CASES TO FILE/ PETITION

1.) Petition for injunction on the burial of Marcos in Libingan ng mga bayani
on the following grounds:
a.) Under the AFP Regulations G 161-373, Marcos does not
comply to requirements of those following deceased persons are
qualified, and therefore authorized, to be buried at the LNMB:
a.) Medal of Valor Awardees;
b.) Presidents or Commander-in-Chief, AFP;
c.) Secretaries of National Defense;
d.) AFP Chiefs of Staff;
e.) Generals/Flag Officers of the AFP;
f.) active and retired military personnel of the AFP, to include active
draftees and trainees who died in line of duty, and active reservists and
CAFGU Active Auxiliary (CAA) who died in combat operations or combatrelated activities;
g.) former members of the AFP who laterally entered or joined the
Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and the Philippine National Police (PNP);
h.) Veterans of Philippine Revolution of 1890, World War I, World
War II, and recognized guerillas;
i.) government dignitaries, statesmen, national artist and other
deceased persons whose interment and re-interment has been approved
by the Commander-in-Chief, Congress or the Secretary of National
Defense, and
j.) former Presidents, Secretaries of Defense, dignitaries,
statesmen, national artists, widows of former Presidents, Secretaries of
National Defense and Chief of Staff.
We highlight to this effect, Marcos qualification as a veteran of the World War II and his
being a medal of valor awardee. The National Historical Commission of the Philippines
has strongly negated that Marcos was a soldier and thus he rightfully deserves to be
buried at the Libingan ng mga Bayani. The NHCP conducted a research and
demonstrated these findings:
a. Ex-president Marcos lied about receiving medals: Distinguished Service
Cross, Silver Star and Order of the Purple Heart
b. His guerilla unit, Ang Maharlika, was never officially recognized and
neither was the leadership of it
c. U.S. officials did not recognize Mr. Marcos rank promotion from Major in
1944 to Lt. Col

d. Some actions of Mr. Marcos as a soldier were officially called into question
by upper echelons of the US military such as his command over the Allas
Intelligence Unit ( for usurpation), his commissioning of officers without authority,
his abandonment of USAFIP-NL presumably to build an airfield for Gen. Roxas
and his enlisting of his name in the roster of different units (malicious criminal
act)
Thus the NHCP strongly contends that the claim of Marcos being a soldier is filed with
myth, factual inconsistencies and lies. The guerrilla unit he was then a member of were
not officially acknowledged and his war stories were allegedly written by Mr. Marcos
himself. The medal of honors that he had received were not verified by the US officials.
In addition, on the claim that because he was a president of the Philippines, he must be
buried in the Libingan ng mga Bayani. The stand of NHCP on this issue is that the AFP
regulations on the burial in LNMB is not mandatory. There were 7 presidents in the past
that were not buried in there namely: Pres. Emilio Aguinaldo, Sergio Osmena, Jose P.
Laurel, Manuel Roxas, Ramon Magsaysay, Corazon Aquino. So G 161-373 or the AFP
Rules do not require that all presidents be buried in the LNMB.
2. In case the burial proceeds, petitioners can file to exhume the body of Marcos
remains from the Libingan ng mga Bayani
(see: NHCP ON FM BURIAL)

2. How do we file?
3. Who are the respondents to be impleaded?
Department of National Defense
4. Who are the petitioners? Do they have legal standing?
- Victims of Martial Law pursuant to 1036 where The State hereby
acknowledges its moral and legal obligation to recognize and/or provide
reparation to said victims and/or their families for the deaths, injuries, sufferings,
deprivations and damages they suffered under the Marcos regime.
- Concerned Citizens invoking
**These two may invoke the transcendental importance of the case. Considering the
instructive guides as determinants in determining whether a matter is of transcendental
importance: (1) the character of the funds or other assets involved in the case; (2) the
presence of a clear case of disregard of a constitutional or statutory prohibition by the
public respondent agency or instrumentality of the government; and (3) the lack of any
other party with a more direct and specific interest in the questions being raised.
(CHAMBER OF REAL ESTATE AND BUILDERS' ASSOCIATIONS, INC. (CREBA) VS.
ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION (ERC) AND MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY
(MERALCO), G.R. NO. 174697, JULY 8, 2010, BRION, J.).

The burial of Marcos is a public interest under the the category of public interest in the
violation of a special law. This is pertaining to martial law. Again, this interest has a
historical context arising from the Filipino peoples experience under twenty (20) years
of martial rule, distinguishing it from a public interest in breaches of the rule of law. This
is to say that the former is a subset of the latter. Given these various interests, the
political community has made a policy choice expressed in the Constitution to give a
constitutional right of action to any citizen to enable them to challenge the factual basis
of a declaration of martial law. It is not unreasonable to suppose that this is based on a
recognition by the community that every citizen has a public interest in an unlawful
declaration of martial law arising from the Filipino peoples experience under twenty (20)
year of martial rule. (source: https://law.nus.edu.sg/asli/pdf/WPS003.pdf)
2. National Historical Commission of the Philippines
- Subject to judicial review, they can suffer direct injury from the misleading
information about Marcos being a soldier and a medal of valor awardee. There
were no enough evidence from historians and other books both from the
Philippines and the US to back Marcos claims that he was indeed a soldier.
SUBSTANTIAL:
1. What are the legal bases?
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 289
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 289 - AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A NATIONAL PANTHEON FOR PRESIDENTS OF THE PHILIPPINES,
NATIONAL HEROES AND PATRIOTS OF THE COUNTRY

Section 1.
To perpetuate the memory of all the Presidents of the Philippines,
national heroes and patriots for the inspiration and emulation of this generation and
of generations still unborn, there shall be constructed a National Pantheon which
shall be the burial place of their mortal remains.
Sec. 2.
There is hereby created a Board on National Pantheon composed of
the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Public Works and Communications
and the Secretary of Education and two private citizens to be appointed by the
President of the Philippines with the consent of the Commission on Appointments
which shall have the following duties and functions:
(a)
To determine the location of a suitable site for the construction of the said
National Pantheon, and to have such site acquired, surveyed and fenced for this
purpose and to delimit and set aside a portion thereof wherein shall be interred the
remains of all Presidents of the Philippines and another portion wherein the
remains of heroes, patriots and other great men of the country shall likewise be

interred;
(b)
To order and supervise the construction thereon of uniform monuments,
mausoleums, or tombs as the Board may deem appropriate;
(c)
To cause to be interred therein the mortal remains of all Presidents of the
Philippines, the national heroes and patriots;
(d)
To order and supervise the construction of a suitable road leading to the
said National Pantheon from the nearest national or provincial road; and
(e)
To perform such other functions as may be necessary to carry out the
purposes of this Act.
Sec. 3.
The sum of one million pesos, or so much thereof as may be
necessary, is hereby appropriated out of any funds in the National Treasury not
otherwise appropriated to meet the initial expenses in carrying out the provisions of
this Act.
Sec. 4.
The Board is authorized to open a popular subscription during a
period of time not beyond December thirty-first, nineteen hundred and fifty, to be
determined by the Board, in order to raise such additional funds as may be
necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act. For the purpose of raising such
funds by popular subscription, the Board may appoint such committees as may be
necessary.
The Board shall cause all the money thus raised by voluntary contribution to be
deposited in one of the government depositories or banks in Manila and shall
withdraw therefrom such sums as the need for them shall arise.
Sec. 5.
The Board is further authorized to appoint an executive secretary,
auditor and such other personnel as it may deem necessary and the compensation
of which shall be fixed by said Board.
Sec. 6.

This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10368]

AN ACT PROVIDING FOR REPARATION AND RECOGNITION OF VICTIMS OF
HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS DURING THE MARCOS REGIME, DOCUMENTATION
OF SAID VIOLATIONS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled:
CHAPTER I
PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS

SECTION 1. Short Title. This Act shall be known as the Human Rights Victims
Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013.
SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. Section 11 of Article II of the 1987 Constitution of the
Republic of the Philippines declares that the State values the dignity of every human,
person and guarantees full respect for human rights. Pursuant to this declared policy,
Section 12 of Article III of the Constitution prohibits the use of torture, force, violence,
threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free will and mandates the
compensation and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices and their
families.
By virtue of Section 2 of Article II of the Constitution adopting generally accepted
principles of international law as part of the law of the land, the Philippines adheres to
international human rights laws and conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and
the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment which imposes on each State party the obligation to enact
domestic legislation to give effect to the rights recognized therein and to ensure that any
person whose rights or freedoms have been violated shall have an effective remedy,
even if the violation is committed by persons acting in an official capacity. In fact, the
right to a remedy is itself guaranteed under existing human rights treaties and/or
customary international law, being peremptory in character (jus cogens) and as such
has been recognized as non-derogable.
Consistent with the foregoing, it is hereby declared the policy of the State to recognize
the heroism and sacrifices of all Filipinos who were victims of summary execution,
torture, enforced or involuntary disappearance and other gross human rights violations
committed during the regime of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos covering the
period from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986 and restore the victims honor
and dignity. The State hereby acknowledges its moral and legal obligation to recognize
and/or provide reparation to said victims and/or their families for the deaths, injuries,
sufferings, deprivations and damages they suffered under the Marcos regime.
Similarly, it is the obligation of the State to acknowledge the sufferings and damages
inflicted upon persons whose properties or businesses were forcibly taken over,
sequestered or used, or those whose professions were damaged and/or impaired, or
those whose freedom of movement was restricted, and/or such other victims of the
violations of the Bill of Rights.
SEC. 3. Definition of Terms. The following terms as used in this Act shall mean:
(a) Detention refers to the act of taking a person into custody against his will by persons
acting in an official capacity and/or agents of the State.
(b) Human rights violation refers to any act or omission committed during the period
from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986 by persons acting in an official capacity
and/or agents of the State, but shall not be limited to the following:
(1) Any search, arrest and/or detention without a valid search warrant or warrant of
arrest issued by a civilian court of law, including any warrantless arrest or detention
carried out pursuant to the declaration of Martial Law by former President Ferdinand E.
Marcos as well as any arrest., detention or deprivation of liberty carried out during the
covered period on the basis of an Arrest, Search and Seizure Order (ASSO), a
Presidential Commitment Order {PCO) or a Preventive Detention Action (PDA) and

such other similar executive issuances as defined by decrees of former President

Ferdinand E. Marcos, or in any manner that the arrest, detention or deprivation, of
liberty was effected;
(2) The infliction by a person acting in an official capacity and/or an agent of the State of
physical injury, torture, killing, or violation of other human rights, of any person
exercising civil or political rights, including but not limited to the freedom of speech,
assembly or organization; and/or the right to petition the government for redress of
grievances, even if such violation took place during or in the course of what the
authorities at the time deemed an illegal assembly or demonstration: Provided, That
torture in any form or under any circumstance shall be considered a human rights
violation;
(3) Any enforced or involuntary disappearance caused upon a person who was
arrested, detained or abducted against ones will or otherwise deprived of ones liberty,
as defined in Republic Act No. 10350 {{1}}, otherwise known as the Anti-Enforced or
Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012;
(4) Any force or intimidation causing the involuntary exile of a person from the
Philippines;
(5) Any act of force, intimidation or deceit causing unjust or illegal takeover of a
business, confiscation of property, detention of owner/s and or their families, deprivation
of livelihood of a person by agents of the State, including those caused by Ferdinand E.
Marcos, his spouse Imelda R. Marcos, their immediate relatives by consanguinity or
affinity, as well as those persons considered as among their close relatives, associates,
cronies and subordinates under Executive Order No. 1, issued on February 28, 1986 by
then President Corazon C. Aquino in the exercise of her legislative powers under the
Freedom Constitution;
(6) Any act or series of acts causing, committing and/or conducting the following:
(i) Kidnapping or otherwise exploiting children of persons suspected of committing acts
against the Marcos regime;
(ii) Committing sexual offenses against human rights victims who are detained and/or in
the course of conducting military and/or police operations; and
(iii) Other violations and/or abuses similar or analogous to the above, including those
recognized by international law.
(c) Human Rights Violations Victim (HRVV) refers to a person whose human rights were
violated by persons acting in an official capacity and/or agents of the State as defined
herein. In order to qualify for reparation under this Act, the human rights violation must
have been committed during the period from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986:
Provided, however, That victims of human rights violations that were committed one (1)
month before September 21, 1972 and one (1) month after February 25, 1986 shall be
entitled to reparation, under this Act if they can establish that the violation was
committed:
(1) By agents of the State and/or persons acting in an official capacity as defined
hereunder;
(2) For the purpose of preserving, maintaining, supporting or promoting the said regime;
or
(3) To conceal abuses during the Marcos regime and/or the effects of Martial Law.

(d) Persons Acting in an Official Capacity and/or Agents of the State.The following
persons shall be deemed persons acting in an official capacity and/or agents of the
State under this Act:
(1) Any member of the former Philippine Constabulary (PC), the former Integrated
National Police (INP), the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Civilian Home
Defense Force (CHDF) from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986 as well as any
civilian agent attached thereto; and any member of a paramilitary group even if one is
not organically part of the PC, the INP, the AFP or the CHDF so long as it is shown that
the group was organized, funded, supplied with equipment, facilities and/or resources,
and/or indoctrinated, controlled and/or supervised by any person acting in an official
capacity and/or agent of the State as herein defined;
(2) Any member of the civil service, including persons who held elective or appointive
public office at any time from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986;
(3) Persons referred to in Section 2(a) of Executive Order No. 1, creating the
Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), issued on February 28, 1986
and related laws by then President Corazon C. Aquino in the exercise of her legislative
powers under the Freedom Constitution, including former President Ferdinand E.
Marcos, spouse Imelda R. Marcos, their immediate relatives by consanguinity or affinity,
as well as their close relatives, associates, cronies and subordinates; and
(4) Any person or group/s of persons acting with the authorization, support or
acquiescence of the State during the Marcos regime.
(e) Torture refers to any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or
mental, is intentionally inflicted on any person under the custody of persons acting in an
official capacity and/or agents of the State, as defined by law, jurisprudence,
international conventions and Republic Act No. 9745, otherwise known as the AntiTorture Act of 2009.
SEC 4. Entitlement to Monetary Reparation. Any HRVV qualified under this Act shall
receive reparation from the State, free of tax, as herein prescribed: Provided, That for a
deceased or involuntary disappeared HRVV, the legal heirs as provided for in the Civil
Code of the Philippines, or such other person named by the executor or administrator of
the deceased or involuntary disappeared HRVVs estate in that order, shall be entitled to
receive such reparation: Provided, further, That no special power of attorney shall be
recognized in the actual disbursement of the award, and only the victim or the
aforestated successor(s)-in-interest shall be entitled to personally receive said
reparation form the Board, unless the victim involved is shown to be incapacitated to the
satisfaction of the Board: Provided, furthermore, That the reparation received under this
Act shall be without prejudice to the receipt of any other sum by the HRVV from any
other person or entity in any case involving violations of human rights as defined in this
Act.
SEC. 5. Nonmonetary Reparation. The Department of Health (DOH), the Department
of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), the Department of Education (DepED),
the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), the Technical Education and Skills
Development Authority (TESDA), and such other government agencies shall render the
necessary services as nonmonetary reparation for HRVVs and/or their families, as may
be determined by the Board pursuant to the provisions of this Act. The amount

necessary for this purpose shall be sourced from the budget of the agency concerned in
the annual General Appropriations Act (GAA).
SEC. 6. Amount of Reparation. The amount of reparation under this Act shall be in
proportion to the gravity of the human rights violation committed on the HRVV and in
accordance with the number of points assigned to the individual under Section 19
hereof.
SEC. 7. Source of Reparation. The amount of Ten billion pesos
(P10,000,000,000.00) plus accrued interest which form part of the funds transferred to
the government of the Republic of the Philippines by virtue of the December 10, 1997
Order of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, adjudged by the Supreme Court of the
Philippines as final and executory in Republic vs. Sandiganbayan on July 15, 2003
(G.R. No. 152154) as Marcos ill-gotten wealth and forfeited in favor of the Republic of
the Philippines, shall be the principal source funds for the implementation of this Act.
CHAPTER II
THE HUMAN RIGHTS VICTIMS CLAIMS BOARD
SEC. 8. Creation and Composition of the Human Rights Victims Claims Board.
There is hereby created an independent and quasi-judicial body to be known as the
Human Rights Victims Claims Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board. It shall be
composed of nine (9) members, who shall possess the following qualifications:
(a) Must be of known probity, competence and integrity;
(b) Must have a deep and thorough understanding and knowledge of human rights and
involvement in efforts against human rights violations committed during the regime of
former President Ferdinand E. Marcos;
(c) At least three (3) of them must be members of the Philippine Bar who have been
engaged in the practice of law for at least ten (10) years; and
(d) Must have a clear and adequate understanding and commitment to human rights
protection, promotion and advocacy.
The Human Rights Victims Claims Board shall be attached to but shall not be under the
Commission on Human Rights (CHR).
The Board shall organize itself within thirty (30) days from the completion of
appointment of all nine (9) members and shall thereafter organize its Secretariat.
SEC. 9. Appointment to the Board. The President shall appoint the Chairperson and
the other eight (8) members of the Board: Provided, That human rights organizations
such as, but not limited to, the Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP), the Free
Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), the Movement of Attorneys for Brotherhood, Integrity
and Nationalism (MABINI), the Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance (FIND)
and the Samahan ng mga Ex-Detainees Laban sa Detensyon at Aresto (SELDA) may
submit nominations to the President.
SEC. 10. Powers and Functions of the Board. The Board shall have the following
powers and functions:
(a) Receive, evaluate, process and investigate applications for claims under this Act;
(b) Issue subpoena/s ad testificandum and subpoena/s duces tecum;
(c) Conduct independent administrative proceedings and resolve disputes over claims;
(d) Approve with finality all eligible claims under this Act;
(e) Deputize appropriate government agencies to assist it in order to effectively perform
its functions;

(f) Promulgate such rules as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act,
including rules of procedure in the conduct of its proceedings, with the Revised Rules of
Court of the Philippines having suppletory application;
(g) Exercise administrative control and supervision over its Secretariat;
(h) The Board, at its discretion, may consult the human rights organizations mentioned
in Section 9 herein; and
(i) Perform such other duties, functions and responsibilities as may be necessary to
effectively attain the objectives of this Act.
SEC. 11. Resolution, of Claims. The Board shall be composed of three (3) divisions
which shall function simultaneously and independently of each other in the resolution of
claims for reparation. Each division shall be composed of one (1) Chairperson, who
shall be a member of the Philippine Bar and two (2) members to be appointed by the
Board en banc.
SEC. 12. Emoluments. The Chairperson and members of the Board shall have the
rank, salary, emoluments and allowances equivalent to s Presiding Justice and
Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals, respectively.
SEC. 13. Secretariat of the Board. The Board shall be assisted by a Secretariat
which may come from the existing personnel of the CHR, without prejudice to the hiring
of additional personnel as determined by the Board to accommodate the volume of
required work. The following shall be the functions of the Secretariat:
(a) Receive, evaluate, process and investigate applications for claims under this Act;
(b) Recommend to the Board the approval of applications for claims;
(c) Assist the Board in technical functions; and
(d) Perform other duties that may be assigned by the Board.
The Chairperson of the Board shall appoint a Board Secretary who shall head the
Secretariat for the duration of the existence of the Board. There shall be a Technical
Staff Head assisted by five (5) Legal Officers and three (3) Paralegal Officers; and an
Administrative Staff Head assisted by three (3) Administrative Support Staff.
When necessary, the Board may hire additional contractual employees or contract a
service provider to provide services of counselors, psychologists, social workers and
public education specialists, among others, to augment the services of the Secretariat:
Provided, That the maximum contract amount per year shall not exceed more than
fifteen percent (15%) of the total annual operating budget of the Board.
SEC. 14. Operating Budget of the Board. The operating budget of the Board shall be
funded from the Ten billion peso {P10,000,000,000.00) fund, with Ten million pesos
(P10,000,000.00) as its initial operating budget: Provided, That it shall not exceed Fifty
million pesos (P50,000,000.00) a year
SEC. 15. Proper Disposition of Funds. The Board shall ensure that funds
appropriated or those which may become available as reparation for HRVVs are
properly disbursed in accordance with the policies stated by Congress and relevant
government rules, regulations and accounting procedures.
CHAPTER III
CLAIMANTS, REPARATION AND RECOGNITION
SEC. 16. Claimants. Any person who is an HRVV may file a claim with the Board for
reparation and/or recognition in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

Sec. 17. Conclusive Presumption That One is an HRVV Under This Act. The
claimants in the class suit and direct action plaintiffs in the Human Rights Litigation
Against the Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos (MDL No. 840, CA No. 88-0390) in the US
Federal District Court of Honolulu, Hawaii wherein a favorable judgment has been
rendered, shall be extended the conclusive presumption that they are HRVVs:
Provided, That the HRVVs recognized by the Bantayog Ng Mga Bayani Foundation
shall also be accorded the same conclusive presumption: Provided, further, That
nothing herein shall be construed to deprive the Board of its original jurisdiction and its
inherent power to determine the extent of the human rights violations and the
corresponding reparation and/or recognition that may be granted.
SEC. 18. Motu Proprio Recognition. The Board may take judicial notice motu proprio
of individual persons who suffered human rights violations as defined herein and grant
such persons recognition as HRVVs and included in the Roll of Victims as provided for
in Section 26 hereof.
SEC. 19. Determination of Award. (a) The Board shall follow the point system in the
determination of the award. The range shall be one (1) to ten (10) points, as follows:
(1) Victims who died or who disappeared and are still missing shall be given ten (10)
points;
(2) Victims who were tortured and/or raped or sexually abused shall he given six (6) to
nine (9) points:
(3) Victims who were detained shall be given three (3) to five (5) points; and
(4) Victims whose rights were violated under Section 3, paragraph (b), nos. (4), (5) and
(6) under this Act shall be given one (1) to two (2) points.
The Board shall exercise its powers with due discretion in the determination of points for
each victim, which shall be based on the type of violation committed against the HRVV,
frequently and duration of the violation. In each category, HRVVs who had suffered
more would receive more points. In instances where a victim is classified in more than
one category, one shall be awarded the points in the higher category: Provided, That in
cases where there are several eligible claims filed for reparation by or on behalf of a
particular HRVV, the Board shall award only one (1) valid claim which corresponds to
the category obtaining the highest number of points for each eligible claimant.
(b) The Board shall proceed to determine the award for each claimant classified under
Sections 16, 17 and 18 of this Act.
(c) The Board shall then compute the final monetary value of ones award that is
equivalent to the numerical value of one point multiplied by the number of points that a
claimant is entitled to, as previously determined by the Board.
(d) Within thirty (30) days after the Board has approved with finality each eligible claim
pending before it and after due publication of such legitimate claim, the award of
monetary compensation shall take effect: Provided., That any pending appeal filed by
an aggrieved claimant or opposite before the Board en banc must resolved by it sixty
(60) days before the Board becomes functus officio.
CHAPTER IV
GENERAL- PROVISIONS
SEC. 20. Transfer of Funds. Pursuant to the judgment mentioned in Section 7 hereof,
the amount of Ten billion pesos (P10,000,000,000.00) plus the accrued interest are
hereby set aside and appropriated to fund the purposes of this Act.

SEC. 21. Documentation of Human Rights Violations Committed by the Marcos

Regime. In the implementation of this Act and without prejudice to any other
documentary or other evidence that may be required for the award of any reparation,
any HRVV seeking reparation shall execute a detailed sworn statement narrating the
circumstances of the pertinent human rights violation/s committed.
SEC. 22. Publication. Consistent with Section 23 herein, the Board, after having
been duly convened, shall set the period for the commencement and termination of
applications by HRVVs and cause the publication of the same: Provided, That such
period shall only become operative fifteen (15) days after its last publication, which shall
be once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in at least two (2) national newspapers
of general circulation.
SEC. 23. Period for Filing of Claims; Waiver. An HRVV shall file an application for
reparation with the Board within six (6) months from the effectivity of the implementing
rules and regulations (IRR) of this Act: Provided, That failure to file an application within
said period is deemed a waiver of the right to file the same: Provided, further, That for
HRVVs who are deceased, incapacitated, or missing due to enforced disappearance,
their legal heir/s or representatives, shall be entitled to file an application for reparation
on their behalf.
Any opposition to the new application/s pursuant to Section 16 hereof shall only be
entertained if such is filed within fifteen (15) days from the date of the last publication of
the official list of eligible claimants as may be determined by the Board. The Board shall
cause the publication of the official list of eligible claimants once a week for three (3)
consecutive weeks in at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation.
SEC. 24 Appeal. Any aggrieved claimant or oppositor may file an appeal within ten
(10) calendar days from the receipt of the Resolution of the Division, to the Board en
banc, whose decision shall then become final and executory.
SEC 25. Penalties; Applicability of the Revised Penal Code. Any claimant who is
found by the Board, after due hearing, to have filed a fraudulent claim, shall be referred
to the appropriate office for prosecution. If convicted, he shall suffer the imprisonment of
eight (8) to ten (10) years, shall be disqualified from public office and employment and
shall be deprived of the right to vote and be voted for in any national or local election,
even after the service of sentence unless granted absolute pardon.
Any member of the Board and its Secretariat, public officer, employee of an agency or
any private individual mandated to implement this Act, who shall misuse, embezzle or
misappropriate the funds for the reparation of HRVVs or who shall commit fraud in the
processing of documents and claims of HRVVs, or shall conspire with any individual to
commit the same, shall also be prosecuted,
Any member of the Board and its Secretariat, public officer, employee of an agency or
any private individual mandated to implement this Act, who may have been found guilty
of committing any or all of the prohibited acts stated in the preceding paragraph, or
those acts punishable under the Revised Penal Code, shall be penalized under the
pertinent provisions in the Code and relevant special penal laws.
SEC. 26. Roll of Victims. Persons who are HRVVs, regardless of whether they opt to
seek reparation or not, shall be given recognition by enshrining their names in a Roll of
Human Rights Victims to be prepared by the Board.

A Memorial/Museum/Library shall be established in honor and in memory of the victims

of human rights violations whose names shall be inscribed in the Roll. A compendium of
their sacrifices shall be prepared and may be readily viewed and accessed in the
internet. The Memorial/Museum/Library/Compendium shall have an appropriation of at
least Five hundred million pesos (P500,000,000.00) from the accrued interest of the Ten
billion peso (P10,000,000,000.00) fund.
The Roll may also be displayed in government agencies as maybe designated by the
HRVV Memorial Commission as created hereunder.
SEC. 27. Human, Rights Violations Victims Memorial Commission.. There is hereby
created a Commission to be known as the Human Rights Violations Victims Memorial
Commission, hereinafter referred to as the Commission, primarily for the establishment,
restoration,
preservation
and
conservation
of
the
Memorial/Museum/Library/Compendium in honor of the HRVVs during the Marcos
regime.
The powers and functions of the Commission shall be assumed by the Board of
Trustees which shall be composed of the following; Chairperson of the CHR as
Chairperson; Chairperson of the National Historical Commission as Co-Chairperson;
and Chairpersons of the CHED, the National Commission on Culture and the Arts
(NCCA), the Secretary of the Department of Education and the Head of the University of
the Philippines Diliman Main Library, as members.
The Board of Trustees shall have the authority to hire and appoint its officials and
employees, receive donations and grants for and on its behalf, and generate revenues
for the benefit of the Commission.
The Commission shall be attached to the CHR solely for budgetary and administrative
purposes. The operating budget of the Commission shall be appropriated from the
General Appropriations Act.
The Commission shall also coordinate and collaborate with the DepED and the CHED
to ensure that the teaching of Martial Law atrocities, the lives and sacrifices of HRVVs in
our history are included in the basic, secondary and tertiary education curricula.
CHAPTER V
FINAL PROVISIONS
SEC 28. Guidelines for the Implementing Rules and Regulations (1RR). In
implementing this Act and in formulating the corresponding rules and regulations, and to
ensure that all applications are properly screened for fraudulent claims, the Board must
provide for:
(a) Transparency in the processing of the claims;
(b) A procedure that allows any concerned party to oppose an application or claim on
the ground that it is fraudulent, fictitious or spurious and gives that party the opportunity
to question the same and to present evidence in support thereof; and
(c) A procedure that is speedy and expeditious without sacrificing any of the parties
fundamental rights.
Within fifteen (15) days from the date of its organization, the Board shall promulgate the
necessary IRR and procedures for the effective implementation of this Act. The IRR
shall be effective fifteen (15) days after its publication in two (2) national newspapers of
general circulation.

SEC. 29. Work Period; Sunset Clause. The Board shall complete its work within two
(2) years from the effectivity of the IRR promulgated by it. After such period, it shall
become functus officio.
SEC. 30. Separability Clause. If, for any reason, any section or provision of this Act is
declared unconstitutional or invalid, such other sections or provisions not affected
thereby shall remain in full force and effect.
SEC. 31. Repealing Clause. All laws, decrees, executive orders, rules and
regulations or parts thereof inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Act, including
Section 63(b) of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, otherwise known as the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 and Section 40(a) of Republic Act No.
7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991, are hereby repealed,
amended or modified accordingly.
SEC. 32. Effectivity Clause. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
complete publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) national newspapers of
general circulation.
EXCERPTS FROM AFP REGULATIONS G161-313 (CANNOT FIND THE FULL TEXT)
AFP Regulations G 161-373 or The Allocation of Cemetery Plots at the LNMB was
issued on 9 April 1986 by former AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Fidel V Ramos and former
Corazon C. Aquino.[4]
According to the AFP Regulations, there are 10 categories of deceased persons who
entitled to be interred at the LNMB:
1. Medal of Valor Awardees
2. The President of the Philippines as the Commander-in-Chief of AFP
3. The Secretary of National Defense
4. The Chief of Staff of AFP
5. General/Flag Officers of the AFP
6. Active and retired military personnel of the AFP
7. Former AFP members who laterally entered/joined the Philippine
National Police and the Philippine Coast Guard
8. Veterans of Philippine Revolution of 1896, First World War, and
World War II, as well as recognized guerrillas
9. Government Dignitaries, Statesmen, National Artists and other
deceased persons whose interment or re-interment has been approved by
the Commander-in-Chief, Congress, or the Secretary of National Defense.
10. Former Presidents, former Secretaries of National Defense, widows
of former Presidents, and former Chiefs of Staff.
Disqualifications:

Personnel who were dishonorably separated, reverted, and/or

discharged from the service

Authorized personnel who were convicted by final judgment of an

offense involving moral turpitude

Corrupt officials

Sources: http://wpedia.goo.ne.jp/enwiki/Libingan_ng_mga_Bayani

News Clippings
LINK: http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2016/08/09/philippine-law-marcos-burial-legalitieslibingan-ng-mga-bayani-heroes-cemetery.html
Metro Manila (CNN Philippines) With the preparations for the burial of former
President Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, human rights victims are
asking if its legal to allow the former dictator to be buried at National Heroes Cemetery
(Libingan ng Mga Bayani).
But for University of Santo Tomas Law Dean Nilo Divina from a purely legal
perspective there is nothing in Philippine Law that prohibits Marcos from being laid to
rest at the heroes cemetery.
"There is no prohibition from the legal perspective and because there's no prohibition, it
can be allowed," Divina told CNN Philippines in an interview, Tuesday.
According to Divina, the idea of "moral turpitude" which human rights advocates and
martial law victims raise cannot easily be used.
Divina said the Armed Forces of the Philippines' regulation on allocation of plots at the
Libingan ng mga Bayani, only prohibits those convicted of a criminal offense to be
buried at the cemetery.
The law expert noted, the specific decisions of the Hawaii court, Swiss court, and
Supreme Court involve a civil case.
"In the case of the former President, he was found liable and the estate ordered to pay
the victims of human rights during his regime, but that was a civil case. That was not a
criminal case. So from the legal perspective, there is no prohibition, Divina said.
Human rights advocates to question heros burial for Marcos
Objections to the planned burial of former president Marcos at the National Heroes'
Cemetery may reach the Supreme Court.
Albay Representative Edcel Lagman said he is working with a group of lawyers to come
up with the petition.
As a human rights lawyer, Lagman strongly opposes the decision of the administration,
alongside victims of rights abuses during the Marcos regime.

His brother, Hermon Lagman, was a political activist who disappeared during Martial
Law.
"The president's decision should not be arbitrary and absolute. An independent body
like the Supreme Court could intervene in order to stop this projected desecration of the
Libingan ng mga Bayani," Lagman said.
Former Akbayan Partylist representative and human rights lawyer Barry Gutierrez is
also involved in the drafting of the petition.
Gutierrez said one of the documents they could cite in the petition is a position paper of
the National Historical Commission of the Philippines, which previously stated that
Marcos should not be buried at the heroes cemetery.
Gutierrez added they are hoping to finalize the petition by next week.
Moral Turpitude
Divina said it may not be too late for the human rights victims and their kin to question
the move of the administration on Marcos burial.
According to Divina, the victims may get an injunction before the Supreme Court.
Divina admits the definition of moral turpitude is broad, and the petitioners could argue
that Marcos' offenses fall under the idea of "moral turpitude."
"They may argue perhaps that given the death, the crimes have already been
committed, they can make a case that this is one of moral turpitude. The phrase moral
turpitude is very broad. Bouncing check is also an example, rape, theft, Divina noted.
Divina also said the President should consider what the Martial Law victims would feel
with his decision.
"The president should consider all sensitivities in making that final decision."
According to Divina, if the Supreme Court decides in favor of the petitioners, it can issue
an order to exhume Marcos' remains from the Libingan.
Divina added, although there's still time to stop the transfer of Marcos' remains to the
Libingan, the petitioners have to do it as soon as possible but it may be a tough battle
for them to stop the transfer.
"It may be tough given the language of the law," Divina said.

InterAksyon.com
The online news portal of TV5
The late President Ferdinand Marcos cannot be buried at the "Libingan ng mga Bayani."
The law prohibits it.
Section 1 of Republic Act No. 289, otherwise known as "An Act Providing for the
Construction of a National Pantheon for Presidents of the Philippines, National Heroes
and Patriots of the Country" is quite clear in its purpose to "perpetuate the memory of
all Presidents of the Philippines, national heroes and patriots for the inspiration and
emulation of this generation and of generations still unborn."
The spirit of the law is self-evident. The sacred place is the burial ground for honorable
men and women only - as signified by the phrase: "for the inspiration and emulation of
this generation and of generations still unborn".
There is nothing inspirational or emulatory meaning, worth-imitating with respect to
the dictatorship of President Ferdinand Marcos. The Marcos regime was one of the
darkest periods in Philippine history. No less than a law, Republic Act No. 10368,
acknowledged this. It stated:
" ... it is hereby declared the policy of the State to recognize the heroism and sacrifices
of all Filipinos who were victims of summary execution, torture, enforced or involuntary
disappearance and other gross human rights violations committed during the regime of
former President Ferdinand E. Marcos covering the period from September 21, 1972 to
February 25, 1986 and restore the victims' honor and dignity. The State hereby
acknowledges its moral and legal obligation to recognize and/or provide reparation to
said victims and/or their families for the deaths, injuries, sufferings, deprivations and
damages they suffered under the Marcos regime.
"Similarly, it is the obligation of the State to acknowledge the sufferings and damages
inflicted upon persons whose properties or businesses were forcibly taken over,
sequestered or used, or those whose professions were damaged and/or impaired, or
those whose freedom of movement was restricted, and/or such other victims of the
violations of the Bill of Rights."
Moreover, Executive Order No. 1 of the late President Corazon Aquino created the
Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG). Its main mission is

the recovery of all ill-gotten wealth accumulated by former President Ferdinand E.

Marcos, his immediate family, relatives, subordinates and close associates, whether
located in the Philippines or abroad, including the takeover or sequestration of all
business enterprises and entities owned or controlled by them, during his
administration, directly or through nominees, by taking undue advantage of their public
office and/or using their powers, authority, influence, connections or relationship.
Presently, about P170 billion of ill-gotten wealth (assets, monies, and properties) had
already been recovered by the PCGG. And the PCGG is still trying to recover millions, if
not billions, more. This theft can be considered the grandest larceny in Philippine
history. Only plunderers will find this inspirational and worth-emulating. Surely, this
cannot be the "memory" of a president sought to be "perpetuated" by Republic Act No.
289.
Neither can these acts be considered as achievements of a national hero or a patriot.
And, even if former President Ferdinand Marcos were a soldier, his exploits and alleged
medals were dubious in their authenticity as asserted by the National Historical
Commission of the Philippines (NHCP).
Also, while the law provides that it is to perpetuate the memory of "all presidents" and
that "all presidents" shall be interred therein, the word "all" should not be construed as
unconditional or unqualified so as to actualize an absurd application of the law, mock its
noble purpose, and create injustice. In the words of the Supreme Court "the spirit of the
law controls its letter" (US vs. Go Chico G.R. No. 4963 September15, 1909) such that
"a thing which is within the letter of the law is not within the statute unless it is within the
intention of the lawmaker." (ibid) A dishonorable and corrupt president cannot be within
the noble intent of Republic Act No. 289.
And even if the law provides that it "shall be the burial place of their mortal remains", the
Supreme Court has already ruled that, the word "shall" ordinarily meaning a command
will depart from its mandatory character and will be construed as "permissive when no
public benefit or private right requires that it be given an imperative meaning." (Diokno
vs. RFC 91 Phil. 608)
Surely, the members of the Marcos family do not have any private right on the "Libingan
ng mga Bayani". The place is not privately owned by them. Also, no public benefit can
be derived in the burial as allowing the same will contravene the laws noble intent.
Indeed, the non-mandatory requirement of burying presidents at the "Libingan ng mga
Bayani" is evidenced by its very usage since it took effect in 1948. The late Presidents
Manuel L. Quezon, Sergio Osmea, Ramon Magsaysay and Manuel Roxas were not
buried there.

Some ask why should the Filipinos not just move on and simply allow the burial of
former President Ferdinand Marcos at the "Libingan ng mga Bayani"? As I have said
many times, it is not just a matter of simply forgetting a by-gone-Marcos-era. Neither is it
a simple interment. It is about lessons from the dark side of our history initiated by that
President, learning from it and not standing idly-by to let others, repeat what he did.
To honor him, despite the recovery of billions of ill-gotten wealth (which is still on-going)
and in spite of the unequivocal public-policy-recognition of the savagery of his regime
against his own countrymen/women, is to render absurd Republic Act Number 289 and
desecrate the "Libingan ng mga Bayani."
One cannot force respect and honor. It must be earned through genuine service and
sacrifice for others. Burying the former dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the "Libingan ng
mga Bayani" will not revise history. It will not undo what has been done. But there is still
meaning in not allowing his burial there and that meaning is the preservation of our
dignity as free-loving people that we will not anymore be subjected to the cruelty and
greed of a despotic president.
And if erasing the memory of one of the darkest periods in our history after World War II
is what the proponents of this burial is hoping to achieve, then the right thing to do is for
them to acknowledge the atrocities that happened during the Martial-Law years. Then
perhaps healing can start and some will finally have closure. No, they cannot just bury
former President Ferdinand Marcos at the "Libingan ng mga Bayani" and hope that the
memories of his oppressive regime would be buried with him.
Source:
http://interaksyon.com/article/131250/mel-sta--maria--burying-marcos-at-thelibingan-ng-mga-bayani-violates-the-law