Marcos regime marks one of the highlights in our history as a nation.

It was
during that time that Filipino people were enlightened and acted as integrated
rather than a single entity in order to revive the sense of nationalism and to
regain our freedom from the dictator. This regime was marked with widespread
violations on human rights and injustices resulting to economic and social
turmoil.
There are many reasons that lead the Filipino people to acts as one and
bring the dictator down to his power. Our recognition to Marcos as the dictator
has resulted to the framing of our present constitution.
The burial of Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani should not be allowed
because: it will go against the ultimate Raison Detre of the 1987 Constitution as
a Post- Dictatorship Charter. The 1987 Constitution is a post- dictatorship charter
that marked our liberty from the abusive regime of Marcos. It was also the revival
of the Philippine democratic institutions and processes. Our present constitution
is commonly attributed as the human rights constitution due to its strong
advocate of safeguarding the human rights of the inhabitants of the state. It also
organized an independent Commission on Human Rights that seeks to give
emphasis on the provisions of the constitution that highlights the protection of
individual rights and for justice to prevail.
Due to the abusive nature of the dictator, Commission on Human Rights
was created as an independent office that is without any political interference.
Thus, under section 11, article 2 of the 1987 constitution provides, the State
values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human
rights. Present constitution also mandates the judicial review of the acts of the
government to inhibit the possibility of the return of the dictatorship. According to
the constitution, judicial power includes the duty of courts of justice to settle
actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and
enforceable and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part or
instrumentality of the government. This is not merely a judicial power but a
delegated duty to pass a judgment of this nature.
After the turbulent decades of martial law, the aim of the present constitution
is to put primacy on public accountability and integrity on public service. The
constitution under the Declaration of Principles and state Policies in Article 2
states, the State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the public service and
take positive and effective measures against graft and corruption. The
constitution expanded and strengthened the provision of 1973 constitution by
commanding public officers to be accountable to the people at all times. With all
the tendency of the electorates to be corrupt during the time of the dictator, this
was declared as a constitutional principle and a State policy.
During the 1973 constitution, the ombudsman or the Tanodbayans authority
is only to prosecute a criminal for civil or administrative cases against public
officials and employees only in cases of failure of justice. Hence, our constitution
gave the ombudsman more active participation in the enforcement of laws and
anti- graft and corrupt practices and other offenses committed by public officers

and employees. The ombudsman is no longer a passive watchman. He is vested

with the authority to enable him to exercise his duties.
The ill-gotten wealth of the Marcos regime was one of the primary reasons
why he was overthrown and the why our constitution was construed in such a
way for the electorates to use their delegated authority to address the needs of
the society. Filipino people have witnessed how the dictator used the public funds
in vain. As a response to this, article 18 of the 1987 constitution was made to
recognize the continued validity of the freeze orders against the ill-gotten wealth
of the Marcoses. Section 26 of the constitution provides, the authority to issue
sequestration or freeze orders under the Proclamation no. 3 dated March 25,
1986 in relation to the ratification of this constitution. However, in the national
interest, as certified by the President, the congress may extend said period.
The 1987 constitution was formulated to correct the very evils and abuses
during the martial Law. Burying him at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, a place
designated for heroes and patriots is going against the raison detre of the 1987
constitution. That being stated is very unconstitutional. Burial of Marcos at the
Libingan ng mga Bayani is the complete reversal of the core values and main
aims of the constitution. Aside from that, it takes away the historical basis of
which our constitution is designed and anchored to.
Another reason why Marcos should not be buried at the Libingan ng mga
Bayani is that it violates specific provisions of the constitution that direct the state
to uphold human rights, by educating the youth on the positive values of
democracy and citizenship, and by promoting honesty and transparency in public
service. It also violates the constitutional mandate for educational institutions to
inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human
rights appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of
the country, teach the rights and duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and
spiritual values, develop moral character and personal discipline, encourage
critical and creative thinking.
The prevention of the possibility of another reign of dictatorship in the
country is the very reason for the specific protective mandates and mechanisms
of the 1987 constitution. All of these provisions were framed to prevent a repeat
of the Marcos dictatorship by constitutionalizing the states duty to uphold human
rights, by educating the youth on the positive values of democracy and
citizenship, by promoting transparent public service.
Burying a dictator at the Libingan ng mga Bayani would violate the main
frames of our constitution. It will close the possibility that the Philippine
Administration will still take hold of the constitutional directives and abide with the
aims of the constitution.