Starting this month, government lawyers will present the evidence against the Marcoses on the main forfeiture case filed with the Sandiganbayan, according to Galvez.

President Estrada said Tuesday the Marcoses could either forge a settlement with the government or face forfeiture of their ill-gotten wealth.

Galvez said the anti-graft court had finally allowed the government to present its evidence on Civil Case 0141, after a four-month lull. The last hearing was held in November.

''We want to continue with the hearings. We can finish this within the year if the Sandiganbayan will allow us,'' he said in an interview.

But Galvez said the government could still settle amicably with the Marcoses on the civil suit. The case is open for settlement at any stage of the proceedings even up to the point when the case is submitted for decision, according to the government's chief lawyer.

The Presidential Commission on Good Government has hired five top-notch lawyers to pursue with new vigor the forfeiture case. This is part of the two-track approach of the Estrada administration in recovering the ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses.

The other is holding negotiations with the family for a possible compromise agreement.

List of evidence

 Galvez said he had submitted the government's list of evidence to the Sandiganbayan, including the income tax returns of the late President Ferdinand Marcos, his wife Imelda and their children as well as their admissions on the properties that they own.

What government lawyers could do is just to compare the discrepancies of the Marcoses' income with their unexplained wealth, including the $590 million held in escrow by the Philippine National Bank.

The forfeiture case was filed in 1991 but it has been delayed by the motions filed by the Marcoses, including their request to implement the controversial 1993 compromise agreement which called for a 75-25 sharing in favor of the government.

A motion to dismiss the forfeiture case was filed by the Marcoses late last year.

Public disclosure

In the Senate, Malacañang was asked yesterday to make public the details of negotiations for a compromise on the ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses amid suspicions the deal would favor the heirs of the late strongman.

Senate Minority Leader Teofisto Guingona Jr. made the call in a privilege speech in which he cautioned the government against entering into a compromise ''unless legal and moral.''

He also asked the Senate to look into the talks between the Palace and the Marcos heirs to determine if the proposed deal would ''bring justice to the nation.''

''There exists basic roadblocks to compromise, roadblocks that are legal and moral,'' said Guingona, former chair of the Commission on Audit.

He focused on two legal obstacles and left it to the government and the people to determine the moral ones.

One legal obstacle to forging a deal with the Marcoses is the family's demand for immunity from prosecution in exchange for giving up a portion of ''their'' assets.

''The grant of immunity would seemingly not apply to the Marcoses because they are the legal respondents in cases whose basic purpose pursuant to law is to recover assets illegally acquired,'' Guingona said.

''At most, settlement may only extinguish civil liability,'' he said.

Roadblock

A second roadblock is the Marcoses' demand for tax exemptions, which according to Guingona, will be tantamount to giving the Marcoses ''undue favor.''

''While Congress has the power to grant tax exemption, especially so when it is to the public benefit or interest, the exercise of such power to exempt is subject to the same general and specific limitations imposed on the power to tax,'' Guingona said.

Earlier, Sen. Raul Roco urged the government to call off the negotiation with the Marcoses, saying nothing was coming out of it.

Roco, co-chair of the Senate inquiry into Ms Marcos's claims of ownership in several firms estimated at P500 billion, said the government should instead pursue the ill-gotten wealth and other cases against the Marcos heirs.

He pointed out that the two sides were nowhere near a settlement on the recovery of the ill-gotten wealth. Worse, he said, the Marcos family seemed to be the one dictating the terms of the settlement.

Roco said aborting talks for a compromise settlement would take some of the pressure off the government, especially on the matter of pursuing the ill-gotten wealth cases.

By Donna S. Cueto and Lynda T. Jumilla