Marcos Burial: Keeping Track of a Controversy

People gathered at the Lapu-Lapu Shrine in Rizal Park on Aug. 14 for the Citizen’s Assembly Against the Marcos Burial in Libingan ng mga Bayani. Photo by Lito Ocampo.

CHEERS TO Rappler  for consistently covering the controversy over the burial of the late strongman Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.

As the Supreme Court (SC) started hearing oral arguments for and against it on Aug. 31, Rappler posted pieces that discussed the points raised by both the petitioners and the respondents.

In “SC orals on Marcos burial: Issues and answers,” (Aug. 31) Rappler’s Patty Pasion listed the legal points raised by the petitioners against the burial, among them the provisions of Republic Act 289 (An Act Providing for the Constitution of a National Pantheon for Presidents of the Philippines, National Heroes and Patriots of the Country) and Republic Act 10368 (Human Rights Victims Reparations Act); the 1992  agreement between the Marcos family and the administration of Fidel Ramos; the relevance of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; and Marcos’s dubious military records.

On Sept. 1, Rappler followed-up with “SC orals: How justices pursued issues on Marcos burial,” noting that human rights, the creation of RA 289, the rules governing who may be buried in the Libingan, and Marcos’s record as a soldier were among the issues the SC justices paid special attention to.

While the topic was covered by other media organizations as well, Rappler’s efforts to discuss key issues were more informative, since the former limited themselves to simply reporting when the oral arguments would take place, who filed the petitions against the burial, and some of the points raised.

In a recent monitor, CMFR urged the media to go more deeply into the controversy as both a moral as well as legal issue. (“Marcos Burial: The Press as a Moral Compass,” August 2016) Now that the issue is in the hands of the SC, the media will hopefully continue to track developments and provide reports that will better inform the public to enable them to arrive at an informed consensus.