Philippines despite warnings of threats to his life. He was shot and killed moments after stepping off the airplane at the Manila International Airport (now Ninoy Aquino International Airport).
His assassination ignited widespread public outrage and galvanized the fragmented opposition. Millions of Filipinos, previously silenced by fear, took to the streets in massive protests and demonstrations, demanding justice for Aquino and an end to the Marcos dictatorship.
The government’s investigation into the assassination was widely perceived as a whitewash. A fact-finding board, the Agrava Commission, was formed to investigate the killing. While the initial military court martial acquitted the soldiers charged, the Agrava Commission’s findings implicated top military officials, including the Chief of Staff, General Fabian Ver, a close Marcos loyalist. The Supreme Court later reviewed the case and eventually ordered a retrial, which years later led to the conviction of several military personnel, though persistent questions remain about the ultimate mastermind. The assassination exposed the regime’s brutality and corruption to an unprecedented degree and served as a major catalyst for the events that followed.
Growing Opposition and Economic Crisis
The post-Aquino assassination period saw a significant resurgence of the political opposition, now largely unified by the shared grief and anger over his death. Corazon C. Aquino, Benigno Aquino Jr.’s widow, emerged as a prominent figure in the coalescing opposition movement.
The early 1980s also marked a severe Economic Crisis in the Philippines. The global recession, coupled with unsustainable foreign debt accumulated during the Marcos years (much of it linked to crony projects), capital flight, and rampant Cronyism and Corruption, plunged the country into economic turmoil. Inflation soared, poverty worsened, and business confidence plummeted. This economic hardship further fueled public discontent and eroded the regime’s legitimacy. The combination of political repression and economic hardship created a fertile ground for revolution.
The Road to Ouster (1984-1986)
The mid-1980s were a period of escalating crisis and political maneuvering that ultimately led to the downfall of the Marcos regime.
The Batasang Pambansa Elections (1984)
In 1984, elections were held for the Batasang Pambansa. Despite concerns about the fairness of the process, the opposition decided to participate, seeing it as an opportunity to gain a foothold in the legislative branch and amplify their voice. While the Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL) retained a majority, the opposition won a significant number of seats, including many who had previously been hesitant to openly challenge the regime. This provided the opposition with a platform and some leverage.
The 1986 Snap Election
Under immense pressure from the growing opposition at home and from international allies like the United States, Marcos unexpectedly called for a snap presidential election to be held in February 1986. He believed he could easily win and thus legitimize his rule for another term. The opposition, rallying behind Cory Aquino as their presidential candidate, saw this as an opportunity to directly challenge Marcos at the ballot box.
The campaign was intensely fought, but the election itself was marred by widespread reports of fraud, voter intimidation, and violence. Parallel vote counts were conducted by the government’s Commission on Elections (COMELEC) and a citizens’ watchdog group, the National Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL). The COMELEC tally showed Marcos leading, while the NAMFREL count indicated a strong lead for Aquino.
The breaking point came when COMELEC computer technicians walked out, protesting the manipulation of the election results. Despite clear evidence of cheating, the Marcos-controlled Batasang Pambansa proclaimed Ferdinand Marcos the winner of the election. This fraudulent proclamation, often associated with the term Batch ’85 (referring to the block of legislators who voted for Marcos), further enraged the Filipino public.
The People Power Revolution (EDSA Revolution)
The fraudulent election results triggered a chain of events that culminated in the People Power Revolution. On February 22, 1986, Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and Philippine Constabulary Chief Fidel V. Ramos announced their defection from the Marcos government, citing loss of confidence due to the election fraud and alleged knowledge of a planned crackdown on the opposition. They barricaded themselves in Camp Crame and Camp Aguinaldo along EDSA (Epifanio de los Santos Avenue) in Metro Manila.
Fearing an attack from Marcos loyalist forces, Cardinal Jaime Sin, the Archbishop of Manila, went on radio urging Filipinos to go to EDSA to protect the rebels with their presence. What followed was an unprecedented outpouring of civilian support. Hundreds of thousands, and eventually millions, of Filipinos from all walks of life converged on EDSA, forming a human shield around the camps. Nuns, priests, students, professionals, families, and ordinary citizens faced down tanks and armed soldiers with prayers, rosaries, flowers, and songs.
The military, observing the peaceful but overwhelming demonstration of public will and facing internal divisions, largely refused Marcos’s orders to disperse the crowds violently. Key military units and commanders shifted their allegiance to the rebels. The four-day non-violent demonstration became a powerful symbol of the Filipino people’s desire for democracy and freedom. This mass action, known as the EDSA Revolution or People Power Revolution, effectively paralyzed the government and the military.
The End of an Era and Legacy
Faced with the collapse of military support, the mass civilian uprising, and pressure from international allies, particularly the United States, Ferdinand Marcos’s rule came to an end.
Marcos’s Departure and Exile
On the night of February 25, 1986, after a tense standoff and realization that his support had evaporated, Ferdinand Marcos and his family, including Imelda Marcos, were transported by U.S. helicopters from Malacañang Palace to Clark Air Base and then flown into exile in Hawaii. This marked the swift and relatively peaceful conclusion of the Marcos Ouster, achieved not by a bloody civil war, but by the collective will of the Filipino people expressed through non-violent means.
Cory Aquino was sworn in as the seventh President of the Philippines, ushering in a new era of democratic restoration.
Legacy and Historical Debate
The legacy of the Ferdinand Marcos Era remains deeply contested in the Philippines.
Arguments in favor of the Marcos regime often highlight:
- Infrastructure Development: Significant investments were made in roads, bridges, hospitals, and other infrastructure projects during his term.
- Peace and Order (initially): Martial Law was initially perceived by some as bringing a degree of order and security, especially in urban areas, by curbing crime and open dissent.
- Nationalism: Marcos cultivated a strong sense of Filipino nationalism.
However, critical perspectives strongly emphasize:
- Human Rights Violations: The systematic torture, extrajudicial killings, disappearances, and arbitrary detentions are undeniable historical facts, leaving a legacy of pain and injustice for thousands of victims and their families. The term Human Rights Violations is inextricably linked to this period.
- Corruption and Cronyism: The estimated billions of dollars plundered from the Philippine economy through Corruption and Cronyism crippled the nation’s development, contributed to the Economic Crisis, and deepened inequality. The ill-gotten wealth remains a subject of ongoing recovery efforts.
- Suppression of Democracy: The dismantling of democratic institutions, the control of media, and the stifling of dissent undermined the foundations of Philippine democracy.
- Economic Crisis: Despite initial growth, the debt-fueled spending, cronyism, and mismanagement led to a severe economic downturn by the early 1980s, with high inflation and widespread poverty.
The period immediately following the Marcos Ouster focused on democratic restoration, economic recovery, and pursuing accountability for abuses and corruption. The challenges of achieving genuine National Reconciliation and addressing the deep divisions created by the Marcos years continue to resonate in contemporary Philippine society. The historical narrative of the Ferdinand Marcos Era is a subject of ongoing debate, education, and remembrance, particularly concerning the stark contrasts between its proclaimed goals and its devastating human and economic costs.
Key Takeaways:
- The Ferdinand Marcos Era covers his presidency from 1965, with a focus on the Martial Law Philippines period (1972-1981) until the Marcos Ouster in 1986.
- Marcos declared Martial Law under Proclamation No. 1081, citing threats from the New People’s Army and Moro National Liberation Front, as well as breakdown of law and order (Plaza Miranda bombing, First Quarter Storm).
- Martial Law led to the suspension of civil liberties, dissolution of Congress, arrests of opponents like Benigno Aquino Jr., and rule by decree under Constitutional Authoritarianism.
- The regime was marked by widespread Corruption and Cronyism, contributing to a severe Economic Crisis.
- Systematic Human Rights Violations, including torture, extrajudicial killings, and disappearances, were rampant during this period.
- Resistance came from various groups, including armed insurgents like the NPA (Jose Maria Sison), the Church, and the political opposition.
- The assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr. in 1983 was a major turning point, sparking mass protests and calls for change; the Agrava Commission investigated the killing.
- The rigged Snap Election 1986, particularly the fraudulent proclamation involving legislators from Batch ’85, triggered the final confrontation.
- The People Power Revolution (EDSA Revolution) was a non-violent uprising on EDSA that led to the defection of military figures like Juan Ponce Enrile and Fidel V. Ramos and the mobilization of millions of civilians.
- The EDSA Revolution resulted in the peaceful Marcos Ouster and his exile, paving the way for Cory Aquino‘s presidency and democratic restoration.
- The legacy of the Marcos era is highly debated, balancing infrastructure achievements against the profound costs of human rights abuses, corruption, and economic mismanagement, posing ongoing challenges for National Reconciliation.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ):
Q: Why did Ferdinand Marcos declare Martial Law in the Philippines? A: Marcos officially declared Martial Law under Proclamation No. 1081 citing the threat of communist insurgency (New People’s Army), a growing separatist movement (Moro National Liberation Front), and a breakdown of law and order (Plaza Miranda bombing, rising crime, protests like the First Quarter Storm). Critics argue he used these threats as a pretext to consolidate power and extend his term beyond constitutional limits.
Q: What were the immediate effects of Martial Law in 1972? A: The immediate effects included the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, the closure of Congress and media outlets, the arrest of political opponents (such as Benigno Aquino Jr.), and Marcos ruling by decree. Civil liberties were severely curtailed.
Q: What is meant by “Cronyism” during the Marcos Era? A: Cronyism refers to the practice where Ferdinand Marcos and his family granted preferential treatment, monopolies, and control over key industries and state resources to close friends, relatives, and political allies (the “cronies”). This led to immense private wealth for this small group at the expense of fair competition and contributed significantly to Corruption and the Economic Crisis.
Q: What kind of Human Rights Violations occurred under Martial Law? A: Human Rights Violations were widespread and systematic. These included arbitrary arrests, prolonged detention without trial, torture, enforced disappearances (desaparecidos), and extrajudicial killings of perceived political opponents, activists, students, and ordinary citizens.
Q: What was the significance of the assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr.? A: The assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr. in 1983 was a turning point. It galvanized the fragmented opposition and sparked mass public outrage and protests against the Marcos regime, significantly contributing to the growing momentum for change. The subsequent investigation by the Agrava Commission exposed the regime’s complicity in covering up the crime.
Q: What was the 1986 Snap Election and why was it controversial? A: The Snap Election 1986 was a presidential election called by Marcos in an attempt to legitimize his rule. It was highly controversial due to widespread reports of fraud, voter intimidation, and manipulation of results. Despite evidence suggesting Cory Aquino won based on citizens’ counts (NAMFREL), the Marcos-controlled Batasang Pambansa, linked to legislators sometimes referred to as Batch ’85, proclaimed Marcos the winner, which ignited the People Power Revolution.
Q: What was the People Power Revolution (EDSA Revolution)? A: The People Power Revolution, also known as the EDSA Revolution, was a non-violent uprising that took place on EDSA in February 1986. It began with the defection of key military officials like Juan Ponce Enrile and Fidel V. Ramos and grew into a massive mobilization of millions of Filipino civilians who protected the rebels and demanded Marcos’s resignation, leading to the Marcos Ouster.
Q: What is the legacy of the Ferdinand Marcos Era? A: The legacy is highly debated. While some point to infrastructure development, critics emphasize the massive Corruption, Cronyism, severe Human Rights Violations, and the crippling Economic Crisis that occurred under his rule. The era profoundly impacted Philippine democracy, economics, and society, and the issues of accountability and National Reconciliation remain relevant.
Q: Who is Jose Maria Sison and what was his role during this period? A: Jose Maria Sison is the founder of the re-established Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed wing, the New People’s Army (NPA). The government cited the threat posed by the NPA as one of the primary justifications for declaring Martial Law. Sison was imprisoned during the Marcos regime but remained an influential figure in the ongoing communist insurgency.
Sources:
- Cullinane, J. (2003). Imagining the Philippines: Philippine History and History Writing. Ateneo de Manila University Press.
- Curaming, R. A. (2013). The Power of Memory in Postdictatorship Philippines. University of Michigan Press.
- De Quiros, C. (1997). Dead Aim: How Marcos Ambushed Philippine Democracy. Foundation for Worldwide Dialogue.
- Dirksen, A. (2015). The Postcolonial State and Civil War in South-East Asia. Springer. (Contains information on NPA and MNLF context).
- French, J. (2008). People Power: The Philippine Revolution of 1986. National Geographic Books.
- Garcia Gatchalian, M. (1986). The Philippine Revolution and the Aquino Assassination: The Role of the Agrava Commission. University of the Philippines Press.
- Hawes, G. (1987). The Philippine State and the Marcos Regime: The Politics of Export. Cornell University Press.
- McCoy, A. W. (Ed.). (2009). An Anarchy of Families: State and Family in the Philippines. University of Wisconsin Press. (Details on cronyism).
- Schirmer, D. B., & Shalom, S. R. (Eds.). (1987). The Philippines Reader: A History of Colonialism, Dictatorship, Revolution. South End Press. (Contains primary source excerpts, including Proclamation 1081).
- Thompson, M. R. (1995). The Anti-Marcos Struggle: Personal History of the Philippine Democratic Opposition. Yale University Press.
- Human Rights Violations Victims’ Claims Board Official Website (if available, or reports based on their findings regarding Martial Law victims).
- Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines – Proclamation No. 1081 (Archival information).
(Note: While specific links to all these sources might not be universally stable or publicly accessible without subscriptions, these represent credible types of sources for information on this historical period. Always consult reputable academic texts, archival documents, and established historical analyses for in-depth understanding.)