|
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF AMERICA, FOR THE DISTRICTCOURT OF HAWAII
IN RE: ESTATE OF FERDINAND E. MARCOS
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO Hilao et. al.. v. Estate of Ferdinand Marcos
And De Vera et. al. v. Estate of Ferdinand Marcos, Trajano, et. al. v. Imee Marcos Manotoc
AGREEMENT OF COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT
Plaintiffs and defendant by and through their lead counsel and the Republic of the Philippines by and through the Chairman of the Philippine Commission on Good government
enter into this Agreement of Compromise and Settlement ("Agreement") providing for the settlement and satisfaction of the Plaintiff Class Final Judgement
against the defendant Estate purging the courts order of contempt and all fines based thereon against Imelda R. Marcos and Ferdinand E. Marcos, satisfying the
default judgement against Imee Marcos Manotoc in a related action pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth below, and subject to the approval of the Court.
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 This litigation (the "Litigation") consist of two class actions initiated in 1986 against Ferdinand E. Marcos which have
been consolidated in the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii and the default judgement entered be the Court against Imee Marcos Manotoc in
Trajano v. Imee -Marcos HW Civ. 86-207, a related action.
1.2. Ferdinand E. Marcos died in Hawaii on September 29 1989. Imelda R. Marcos and Ferdinand R. Marcos have been substituted as parties
on behalf of the defendant Estate.
1.3. In 1991 the Court certified a plaintiff Class consisting of:
All current civilian citizens of the Republic of the Philippines, their heirs and beneficiaries, who between 1972 and 1986 were tortured,
summarily executed or disappeared while in the custody of military or paramilitary groups.
At least 10,059 persons have filed claim forms in accordance with the Order of Court.
1.4. The jury returned the verdicts in favor of 9,539 members of the Class in the total amount of $1,966,700,000. On February 3 1995 the
Court issued in favor of the Class.
1.5. By Opinion dated December 17, 1996, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the Class' Judgement
1.6. In 1990, the Court entered a default judgement against Imee Marcos Manotoc in Trajano v. Imee Marcos-Manotoc HW Civ. 86-207.
1.7. By opinion dated October 21, 1992, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the judgement.
1.8. By opinion dated December 10,1997 the Swiss Federal Supreme Court directed transfer of certain deposits to an escrow account (the
"Escrow") to be maintained by the Republic in the Philippines at the Philippine National Bank, subject to the satisfaction of certain express
conditions. The Republic, plaintiff and the defendant estate have all asserted claims against the Escrow.
1.9. Based upon information obtained during the twelve (12) years this litigation has been pending and prospects concerning the
collection of the judgements, Lead Counsel have concluded the settlement have concluded that the settlement provided for by this Agreement is fair, reasonable
and adequate and in the best interests of all plaintiffs and the Class.
1.10. The Republic wishes to compensate Filipino human rights claimants from the Escrow, and facilitate a settlement of this litigation.
1.11. Imelda R. Marcos and Ferdinand R. Marcos Substituted herein as representatives of the defendant Estate have concluded that the
satisfaction of the Final Judgements is desirable, consent to the release of US$150 million from the Escrow, and waive any claim to the released monies as
provided in this agreement
2. SATISFACTION
2.1. The Republic shall cause Philippine National Bank to transfer uS$150 million by wire from the Escrow To The Plaintiffs Settlement
Fund (the "Settlement Fund") at a bank designated by the Court within 10 days after preliminary approval of this Agreement by the Court.
2.2. All parties shall make efforts to obtain all necessary consents to trigger release and transfer of the $150 million from the Escrow
to the Settlement Fund and shall execute all documents necessary to accomplish the release and transfer.
2.3. The Republic agrees that the US$150 million is not subject to any income, inheritance, estate or other tax, which has been or maybe
levied in the Philippines.
3. PLAINTIFF'S SETTLEMENT FUND
3.1. Plaintiff's Lead Counsel shall establish at reputable commercial bank to be designated by the court an account for deposit of the
settlement proceeds.
3.2. The assets of the Settlement Fund shall be invested in the discretion of the Court, in a manner to achieve maximum earnings
consistent with safety and appropriate liquidity to pay all claims without undue delay, and under the continuing jurisdiction and supervision of the Court. Any
and all interest and all earnings of the Settlement Fund Assets shall accumulate and become part of the Settlement Fund.
3.3. Except as specifically agreed in paragraphs 4.1,4.2 and 4.3 hereof, defendant and the Republic shall have no ownership or
reversionary interest in the Settlement Fund assets that may be invested to generate income.
3.4. The settlement shall be the sole source of payment of claims of the plaintiffs and Class Members.
3.5. Counsel for the plaintiff class shall receive, as compensation for all services performed a Court award of fees and expenses for
work the court determines to have been reasonably necessary and appropriate. In no event will the defendant or the Republic be required to make any payment on
account of compensation to counsel for the plaintiff or the Special Master.
3.6. Counsel for the plaintiff Class shall make an application to the Court for compensation, which will be determined after hearing on
notice to all parties.
3.7. All expenses incurred in administering the Settlement, including the cost of all required notices to class members and compensation
of any special masters (including obligations in arrears) or administrators, shall be paid from the Settlement Fund subject to the approval of the court.
4. TERMINATION
4.1 This Settlement Agreement shall, without the necessity of notice be automatically terminated if:
(a) The Court denies preliminary approval; or
(b) Final approval of the Settlement Agreement is denied by a final order of the court or any United States appellate court, in which
case the entire proceeds of the Settlement Fund, including interest but deducting therefrom the expenses of administering the Fund and the cost of class
notice, shall be wired to the Philippine national Bank in the Philippines. And returned to escrow.
4.2 LEAD COUNSEL for the PLAINTIFF CLASS shall have the right, without the consent of the court, to terminate this Agreement in the event
the full $150 million is not wired to the Settlement Fund in accordance to the paragraph2.1 hereof.
4.3 Should this agreement be terminated it shall have no further force or effect except as provided herein, and all parties shall be
restored to their respective positions immediately prior to execution hereof.
5. SATISFACTION AND DISMISSAL
5.1 All parties hereto desire and intend that this agreement apply to settle and satisfy the FJ obtain against the ESTATE OF FERDINAND E.
MARCOS in this Litigation, as well as the final judgement in Trajano v. Imee Marcos-Manotoc and the order of contempt and related fines ordered against Imelda R.
Marcos and Ferdinand R. Marcos.
5.2 When the judgements in this litigation are marked satisfied pursuant to the paragraph 5.3 hereof, each individual plaintiff and Class
member shall be deemed covenanted and agreed
(a) that he/she will forever refrain from instituting, maintaining or proceeding against the Republic, the ESTATE OF FERDINAND E.
MARCOS, the immediate members of his family by consanguinity and affinity within the fourth civil degree and heirs executors, and personal representatives of
the said estate on any civil claim for violation of human rights which he/she ever had, now has or hereafter may have against said parties arising between
1972 and 1986 and
(b) that he/she releases said parties from any and all civil claims for violation of human rights arising between 1972 and 1986 which
he/she ever had, now has or hereafter may have against said parties. Imelda R. Marcos has never been charged civilly or criminally with a Human Rights
violation anywhere in the world including the Phil but is released by this paragraph. FRM has never been charged civilly or criminally with a Human Rights
violation anywhere in the world including the Phil but is released by this paragraph. Imee Marcos-Manotoc (with the exception of Trajano V. Marcos Manotoc,
HV Civil) has never been charged civilly or criminally with a Human Rights violation anywhere in the world including the Phil but is released by this paragraph,
including Trajano. Irene Marcos Araneta has never been charged civilly or criminally with a Human Rights violation anywhere in the world including the Phil
but is released by this paragraph. The late Ferdinand E Marcos has never been charged civilly or criminally with a human rights violation in the Phil. His
estate is fully released by this paragraph.
5.3. Upon Final approval of the Final Agreement following formal fairness hearing in accordance with the Rule 23 (c) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure, The Court shall enter an Order directing the Clerk of Court to mark Final Judgement in the Class Action satisfied. The Court shall finally
dissolved the Permanent Injunction and vacate the Judicial Assignment dated July 14, 1995 of certain Swiss Bank Accounts entered in this Litigation and purge the
order of contempt and all related fines and penalties.
5.4. Upon the final approval of this Agreement the Court shall make an order directing the Clerk of Court to mark the final judgement in
Trajano v. Imee Marcos-Manotoc satisfied.
6. REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PARTIES
6.1. Plaintiff's Lead Counsel represents that he has authority to enter into this Agreement on behalf of all plaintiffs subject to Court
approval.
6.2. Counsel for Imelda R. Marcos and Ferdinand R. Marcos represent that they will recommend this agreement to their clients as
substituted representatives of the Estate in this action.
6.3. The chairman of the PCCG represents that he is the authorized to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the PCCG and the Republic of
the Philippines.
6.4. Sherry P. Broder represents that she has authority to enter into this Agreement on behalf of Agapita Trajano.
7. GENERAL PROVISIONS
7.1 The Court shall retain exclusive and continuing jurisdiction of the Litigation with respect to the performance of the terms and
conditions of this Agreement by the plaintiffs counsel with respect to the performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement by the plaintiffs' counsel
to assure that all the disbursements are properly made and to interpret and enforce this agreement's terms, conditions and obligations. The Court shall have the
power to approve the designation, appointment and removal of administrators and disbursing agents and the executions of contracts as necessary and appropriate to
assure the administration of this Agreement; provided, however, upon the final approval of this Agreement counsel for the Republic, the Estate and the representatives
of the Estate shall be fully and finally discharged of any continuing obligation to the court and its jurisdiction shall terminate as to these parties and their
representatives.
7.2 The Republic submits to the jurisdiction of the Court for the sole and limited purpose of effecting this Settlement. Should the
agreement be terminated pursuant to paragraph 4.1 or 4.2 hereof, the Republic withdraws its consent to jurisdiction.
7.3 All parties hereto agree to exercise their best efforts and to take all reasonable steps necessary to effectuate the Settlement set
forth in this Agreement.
7.4 This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective estates, heirs, successors
and assigns.
7.5 This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement among the parties with regard to the subject matter of this Agreement and
supersedes any previous agreements and understanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. This agreement may not be modified or amended
except in writing signed by all parties hereto.
7.6 This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument.
7.7 This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Hawaii applicable to the agreements
made and to be performed in such jurisdiction.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, in the representative or personal capacity indicated, have executed this Agreement of Compromise and
Settlement as of the 19th day of December 1998.
Imelda R. Marcos
James P. Linn (Approved as to form), Linn & Neville, Counsel for Imelda R. Marcos
Ferdinand R. Marcos
John J. Bartko (Approved as to form), Bartko, Zunkel, Tarrant & Miller, Counsel for Ferdinand R. Marcos
Robert A. Swift, Plaintiffs Legal Counsel, MDL No. 840
Sherry P. Broder, Liaison Counsel for the Class
And Counsel for Agapita Trajano
Magdangal Elma, Chairman, Philippine Commission On Good Government
|
