February 13, 1998

Hon. Silvestre Bello III
Secretary of Justice
Makati, Philippines

Re: Marcos Human Rights Litigation

Dear Secretary Bello:

We write out of concern that the Philippine government and the National Democratic Front (NDF) are attempting to usurp the rights of the 9,539 Filipino victims of the Marcos human rights violations we have represented for the past 12 years and continue to represent. Through yesterday's article in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, we understand the government and NDF are negotiating the amount of compensation paid to our clients as well as the distribution of the money in purported satisfaction of the Judgment we obtained for the victims in a United States Court.

We have no objection to the government and NDF negotiating a peace treaty to end their hostilities. However, we take strong exception to the government and NDF using compensation for the Judgment we obtained on behalf of the class as fodder for that treaty. Class actions in the United States are closely controlled by the courts, and judge Manuel L. Real has continuing jurisdiction over the Judgment, which includes a permanent recommendation of class counsel. The December 10, 1997 decision of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court specifically recognized the Judgment and the role of the US Court. Under principles of Philippine Law and international law, the Philippine government is required to respect this and not try to subvert it.

We are the Court-appointed counsel for the class and no one else is authorized to negotiate on behalf of the class. Class members trust in class counsel. We also have the broad support of most human rights groups in the Philippines. Several years ago the Court rebuffed the efforts of a single human rights group, Samahan ng mga Ex-detainees Laban sa Detensyon at para sa Amnestiya (SELDA), which had tried to take over the litigation. Judge Real entered several orders, copies of which are attached, refusing SELDA's demands to intervene in the litigation and declaring that class counsel are the only persons authorized to negotiate a settlement on behalf of the class. Furthermore, the NDF is not "representative" of the 9,539 class members. Fully 30% of the class members are Muslims, and the NDF is not the "representative" of the Muslim class members.

You must also realize that any payment made to the NDF will not settle or satisfy the Judgment and would result in no release to the Marcos Estate or its representatives. In addition, any payment derivative of Marcos assets or the Marcos Swiss bank deposits would violate the permanent injunction and result in civil and criminal contempt proceedings against those responsible. Imelda Marcos and Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. have already been held in civil contempt for violating the injunction, and this was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. A motion for criminal contempt is pending.

Respectfully yours,

(Sgd.)

Robert a. Swift, Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C.

(Sgd.)

Rodrigo C. Domingo, Jr.
Domingo & Dizon, Lawyers

Copy furnished:

Chairman Magtanggol Gunigundo
Presidential Commission on Good Government
Mandaluyong City