A US district court judge in Hawaii has rejected a petition to terminate a $150-million settlement between the family of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos and victims of human rights abuses during his rule, a lawyer for the victims said yesterday.
Rod Domingo, a lawyer representing half of the 10,000 human rights victims, said Judge Manuel Real set another hearing on April 24 to allow the Marcos family more time to pay up.
Domingo and US lawyer Robert Swift had asked Real during a hearing in Honolulu on Thursday to terminate the deal, two days after the Sandiganbayan nullified the agreement, saying it was "unconstitutional."
Nullification of the deal by the US court would allow the victims to demand payment of the entire $2 billion awarded to them by Real in 1994 when they won a class action suit filed against the Marcos estate.
The settlement money was to have been sourced from $630 million the government recovered from Marcos' bank accounts in Switzerland and placed in an escrow account in Manila.
"The situation now is we have to wait until April 24 ... This will effectively give the Marcoses ample time to effect the payment of the 150 million dollars to the victims," Domingo said.
He said they would seek the arrest of former First Lady Imelda Marcos and demand the entire $2 billion, plus $700,000 in interest if the settlement falls through.
After years of litigation, the victims of torture, rape, forced disappearances and summary killings or their relatives agreed to the $150-million out-of-court settlement in 1999.
But the deal, endorsed by President Estrada, needs the approval of the Sandiganbayan, a special anti-graft court which has yet to resolve legal ownership over the recovered Marcos money.
"We are now in the process of looking for other assets of the Marcos estate to answer for the obligation because we feel that if by the time of the next scheduled hearing no payment will be made by the Marcoses, then we will really attach all known properties of the estate," Domingo said in a television interview.
"We will move for their arrest or detention in the US courts and coordinate with the government in locating other assets of the Marcoses."
For her part, party-list Rep. Loretta Ann Rosales urged the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) to file a motion for reconsideration before the Supreme Court to reverse the Sandiganbayan's ruling.
"I was initially disappointed. But on second thought, I tried to look at the wisdom of the US court and I think Judge Real merely wanted the two parties to look for alternative sources of money to enable the Marcoses to pay the victims," she said.
Domingo acknowledged they face a tough legal battle ahead.
"The Marcoses are indeed tough. They will do every trick in the book to withhold payment of the money. So we will just use whatever legal remedies (there are) to be able to satisfy the judgment," he said.
Marcos was deposed in a bloodless popular uprising in 1986 and died in exile in Hawaii three years later.
He and his family have been accused of plundering billions of dollars from the national coffers.
Meanwhile, another group of human rights victims expressed disgust over Real's decision.
"We are so disgusted, dismayed and angry at the way Judge Real treated us," said Marie Hilao-Enriquez, secretary general of the Samahan ng mga Ex-Detainee Laban sa Detensyon at Para sa Amnestiya (SELDA).
"It seems that we are not only against the Marcoses, Swift and the Estrada government, but also against Real," she said in a statement from Honolulu.
SELDA actually wants the $150-million deal terminated because "any settlement by any means, if penned by the cunning duo of Imelda Marcos and the Estrada government ... will just be a legal document of grave insult to the human rights victims and the historic struggle of Filipinos against the Marcos dictatorship and fascism."
SELDA stressed that the Marcos family had constantly held on to their innocence and would never let go of a single centavo without a legal declaration of their exoneration.
"Any agreement with the Marcoses without proper consultation and primary consideration of the victims' interest is downright immoral and complete treachery of the rights and interests of 9,539 human rights victims," SELDA said. -- With wire reports