Ilocos Norte Rep. Imee Marcos also decried a final ruling by the Supreme Court ordering the family to pay some P23 billion in inheritance and real property taxes on the amount.

She said the Marcoses do not have such an amount of money to pay their tax dues.

But Solicitor General Ricardo Galvez argued the government could confiscate the Marcos properties as payment for the family's tax liability.

On the other hand, President Estrada said the government cannot seize the Marcos assets immediately because the heirs of the late dictator may still file a motion for reconsideration.

"The Marcos family has the right to due process. They can file a motion for reconsideration," said the President, a known friend of the Marcoses.

Imee Marcos said the family's agreement to pay victims $150 million does not amount to an admission of guilt over the alleged atrocities committed by the late strongman during his 20-year reign.

"The only thing the family wants is for the whole thing to end," the congresswoman told radio station dzBB. "Like I said earlier, we are not talking about guilt here, the issue here is how much in damages should be paid."

She stressed that "at no time was there a case against us personally," noting the human rights violation suit was lodged against the Marcos estate.

Under the deal announced last week, $150 million will be paid to 9,539 victims of torture, forced disappearances and summary killings during the Marcos regime.

However, many of the victims have rejected the deal because it contains provisions which clear the Marcos family of responsibility and grant them immunity from future civil or criminal lawsuits.

The victims and their lawyers claim the immunity clause was a "last-minute" insertion by the Marcoses, led by former First Lady Imelda Marcos.

Yesterday, a human rights lawyer urged a US judge to give torture victims more time to prepare objections to the settlement.

Romeo Capulong, who represents some of the victims in the 1994 case filed against the Marcos estate before a court in Hawaii, said his clients have not been properly consulted.

He also alleged the agreement includes a provision that grants the late dictator's widow immunity from lawsuits -- a clause to which his clients object.

Hawaii Federal District Court Judge Manuel Real is to conduct a "fairness hearing" to assess the reasonableness of the agreement from the victims' viewpoint on April 29.

But Capulong said in a statement that a March 30 deadline set by the court to submit written objections made the timetable unrealistic.

"We urge Judge Real to instead conduct the fairness hearing in the Philippines before `special masters' who shall represent Real's court here," Capulong said.
"Considering that the great majority of the victims are scattered in far-flung areas of the Philippines, the brief period allowed them to file written opposition is not enough," he added.

Capulong also urged Robert Swift, a US lawyer who signed on behalf of some of the plaintiffs, to "withdraw his signature to the agreement while such consultations are being held and afterwards, to renegotiate the terms of the agreement."

President Estrada clarified on Monday that the $150-million settlement does not exonerate the family from charges of human rights abuses.

He said any "immunity" provision referred only to future lawsuits that may be filed by the nearly 10,000 rights abuse victims.

The government and Filipinos who are not party to the deal can still file charges against the Marcoses for rights abuses, he said.

`We have no money to pay the P23-B tax'

Reacting to the Supreme Court's recent ruling, Imee Marcos said she finds it "too hard to accept that we lost on a technicality."

The ruling, which concerns the family's inheritance that includes 30 parcels of prime land, affirmed a June 1997 decision by the high tribunal.

The Supreme Court said lawyers for the Marcos family filed an appeal too late and at the wrong venue.

Marcos said the government was inconsistent because it had earlier sequestered the properties from Marcos cronies alleging they were ill-gotten.

"They should really find out first the owners of these properties, because if we are not the owners, why should we pay the taxes?" she asked.

Imee also said that her family does not have P23 billion to pay the tax liability. She added that the tax assessment was too high.

"It seems they know much better how much my father left behind," she said. "The assessment was too much."

The congresswoman claimed the Marcoses have no idea how they will pay their tax liability.

"We have to live with the Supreme Court decision. But how to enforce that decision is still confusing to our family," she told reporters.

"What if a miracle happens and we suddenly have P23 billion to pay our tax liability -- will those assets (covered by the SC decision) be returned to us?" she asked.

She said many of their alleged ill-gotten assets have been seized by the government, while others are still tied up in ill-gotten wealth cases.

"It's still not clear which assets belong to my father's estate," she said.

Imee said her family is ready to cooperate with the government to settle all issues relating to their wealth.

"What is important is that the Marcos assets go to the people. Let us do that as soon as possible," she said.

Meanwhile, a Palace official said torture victims may not get a single centavo from the $150-million deal unless Congress amends a law that would allow the government to compensate human rights victims.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Republic Act 6657, or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, dictates that the recovered assets of the Marcoses must first be used to fund the agrarian reform program.

"This is really a problem for us" especially after President Estrada promised to compensate the human rights victims, he said. "The government is really in a bind here."

By Marichu Villanueva, Delon Porcalla, Jess Diaz, wire reports