Marcos refutes allegations of family’s ill-gotten wealth, blames critics for ‘propaganda’

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has once again refuted allegations of his father’s embezzlement of billions of public funds during his twenty-year tenure, dismissing calls for the Marcos family to return their ill-gotten wealth as “propaganda.” In an interview with Australia-based ABC News published on Monday, Marcos downplayed the well-documented evidence of former President Ferdinand Marcos Sr.’s misappropriation of at least $5 billion from government coffers. Despite initial laughter at a question regarding the stolen billions, Marcos asserted that he “takes exception” to the accusations made against his family. He defended the family’s innocence by pointing out failed government cases filed against them and claimed that a thorough investigation had debunked the claims of ill-gotten wealth as mere “propaganda.” The Marcoses have come under scrutiny for the massive amount of wealth accumulated during Marcos Sr.’s presidency, with estimates ranging from $5 billion to $13 billion, well beyond the former president’s legitimate income. Legal battles over frozen Swiss bank deposits and civil forfeiture cases have followed the Marcos family for years, with mixed results in court. Despite calls for the return of stolen assets, Marcos insisted that his family left empty-handed when they sought exile in Hawaii in 1986. However, evidence contradicts this assertion, revealing that the Marcoses fled with substantial assets, including cash, jewelry, and bank certificates confirmed as ill-gotten wealth. Marcos’ public denial of his family’s corruption marks a departure from his typical narrative and has been met with skepticism from various sectors. In the lead-up to his presidency in 2022, Marcos had consistently portrayed himself and his father as victims of disinformation, a claim that has been refuted by fact-checking organizations. The ongoing controversies surrounding the Marcos family’s alleged ill-gotten wealth continue to be a topic of debate and investigation.

Leave a Reply