Carmella S.

Hinacay December 9, 2019

HISTO 12 - S Final Paper
Topic: How did EDSA People Power of 1986 empower the Filipino masses?

The Pursuit of Democracy

“The Filipino has lost his soul, his dignity, and his courage!” Ferdinand Marcos said.
On the 30th of December 1965, thousands of Filipinos have gathered in Manila’s Luneta Park
to witness the inauguration of the sixth President of the Republic of the Philippines.

According to Zich (1986), in his article about The Marcos Era, the then 48-year-old
Marcos had first been noticed by the public when he topped the bar examinations in the late
1930s, while successfully lifting himself out of prison for killing his father’s opponent in the
provincial elections in his home province, Ilocos Norte. To add to that, he also had a glamorous
wife, Imelda Romualdez Marcos, a Visayas-born Filipina who won the 1954 contest for Miss
Manila. Their undeniable charisma had gotten them Ferdinand’s position at the most powerful
seat in the country.

Moreover, in his book entitled ‘The Conjugal Dictatorship of Ferdinand and Imelda
Marcos’, Mijares (1976) had mentioned that the ruling duumvirate enabled the rise of the
conjugally-managed New Society (Bagong Lipunan) in the Philippines. In fact, the author
further stated how the two managed to secretly wield the powers of the government to their
own advantage - major expenditures on lavish dinners, travels, and visits that were seemingly
unnecessary. Nonetheless, despite the alleged corruption issues going around, Marcos still
managed to win a second term in the 1969 reelections. However, it is important to note that
Mijares (1976) tagged this campaign as “the dirtiest election ever held in the Philippines.” It
was revealed that Marcos had resulted to the use of “goons, guns, and gold.” Under the
Philippine constitution, the president is only limited to two terms, but Marcos didn’t want to
surrender his throne just yet. In order to secure his power, on the evening of September 23,
1972, the late president appeared on national television to formally announce that the
Philippines was under Martial Law. That day was said to be the beginning of one of the darkest
eras in Philippine history.

In the renowned 1997 documentary called Batas Militar, it was shown that when
Marcos publicly informed the public about the signed Proclamation No. 108 - the written note
on Proclaiming A State of Martial Law in the Philippines, he used a communist threat that led
to the so-called ‘ambush’ of his then defense secretary Juan Ponce Enrile as one of the
justifications to the said declaration. The main purpose of this declaration was to eliminate the
supposed ‘threats’ to the nation’s freedom and liberty. However, subsequent reports suggested
that the ambush was staged, which was later on admitted by Enrile in 1986.

With the help of many strategical minds and influential connections, Marcos effectively
put the entire power of government under his own rule. With the suspension of civil law, civil
rights and habeas corpus, and the extension of military law, the imposition of martial law
granted Marcos a direct hand on the operations of the entire government. He then ordered the
armed forces to prevent or suppress any act of rebellion. Among the orders were enforcement
of curfew hours, prohibition of group assemblies, and the forced shutdown of privately-owned
media companies. In addition, those considered to be threats to Marcos’ regime such as
prominent politicians and media journalists were arrested by the military.
 During this time, the uprise of the Filipino people had already begun in various parts of
the country. Some would go to the heavily-guarded Malacañang palace to rally for their own
liberty, others would protest in their own schools and institutions. The masses were extremely
outraged by the multiple accounts of tortures and deaths of people who opposed the
government’s cause. These casualties unceasingly happened year after year, but they were seen
to be merely ‘accidents’ and collateral damage. Media censorship was also strictly imposed.

Defiant slogans such as “Makibaka, huwag matakot!” and “Digmaang bayan, sagot sa
martial law!” reverberated in streets, schools, workplaces, and communities. In an article by
Renato Constantino (1970), he highlighted topics such as student brutality, mass action and
mass understanding. He further stated that “the frequency of demonstrations and the wider
involvement of many sectors of our population in united action is a salutary development.”
Although, at that time, a few influential people remained vocal against the government’s ways
- Senator Benigno Aquino Jr., for instance. He was one of the few who were openly expressing
criticism against the administration. But, as expected, these people were silenced by the
government. Aquino, for one, was jailed, and later on sent to the United States due to his health
condition while also being treated as an exile. In spite of that, he managed to regain his strength,
enough to be able to go back to his own country. Upon his arrival at the airport, he is met with
the tragedy of death. He was assassinated.

Aquino’s death is one of the reasons that ignited the people’s revolution and call for
freedom and justice. He was known for his fight for democracy and his famous words: “The
Filipino is worth dying for.” Not long after, Corazon “Cory” Aquino, Ninoy’s widow, was first
recognized for rallying against Marcos in the snap presidential elections. Despite Marcos’
claim of having won the said elections, massive protests took place to denounce the said claim.
People Power was slowly starting to take form.

In an article by Tornquist (1990), the democratic struggle for a new Philippines at that
time was emphasized. The author explained the series of demonstrations that happened along
Metro Manila’s Epifanio de los Santos Avenue or more popularly known as EDSA that led to
the ousting of Philippines’ greatest dictator. Throughout the days of February 22-25, 1986,
there was a sustained campaign of civil resistance against an unjust regime and alleged electoral
fraud. More than a million people blocked the avenue at the Camp Crame police headquarters,
and prevented Marcos from using his troops against dissident military leaders. EDSA has given
name to the renowned peaceful democratic march which placed Corazon Aquino on the seat of
presidency. The newly-elected president was then deemed to be the “Icon of Philippine
Democracy.” Truly, Constantino (1970) was right when he mentioned: “The police forces of
the state are well-equipped to handle and control mobs. They will be powerless if confronted
by a dedicated citizenry with a high degree of political consciousness.”

Furthermore, EDSA People Power of 1986 made it to international news headlines as

“the revolution that surprised the world.” Besides the Filipinos rejoicing in their claim for
democratic rights, the Filipinos were also celebrated with pride in different parts of the world.
On the 18th of September 1986, President Corazon Aquino conferred a speech in Washington,
D.C. that is addressed to the Filipino people and the Philippine and American government
officials. Her speech was a plea for alliance with the United States in rebuilding the nation as
she starts as the newly-elected President of the Republic of the Philippines. “Today, I say, join
us, America, as we build a new home for democracy,” she said. It was, in fact, her first visit to
America ever since Marcos had been deposed. Thus, Aquino took it upon herself to make an
effort to reach out to America. As a result of this speech, Aquino defended her stand against
the communist insurgency and succeeded in getting financial aid aimed at the rebuilding of the
Philippine economy.

In an article by Hernandez (1988), she reports the difficult adjustments and various
criticisms that came with Aquino’s task of transitioning from dictatorship to democracy.
Redemocratization has been curbed by sectors that stood to lose positions of privilege and
power. The government’s commitment to restore democracy to the country necessarily entailed
the rebuilding of political institutions that were destroyed during the Marcos dictatorship. As a
result, the 1987 constitution was born. The new constitution, she said, should be “truly
reflective of the aspirations and ideals of the Filipino people.” On February 2, 1987, a National
Plebiscite to survey people’s affirmation on the newly-drafted constitution. More than 75% of
the total votes were in favor of the ratification. The 1987 Philippine Constitution was ratified
on February 11, and it took effect on the same day. The new constitution revised the separation
of powers of the former Marcos-controlled government wherein balance of function is present
among the executive, legislature, and judiciary. It also consisted of lengthy provisions on the
economy and patrimony.

Claudio (2013) reiterates the significance of the revolution in Philippine history. He

further suggests that the People Power narrative, in accordance with the nation’s collective
memory of the said event, will forever symbolize the period of Marcos’ regime, and supports
this argument by saying that the Martial Law and the People Power Revolution are two
mutually reinforcing events that cannot be separated from the other. He then connects this with
national identity by suggesting how People Power has shaped the nation’s character in terms
of having strategic, political, and ethical consequences. This collective memory of the Marcos
regime and the People’s revolution have brought about different forms of nationalism in present
time.

The remnants of the revolution have had significant effects of the political mindset of
Filipinos. The nonviolent revolution to overthrow a dictator led to the democracy that our
country has now. Since then, the Filipino people have had more courage to stand up for their
own rights and freedom. In accordance with Claudio (2013), the people power narrative
became significant and memorable largely due to the objective truth of the people’s suffering
during Martial Law, and how the people overcame this through a peaceful but powerful
revolution.

So, given all of the details above, how exactly did the EDSA People Power of 1986
empower the Filipino masses? It gave them a sense of freedom. It made them comprehend the
power of freedom. It enabled them to fight for their own liberation, and win over their human
rights collectively. Gonzaga (2008) mentions that “because the constitution of collectivity
during the People Power Revolution was indeterminate and precarious, actions performed
collectively were spontaneous and creative.” More than that, the EDSA People Power of 1986
served as a concrete evidence of what nationalism looks like and how powerful the love of
country and the pursuit of freedom can be. “The crowd of millions present at that time
represented a cross-section of the people, the rich and the poor, the devout and the frivolous…
All were there with only one through in mind: to help the revolution succeed in each one’s
small way.” (Mercado and Tatad, 1986). The revolution showed how a nation is run by its
people, and not merely by its government.

Moreover, with Marcos being the strongest symbol of state-sponsored terror, media in
the following years has used a series of comparisons among succeeding presidents and their
corresponding leadership styles. This illustrates how the ghosts of the Marcos regime still loom
over the country. In fact, the current administration of President Duterte has been faced with
various criticisms such as being a “Marcosian” (Claudio, 2013) government. However, we see
people standing up for themselves and for the country in this time of political mess. The
empowerment brought about by the EDSA People Power of 1986 is one of the main factors
why the Filipino people of today are more conscious with the welfare of the nation and their
fellowmen. It set an example of how compelling a united nation is, and we must never forget
that.

In the end, we must keep in mind that a nation is its people. So if the people are
empowered to liberate themselves from self-serving leaders and regimes, then the country by
which they stand upon will also be a land of the free. In the reading “The Myths We Live By,”
Tanada (1965) states that the essence of independence and the substance of democracy is the
challenge of escaping the captivity in which we have imprisoned ourselves - the EDSA People
Power of 1986 did that. And it will always be a global reminder of how the Filipino people
once fought a nonviolent revolution for the freedom that we have now, and that as Filipinos
ourselves, we are empowered to preserve that gift for generations to come. It shall never be
taken away again.
 REFERENCES

CLASS READINGS

Aquino, Corazon. Speech to a Joint Session of the US Congress. September 18, 1986.

Batas Militar: A Documentary on Martial Law in the Philippines. Film by Eugenia Apostol and
Felicitas Arroyo. 1998.

Claudio, Lisandro. Taming People’s Power: the EDSA Revolutions and their Contradictions.
Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 2013.

Constantino, Renato. “January 26: Two Moods.” Graphic Magazine, February 11, 1970.

Mijares, Primitivo. Conjugal Dictatorship of Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos. San Francisco:
Union Square Publications, 1976.

Tanada, Lorenzo M. 1971. “The Folklore of Colonialism.” History of the Filipino People, ed.
Teodoro Agoncillo and Milagros Guerrero. Quezon City: R.P. Garcia Publishing Co.,
610-618.

SUPPLEMENTARY ONLINE SOURCES

Gonzaga, F. (2009). People Power as Immanent Collectivity: Re-imagining The Miracle of the
1986 EDSA Revolution as Divine Justice. Kritika Kultura 12, 109-127.

Hernandez, C. (1988). The Philippines in 1987: Challenges of Redemocratization. Asian

Survey, 28(2), 229-241. doi:10.2307/2644824

Törnquist, O. (1990). Fighting for Democracy in Philippines. Economic and Political Weekly,
25(26), 1385-1387. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/4396430

Zich, A. (1986). The Marcos Era. The Wilson Quarterly (1976-), 10(3), 116-129. Retrieved
from www.jstor.org/stable/40257031