The government and Filipinos who are not party to the deal can still file charges against the Marcoses for rights violations, President Estrada said through spokesperson Fernando Barican.

Barican said in a statement that any ''immunity'' provision in the $150-million settlement agreement with 9,539 rights abuse victims referred only to future lawsuits that might be filed by the victims.

''There will be no absolution or exoneration of the Marcoses in this compromise deal. The agreement is exclusively between the Marcos family and the 10,000 human rights claimants named in the class suit,'' the statement said.

Official notices sent to the plaintiffs this week contained the legal terms of the provisional deal, including this condition: ''In return for the payment, the (plaintiffs) give up the right to continue executing on the judgment, vacate the injunction and contempt citation and related fines, dissolve the judicial assignment and agree to release the Estate, the Marcos family and the Republic of the Philippines from any civil claims for human rights abuses occurring between 1972 and 1986.''

The agreement was reached as a settlement for a $1.9-billion judgement in a class suit against the Marcoses. US District Court Judge Manuel Real decided in favor of the rights plaintiffs in the 1994 suit.

Many of the victims have called the deal a ''sellout.'' It contains an immunity clause reportedly inserted at the last minute by the Marcoses, led by former first lady Imelda Marcos.

Varying interpretations

Amid varying and confusing interpretations of the agreement's text, senators called for the document to be made public ''so we could see for ourselves who is telling the truth.''

Senate President Marcelo Fernan warned that any provision giving the Marcoses criminal immunity should be considered void since the civil settlement did not cover criminal acts.

Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, whose law firm represents Imelda Marcos in a suit filed to recover multi-million assets allegedly entrusted by her late husband to former trustees, echoed Fernan's suggestion.

''The best thing to do is to make that document public because the best evidence is the text of that document, if there is any,'' Enrile said.

Matter for the state

He maintained that the issue of the Marcoses' criminal liability should be handled by the government, and not the claimants through the agreement in question.

''What I understand of the $150 million is for the settlement of the money claims based on a foreign judgment issued by the Hawaii court, but not the settlement of the criminal liability. The one interested in criminal prosecution is the state, not the claimants,'' Enrile said.

The senator stressed that a quit claim ''ends the money claim but not the criminal liability.''

Palace evasive

The Palace was evasive when asked if there was a possibility that government might come out with its own immunity clause in a future and separate compromise deal with the Marcoses.

''I don't think that matters on the agenda,'' Barican said when asked whether the government was considering waiving criminal liabilities of the Marcoses.

Barican said that the immunity clause barred only the ''named complainants'' in the class suit from filing future claims against the Marcoses.

He said the immunity, if it existed at all, was ''compartmentalized, limited and exclusive.''

''This is an agreement between the Marcoses and these human rights claimants. The Philippine government is pursuing its claims, continues to pursue its claims,'' he said.

''We don't want to drag this out for another 10 years in some legal proceeding,'' he added.

Rest of the loot

Barican also said the remaining $440 million would ''not be released to the Marcoses, as the government's position that this account is ill-gotten and should revert to the national treasury remains unchanged.''

The $150-million settlement money for the human rights victims would be taken from the $590 million in Marcos Swiss deposits now held in an escrow account by the Philippine government.

The government stands to lose millions of pesos should it insist on waiving income and transfer taxes on the remaining $440 million as it did on the $150 million, said Makati Rep. Joker Arroyo yesterday.

Clause 2.3 of the tripartite agreement states that ''the Republic agrees that the $150 million is not subject to any income, inheritance, estate or other taxes which have been or may be levied in the Philippines.''

Arroyo said it was inconsistent public policy for the Bureau of Internal Revenue to go after tax evaders while letting the Marcoses off the hook.

'Moral victory'

The Malacañang statement described the settlement as a ''moral victory particularly for the human rights victims who have worked for almost 13 years for some form of compensation.''

The Marcos family has repeatedly rejected calls for an apology to the nation. Marcos' 20-year rule has been linked to massive corruption, plunder and abuses such as torture, summary killings and disappearances.

Mr. Estrada, a former pro-Marcos politician who brokered the deal, still has to formally approve it, as does the Sandiganbayan and Real's court in Honolulu.

Closed book?

Ilocos Norte Rep. Imee Marcos, eldest daughter of the late strongman, defended the inclusion of the immunity provision, which she called a ''standard legal provision.''

''The reason we're entering into a compromise settlement is to make the matter a closed book so that this won't be talked about anymore, to end it all,'' said Marcos in a radio interview.

In Laoag City, her brother Ilocos Gov. Ferdinand ''Bongbong'' Marcos Jr. said again that the settlement agreement would ''now leave both the Philippine government and the Marcos family free to negotiate.''

Satisfactory compensation for the victims was one of two conditions set by Swiss courts for the release of the escrow funds that were transferred from Swiss banks to the Philippine National Bank last year.

'We lost'

The Marcoses and the administration of former President Fidel Ramos had forged a compromise deal giving the government 75 percent of the money and the Marcoses 25 percent.

Although that accord was nullified by the Supreme Court last year, it could serve as a starting point for new talks, Governor Marcos said.

The young Marcos insisted that the signing of the deal was not an admission of guilt on the part of his family. He said it was only a negotiated settlement of the suit the Marcoses had lost.

''Judge Real, in his decision, said we lost and we had to pay. We cannot proceed with talks with the government unless we solve the problem,'' he said.

He criticized rights lawyers who ''have latched on to this issue with no sympathy for anyone who may have been hurt. They have no concern for any of that. They are in this for the money. That is the be-all and the end-all.''

Fairness hearing

Rod Domingo, local co-counsel of the rights victims in the class suit, yesterday began to send out notices to the plaintiffs who must air their objections to the deal by March 30.

Judge Real gave his provisional approval of the agreement on Feb. 24, but set a ''formal fairness hearing'' for April 29 to deliberate on the ''reasonableness, fairness and adequacy'' of the proposed deal.

The hearing is the plaintiffs' only opportunity to raise their objections.

the class notice, US Clerk of Court Walter Chinn said the money would be transferred to the registry of the US District Court of Hawaii, pending approval of the settlement by the court.

Should the court refuse final approval, Chinn said, the money would be returned to its point of origin.

Capulong insisted that if the fairness hearing were held in the United States, the rights victims would not be given a real chance to air their sentiments.

But Domingo said that the hearing, ordered by Real, would have to be held in Real's court and presided over by Real himself.

Lawyers fight

Romeo Capulong, defense counsel for Selda which represents a faction of the plaintiffs, said yesterday that American lawyer Robert Swift knew of and agreed to the controversial provision in the $150 million agreement.

Swift, lead class suit counsel, had reportedly called the provision ''fair, reasonable and adequate'' in his motion for preliminary approval of the agreement in Real's court.

Swift's approval of the settlement prompted Capulong to accuse the American of negotiating ''in bad faith.''

Swift's local co-counsel, Rod Domingo Jr., said Swift had ''no choice'' but to submit the proposed settlement for preliminary approval ''as a matter of procedure.''

Taking turns

Other lawmakers again took turns in blasting any attempt to give the Marcoses immunity or absolve them from rights abuse charges.

Sen. Aquilino Pimentel, one of those ordered incarcerated by President Marcos, agreed with Enrile that the present civil agreement ''does not offset the criminal liability of the Marcoses. If they are proven guilty of any criminal offense, they will still have to pay.''

In a statement, Sen. Renato Cayetano called the agreement ''a worthless piece of paper as far as the Philippines is concerned since it is not binding and enforceable against the government.''

By Martin Marfil, Christine Herrera and Cathy C. Yamsuan, with reports from Rocky Nazareno, Cristina Arzadon, PDI Northern Luzon Bureau, and AFP