Predictably outraged, lawmakers and martial law victims yesterday roundly denounced a clause in the victims' $150-million settlement agreement with the Marcos family that would absolve the latter of human rights violations.

In Zamboanga City, Mr. Estrada yesterday ordered the Presidential Commission on Good Government to ''carefully review'' the terms of the provisional agreement.

Jerry Barican, his spokesperson, said in a statement that Mr. Estrada had instructed PCGG Chair Magdangal Elma to conduct the review ''to make sure that the proceeds will indeed go to the intended beneficiaries.''

Senate Majority Leader Franklin Drilon urged President Estrada to call the deal off if the Marcoses insist on a provision which American and Filipino lawyers for the 9,539 plaintiffs are working to have deleted from the agreement.

''This is unacceptable,'' Drilon said of the paragraph inserted into the document's text at the last minute by the heirs of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, ''fully'' releasing them from criminal and civil charges of human rights violations.

Former political detainee and now lawmaker Loretta Ann Rosales said the victims would ask US District Court Judge Manuel Real, who is presiding over the case, ''to scrap that lie, that hogwash, that obnoxious, onerous provision.''

Rod Domingo Jr., the local counsel for the victims, said the problem could be remedied by petitioning Real to scrap the ''detestable provision'' on April 29 when a ''formal fairness hearing'' is held in Hawaii.

In that hearing, the rights victims will be given a chance to air their objections.

Starting Monday, claim notices will be sent to each of the 9,539 plaintiffs to find out what other clauses they find objectionable, according to Domingo.

Real has given the plaintiffs ''not later than March 30'' to present their objections before his court.

On Feb. 24, Real approved the provisional agreement, signed by the Marcoses, the Presidential Commission on Good Government, and lead class-suit counsel Robert Swift for the victims.

Domingo said that in the event that agreement would not be approved, the negotiations would be ''back to square one.''

The $150-million settlement pot, which is supposed to come from $590 million in escrow funds and be transferred to a plaintiffs' account in a US bank, would have to be sent back to its point of origin, he said.

Don't expect apology

In Davao City, other abused victims said they would ''never accept'' any money from the deal in its present form. ''Our primordial interest is justice, not money,'' said Nenita Labial, the head of the Samahan ng mga Ex-detainees Laban sa Detensyon at para sa Amnestiya in Southern Mindanao.

She said the group was also demanding a public apology from the Marcoses, as well as a pledge to never again commit any crime against humanity.

Domingo said, however, that the victims should not expect a public apology from the Marcoses since no such condition was set by Judge Real in deciding in favor of the plaintiffs in 1995.

In other words, Real awarded the victims close to $2 billion, but never said the Marcoses had to apologize.

Immunity

Domingo told a news conference at the New World Hotel that a public apology could be demanded only ''on moral grounds,'' not legal.

He also insisted that when the Marcoses signed the agreement, they in effect admitted their crimes and ''nothing can change this.''

But Marie Hilao-Enriquez, a torture victim and Selda secretary general, slammed the deal as a ''sellout.''

''Besides not apologizing for the atrocities suffered by the victims during martial law, the agreement would absolve the Marcoses and grant them immunity from future suits,'' she said.

Roses, Pontius Pilates

The inserted paragraph provides that ''each individual plaintiff and class member shall be deemed to have covenanted and agreed that he or she will forever refrain from instituting, maintaining or proceeding against (all of the Marcoses and the representatives and executors of the Marcos estate) on any civilian claim for violation of human rights which he or she ever had, now has or hereafter may have against said parties.''

The provision, Enriquez said, would make the Marcoses ''smell like roses and Pontius Pilates.''

''I think that's a bribe,'' said Rosales, the chair of Claimants 1081, a faction of the plaintiffs.

''I'm calling it a bribe because they are trying to buy us off by getting us to sign a covenant that they have not committed any human rights violation, anywhere in the world,'' Rosales said.

She added: ''That's going against our own class suit. That's a stupid insertion and distortion of facts.''

Imee gets off

The provision, Domingo said, would specifically affect two cases, that of the abused victims and the so-called Trajano case against Ilocos Norte Rep. Imee Marcos.

Archimedes Trajano was a student at the Mapua Institute of Technology who was ordered murdered by Manotoc for questioning her capability to lead the Kabataang Barangay.

The Trajano case was tried independently of the rights victims'. Trajano was awarded $3 million by a US court. He was represented by lawyer and former Sen. Rene Saguisag, who said the midnight insertion was intended to ''sugar-coat'' the sins of the Marcoses against Filipinos.

Behind Swift's back

Domingo also defended lead lawyer Swift for signing the agreement, saying the American was caught unawares by the last-minute changes in the document's text.

Swift, he said, signed the initial final draft of the agreement ahead of the other parties, then sent it to them, which was when the paragraph was inserted.

It also apparently explained why the page containing the clause did not have Swift's signature.

In shock

''The clause is a travesty of justice. It negates the very spirit and purpose of the agreement, which is to give justice to the victims of human rights abuses during the dark years of martial law,'' Drilon said.

He also said the clause ''cheapened the agreement'' and ''transformed the deal into a simple financial transaction.''

''Evil does exist...when these people fight to the end to defend a lie,'' said Rosales, adding that yesterday's Inquirer headline about the 11th hour clause had left her ''in shock.''

She maintained, however, that the monetary award to the claimants was ''just. But we cannot allow it to be undermined by the distortion of facts.''

By Christine Herrera, Lynda Jumilla and Volt Contreras, with a report from Jowel F. Canuday, PDI Mindanao Bureau