Martial Law in the Philippines

Martial Law is a term that evokes fear and memories of oppression, authoritarianism, and
human rights abuses. It is a term that resonates with the Philippine experience during the Marcos
regime. From September 21, 1972, to January 17, 1981, the Philippines was under martial law,
which was declared by then-President Ferdinand Marcos. The declaration of martial law allowed
Marcos to exercise absolute power and control over the country, resulting in one of the darkest
periods in Philippine history.

The Philippines had a long history of political instability and corruption, which became
more evident during the late 1960s and early 1970s. The country was facing various challenges
such as a growing communist insurgency, a Muslim separatist movement in the southern part of
the country, and a deteriorating economy. In addition, political opponents were becoming more
vocal in their criticisms of Marcos, who was then serving his second term as president. On
September 21, 1972, Marcos declared martial law, citing the need to preserve national security
and restore law and order. He suspended the writ of habeas corpus, which allowed him to arrest
and detain anyone without trial or due process. He also closed down media outlets and curtailed
civil liberties, effectively silencing any opposition to his regime. The declaration of martial law
had far-reaching effects on Philippine society. Human rights abuses became widespread, with
reports of torture, extrajudicial killings, and disappearances becoming commonplace. The
military, under the direction of Marcos, carried out a campaign of terror against political
opponents, activists, and journalists. The media was heavily censored, with newspapers and
television stations being shut down if they were critical of the government. Journalists were
harassed, and some were even imprisoned. The education system was also affected, with
universities being closed down, and professors and students being arrested and detained. The
economy also suffered under martial law, with corruption becoming rampant. Cronies and friends
of Marcos were given lucrative contracts and projects, leading to massive wealth inequality. The
Philippine peso was devalued, and the country was heavily indebted to foreign creditors.

Despite the repression, there were those who resisted and opposed the Marcos regime. The
Catholic Church, for instance, spoke out against the human rights abuses and called for an end to
martial law. Student activists, trade unions, and human rights organizations also rallied against
the government. One of the most prominent opposition figures was Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino Jr.,
a former senator and critic of the Marcos regime. He was arrested and imprisoned for eight years
and was only released in 1980 due to deteriorating health. He went into exile in the United States
but returned to the Philippines in 1983, where he was assassinated upon his arrival at the airport.
Another key figure in the opposition was Corazon Aquino, the wife of Ninoy Aquino. She
emerged as a leader of the opposition after her husband's assassination and ran against Marcos in
the 1986 presidential elections. She won the election, which was marred by allegations of fraud,
and became the first female president of the Philippines. The legacy of martial law in the
Philippines is still being felt today. The country continues to grapple with issues such as
corruption, human rights abuses, and authoritarianism. The memories of martial law serve as a
cautionary tale for those who seek to undermine democracy and human rights. The lesson that can
be learned from the Philippine experience is that democracy and freedom are fragile and must be
constantly defended. The rule of law and respect for human rights are essential for a just and
equitable society.

The declaration of martial law in the Philippines was a dark chapter in the country's history.