HE said — SHE said

The Imelda Marcos I knew from my time was the lavish, ruthless, scheming wife to then President Ferdinand Marcos.

Ferdinand was the only leader this rubbernecker knew from birth to the fringes of his adulthood. I may have given my age away by that.

Those long years — two decades — of Marcos rule had brought the Philippines to imaginary greatness as they have also plunged the country deeper into poverty and in debt.

But amid these, Imelda had thousands of shoes, which had become symbols of her excesses.

Some of them were made locally to claim support to the then thriving leather and shoes industry, which collapsed later on, no thanks to the leaders who succeeded Marcos but were also no better. But majority of the shoes were designer brands purchased during those notorious shopping adventures when Imelda had whole upscale department stores closed for herself. She was queenly as she was a queen when she did all these.

Beyond her shoe cabinets is a history of abuses and thievery, though.

Despite their once very strong power after he placed the Philippines under martial rule a year before his term was to expire, which became his ticket to padlock Congress, jail political rivals and activists, rule by decrees and amass an estimated $5 billion to $10 billion while in Malacañang, Ferdinand was no match to the people’s wrath when they fought back.

And for these, Ferdinand was ousted by an army-backed people’s revolt in 1986.

A Hawaii court subsequently found Ferdinand liable for human rights violations and awarded $2 billion from his estate to compensate more than 9,000 victims of systematic torture, incarceration, extrajudicial killings and disappearances.

Ferdinand died in Hawaii in 1989. And when things were again favorable, Imelda towed her family to return to the Philippines and made a strong political comeback along with son Bongbong — Ferdinand’s namesake — and daughter Imee.

And so, the second Imelda Marcos rose. She had kept her motherly persona, but less lavishly as she was before.

With the help of social media, the Marcoses went on a charm offensive, attempting to rewrite history through Facebook, Twitter and the like. And the Marcoses have been successful no doubt, although just partly.

Bongbong nearly won the vice presidency.

Imee is now bidding for a senatorial slot.

Imelda is planning to return to her comfort zone in her late husband’s bailiwick.

But no matter how she tries to bury history with the ones and zeroes of binary lies, her past will chase her to her grave.

Before the end of last year, the Sandiganbayan found Imelda guilty of graft and ordered her arrest.

It was a rare conviction among many corruption cases Imeda still plans to appeal to avoid jail term.

Imelda is now 89 and leaders said she could no longer serve time. She is supposed to face six to 11 years in prison for each of the seven counts of violating an anti-corruption law when she illegally funneled about $200 million to Swiss foundations in the 1970s as Metropolitan Manila governor.

“No matter how she tries to bury history with the ones and zeroes of binary lies, her past will chase her to her grave.

Imelda was acquitted in three other cases, though. Those cases took nearly three decades of trial by several judges and prosecutors.

Imelda was also once convicted of a graft case in 1993, but the Supreme Court later cleared her of any wrongdoing.

There is also a P1-billion civil suit filed by the Presidential Commission on Good Government against Ferdinand and Imelda and their cronies, which is already up for decision at the Sandiganbayan.

Imelda’s lawyers are seeking to stop the Sandiganbayan from deciding on the case claiming it is related to the other cases filed against the defendants. The Sandigan, in a 9 November 2018 resolution, said it is not.

Imelda can hire the best teams to erase her past. But the truth is always out there to surface anytime.

Even Janus, who could look into the past and present including attempts at revising the past, could not hide his faces in witnessing transitions in history which, fortunately for the future generation and mine, cannot be revised and be rewritten by simple apps and tools.

Imelda Marcos’ over-3,000 pairs of shoes are no longer as shocking nowadays when one would likely get deluged by a storm of avarice on a daily basis if only one cared to look.

Besides, Darlene Flynn of the United States has beaten Imelda’s record hands-down (or feet up) with 15,665 pairs in a span of 12 years — albeit these are various “shoe-related items,” including glass shoes and artwork.

Our former First Lady of 20-plus years, meanwhile, is listed in the Guinness Book of World Records as the woman with the largest collection of shoes at “around 3,400 pairs” discovered in just one room in Malacañang Palace. (Did she have more in other rooms, though? In a Swiss secret chamber, perhaps?)

That shoe story that wasn’t Cinderella’s is in the distant past and long gone from memory (in its original shocking glory, that is).

These days, when kids can make billions of dollars by grabbing ideas from the air and turning them into apps, or bank on a notorious family name and a hefty social media following to make multimillions on a lip gloss product alone, a thousand pairs of shoes are not such a big deal compared to, say, someone mouthing off against someone else’s idol.

You could get razed to the ground with a tongue-lashing and social media-bashing for speaking ill of Marcos, for example, among a few other untouchables in this land. Such a thing can ruin relationships, not to mention divide a nation.

These days, when extreme lifestyles and extreme makeovers are being peddled like some shiny object, it is not that appalling for someone to have amassed enough shoes to last a lifetime. The Guinness Book will not tag it as greed when collections grow to extreme levels — it simply records these amazing feats. No judgment, as they say.

Even the Sandiganbayan, in its judgment, did not pronounce graft as greed when it found the former First Lady and incumbent Ilocos Norte Representative guilty in connection with her “alleged financial interests in Swiss-based foundations during her time as Minister of Human Settlements and interim member of Congress.” Judgment is between you and your God, as they say.

Seven counts of violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act are miniscule compared to the number 3,400. Six years and one month to 11 years “for each count” of graft, however, is innumerable to someone in her late 80s. But seven foundations that someone in public office had no business having and which supposedly became the funnel for about $200 million — where is the justice there?

Age, again they say, does not matter — and Marcos is running for governor in Ilocos Norte in this year’s elections. No doubt, she will make a dent in the Marcos bailiwick, just as her children, Ilocos Norte Gov. Imee Marcos and former Sen. Bongbong Marcos did. Because, judging from their success at the polls in spite of the unfinished business that continues to haunt them, public perception is an unreliable basis for justice — legal justice, that is.

“Six years and one month to 11 years “for each count” of graft, however, is innumerable to someone in her late 80s.

What is justice in the face of unwieldy perception that may well change in the next gust of wind (of hot air)? We live in a world inundated with fake news and unapologetic apologists whose convictions are practically nonexistent but whose power to provoke is insane. These are the ones who will scoff at findings of massive amounts of money in foreign bank accounts unless, one supposes, they see the actual thing right in front of them. Maybe then, and that is a tenuous maybe, they may begin to change their minds.

When Ferdinand Marcos’ body was buried in the Libingan ng mga Bayani, the issue bared a sore point: historical revisionism. History, if one cared to reread the books they made us read in school decades ago, is subjective. Schools may ingrain certain so-called facts into the brains of children, but at some point, when these children grow up and they see the world around them, they may end up questioning the past because there are so many “disconnects” in the present.

Perhaps what we may have to digest is that facts are worth zilch to someone who prefers fairytales.