MARCOS HUMAN RIGHTS litigation (1986-?) (1?86-?) -ComplaintS Filed on Behalf of Class and Trajano Family in Early 1986 When Marcos Family Arrives in Hawaii \ --Imee Marcos-Manotoc Does Not Answer Complaint in Trajano Case -Federal District Judge Harold Fong Dismisses Cases Based on IIAct of State Doctrine, II July 18, 1986 --u.s. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Reverses,. July 10, 1989 -Federal District Judge Manual Real Awards More Than $4,000,000 to Trajano Family Against Imee Marcos-Manotoc in Default Judgmen~, March 25, 1991 --Federal District Court Jury in Honolulu Rules that the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos Is Liable to the Class of Victims of Torture and Murder, September 1992 --u.s. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Affirms Trajano Judgment, October 21, 1992, 978 F.2d 493 (9th Cir. 1992) --u.s. Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in Trajano Case, June 1993 -More --More Than 10,000 Persons Register To Be Members of the Class, July 1993 --Jury Awards $1,200,000,000 in Punitive Damages Against Marcos Estate, February 1994 -Next --Next Phase: Determining Compensatory Damages of Victims - "If. ~ 715';000 77 s.; 1 1000 (To.>1...., 1995) /9c;s) --- - Vu,)itf Af/y;".d A{f,y;".d b J N'llfh N;.. th (,rc..j (,'rwj (7).r.. C 7)e.(.,./'}9b) /,}9 ).
Hilao v. Estate of Marcos (9th Cir. 1996) Command Responsibility "The district court instructed the jury that it could find the Estate liable if it found either that (I) Marcos directed, ordered, conspired with, or aided the military in torture, summary execution, and "disappearance" or (2) if Marcos knew of such conduct by the military and failed to use his power to prevent it." Good instruction? Determining Compensatory Damage Sample of 137 (out of 9,541) cases were worked up and presented to the Special Master and then the jury. Damages to others were extrapolated based on these cases. $51,719 for torture. $128,515 for summary execution. $107,853 for "disappearance." Good system?
MARCOS HUMAN RIGHTS LITIGATION (1986-?) --Based on. Representative Sample of 135 Fully-Documented Cases Selected Randomly, Honolulu Jury Awards $775,000,000 in Compensatory Damage to the Class of Victims, December 1994, ~-Arguments Presented to the Ninth Circuit Regarding Whether the Injunction on Marcos Assets Applies to the Philippine Government, February 1995 --Marcos Family Held in Contempt, $10,OOO/day, spring 1995 --Swiss Announce That the $400,000,000 in Swiss Banks Should Be Moved to the Philippines; Philippines Accept Idea That Victims Should Receive $100,000,000'; Marcos Family Objects; Negotiations Continue --Marcos Lawyers (Linn & Helms) Withdraw from Ninth Circuit Appeal; Mark Lane Files Notice of Appearance; Briefs Due in October 1995.
MARCOS HUMAN RIGHTS LITIGATION (1986-?)..'. --Federal District Judge Manual Real Awards More Than $4,000,000 to Trajano Family Against lmee Marcos-Manotoc in Default Judgment, Mareh 25, 1"1 --Federal District Conrl Jury in Honolulu Rules After Three-Week Trial That the Estate of Ferdinand Marcos Is Liable to the Class of Victims of Torture and Murder, September 1992 --u.s. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Affirms Trajano Judgment, October 21, 1992, 978 F.2d 493 (9th Cir. 1992) --U.S. Supreme Court Denies C'ertiorari in Trajano Case, June 1993, 113 S.Ct. 2960 (1993). --10,000 Persons Register to Be Members of the Class, July 1993 --Honolulu Jury Awards Exemplary Damage Verdict of $1,200,000,000 to the Class of Victims, February 1994 --Ninth Circuit Affirms Judgment on Behalf of Class, June 16, 1994, 25 F.3d.1467 (9th Cir. 1994)
How Should the Losses Suffered b)1 the Human Rights Victims Be Valued? The Marcos JUI)' Awards: Torture = $ 51,719 Summary Execution = $128,515 Disappearance = $107,853 Is that enough? Too much? Japanese-Americans interned during World War II received $20,000 each. Enough? Too much? Would a Class settlement of $150,000,000 be adequate? [The Class has 9,541 members.]
Federal Office for Police Matters v. District Attorneys' Office IV for the Canton of Zurich (Swiss Federal Supreme Court 1997) Philippine government sought the return of some $540 million in Marcos accounts in the Swiss Banks. How should this request be evaluated in light of the claims of the Human Rights Victims? The Court agreed that under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Torture Convention, "victims of serious human rights violations are entitled to compensation and to a fair trial, in which they can assert their claims for compensation. " The Court also recognized that the "Philippine judiciary is reputed to ponderous and susceptible to corruption and political influence. " Should the money be returned to the Philippines? With conditions?
Attorne~s' Office IV for the Canton of Zurich (Swiss Federal Supreme Court 1997) The Conditions: 1. All proceedings in the Philippines regarding these accounts must satisfy the procedural requirements of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 2. The Philippine government must "keep the Swiss authorities up to date on the status of those proceedings and on the precautions and procedures applied to compensate the victims of human rights violations under the Marcos regime.. " And if no action is taken b)' the Philippine government to compensate the Victims? 1. Individual complainants can bring an action under the Optional Protocal of the ICCPR to the Human Rights Committee. 2. The Swiss government can bring a complaint against the Philippine government under Article 41 of the ICCPR.