Asset Recovery Watch

Ferdinand Marcos and Imelda Marcos / Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos Human Rights Litigation
President (F. Marcos,1965-1986); First Lady, Governor of Metro Manila and Minister of Human Settlements (I. Marcos. Governor and Minister from 1978-1986)
United States
Location of Recovery Effort, Asset Location / Alleged Asset Location
Art.15, Art.16, Art.17, Art.18, Art.19, Art.20, Art.23
Private Civil Action
Letter of Request
Much of the $7.5 million recovered by the Marcos' era human rights victims resulted from the settlement of the Texas case, in which judicial assistance was provided by the Philippines and Hong Kong. (Source: In Re: Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos Human Rights Litigation, Case No. 1:03-cv-11111-MLR (MDL-00840-MLR) (D. Hawaii). The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals also held that the Full Faith and Credit clause of the U.S. Constitution requires a state to give a judgment on a judgment rendered by a different state court equal dignity to a judgment rendered by its own state court. (Source: Del Prado v. B N Development Company, Inc. et al, Case No. 09-10581 (5th Cir. 2010), citing Roche v. McDonald, 275 U.S. 449 (1928).
Completed (in part) and Ongoing (in part)

See also related entry, "Ferdinand Marcos and Imelda Marcos / Vilma Bautista New York Art Case / Human Rights victims' Settlement."

In January 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii authorized the distribution of $1,000 to each of the 7,526 eligible members of the class action brought by victims of the Marcos era human rights violations. The Court held that $10,261,000 were available in the Class Settlement Fund (comprised of $286,000 from pre-2010 executions and $9,975,000 net from the Texas class action settlement, Del Prado v. BN Development Company Inc et al, Case No. 4:05-cv-00234-Y; and included the following Colorado actions: De Leon v. Imelda R. Marcos et al., No. 09-CV-2216, and 135 Randomly Selected Class Claimants and the Plaintiff Class as Designated in the Judgment of February 3, 1995 v. Denman Investment Corporation, Inc. et al, No. 05-CV-702). The Court ordered the funds to be distributed as follows: $7,526,000 to 7,526 eligible class members, the vast majority of whom reside in the Philippines; $50,000 advanced to the attorneys for the cost of distribution; $1,402,288 in plaintiff's attorney fees and $847,952 in reimbursable costs for their work for the past 25 years; $300,000 to Alan Meeker in finders fee for locating the Marcos-related properties in Texas and Colorado; $10,000 to Jerry Pimentel as the next of kin to deceased Mariano Pimentel for Mariano Pimentel's services as a class representative in the Texas and Colorado actions; $5,000 to Ferdinand De Leon, for services as class representative. The order is in partial satisfaction of a 1995 judgment for $2 billion that was awarded to the human rights victims, who registered the judgment in Illinois, and in turn, in Texas. In 2010, a federal court in Northern District of Texas approved a settlement agreement between the human rights victims and seven companies that held legal ownership to properties in Texas and Colorado that the claimants had alleged were beneficially owned by the Marcoses. Hong Kong provided judicial assistance in the Texas case. On January 25, 2011, Judge Manuel Real also handed down a Judgment of Contempt against Imelda R. Marcos, Ferdinand E. Marcos and the Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos in the amount of $353,600,000. The Court held that it had jurisdiction over a contempt order of May 26, 1995 which provided a daily sanction of $100,000 against the Marcoses for refusing to furnish information and using the frozen assets of the estate, and that a total of 3,536 days had elapsed since the Contempt Order. On February 24, the Marcoses' attorneys filed an appeal against the Judgment of Contempt. (Source: In Re: Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos Human Rights Litigation, Case No. 1:03-cv-11111-MLR (MDL-00840-MLR) (D. Hawaii), Order Authorizing Distribution to Eligible Class Members from the Settlement Fund, Order for Interim Award of Attorneys Fees and Reimbursement of Expenses, and Order for Finders Fee and Incentive Fee, all issued on January 13, 2011; Judgment of Contempt and Judgment in a Civil Case, both filed on January 25, 2011; Notice of Appeal, filed on February 24, 2011.)

A trial in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on criminal racketeering and fraud charges concluded in an acquittal for Mrs. Marcos. Mr. Marcos had also been indicted in the case, but the court had deemed him too ill to stand trial. (Sources: US v. Tantoco, et al, Case No. 1-87-cr-598-JFK (S.D.N.Y.), Docket Report accessed on January 2, 2011 and Indictment of October 22, 1988, obtained from US National Archives; Craig Wolff, "The Marcos Verdict; Marcos Is Cleared of All Charges In Racketeering and Fraud Case," New York Times, July 3, 1990.) On April 21, 2010, the GMA News reported that "According to records of the Philippine anti-graft court Sandiganbayan as of 2005, Mrs. Marcos continues to face 11 criminal charges and 25 civil cases." (Source: Sohpia Regina M. Dedace, "Imelda Marcos and her road to vindication," GMA News, April 21, 2010, accessed at

Presidential Commission on Good Government
Presidential Commission on Good Government
Sandiganbayan; Supreme Court of the Republic of Philippines
Kohn Swift & Graf PC (Attorney Robert A. Swift); Attorney Sherry P. Broder, Liaison Counsel; and Others [for Human Rights Victims Class]; Kabayashi, Sugita & Goda (Attorneys Lex R. Smith, Joseph A. Stewart, Maria Y. Yang) [for Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos]
U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals; U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas and Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals; U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado