21/09/2026
THE MARCOS NAME CANNOT BE SEPARATED FROM INJUSTICE.
UP Broad Ass' Statement on Martial Law's 54th Commemoration
On September 21, 1972, Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. signed Proclamation No. 1081, which placed the Philippines under Martial Law and inaugurated a law that stripped Filipinos of their rights and freedoms for over a decade [1]. The regime’s crackdown on dissent led to the arrest, detention, torture, and killing of hundreds of thousands of Filipinos, targeting activists, journalists, and critics of the administration. Marcos’ regime eventually fell through the People Power Revolution, yet the consequences did not end, nor did the struggle for accountability cease.
Fifty-four years later, the conditions that enable state repression and impunity continue to manifest today.
As a media organization, we, the UP Broadcasting Association, recognize our responsibility to preserve historical memory and hold power accountable.
Today, Journalists, human rights defenders, activists, and members of society remain vulnerable to red-tagging, mass trolling, harassment, and arbitrary arrests. The recent protest against the proposed Pax Silica initiative, where over 300 activists gathered outside the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Taguig, resulted in injuries to protestors and police officers, alongside the arrest of five individuals dubbed the Luzon Economic Cooperation (LEC) 5 [2]. These incidents come as the Philippine National Police (PNP) deploys over 15,700 personnel across Metro Manila for the September 21 demonstrations [3]. While authorities emphasized its policy of maximum tolerance, these assurances bear no weight when violent dispersal continues and arrests raise concerns over the government’s treatment of those who exercise their constitutional right to protest.
Beyond the suppression of dissent, the Marcos Jr. administration’s claims of accountability must be challenged and examined against its own role in enabling the flood control corruption controversy. The Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) established by Marcos to investigate these irregularities concluded its operations after only six months due to concerns over its independence, resources, and transparency [4]. While Marcos vowed to prosecute those responsible, a report by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) has identified that his administration introduced a new pork barrel system for distributing Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Funds, which became a source of kickbacks for lawmakers and government officials [5].
This is unacceptable. Marcos cannot simply position himself as an outsider who exposes corruption and reduce accountability to selective action when it is his administration that helped create the conditions that allowed it to flourish. This simplification of state concerns is pure disrespect to the Filipino body and must never be tolerated; therefore, the administration's repeated promises of accountability must be examined through the cases it pursues and whether it can confront the institutional and political relationships that enable corruption in the first place.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s June 10, 2026 acquittal of Imelda Marcos on seven counts of graft involved allegations that she held a financial interest in and participated in the management of Swiss Foundations during the Marcos regime. It was alleged that there were violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act; however, the Supreme Court found that the prosecution failed to establish her guilt beyond reasonable doubt [6]. Despite this outcome, the decision does not resolve separate civil proceedings concerning the ill-gotten wealth of the Marcos regime, nor does it confront the family’s history.
The Marcos name cannot be separated from the injustices committed, nor should legal victories or political resurgence be used to obscure the Filipino people’s continuing demand for truth, restitution, and transparency.
Hence, we challenge the Marcos Jr. administration to match its calls for accountability with action.
We condemn the human rights abuses, corruption, and authoritarian state violence committed under the Marcos dictatorship. We reject attempts to detach the Marcos name from the historical record of Martial Law, because the history of dictatorship is inseparable from the experiences of those who suffered and the struggles of those who resisted. As Marcos Jr. continues to invoke accountability in addressing present-day controversies, we call for these allegations to undergo transparent and comprehensive investigations that uphold due process and allow the public to see how responsibility is established and justice is pursued.
As students, journalists, and media workers, we hold the responsibility of keeping the experiences of those who lived through Martial Law within public consciousness. We refuse to let these accounts be buried beneath narratives that distort the realities of the past. With this, media practitioners and institutions must therefore remain vigilant in scrutinizing those entrusted with public office, particularly when accountability is invoked but questions remain unanswered.
Calls for accountability must be matched by action from the Marcos Jr. administration, with those responsible for wrongdoing made answerable to the Filipino people.
#
REFERENCES
[1] Marcos Declares Martial Law in the Philippines. (n.d.). EBSCO. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/marcos-declares-martial-law-philippines/
[2] Macababbad, E.J. (2026, September 11). 43 cops, activists hurt during rally vs Pax Silica. philstar. https://www.philstar.com/nation/2026/09/11/2555528/43-cops-activists-hurt-during-rally-vs-pax-silica
[3] Caliwan, C.L. (2026, September 17). NCRPO on full alert, deploys over 15K personnel for Sept. 21 rally. Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1284250
[4] Cruz, J.P. (2026, July 26). Marcos promised a crackdown on flood control corruption. What happened a year later?. Rappler. https://www.rappler.com/philippines/marcos-promise-crackdown-flood-control-corruption-year-later/
[5] Latoza, G. (2026, July 26). One Year After the Flood-Control Speech: Probes, Protests, and the President’s Possible Culpability. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. https://pcij.org/2026/07/26/one-year-after-the-flood-control-speech/
[6] de Villa, K. (2026, September 10). Supreme Court acquits Imelda Marcos on 7 counts of graft. Inquirer. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2302765/sc-acquits-imelda-marcos-on-7-counts-of-graft
