The Martial Law Period (1972–1986) — From Proclamation No. 1081 to the "Endgame" of the Ill-Gotten Wealth Pursuit

As of 2026-09-08 · Updated 2026-09-08 · Section: History · 日本語版

0. Key Points of This Material (Conclusions First)

• Martial law was imposed nationwide by Proclamation No. 1081, signed September 21, 1972. Its legal basis was Article VII, Section 10, Paragraph (2) of the 1935 Constitution (primary source: the full text of Proclamation No. 1081, lawphil.net).
• Proclamation No. 2045, dated January 17, 1981, "terminated" martial law, but explicitly stated that all proclamations and presidential decrees (PDs) issued up to that point would remain in force — meaning the legal structure of dictatorship was not dismantled (primary source: Proclamation No. 2045, lawphil.net). The understanding that "the dictatorship ended in 1981" is incorrect.
• The "numbers" for human rights violations differ by source in both definition and time period covered. The government's compensation-recognized figure is 11,103 (finalized by the Human Rights Victims' Claims Board in May 2018; reported by Rappler/Inquirer, May 9–10, 2018; applications as of May 2015 numbered 75,730). The commonly circulated estimates come from two distinct systems covering different periods: Amnesty International (1972–81: 3,240 killed / 34,000 tortured / 70,000 imprisoned) and Alfred W. McCoy (1975–85: 3,257 killed / about 35,000 tortured / about 70,000 imprisoned). These cannot simply be added to or compared against the government-recognized figure (see §3; separated in the 2026-08-25 verification pass to align with §6 of this material group's "General History" document).
• External debt rose from $2.67 billion in 1972 to $28.20 billion in 1986 (about 10.6x) (World Bank, DT.DOD.DECT.CD, retrieved August 2026). Consecutive years of negative growth: −7.0% in 1984 and −6.9% in 1985 (World Bank, NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG).
• On June 2, 2026, the Sandiganbayan's Special Division dismissed the remaining forfeiture case against the Marcos family. The 40-year pursuit of ill-gotten wealth has effectively come to an end (The Manila Times, June 7, 2026).
• On August 14, 2026, President Marcos Jr., at a luncheon with the Foreign Correspondents' Association, stated plainly that "it was not ill-gotten wealth," and acknowledged that he had been remiss in his duties as co-executor of his father's estate (Daily Tribune, August 14, 2026).

1. Timeline (primary-sourced items in bold)

2. Reading Proclamation No. 1081 in the Original

Proclamation No. 1081's skeleton consists of three key points (Proclamation No. 1081, lawphil.net):

注 This last clause is decisive. The military was ordered to enforce obedience not only to "the laws" but also to "decrees, orders, and regulations promulgated by me personally, or upon my direction." This is where the transfer of legislative power to the president personally was written into law. Japanese-language commentary often introduces this only as "for the sake of public order," but the original text does not stop there.

注 A gap between the date of signing and the date of announcement: the signing date was September 21, but the announcement and implementation to the public are widely recorded as having come on September 23. In practice, the Philippines observes the anniversary on "September 21" (the September 21, 2025 rally was reported as the "53rd anniversary"). This material treats September 21 as the signing date.

2-1. The 1981 "termination" was not a termination

Proclamation No. 2045 (January 17, 1981) revoked Proclamations No. 1081 and 1104, but the original text continues as follows (lawphil.net):

• "the call to the Armed Forces of the Philippines to prevent or suppress lawless violence, insurrection, rebellion and subversion shall continue to be in force and effect" = the military mobilization order continues
• Existing proclamations, orders, and presidential decrees (PDs) "shall remain part of the law of the land, and shall be enforced and implemented as such" after the termination of martial law
• The suspension of the writ of habeas corpus continues for detainees held in connection with the two Mindanao autonomous regions or with rebellion/subversion
• Military tribunals are dissolved, but pending cases whose transfer to civil courts would cause "irreparable damage to the national interest" may continue in military tribunals

注 So while writing "the martial law period was 1972–1981" is correct as a matter of legal history, it is common practice to count the repressive regime as lasting until February 1986, and the compensation law RA 10368 itself defines the period covered as September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986. Different sources use different definitions of the period, which is the single biggest cause of conflicting figures.

3. Statistics on Human Rights Violations — Japanese-language articles get this wrong very often

3-1. A list of the figures, and what they really represent

注(Comprehensively revised in the 2026-08-25 verification pass) The earlier draft lumped together "over about 3,000 killed / about 35,000 tortured / about 70,000 imprisoned" as a combined figure from Amnesty and McCoy, which is incorrect — this mixes two systems that differ in both their source and the period they cover. This material group's "General History" document has a table separating the two in its §6, and this article aligns with that table.

注 These three systems must absolutely not be added together or compared directly. 1. The periods they cover differ (Amnesty 1972–81 / McCoy 1975–85 / government 1972-09-21–1986-02-25). In particular, the Amnesty figure only covers through 1981, so presenting it as "the figure for the whole martial law period" would be incorrect. 2. The unit of counting differs. Amnesty and McCoy give estimates based on incidents/acts (one person tortured and also detained could be counted in both categories), while HRVCB counts recognized individuals (one person counted once even if they experienced multiple types of violation). 3. The population differs. HRVCB's denominator is only those who applied — victims who never applied, or could not, are not included (the "yield" from 75,730 applications to 11,103 recognitions reflects evidentiary provability, not the scale of the harm).

Writing "11,103 vs. 70,000 — the government only recognized 10,000" and presenting that as a contradiction is inaccurate. The former is a headcount of compensation-recognized applicants (counted once even for multiple violation types); the latter is an estimate of cumulative arrests/detentions — the populations differ. 注Several Japanese-language media accounts have been seen comparing these two on the same footing, which is an error.

Supplementary note 3-1①: the origin of the McCoy figure (supplemented from this material group's "General History" §6 in the 2026-08-25 second-round verification) This material group's "General History" document §6 records that McCoy's figure is "Richard J. Kessler's 1975–85 tally, plus 93 extrajudicial killings in 1984 added on top" (McCoy's own explanation). In other words, the McCoy figure is not an independent estimate from Amnesty's, but a derivative value added to a separate tally. That 3,240 (Amnesty) and 3,257 (McCoy) are close is coincidental — one does not corroborate the other.

Supplementary note 3-1②: the breakdown of "26 people" (added in the 2026-08-25 verification pass) The Agrava Board's majority report found 26 people indictable, but the earlier draft's "26 military personnel" was inaccurate — the correct breakdown is 25 military personnel + 1 civilian. The same 26 (25 military + 1 civilian, including Chief of Staff Ver) were acquitted by the Sandiganbayan on December 2, 1985. The majority report named Chief of Staff Ver, AVSECOM commander General Luther Custodio, and METROCOM commander General Prospero Olivas by name. (Source replaced 2026-08-27: the earlier draft cited English Wikipedia's "Assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr." article. Sources: VERA Files, "How Marcos suppressed the truth behind Ninoy Aquino's assassination"; UP Diliman, "Diktadura" (the University of the Philippines Diliman's regime-studies archive); Inquirer. Reconfirmed that 25+1=26 is correct. Retrieved 2026-08-27.)

3-2. The content of RA 10368 (Human Rights Victims Reparation and Recognition Act)

From the primary source (Republic Act No. 10368, lawphil.net):

注 The compensation funds do not come from Japanese ODA or the national budget. The funding source is the Marcos funds themselves, returned from Switzerland. This is an important point that is easily misunderstood if left unexplained.

3-3. Delays at the HRVVMC and the Freedom Memorial Museum

• RA 10368 established the Human Rights Violations Victims' Memorial Commission (HRVVMC) and provided for construction of a Freedom Memorial Museum on the UP Diliman campus.
• In September 2024, the HRVVMC and UP publicly traded blame over delays caused by UP's own red tape (Philstar, "UP red tape delays launch of Martial Law museum," 2024-09-03; Rappler, "Memorial body points to UP as 'cause of delay,'" 2024-09-03). On September 6 that year, the two issued a joint statement pledging to speed things up (UP official statement, 2024-09-06; GMA, 2024-09-06), and a handover ceremony was held October 2 (UP official statement, 2024-10-02).
• At the time, reports said "construction to begin in December 2024" (Philstar, 2024-09-08; Daily Tribune, 2024-09-20). The budget was also increased, and there was reportedly no order from the Marcos administration to halt the project (GMA, 2024-09-11; Philstar, 2024-09-11).
• 注 This investigation could not find major reporting on groundbreaking or completion from 2025 through August 2026. The HRVVMC's official site (hrvvmc.gov.ph) was inaccessible to this investigation due to bot protection. There is no basis at present for stating that it has opened. As of 2026, memory-preservation work is being carried out instead by the Ateneo Martial Law Museum & Library (martiallawmuseum.ph, a digital archive that opened a digital library in March 2024 and unveiled VR escape-room learning materials in April 2026) and Bantayog ng mga Bayani (bantayog.org, a memorial wall, library, and resource center).

4. Crony Capitalism and Debt — By the Numbers

4-1. External debt (World Bank, DT.DOD.DECT.CD, retrieved August 2026)

Roughly a 10.6x increase over 14 years. 注 Japanese-language sources circulate a rounded figure of "debt swelled to about $27 billion during the Marcos period," but according to the World Bank series it was $28.2 billion in 1986 and $26.64 billion in 1985. Depending on which year you cut the data at, the figure shifts by over $2 billion, so always specify the year.

(2026-08-25 verification) The DT.DOD.DECT.CD series was re-retrieved from the World Bank API, and every value in the table above was confirmed to match the primary data (1970: $2.196 billion / 1972: $2.671 billion / 1976: $6.039 billion / 1980: $17.417 billion / 1982: $24.413 billion / 1984: $24.357 billion / 1985: $26.637 billion / 1986: $28.204 billion / 1990: $30.580 billion). 1983's $24.211 billion and 1984's $24.357 billion are nearly flat, worth noting since debt did not expand in a straight line.

4-2. Growth and living standards (World Bank)

Over the two years 1984–85, GDP per capita fell by about 19%. 注 Even more important: the 1982 level was not recovered until the late 1990s. This is more than just a "lost decade."

(World Bank primary data re-retrieved and confirmed correct in the 2026-08-25 verification pass) - World Bank NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG (retrieved August 2026): 1984 = −7.04% / 1985 = −6.86%, as shown above. - 注This material group's "General History" document §6 gives "1984: about −7.3%, 1985: about −7.3%," which conflicts. This is likely a difference between an estimated series (an old-basis, domestically compiled series) and the World Bank's current series. Neither figure should be deleted — present both as "the World Bank's current series gives −7.04%/−6.86%; a domestic series and others give about −7.3%," always naming the series.

注"The latter half of the martial law period was the worst downturn in postwar Philippine economic history" — as of 2026, this superlative does not hold up (corrected in the 2026-08-25 verification pass). In the same World Bank real-GDP-growth series, 2020 registered −9.52%, worse than 1984's −7.04%. The correct statement is: "by real GDP growth, excluding the 2020 COVID downturn, the worst two-year stretch in the postwar era." Always state both the indicator (real GDP growth) and the exclusion condition.

4-3. The structure of crony capitalism

• The presidential decree (PD) monopoly on legislative power legally legitimized monopolistic trading and levy mechanisms in industries like sugar, coconut, and tobacco. Audit disputes over the group of companies tied to the coconut levy (coco levy) were contested for years even after EDSA (The Manila Times, 2005-05-15, "Audit of coco-levy companies pushed," and others).
• 注 Figures such as "the list of crony companies" or "the scale of monopoly revenue" vary widely by source. When citing specific company names or amounts, always check them against PCGG litigation documents or Sandiganbayan rulings. This material limits itself to what could be verified.
• As of August 2026, disputes remain outstanding: it was reported that the PCGG is pursuing ₱1.6 billion in Marcos funds against Bank of Commerce, a San Miguel subsidiary (Rappler, 2026-08-21).

5. The 1983 Assassination of Ninoy Aquino — the Judicial Timeline in the Primary Sources

Facts confirmable from the Supreme Court's Galman v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. L-72670, September 12, 1986) (lawphil.net):

注 It is not accurate that "Ver and the others remain acquitted." The Supreme Court voided the acquittal itself (a point missed by many Japanese-language articles).

(Added in the 2026-08-25 verification pass) Outcome of the retrial: in September 1990, the Sandiganbayan found 16 defendants, including General Custodio, guilty and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment), also awarding damages to the families of both Aquino and Galman. In September 1986 the Supreme Court had voided the 1985 first-instance ruling as "a sham trial ordered by President Marcos," opening the way to a retrial (source replaced 2026-08-27: the earlier draft cited English Wikipedia's "Assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr." article. Sources: Inquirer, "Ninoy slay case closed, high court decides"; cjpanganiban.com (the personal site of former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban), "Who killed Ninoy Aquino?" Retrieved 2026-08-27). 注However, the primary source for that ruling (the decision text itself) could not be reached even in this verification pass, so it should be used with clear attribution as a secondary-source-based account. When citing the number of convictions (16), always give the source.

6. The 1986 Snap Election and EDSA

• The snap presidential election was held on February 7, 1986, and after disputes over the vote count, Marcos fled the country during the EDSA "People Power" uprising of February 22–25 — this much is widely and consistently documented.
• What this material can confirm from primary sources is that the new administration issued Executive Order No. 1 on February 28, 1986, creating the PCGG (Executive Order No. 1, lawphil.net). EO No. 1 specifically names the recovery of ill-gotten wealth accumulated by "former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, his immediate family, relatives, subordinates and close associates," and grants powers including sequestration of assets, temporary takeover of company management, issuance of subpoenas, and holding parties in contempt. The first commissioners were led by Chairman Jovito R. Salonga plus 4 others, with an operating budget of ₱50 million.
• 注 Details of the vote count (the walkout of COMELEC tabulators, NAMFREL's parallel count, the date of the Batasang Pambansa's proclamation of a winner, etc.) could not be confirmed against primary sources in this investigation, so specific figures and dates should not be stated as certain.

7. The Pursuit of Ill-Gotten Wealth — From the Swiss Accounts to the 2026 Endgame

7-1. The Swiss deposits: the amount finalized by the Supreme Court

From Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152154 (July 15, 2003) (lawphil.net):

注 A figure of "about $658 million" or "about $700 million returned from the Swiss accounts" also circulates. The amount finalized in the decision text is, as stated above, US$627,608,544.95 (as of August 31, 2000), and the amount actually received, including subsequent interest, would be larger. Since old and new figures coexist, always specify which figure, as of when.

7-2. The PCGG's recovery record

注 "The amount PCGG has recovered" ranges from ₱171 billion to ₱174 billion depending on who reported it and when. The "recovered amount" also mixes cash, stock, and real-estate valuations, and the valuation methodology has not been made public. It is best to avoid converting this into other currencies and citing a dollar figure.

7-3. 2025–2026: the endgame of the pursuit

注 It is not the case that "all litigation ended in June 2026." What ended was the remaining civil forfeiture claim; individual pursuits such as the Bank of Commerce case and the estate tax discussed below remain separate and unresolved.

7-4. Estate tax

• The BIR was confirmed in 2022 to be claiming about ₱203.8 billion in estate tax from the Marcos family (Philstar, 2022-03-18). Civil society groups have repeatedly called for its collection (Inquirer, 2022-03-26).
• As of August 2026, the payment status has not been made public, and the president himself has responded that people should "ask the lawyers" (Daily Tribune, 2026-08-14). SCMP reported the same month on "the family's US$3 billion estate tax" (2026-08-18).
• 注 The ₱203.8 billion figure is "the principal tax finalized in 1997, plus accumulated interest and penalties," and multiple dollar conversions — "$3 billion," "$3.6 billion" — circulate depending on exchange rate and timing. It is safer to state figures in pesos, with the date attached.

8. Historical Revisionism and the Struggle Over Memory

8-1. The curriculum (MATATAG)

Under the MATATAG curriculum, the term "Marcos dictatorship" has disappeared, replaced with more neutral wording — that is the point of contention. DepEd calls it "a cleanup of terminology," while critics see it as "the erasure of the perpetrator." 注 "Martial law has vanished from the textbooks" would be an overstatement; the precise dispute is over detaching the label "dictatorship" from a specific name.

8-2. Politics around commemorative dates

The 2026 holiday list was set by Proclamation 1006 (signed September 3, 2025, countersigned by Executive Secretary Bersamin) (The Manila Times, 2025-09-04). 注Since this investigation could not confirm the full text on individual dates, it is more accurate to write, "the 2026 EDSA anniversary was reported to have been treated as a special working day," rather than stating flatly that it was removed from the holiday list.

8-3. Glorification on social media

• Around the 2022 presidential election, a TikTok-driven "golden age" narrative about the Marcos period drew international attention (TIME, 2022-05-05; The Guardian, 2022-05-07).
• Fact-checking efforts have continued (e.g., Rappler, "FALSE: Filipinos could freely go out and watch the news even under martial law," 2018-09-22).
• In October 2022, calls were made for "systematic countermeasures against disinformation and historical distortion" (Rappler, 2022-10-28).
• 注 It would be risky to write simplistically that "glorification on social media determined the election result." Multiple contributing factors have been cited, including economic discontent, disillusionment with post-EDSA administrations, and the local organizational strength of political dynasties (e.g., sociologist Randy David's remarks in Rolling Stone Philippines, 2026-02-24).

8-4. What Enrile's death (November 2025) revealed

• Juan Ponce Enrile, defense minister and martial law administrator under Marcos, was the figure who turned against Marcos in 1986 and triggered EDSA. He died at 101 on November 13, 2025 (Reuters / Inquirer / Philstar / PNA, 2025-11-13).
• A memorial service was held in the Senate on November 19, and he was buried at Libingan ng mga Bayani (Heroes' Cemetery) on November 22–23. President Marcos called him "one of the longest-serving and most respected public servants."
• Tributes from the armed forces and the defense department could not avoid touching on "enduring debates" over his legacy as an enforcer of martial law (Philstar, 2025-11-14). 注 The fact that the same person is remembered both as "an enforcer of martial law" and "a hero of EDSA" symbolizes a peculiarly Philippine twist in the difficulty of the politics of memory.

9. Generational Differences in Perception

The point is not "young people don't know history," but the growing, cross-generational consensus that "EDSA's promised gains never reached people's daily lives." 注 Framing this purely as "young people are being fooled by social media" misreads the actual domestic debate in the Philippines.

注 A note on the data: WR Numero is a polling firm that gained prominence in 2026 (it also published surveys on Sara Duterte's impeachment and Marcos's approval rating in April 2026; ABS-CBN, 2026-04-07). However, unlike SWS (Social Weather Stations) or Pulse Asia, it lacks a long time series, so the "45%" figure cannot be compared against past data. SWS's official site (sws.org.ph) had no public release on EDSA/martial law as of August 2026.

10. The 2026 Context — "Memory" Amid Middle East Conflict and Corruption Scandal

10-1. Economic impact of the Middle East conflict (starting February 28, 2026)

Distinct from the martial law period itself, this decisively shapes the context in which "Marcos-era debt and economic collapse" is discussed in 2026, and must be kept in mind.

The reason Marcos-era economic history is being read now is that "the 1970s–80s, when external debt grew tenfold" is being discussed alongside "2026, buffeted by oil shocks and remittance risk." 注 Remittances were "rising," not "falling," through the first half of 2026, so writing about this with pessimism alone would be inaccurate.

10-2. Anti-corruption protests redefine "September 21"

• In 2025, a massive corruption scandal over the flood-control budget was reported as "the biggest corruption scandal in [Philippine] history" (ABS-CBN, 2025-09-19). 注(Noted in the 2026-08-25 verification pass) This "biggest ever" is a media characterization, and the metric (amount involved, number of people implicated, or share of the budget) is not specified. This material does not assert this as fact and cites it in the form "reported as."
• On September 21, 2025 (the 53rd anniversary of martial law's proclamation), about 45,000 people gathered at Rizal Park/EDSA for the "Trillion Peso March" (Rappler / ABS-CBN, 2025-09-21, an estimate as of 10:45am). Inquirer characterized it as "the largest wave of protest under the Marcos administration" (2025-09-21). The same day, pro-Duterte factions in places such as Davao held a separate rally (MindaNews, 2025-09-19).
• On November 30, 2025, another rally of about 3,000 people took place (with the backing of 86 dioceses, ABS-CBN, 2025-11-30).
• At the 40th anniversary of EDSA on February 25, 2026, "accountability" and "opposition to political dynasties" were also front and center (GMA, 2026-02-25, and various regional reports). The same day, pro-Duterte factions separately planned their own rally (2026-02-23).

September 21 is expanding in function from "a day to remember martial law" to "a day to demand accountability for the current administration's corruption." Without understanding this dual character, the 2025–26 rally coverage cannot be properly read.

11. 注 Summary: "Points You'll Get Wrong If You Don't Know Them"

(In the 2026-08-25 second-round verification pass, the disordered numbering of this section — 1, 2, 2b, 2c, 4b, 5b, 3, 4… — was cleaned up into a straight 1–16 sequence. Only item 4 is newly added; the rest are unchanged in content.)

12. Key Sources (primary sources given priority)

Primary sources (statutes and rulings) - Proclamation No. 1081 (1972-09-21) / Proclamation No. 2045 (1981-01-17) / Executive Order No. 1 (1986-02-28) / Republic Act No. 10368 (2013-02-25) — all lawphil.net - Galman v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-72670 (1986-09-12, Supreme Court) — lawphil.net - Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152154 (2003-07-15, Supreme Court) — lawphil.net - Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) press releases (2025-02-25 / 2025-05-27 / 2025-12-11) — pcgg.gov.ph

Statistics - World Bank Open Data: DT.DOD.DECT.CD (external debt stock), NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG (real GDP growth), NY.GDP.PCAP.KD (GDP per capita, constant 2015 US$) — all retrieved August 2026

News reporting (mainly 2024–2026) - The Manila Times (2025-11-14 / 2026-02-08 / 2026-02-10 / 2026-06-06 / 2026-06-07 / 2026-08-22) - Daily Tribune (2026-06-12 / 2026-08-14 / 2026-08-15) - Rappler (2018-05-10 / 2021-12-03 / 2024-09-03 / 2026-08-21) - Inquirer.net (2018-05-09 / 2019-02-28 / 2023-10-14 / 2024-09-03 / 2025-09-21 / 2026-03-03 / 2026-03-12 / 2026-08-14 / 2026-08-15) - GMA Network (2018-06-21 / 2023-09-11 / 2024-09-06 / 2025-09-11 / 2025-12-08 / 2026-03-10) - Philstar.com (2022-03-18 / 2023-09-11 / 2024-09-08 / 2025-11-14) - ABS-CBN (2025-09-19 / 2025-09-21 / 2026-04-07 / 2026-06-06) - Bloomberg (2026-06-05), Reuters (2025-11-13), The Straits Times (2025-12-19), SCMP (2026-08-18) - Rolling Stone Philippines (2025-09-19 / 2026-02-24), The Varsitarian (2024-09-21 / 2025-09-22), Bulatlat (2026-06-10) - Ateneo Martial Law Museum & Library (martiallawmuseum.ph), Bantayog ng mga Bayani (bantayog.org)

What this investigation could not reach (treated as unconfirmed) - The original text of Amnesty International's Philippine fact-finding mission report (1970s) and Alfred W. McCoy's original human-rights-violation statistics — unreached even in the 2026-08-25 re-verification. However, this material cross-checked against this material group's "General History" §6 and separated the two sources' periods (1972–81 / 1975–85) and figures, and the second-round verification also supplemented, from that same §6, the finding that the McCoy figure is a derivative value equal to Richard J. Kessler's 1975–85 tally plus 93 extrajudicial killings in 1984 (see §3-1 supplementary note ①). 注 Richard J. Kessler's own original work (Rebellion and Repression in the Philippines) itself could not be reached even in this verification - The HRVVMC's official site (hrvvmc.gov.ph, inaccessible due to bot protection); 2025–26 progress on the Freedom Memorial Museum - The primary source for the 1990 retrial verdict in the Aquino-Galman case the outcome (16 convicted, life imprisonment) was confirmed via secondary sources, but the decision text itself was not reached - Primary sources on the vote-counting process of the 1986 snap election - The Official Gazette (officialgazette.gov.ph, returns 403; also inaccessible via an alternate routedue to automated-access screening)

What this verification pass was able to reconfirm against primary sources on 2026-08-25 - Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152154 (lawphil.net): forfeited amount US$627,608,544.95 as of August 31, 2000, and legitimate income of 1965–1984, ₱16,408,442 = US$2,414,484.91, disposable net income ₱6,756,301 = US$980,709.77 - World Bank API: the 1970–1990 series for DT.DOD.DECT.CD and NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG (all figures in §4-1 and §4-2 match), and the 2020 figure of −9.52%

日本語の詳細版: 分野「歴史」「戒厳令期」（本サイト日本語版）。