MARTIAL LAW, MARGINALIZED SECTORS AND DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE:

MARTIAL LAW, MARGINALIZED SECTORS AND DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE: A DILEMMA IN PHILIPPINE DEVELOPMENT

The Dilemma of Development Since the declaration of Martial Law in nineteen seventy-two, the Philippine government has avowed a commitment to economic development. Time and again, it has mentioned economic development as one of the justifications for the continuation of Martial Law in the country. Indeed the statistics on Martial Law accomplishments on economic development are impressive. The annual growth rate of the Gross National Product has increased from five point zero per cent per annum in nineteen sixty-six to six point five per cent from nineteen seventy-two to nineteen seventy-eight, a growth rate which compares favorably with moderately fast growing economies. Unemployment rate has been significantly reduced. Per capita income has gone up. The volume of Philippine exports has equally increased. Multi-national investments in the Philippines have also increased due to attractive incentives. Nevertheless, poverty remains widespread and endemic. Thus, the question remains as relevant and as urgent as ever: can strong governments such as dictatorships or martial law governments guarantee the bringing in of the marginalized sectors of society into the mainstream of development and the distribution to them of a fair share of the fruits of development? One way of answering this question is to look at some of the segments of the Philippine labor force and examine what has been happening to them since nineteen seventy-two. Studies on the sugar industry are in consensus about the grinding poverty of sugar workers and the vast wealth of the planters and mill owners. Plantation laborers or sacadas live in extreme