Monday, November 27, 1972

The headline of the Daily Express today was “Second Reading Vote Today on Draft of Proposed Constitution.” The subheading is “Charter Reflect Spirit of New Society.”

I had a brief chat with Johnny Remulla and Jun Davide.

“There is no more oppposition in Cavite,” Johnny declared triumphantly. “Governor Bocalan is in the stockade while Senator (Tatang) Montano is out of the country. Tatang Montano was one of those to be arrested on the first day of martial law for smuggling and/or gunrunning.”

That left Johnny, indeed, the virtual ruler of Cavite.

I had thought that today we could start with our interpellations. I was about one of the few more interpellators who could not be accommodated yesterday because we adjourned early. However, when the session started in the morning, Roy Montejo moved that all other interpellations on the draft Constitution be submitted in writing to the Secretariat no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 28 for insertion in the journal.

I whispered to Sed Ordoñez, who was sitting beside me, “They have just killed my interpellation.”

I then dictated my interpellation to my secretary, Olive:

“We have divided the provisions of the new Constitution into those that are meant to be transitory in character and those permanent and enduring. I understand that the transitory provisions are meant to be merely provisional—that is to say, in the interim; that because of extraordinary circumstances certain powers are vested in certain officials. Is this the rationale for the concentration of executive powers which, ordinarily, we would not write among the permanent provisions during normal times?

“The members of the committee have been instrumental in convincing the majority of delegates that a parliamentary system of government is desirable for this country. The transitory provision, according to the draft Constitution, shall effect priority measures for the orderly transition from the presidential to parliamentary system of government. Does this mean that after the transition period, we shall then revert to the parliamentary system?

“If so, why the grant of extraordinary powers to the prime minister after the transition? Should these powers not be effective during the transition period only? Why should all the powers of the presidency be vested in the prime minister during normal times? Why not limit this grant of extraordinary powers during states of emergency? Again, why should veto powers be given the prime minister during normal times?

“As a corollary, there has been a diminution of the powers and responsibilities of the National Assembly under the draft being presented to us. I grant that during periods of emergency the power of Congress or of the Assembly may be greatly weakened, the reason being that these are abnormal times. But why, after normalcy shall have returned, should the National Assembly be allowed to pass only bills of local application? And what can be the justification for the deletion of the traditional immunity from arrest of its members during normal times?

“In the same manner, let us talk about civil rights. In the long history of constitutionalism, the most fundamental problem is that of striking a balance between national security and individual liberty. During normal times, however, democratic politics have tended to give greater weight to the fundamental liberties of citizens—not only of freedom of thought and speech, press, and worship but with all those freedoms that make human life human—the freedom to work and play, the freedom to laugh, the freedom not to be afraid. I find the predilection for being obsessed with national security understandable during abnormal times—during states of emergencies. But should we institutionalize the doctrine of national security and correspondingly diminish our vigorous support of civil liberties in the permanent provisions of the Constitution—after the national emergency shall have been over?

“Finally, we have a thick draft of the Constitution consisting of 92 pages. I find no more than eight pages given to the provisions on the national economy. And yet all of us agree that problems of national economy are among the most compelling problems of our people, and that indeed, the mediocre performance of the economy may put at risk the survival of our fragile democracy.

“What is our grand design for development? Is it not necessary to work for a fundamental restructuring of the world economy and a radical restructuring of social, political and economic institutions internally if we have to achieve development?

“And most important, is not social justice the overarching goal of development with which economic growth and self-reliance must be integrated to enable our people to attain a higher quality of life? Make their lives more human under the stresses and opportunities of growth? In other words, how do we effect radical changes in social structures so as to liberate the poor and the weak in Philippine society from their age-old bondage? What plan do we have for social reconstruction?”

Consummatum est,” I said as we filed out of the session hall at 9:40 p.m. today.

“Consummatum est,” echoed several delegates behind me, among them, Jess Matias and Erning Amatong. “We have just put the last nail in the coffin,” Erning said.

The elevator was getting to be full and I was the last one to enter. I asked quite innocently, “Where are we going?” A voice from behind said, “Very appropriate question—’Where are we going?’—Where else but down?” And still another delegate spoke: “Caesar, why do you ask such a question? Of course we are all bound to go down.”

The delegates were taking in stride the tragedy that has just struck. Filipinos are adept at double talk and the use of humor to hide their wounded feelings. Yet the note of fatalism cannot be hidden from their remarks.

The draft Constitution for the Republic of the Philippines was approved on second reading by a show of hands. Several of us—many from our Independent-Progressive group—abstained or voted “No.” But naturally, it was approved just the same.

But let us review the events of this day of infamy.

The day started with Delegate Yuzon proposing to change the first sentence in the Declaration of Principles to “The Philippines is a social and democratic Republic.” He made a very eloquent plea for acceptance of the amendment, arguing that the present wording, “The Philippines is a republican state,” was too tame to suit the progressive orientation of the new Constitution.

Of course, even the German Basic Law speaks of Germany as a social democratic state.

But responding on behalf of the committee, Ikeng Corpuz contended that the amendment would lead to confusion. The Yuzon amendment was lost, but I went over to Yuzon, anyway, to congratulate him for his progressive views.

The amendment of Naning Kalaw, which expresses the sentiment that those who have less in life should have more in law, was inserted into the records. Actually, President Magsaysay had made this as his slogan in the 1950s, the centerpiece of his social amelioration program. The poor guy did not realize that his legal adviser, Prof. Enrique M. Fernando, had taken the idea from Prof. Thomas Reed Powell of Harvard Law School. Insofar as our countrymen are concerned, this slogan is inextricably linked to Ramon Magsaysay; didn’t I see it inscribed at the Magsaysay Center at Roxas Boulevard?

At about 11:13, while we were still in the midst of amendments, Vic Guzman moved for the previous question on the entire draft of the Constitution.

That was not only foolish; it was sordid. Many delegates were furious.

I do not know what was in the mind of Vic. Of course, none of the amendments would be accepted. Nevertheless, he—along with the majority that completely overwhelmed us—could have manifested a spirit of moderation, of fair play, let alone generosity.

“Worse than the executioner is his valet,” Mirabeau had said during the French Revolution. How appropriately exhibited in our Con-Con!

When we started discussing the Bill of Rights, Sed Ordoñez rose on interpellation. He asked if the Bill of Rights was supposed to be operative. The answer of Tony Tupaz was “Yes.”

But was it not in conflict with the transitory provision?

“No, the Bill of Rights would be effective, subject to the transitory provision,” was the deceptive reply.

Double-talk!

“This is a fundamental matter—that of the civil liberties of citizens,” Sed warned. “We should not gloss this over.”

Tony Tupaz reiterated that the transitory provision would not nullify our civil rights; rather our civil rights would be subject to the transitory provision. Tony did not bat an eyelash as he solemnly affirmed his devotion to individual freedom.

In effect, our rights are guaranteed so long as they are not in conflict with the transitory provision, that is to say, with the decrees of the President. In other words, the President may suspend all our rights because we gave him that power in the transitory provision. Das ist klar (that is clear), my German friends would say.

Ramon Diaz has been around since yesterday. Presumably, he is only here to vote “No.” He had abandoned the Convention more than two months ago, right after we lost on the resolution providing for no reelection for the President. In fact, when I saw him, I said, “Ramoning, it is good to see you around; I mean, it is good to see you personally although it would have been better if I were seeing you elsewhere….”

“Yes,” he said, “it is tragic.”

Lolo Baradi and I exchanged some pleasantries in the hallway. Baradi, until the end, professed loyalty to Marcos. Yet…

“I tell you partner,” he said, “this New Society will fall unless the economy is able to pick up. What about the unemployment situation? I was talking with some of my clients and their attitude is not to move. The President has told the businessmen to cooperate, not just to wait and see—but why will the businessmen move when all they hear from the President are decrees: ‘Do this!’ ‘Do that!’ ‘Don’t do this!’ ‘Don’t do that!'”

I looked at this kindly old man quizzically. Here is a good friend of President Marcos disagreeing with what is happening and yet not being able to express openly his true feelings.

During the meeting with the businessmen, he commented, the President should have taken the opportunity to have some dialogue with them. What the Apo did was a monologue.

“Yes,” Lolo Baradi continued in a whisper, “the country will not prosper until we stop these decrees—’Do this!’ ‘do that!’ ‘don’t do this!’ ‘don’t do that!’ business.”

What a pity that men can have good thoughts but have their lips sealed, I thought.

I kept on waiting to pursue my amendments. I wanted to put on record my amendments on the Bill of Rights. Of course, Naning Kalaw has already presented so many amendments which have been recorded. I wanted to read my amendments on the Bill of Rights into the journal.

At 4:30 p.m., Vic Guzman stood up again and presented his motion to vote on the previous question.

What a terrible pest! Why the mad rush? Why not give everyone a chance to present amendments? Of course, these would all be voted down but nevertheless that was the very least that should be accorded the minority—the vanquished minority—us. The sporting idea of fair play, if not the generosity of the victor, is absent.

I thought of a strategy. I went to Edmundo (Munding) Cea and President Macapagal. I suggested that if we should run out of time, the floor leader, Roy Montejo, should move that all the amendments properly filed and not discussed on the floor should become part of the journal records. They agreed.

Munding was happy enough. But I suggested to him that it would be good to wait until the last moment to say this. In the meantime, we should still continue with our amendments.

President Macapagal was somewhat vigorously suggesting the same thing to Munding. “We should give everyone a chance to present his amendments,” he said.

“The amendments would be refused hut at least everyone should be given a chance,” I added.

Even President Macapagal was finding the proceedings repulsive. “Yes,” Macapagal echoed. “At least give them a chance so that people would not say we have railroaded everything…. Let us be somewhat democratic about this.”

We went through the whole ritual of having one amendment after another presented to the body refused by the committee, and overwhelmingly disapproved or withdrawn by the proponents. Whenever it was an amendment which would be quite difficult, a recess would be called by the committee members—Tony Tupaz, Tony de Guzman, Peps Bengzon, etc.—and then they would talk to the proponents. It was almost unbelievable—the way this would be followed by withdrawals of amendments by the proponents.

I started swapping jokes with my neighbors, “Madali palang magpa-withdraw.”

“How?”

“Two words are uttered by the committee people: ‘Isusumbong kita.'”

“Maybe it is not only ‘isusumbong kita,’ maybe it is ‘ipapa-stockade kita.'”

We laughed. Our laughter was tinged with sadness.

How come everybody, no matter how vehement about his amendment in the beginning, later on acceded to the request for withdrawal after a little conference?

“We are in a bullet train—five hours to Osaka,” I said in a loud voice.

“Yeah, make it three hours so we can go home,” echoed another voice.

We shook our heads in disbelief. Out of so many proposed amendments falling by the wayside, only one amendment was passed. This was a proposal by Sensing Suarez on search warrants and warrants of arrest. Under the committee draft, a search warrant and warrant of arrest shall be issued only upon probable cause to be determined by the judge or such other responsible officials as may be authorized by law after examination, etc. The amendment was to delete “or such other responsible officers as may be authorized by law.” In other words, only a judge may issue a search warrant or warrant of arrest under the Suarez amendment. Of course. Surely, not police officers!

The amendment was unexpectedly approved on a vote of 96 to 87.

We were jubilant. How grateful we are even for little blessings. The first amendment approved in two days! I was one of the many who congratulated Sensing for this.

Sensing told us the reason he stood up to thank the members of the committee after the voting was that the committee members also voted in favor although it was formally refused for the committee by Tony Tupaz.

Later, I joined Joe Feria, Bobbit Sanchez, Naning Kalaw, Lilia Delima and Cefi Padua at the terrace.

“What is your stand now?” Jose asked me.

“As of now, if the voting were nominal, I would abstain. If it is by a show of hands, I would abstain or vote ‘No.'”

Lilia then said, “Please reconsider. It is important for us to vote ‘Yes.’ The majority would only be too glad to have us out of the Assembly. They would only be too glad to see us taken to the stockade. Do you know that during the voting on the transitory provision, they were urging me to vote ‘No’ so that I would not be in the Assembly? Why should we play into their hands?”

Most of us decided to abstain or vote “No” if it is going to be a show of hands—with the exception of Fr. Ortiz, Justice Barrera and Nene Pimentel who, we know, are already firm in deciding to vote “No,” in any case.

Our little group was hoping that the voting would be by a show of hands.

Bebet Duavit was at the next table. He agreed with us. Nominal voting should only be on third voting.

We wanted it this way so that our little group could at least abstain if we may not be able to vote “No.”

As we were talking, Raul Roco strolled towards us with an air of nonchalance. He was whistling.

“Are you having any problem?” he asked laughingly. “Why do you have problems? I have no problems.”

“Sit down.” We put Raul on the chair.

He then told us that he had spent many hours of discussion with two “moral counsellors” and both of them had advised him to vote “Yes.” It was meaningless to vote “No” anyway. The important question was what possible harm could there be in voting “Yes?”

“Obviously, we have different loyalties. We have loyalties to our families, our committees, our country, but what harm does it do to vote ‘Yes?’ There could be harm in voting ‘No.'”

I related to this group—the remnants of our once proud Independent-Progressive bloc—the interview with Sakharov which I had read the other night. When asked finally whether they thought that their efforts—which have been putting him, his wife and his family in very great danger—would produce any significant change in Russian politics, Sakharov answered that he did not expect any such changes at all. Then why continue exposing himself and his family to danger? Because for them this is not a political struggle. It is a moral struggle: “We are dissenting, because we have to be true to ourselves.”

Raul Roco straightened up and looked straight into our eyes.

“The time to be true to ourselves has passed—that was during the voting on the transitory provision.”

There was a deafening silence.

Raul confided to us that one of the priests—with a foreign name which I cannot recall—told him it was like the question of Laurel and Abad Santos during the war. But then, Raul said, the analogy is not very accurate. The enemy was clear and specific during the Japanese time. The lines are quite vague this time. Who are we to say that this or that is the enemy?

We asked whether as a condition for the removal of his name and that of Romy Capulong’s from the wanted “list,” he was supposed to vote “Yes.”

“No,” Raul answered. “There was no discussion, there was no such condition. But it was assumed…. it was assumed.”

He laughed. Nervously.

We were all downcast, depressed.

Soon we were voting on the entire Constitution.

Sed Ordoñez stood up to move for nominal voting. As was to be expected, his motion was lost. The majority insisted on voting by a show of hands or by standing up.

Should I vote “No” or should I abstain? I could not possibly vote “Yes.” But what might I expect if, indeed, I voted “No?”

Before I could think through my dilemma or banish my fears, voting was called. Those who were voting “No” were asked to stand up.

I found myself instinctively standing up—to join the “No” voters. In half a second, Joe Feria joined me. But before we could fully straighten up, a sudden loud roar of approval burst out. The overwhelming majority of the delegates had obviously voted for the ap­proval of the Constitution!

We now have a brand new Constitution. A Marcos Constitution. Authoritarianism has been institutionalized. The lapdogs of the dictator were delirious with joy.

I remember that the British Prime Minister Gladstone had called the American Constitution “the most wonderful work struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.” Our brand new Constitution is the opposite; it is the most despicable work struck off at a given time by the warped brain and purpose of man, to his lasting disgrace.

What is really this new Constitution that we have approved? It was not the draft Constitution approved by the Convention as such, a couple of months earlier. For all purposes, this is a new Constitution that has been framed by a Convention that has changed its stripes. The watershed was reached during the proclamation of martial law. From then on the Convention has been a transformed Convention. Several delegates have even turned against their own provisions—willingly or under duress.

Of course, the most “scandalous provision,” to use the phrase of (Senator) Jovito Salonga, is that of the transitory provision. It is objectionable on several points: (1) we have constitutionalized a dictatorship; (2) we have affirmed all the proclamations, decrees, general orders and letters of instructions of the President; (3) we have made ourselves, as delegates, beneficiaries of this Constitution by making ourselves assemblymen.

We shall become assemblymen—just like that!

The second feature—the legalization of the decrees of the President, was just somewhat improved upon by the amendment of Ikeng Belo to delete “are hereby confirmed, ratified as valid and binding,” etc., etc.

Part of the objections are contained in my interpellation which will be submitted tomorrow—because we are given until tomorrow to submit our written interpellations. Our oral interpellations have been cut off.

Bobbit Sanchez represents the same 2nd district of Rizal that Bebet Duavit represents. Bobbit informed us that it is now official knowledge in the Convention that Duavit is the high priest of Malacañang in the Convention. He receives instructions from Malacañang and transmits these during the proceedings.

Bobbit Sanchez confirmed that Duavit is presently thinking that only those who would vote for the Constitution on second and third readings should be allowed to be members of the Assembly. And we have just now not voted in favor. We have voted against. We are not going to disgrace ourselves. Whatever else life would bring or deny, one thing is absolutely certain: that we should not break faith with ourselves; that in our own eyes, our honor remains bright.

Duavit spoke. We should bear in mind, he said, that the rules of the Convention have been suspended.

What is the import of the rules being suspended? It is that the majority can do whatever it pleases, precisely because there are no rules.

But this is a perversion of democratic politics. Majority rule demands that the majority should prevail, it is true, but there are two conditions attached to these: that minority rights are not suppressed in the meantime, and that some day the minority might be the majority. In fact, the rationale for a written Bill of Rights in a democratic polity is to ensure that certain basic principles are insulated from the passing whims and caprices of majorities and officials.

Bobbit Sanchez, who seems to be able to gather much intelligence, gave the information that the other thing that Duavit is trying to accomplish is to undo the Suarez amendment, which restricts the issuance of warrants of arrest and search warrants to judges.

It was 9:18 p.m.—quite late in the night—when Duavit quietly, almost innocently asked Vice Pres. Abe Sarmiento, who was presiding, whether the rules have been suspended. He received an affirmative answer. He then quickly proposed to amend Section 16, Article 9, by adding on line 6, the words “unless the National Assembly shall provide otherwise.”

On behalf of the committee, Tony de Guzman accepted the amendment. Three seconds later, Abe banged the gavel to signify that the amendment was approved.

It was 9:19 p.m. No one was paying attention. Many delegates were still coming in.

Duavit then murmured some words. Was he uttering some magical incantations? He seemed to be proposing something… to amend Section 3, Article 4, by inserting the words that were deleted by the Suarez amendment on who may issue a warrant of arrest, “or such other responsible officers as may be authorized by law.”

Tony de Guzman accepted the amendment—which only a few people heard—in five seconds flat.

Chairman Abe Sarmiento asked if there were no opposition. A small, little figure swiftly darted towards the microphone and cried, “Objection!”

It was Bobbit Sanchez. Bobbit of course. Our gallant knight.

“We vote,” said an unruffled Abe. “Those in favor, raise your right hands. Those opposed…. Approved!” He banged his gavel.

It was 9:20 o’clock.

Ano ba ang pinag-uusapan?” one delegate innocently asked. He could have come from Mars.

Joe Feria was shaking his head in disbelief.

Ano, ano?… ito ‘yong amendment ni Suarez? Maganda ‘yon a. Hindi ba inapprove na natin?” Eli Johnson asked likewise in innocence. She could have also come from another planet. Creatures from another planet could have already conquered Earth, and she did not know it.

“This is terrible, terrible!” Rebeck exploded.

Yan ang sinasabi ko,” Bobbit threw his arms sidewards in a gesture of despair. He was grim. What can one really say to this? Like the dancing bear in Heinrich Heine’s Atta Troll, we are a people who love making speeches about freedom but secretly enjoy being in chains!

Many delegates started asking what had happened. All in one minute. But Abe was already far away on another item in the agenda. The railroad team had worked so efficiently. There was no discussion, no explanation.

Our Independent-Progressive coalition likes Abe but many delegates get exasperated when at times he becomes too cooperative with the establishment.

What is the meaning of the latest action? The clear meaning is that now it is not only the judge who may issue a warrant of arrest as provided for in the present Bill of Rights. It may be such other responsible officers as may be authorized by law. And law may be a decree. Which means, by a decree the President can ask any colonel or major or any other government officer, say, a chief-of-police, to arrest anyone.

It was not until some 15 minutes later that the full impact of the most recent action of the Convention was realized by most delegates. But by then everything was finished.

Cicero Calderon said that Duavit had phoned Malacañang about the earlier deletion of the phrase and that President Marcos was very angry over the deletion.

The Convention is really finished.

Two centuries ago, Vauvenargues said that the greatest evil which fortune can inflict on men is to endow them with small talents and great ambitions.


January 20, 1970

01 Diary of Ferdinand Marcos, 1970, 0001-0099 (Jan01-Feb28) 43 01 Diary of Ferdinand Marcos, 1970, 0001-0099 (Jan01-Feb28) 44

PAGE 41

Malacañang

Manila

January 20, 1970 Malacañang Palace I still write this in Veterans Memorial Hosp. at 8:00 AM. Meldy is coming home to the Palace at noon before lunch. We have stopped the regular stipends to the columnists and newspapermen. This was started by Pres. Magsaysay in 1954. But we have to stop this corruption. This may be the cause of the harsh and even vicious attitude of the newspapers. I am still trying to ferret out the TV and radio commentators who are being bought. This has to be stopped too. The Commissioner of Civil Service, Abelardo Subido, has been found guilty in the investigation of his actuations in entering into contracts with himself. I have requested him to resign. We have to set the example in the higher echelons of government. For undoubtedly there is still petty graft in the lower ranks – the export office is one, the BIR and the Customs. This must be eradicated and soon. Malacañang 11:55 PM Settled the Speakership problem this morning by calling Ex Speaker Villareal, then Speaker Laurel to Maharlika. Villareal graciously withdrew but his supporters swear that if Laurel does not remain loyal to me, they will topple him. Met the congressmen who all wanted releases and appointments. Met Commissioner of Civil Service Abelardo Subido whom I asked to resign for violation of the Anti-Graft Law for signing a contract of lease both as lessor and lessee.

PAGE 42

Malacañang

Manila

Will reorganize the army so that the IInd and IIIrd Military areas will be converted into brigades. More flexible and fitted to the concept of home defense or guerrilla war. Updating the emergency plan to include not only counter-insurgency but even a military attempt at a take over. Have ordered Gen. Raval to prepare a strike force in Camp Crame. Must get the armored units, the air force and naval units organized. Met Sec. Mata, Usec. Melchor, Gen. Yan, Ileto, Raval, Singson and Com. Lomibao. Will meet with Gov. Licaros and Zavkar of the IMF tomorrow. Looks like Zavkar has no power to negotiate but has been instructed to propose devaluation of from 25% to 30% or a multiple rate of exchange. From reports, Zavhkar is of the belief that we will not be able to enforce a multiple rate of exchange. They want a budget surplus in the next six months – which we already have. The truth of the matter is everything – but everything is awaiting at a standstill the results of the consultations with IMF – both government and the private sector cannot move until we know what the BOP strategy is.


July 4, 1969

DIARY page 1DIARY page 2DIARY page 3DIARY page 4DIARY page 5DIARY page 6DIARY page 7DIARY page 8DIARY page 9DIARY page 10DIARY page 11DIARY page 12DIARY page 13DIARY page 14

p.1

JULY 4/69

DIARY

     On board 777 THE PRESIDENT at 9:00 PM I am about to take dinner in the dining saloon in this 2,400-ton Presidential yacht which is a carry over from the administration of President Garcia from 1957 to 1961. It was ordered reparations at an alleged cost of five million pesos. If ordered today it will probably cost double the amount. It is the length of a destroyer and originally intended for 18 knots but it is travelling only at 15 knots, never dry-docked or serviced during the time of President Diosdado Macapagal. It had to be repaired by its original manufacturers in Japan in 1966 so that it might continue to be in operation otherwise it would have been sold for scrap iron — such a pity since it is such a beautiful ship. In twenty minutes it will be turning to the point at Surigao street as we have just come from Tandag, Surigao del Sur.

I we woke up at 4:30 o’clock in the morning of July 4th to discover we were anchoring between two islands that guarded entry into Tandag port. The passage from Tandag on the Pacific left side was rather rough some of bottles in the bar room

p.2

either fell from the tables or broken.

I returned to the ship at 3:30 o’clock in the afternoon and I went to sleep at around 4:00 p.m. It was marred by noise in the Pacific side which somehow affected my golf which I attempted to exercise at about 5:30 p.m. I went around on the face on the deck for one-half hour and practiced petty ball net for another half hour after which my usual shower and massage while I worked on some papers and documents.

We have been away from Manila since the 29th of June and we departed from Pier 5 at 11:30 AM to arrive at San Juanico street at 11:30 following morning and off Tacloban at 1:30 p.m.We anchored at the port to wait for the fluvial parade which started at 4:00 o’clock p.m. and which we participated. This fluvial parade is for the Santo Niño of Tacloban. I have been Hermano Mayor for this year and I was transferring the Santo Niño to Tacloban to the new Hermano Mayor, Secretary Eduardo Romualdez of Finance, cousin of Imelda. In the evening I dedicated a new song “IMELDA” in Tacloban, the music of which was composed by Mike Velarde and sang by Ric Manrique, Rita Rivera and Cely Bautista. At 11:30 in the evening we took

p.3

the 777 THE PRESIDENT for Maasin, Leyte del Sur after the dedication of the song. We left Olot where the 777 was anchored for Maasin where we arrived at 6:30 following morning, July 1st, where I was supposed to participate in the Ninth Anniversary of the creation of the Province of Leyte del Sur. Imelda was to take a small plane for the airport at Hilongos and take one of the LCT US small helicopter for Maasin which was one hour drive by car away. Instead however she took the DBP jet helicopter from Olot directly to Maasin which she made in 40 minutes to arrive 10:00 o’clock in the morning just after I had finished inspecting different projects like cementing of the roads, capitol building, school houses and was ready to start the program after the parade at the grandstand of Maasin High School referred to as Pilot High School in as much as it is the pilot project for high school and manpower training in the province. This was obviously the first helicopter that ever landed in Maasin and it attracted attention so much so it endangered the lives of the spectators who milled around the small helicopter. I ordered the two helicopters based at Hilongos at LCT to come to Maasin to seek cover. The reason I am taking the

p.4

boat is first my nose is clogged and the doctors advised meDo not fly while I have severe cold because any sudden changes in elevation may cause a rupture in eardrum or a return of my congestion of the inner ear and at the same time Imelda dreamt of accident in airplane because of the death of President Magsaysay at Mount Manungal on March 17, 1967. Because of the raw reports lately to the effect that the men of the Opposition candidate, Senator Sergio Osmeña, Jr., are planning a sabotage and they are after to assassinate me, she insisted that I do not take plane or helicopter any time now. And there have been on several instances of suspected sabotage of the Presidential plane — Fokker 29 — and the Presidential helicopter which crushed off Bohol made and crush landing in the water in Bohol and sunk after 40 minutes. After turning the point at Surigao del Norte and passing by the Mindanao deep at Dapa the seas have become even and quiet and the boat was quite stable. I find my visit to the provinces by ship more restive as there are none of these hurry and scunny which attend by plane.

I also have an opportunity to rest in the afternoon after the meetings. When I went to Maasin on the first of July and after we finished the meeting at which time Imelda flew by helicopter back to Olot, Leyte which she reached in 45 minutes. The five minutes delay of her arrival was apparently caused by her flying all over the various valleys throughout Leyte to acquaint herself with the agricultural areas of the Province. This is the first

p.5

time she flew southward along the Pacific area by helicopter. I attended the lunch at the Governor’s house (Gov. Yñiguez) where I conferred with former Governor Bantug, Governor Bernardo Torres and the three LP mayors — Mayor Espina of Malitbog and the Lim brothers. At 2:30 p.m. we left Maasin and reached Olot at 9:30 in the evening. I was able to reach the guest house after a separate passage which is around 800 meters away off from the shore. The waves were quite probably about two feet high.

But on the way from Maasin I went to sleep taking a short nap from 3 to 4 p.m. and to work on some papers and read some books.

Same thing is true from Tandag. I was able to finish the conference at the Municipal hall at Tandag at about 2 o’clock p.m. I brought Congressman Gregorio Murillo and Congressman Constantino Navarro with Governor Modesto Castillo and Governor Sering of Surigao del Norte on board with me with some of the mayors, board members and councilors. We were finding solution for the organization of the party and the operations that we are conducting for registration of voters, and information on agricultural development. Agricultural development because we discovered in Surigao del Sur that up to now it has no irrigation system.

I observed on the way to Tago, especially the way to the inauguration, of the road which we have

p.6

opened a stretch of about 80 kilometers from Tandag to Leñgig, the road now having reached the last barrio of Surigao del Sur at San Roque and ready to reach Cateel of Davao at the cost of P2,600,000. For the first time the Bayabas-Kaguit and another town of South Agusan which was used to be unconnected with road are now connected by road. We are trying to finish the bridge at Gamot, Tago — the biggest voting town with the previous registered voters of more than 8,000. Tandag, the capital town, is about 5,000 only.

We are also finishing a 4,000 hectares guaranteed irrigation project in Cantilan in the coast. It should be inaugurated before my birthday on Sept. 11.

Four years ago in 1965 at about this time I have already finished campaigning throughout the entire Philippines but I remember that in the birthday of Imelda she had a small party going to Olot and I landed like Magellan from a small motor launch which could be brought within a meter of sandy beach and from which I jumped into the beach itself. As soon as I became President I recommended to Congress in my State of the Nation address on January 23, 1966 to limit election expenditures and period for campaigning. I recommended the period for campaigning for national offices be limited to 120 days and for local offices be limited to 90 days.

p.7

This was adopted and which is known as the Tañada-Singson law, because they were the ones who authored the bill I presented to both Houses of Congress. Because of this nominations to national offices such as the Presidency, Vice-Presidency and Senators have been delayed. On June 15, 1969 the Opposition or the Liberal Party, after much confusion and a costly consensus as well as a directorate meeting, all presumably financed by the candidates for the Presidency, the presidential nomination in the Opposition listed the officially nominated candidates; Senator Sergio Osmeña, Jr., Senate Minority Floor Leader Ambrosio Padilla and former Speaker Cornelio Villareal whom I have helped to depose in March 1967 because of the need for a fully controlled House of representatives in as much as the members of the Senate even in my own party were beginning to show antagonism towards my proposals who wore too revolutionary for their conservative taste. In his place I used my moral influence over the House of Representatives to support now incumbent Speaker Jose B. Laurel, Jr. I often wonder as to what would have been happening if this was

p.8

not materialized because as of now I occasionally received reports from the Laurel family including one lady, senator whom we have helped to elect from our funds and actively campaigned in 1967 elections. Senator Salvador “Doy” Laurel has an ambition someday. I gathered information he is preparing for 1973 Presidential elections to coincide with the termination of the Laurel-Langley agreement.

Either Speaker Laurel or Senator Salvador Laurel is aspiring for the Presidency. Our experience with a lady senator have been rather sad. Imelda personally chose Senator Helen Benitez, President of the Philippine Women’s University, her Alma Mater, as the lone representative of the ladies for senator in that election. We practically ran the nominations through the directorate meeting against the violent opposition of the old party leaders. She was specially mentioned by me in all my speeches in the campaign of 1967. She was given P200,000 for her personal expenses by the First Lady and yet a few days ago as Committee Chairman, in the Senate Committee on Housing, Urban Development and Resettlement, allegedly according to the papers for I have not received a formal report on this matter, she used uncalled for remarks attributed to me that we have violated the law and that

p. 9

the 16 million-dollar contract of machinery between National Housing Corporation and the Hildebrand for low cost housing was a waste of funds, because an American Corporation presumably headed by Lock had testified that he could have produced 1/32 of the cost. As J. V. Cruz said in his column – HERE AND THERE — in the Manila Times, this naive assumption by the Committee which adopted this testimony of this American firm is not totally without any reservation nor any concern about the truth and basis of his statement has questioned the integrity of such men like Chairman, Board of Directors of the Development Bank of the Philippines and most prestigious bank, the President of the Philippine National Bank, the Administrator of the Social Security System and the General Manager and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Government Service Insurance System who were organizers of the National Housing Corporation which purchased this equipment.

This is in accordance with my plan to set up a massive low cost housing construction program over the Philippines. This is because according to the experts we need to build 400,000 units every year to meet the requirements of housing shortage in the Philippines, 300,000 of which will be constructed in the

p. 10

urban areas and 100,000 units for mostly hard hit typhoon and fire victims and squatters and low income in the labor group.

It was my intention to build houses for the laboring class costing not more than P5,000.00 each with two bedrooms and all the necessary facilities including kitchen, bathroom and toilet and small sala and dining room. No down payment whatsoever payable for a period of 20 to 25 years at a low rate of 6%. The amortization will probably be P1.00 a day. This could be afforded by our laborers residing in the urban areas. We are now hoping that the low-salaried earners will save in the form of rental at an average of P2.50 a day. Thus we have to purchase the equipment necessary to meet the needs for this massive housing. The conflict here arises the boldness such program was initialed for the capital outlay is indeed staggering initially since it is about 16 million pesos but perhaps over a period of _____ years the down payment of 16 million pesos which has already been paid in the form of funds of the national government by some financial institutions which

p. 11

made a complete study of the project from the view point of experts whom they have consulted. We have met this problem with the effort to cut red tape in the purchase of equipment. But the Panel-Lock homes succeeded in getting some __________ of a judge issuing injunction. Incidentally one of these judges who has been rude before the Supreme Court as having been guilty of issuing injunction even without a hearing was suspended by me and later on removed from the judiciary, another bold step that we have to take which is unthought of in this society for which respect for the judiciary was at its highest type. We have to maintain the judiciary although grievances of people reaching the point of litigation will be probably redressed.

For after the usual formality and the losing parties have obtained the services of our politicians in the legislature to bring about a legislative investigation to block the project. This was purely the obvious reason for the opposition by the second contractor who claims that they will be deprived of legitimate source of income by the government. When they were called by Chairman Licaros of the DBP and offered the contract to them to build the

p. 12

houses at the same rates and under the same terms they confessed that they could not build those houses and yet the zarzuela continues their connection. It was made by no less than the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Housing and Resettlement, Senator Helen Benitez, who owes her position to the First Lady and myself. Perhaps it is necessary to record that recently she lost out in a conflict of boundary in a forest concession in Polilio, Province of Quezon to the Universal Timber Corporation. Before that she had been persisting in demanding the establishment of a sawmill presumably near her farm which I discover from the charges filed by incumbent minority floor leader of the House, Congressman Justiniano Montano, on the road to which she has spent part of the P200,000 that I released for typhoon damage from her provincial allocation. She has sought to obtain some deals in reparations which I refused to participate in and before the war damage educational fund was allocated among the private universities she wanted monopolize the amounts set for private institutions in medical center in the Philippine Women’s University

p. 13

all of which I turned down. I wonder what affected her change of position in the Senate.

We are now proceeding towards Cagayan de Oro City which should be reached by five o’clock following morning. We may be able to proceed from here to Malaybalay, Bukidnon which I have not visited for sometime since I became President. Incidentally Cagayan de Oro City is within the Province of Misamis Oriental, the home province of Senator Emmanuel Pelaez, former Vice-President of President Diosdado Macapagal. He was my principal opponent in the convention of November, for Presidential nomination in the Nacionalista Party. I campaigned for my nomination from the date I joined the Nacionalista Party in April, 1964 up to the convention time, except the period when I was ill from an infection of the gall bladder in me for about one month. I was told by my doctors it was necessary to be operated on and the alternative was antibiotics but the second attack should probably be dextrose if I were not operated immediately. Imelda said I should not be operated as this would adversely affect my nomination in the coming convention of 1964. This was a chance

p. 14

that had to be taken and had to limit my diet to almost no meat and oil whatsoever. I had the gall bladder removed in January, 1967 immediately after my State of the Nation Address on January 23, 1967 when I suffered pains and several attacks before the Joint Session of Congress. Dr. Sison, my attending physician, at the time thought that the campaign was…..

The Presidential yacht is No. 777, the number of votes, that made me win the convention of 1964 as against Senator Emmanuel Pelaez who received 444 votes, in the second balloting in the convention.

Senator Pelaez campaigned for President Macapagal bitterly attacking me on any pretext and ground whatsoever to run for a seat in the House of Representatives in that election of 1965. In 1967 when I noticed that he was beginning to come along to my point of view on any issues where he claims he thought I was right, he decided to re-join the Nacionalista Party and run for the Senate. Most of the party leaders objected to his candidacy for the Senate. We were however able to push his nomination and he came out No. 5 in the election.