These remarks were delivered during the “EDSA@40: Stewarding People Power, from Memory to Mission” Talk-Conversation at the Ateneo de Naga University, 25 February 2026.
First of all, congratulations to the Ateneo de Naga University community for this meaningful commemoration of the 40th anniversary of the EDSA People Power Revolution by holding what should be a thought- and action-provoking discussion on Martial Law (or ML), EDSA, and their relevance to the current political situation. It is good that Ma’am Becky Torres and Ma’am Y delos Trino have spoken ahead of me about their lived experiences relevant to Martial Law 1972 and EDSA 1986. Their experiences give you a fair sense, even if on a micro or personal level, of what ML was like, esp. for Philippine democracy, and of the fight to restore it from a one-man military-imposed dictatorship. So, I feel that there is not as much need for me to speak about my own experiences, as there may be more need to speak about certain historical themes when looking back at ML and EDSA. But also fast forward bringing these themes to the current political situation under another President Marcos, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. (BBM), the son of the late ML dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr.
By the way, the ML and EDSA stories of Ma’am Becky, Ma’am Y and mine are among those found in a new book titled MGA DASO: Stories of Martial Law in Bikol that was launched here at your Richie Fernando Hall last October 15. My wife, another ADNU Ma’am, Ma’am Doods, and I, along with an Ateneo de Naga High School Class of 1966 alumnus friend Greg Castilla, were the editors who put together these stories of life, repression, and resistance during ML in Bikol from around 30 contributors coming from all 6 provinces of our region. I can honestly tell you, it is a good read, with some pieces in Filipino and Bikol. You will be proud especially of a fair number of Atenistas whom you will come across from start to finish of this 340-page book. Fortunately, it is very available for reading at your impressive James J. O’Brien, S.J. Library. Yes, do read more, including about ML, EDSA and Philippine history. It is more interesting than you may think. Each reading brings new insights, especially when we can see more of “Yesterday in Today.”
ML and EDSA were the two most important Philippine historical events since 1970, dekada sitenta. Kaming tatlo, edad sistenta na. ML from September 1972 to February 1986, or more than 13 years, was the first ever (and hopefully the last) modern-day dictatorship in the Phiippines. It broke up a relatively young 26-year old formally independent Philippine Republic and democracy since 1946. That was soon after the end of World War II and the Japanese occupation. That American-style democracy was however an elite democracy dominated by the country’s socio-economic elite. When EDSA ended ML or the Marcos dictatorship in February 1986, it was still that kind of elite democracy that was restored. But a new ruling elite only replaced the Marcos ruling clique of cronies. As we know, even that Marcos family faction of the ruling class has since been restored to presidential power. Together with its then Uniteam partner the Duterte family faction, it defeated the hopeful and promising pink movement of then Vice-President and now our new Naga City Mayor Leni Robredo in the 2022 presidential elections. There is so much to unpack about this more than five decades of Philippine history.
But given our limited time, I will focus or deal with the particular objective of this commemoration which is to “reflect on the enduring significance of the peaceful revolution at EDSA in shaping Philippine democracy and its continuing relevance in our present context.” Just three points first about EDSA. First of all, it should be clear by now that EDSA was a political revolution, one that removed a dictator from power and that also restored democracy. That was in itself already a very significant advance. But it was not a social revolution that resulted in more economic democracy aside from political democracy. In other words, it did not transform the pre-ML elite democracy into a more socio-economically equitable democracy, a democracy of substance and not just of form. I hope this does sound too abstract to you. But you Atenistas are bright and sharp, so I believe you understand.
Secondly, EDSA was a peaceful or non-violent revolution, exemplary in its relative bloodlessness, sabi nga “handog ng Filipino sa mundo, mapayapang paraan ng pagbabago.” And this way was what came to be known as “People Power” – the great mass of millions of people who stood fast against the military tanks at EDSA. As EDSA icon and former President Cory Aquino once said, “The power of the people is greater than the people in power.” The people took action peacefully using only their own warm bodies, basically putting their lives on the line, in what was classic non-violent action. Fortunately, handang “mamatay nang dahil sa iyo,” Inang Bayan kong Pilipinas, did not become “ang mamatay nang dahil sa iyo.” But let us not forget that there was a military or armed component at EDSA. Right before “People Power” was the foiled coup attempt of the RAM military rebels of Bikolano Col. Gringo Honasan. Eventually, the majority of the AFP nationwide decided to side with the people at EDSA against the Marcos dictatorship and for the restoration of democracy. Also, shortly before Marcos and family, including Bongbong and Imee, with the ill-gotten wealth that they could bring along, fled Malacañang to exile in Hawaii with U.S. assistance, a U.S. F-4 Phantom jet fighter-bomber made several persuasion fly-bys over the Palace.
Thirdly, EDSA itself occurred quickly in only four days, February 22 to 25, 1986. But it should be seen as only the culmination of many years of struggle against the Marcos dictatorship. The ML repression began upon its declaration in September 1972, and so did the resistance against it. In those darkest early years, the main resistance to military or armed repression was armed resistance. Credit the Moro armed resistance led by the MNLF and then the Communist armed resistance led by the CPP-NPA. But of course, the struggle against the Marcos dictatorship was not only armed struggle, as there was also unarmed and legal struggle. We saw this in such legal arenas as the courts, in various electoral exercises like elections, plebiscites and referendums, in the increasingly less fearful press and broadcast media, in the reactivated campus activism like that in Ateneo de Naga, in the increasingly vocal Christian witnessing of the churches and social action centers, and in the “parliament of the streets” for marches, rallies and other mass actions. The tipping point was the August 21, 1983 brazen assassination of returning opposition Senator Ninoy Aquino. But clearly, Ninoy, “hindi ka nag-iisa” in terms of martyrdom and other contributions to the struggle against the Marcos dictatorship and for the restoration of democracy.
Now fast forward 40 years to the present. The EDSA-restored democracy has turned out to be inadequate in meeting our people’s aspirations especially for socio-economic upliftment. Also in preventing the rise of the murderous Duterte presidency, and then the return to presidential power of the Marcos family. Our present context features the new struggle for presidential power between these two political dynasties. Also the opened floodgates of massive, systemic, and high-placed corruption in flood control and other infrastructure projects. This scandalous and shameless corruption has stirred the people’s outrage, especially that of Gen Z youth like many of you, which has manifested itself most notably in the big protest rallies held at Luneta and at EDSA last September 21 and November 30, and at EDSA today. Is this, or are we, in a revolutionary situation? Maybe, maybe not. Are the examples, lessons and insights from the EDSA peaceful revolution still relevant to our present context?
Surely, political regime change will not be enough to solve our big corruption problem, not to mention our other big problems such as serious socio-economic and environmental issues and the foreign security threats facing the country. No less than systemic change — and more — are needed. But what kind of systemic change, especially of the social system? And then how to achieve it? Or is the next presidential election contest in 2028 a more immediate or urgent concern, something like the key link in the chain of events for the direction the country is to take? I suspect that these kind of questions are behind the two different kinds of major anti-corruption movements, rallies and slogans last September 21 and November 30, and today both at EDSA. Not so much here in Naga which appears to be church-led “Three Million Peso March” territory. But in Manila and other places, there is also a significant “Kilusang Bayan Kontra Kurakot” (KKBK) led by avowed national-democratic organizations like Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN).
When it comes to needed systemic or social change, will a peaceful revolution suffice? We ask because the EDSA Revolution did not result in or lead to that. Is an armed and violent revolution necessary? Armed revolution or armed struggle is not only of one kind. But in contemporary Philippines, there is at hand only the national-democratic revolution led by the CPP-NPA. Note that their armed struggle against the Marcos dictatorship was also an armed struggle for national democracy. This is their envisioned social system to replace the existing one which they characterize as semi-colonial, semi-feudal, and bureaucrat-capitalist. The last characteristic is what they consider the root cause of corruption. But the nat-dem strategy of protracted people’s war with armed struggle as the main form of struggle has not advanced much since it started in 1969, ongoing for nearly 57 years now. By its own terms, it is still in the strategic defensive, with two more strategic stages to go, the strategic stalemate and the strategic offensive. In the meantime, so many lives, tens of thousands, have been lost, on both sides of the armed conflict, including Atenistas, as well as civilians fatally caught in the crossfire. Even if the nat-dem armed revolution somehow eventually succeeds in overthrowing the ruling system, the primacy of armed force, a.k.a. the NPA, in seizing and consolidating political power would tend to lead to a CPP “dictatorship of the proletariat.” There must be a better way to attain national and social liberation, including progressive aspects of the nat-dem socio-economic program like genuine land reform and national industrialization.
This is not to absolutely rule out armed struggle. It would be justified in certain situations, like these ones in Philippine history: Spanish and then American colonial rule, the Japanese occupation, and the Marcos dictatorship. I do not believe that we are in those kinds of situations at present. I have spoken only of political and social change. But there must also be character change, which is internal as individuals and as a people. We must do our best to make the present situation and ourselves better, and bring things towards the best possible direction. — #
The header features the People Power Monument by Eduardo Castrillo during EDSA@40. The monument celebrates the power of the Filipino people as represented by the figure of the Inang Bayan. (video image credit: GMA News)
About the author
SOLIMAN M. SANTOS, JR. is a retired Judge of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Naga City, Camarines Sur and a resident of neighboring town Canaman in that province. He has a trilogy of books on his court work and practice: Justice of the Peace (2015), Drug Cases (2022), and Judicial Activist (2023), all published by the lawbook publisher Central Books, Inc., Quezon City.