SPECIAL REPORT: REVISITING THE AQUINO ASSASSINATION CASE

No less than a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Andres Narvasa, two years ago, on the anniversary of the late Ninoy Aquino’s assassination, called on the Filipinos to “close the book” on the case—even if the mastermind remained unidentified (Inquirer report of August 21, 2007, by Juliet Labog-Javellana).

He also pleaded for the release of the soldiers convicted and jailed for the murder because they had “suffered enough.”

Javellana’s report quoted Justice Narvasa saying: “Better left closed. No sense anymore in trying to find out [who ordered his killing]. If anything could be found out, it would have been revealed by this time. If we haven’t found out by this time, we will never find out.”

“Ver is dead, Marcos is dead. I don’t think we will ever find out,” he also said. The late Gen. Fabian Ver, who died abroad, avoiding the Philippine authorities, was President Marcos’ Armed Forces chief of staff.

Narvasa, however, made it clear that he was all for honoring Ninoy and for the Filipinos learning “the lessons of his martyrdom.” He also speculated that Ninoy would prefer reconciliation to vengeance.

Marcos disliked Narvasa for actively pinning down the soldiers. He worked actively as a member of the
Agrava Fact-Finding Board, whose majority could not accept the Armed Forces of the Philippines contention that Rolando Galman, whom the military said was an NPA man, killed Ninoy. The majority also included Ver among the soldiers who should be indicted for the conspiracy to assassinate Ninoy.

Court of Appeals Justice Corazon Agrava, who was the chairman of the Marcos-appointed Board, wrote a separate report excluding Ver from the list of Ninoy’s murderers.

The Manila Times does not agree that the nation should just closed its eyes and stop pursuing the brain behind the assassination.

The Times published the book Death on the Tarmac: Forensic Analysis of the Assassination of Senator Benigno Aquino, Jr. to provoke a debate about this issue and ignite a reenergized search for the mastermind.

The authors of the book have tried to prove that the soldier the courts have found to be the killer could not have fired the shot that killed Ninoy from a step higher than Ninoy as they were descending the planes stairs. Therefore it must have been Rolando Galman who did kill Ninoy.

We do not necessarily believe in the findings of these independent forensic experts. And we do not believe in the conclusion the convicted soldiers have drawn from these findings that they are innocent.

We believe in the Agrava Board’s two reports (one by the majority and another by the Board’s chair) that the murder of Ninoy was a military conspiracy, that the convicted soldiers and their co-accused were participants of the “military conspiracy” and therefore cannot claim to be innocent.

The book is expected to stir debate, and we hope new discussions—and action—on the issue that will contribute to unmasking the mastermind.

We published the book because we believe in the need for closure. But we also believe that closure can only come if a new and more thorough investigation yields the face of the master plotter of the Aquino assassination.

The innocence claimed by the military men who were convicted and jailed for involvement in the murder is untenable. Their own testimonies at their trial show that they know more than they have been willing to tell.

We hope the debate and discussion will make readers revisit the findings of the Agrava Board and the testimonies of earlier forensic experts.

These findings detailed in Death on the Tarmac, contradict those of other forensic investigators, including independent ones from the United States, and the testimonies of hundreds of witnesses.

More than the desire to find the answer to “Who pulled the trigger?” we want to get closer to the identity of the mastermind.

We hope each one of the convicted soldiers who are still alive—and now enjoying the conditional pardon
President Gloria Arroyo has given them—would be prompted by the publication of this book to speak out in the service of the truth and unmask the mastermind.

Or at least they might at least tell all that they know and stop hiding things. Their words would perhaps yield more accurate trails to the mastermind’s identity.

Finding out the brain, the master-plotter, will put closure to the Aquino assassination—and heal an open wound from which our society has continued to suffer since August 21, 1983.