Treasure Hunt

The United States made two planes available to Ferdinand E. Marcos so that he could depart safely from the Philippines. One carried the deposed president, his family, various retainers and henchmen. The other was packed with “personal” effects, among which customs officials in Hawaii discovered--surprise, surprise--crates of currency, gold, jewelry and securities. In all, a considerable fortune, but still only a fraction of Marcos’ suspected wealth. No longer able to rule imperially at home, the Marcoses can look forward to living royally abroad.

Just how great an estate Marcos amassed after 20 years in power--and on an official salary of $5,600 a year--may never be known. According to a Central Intelligence Agency estimate, Marcos and his rapacious wife, Imelda, are worth $2 billion to $3 billion. Other estimates run higher. The virtues of honest hard work and thrift had little to do with the acquisition of this fortune.

A New York judge has temporarily blocked the transfer of five Marcos-owned properties in Manhattan and Long Island that are worth $350 million. The new Philippine government, meanwhile, is taking steps to try to get hold of the loot that was flown to Honolulu. Under Philippine law it is illegal to transfer gold and large amounts of currency out of the country. But the Marcoses need not fear any sudden decline into poverty. Indications are that their diverse assets are scattered far and wide, with the ownership carefully disguised.

Current U.S. law can do little to strip deposed rulers of their illicit gains. Rep. Stephen J. Solarz (D-N.Y) plans to introduce legislation to facilitate such recovery. For now, though, the United States can’t do much more than make its courts available to the Philippine government as it tries to get back what was stolen from the country. The problem comes in identifying the property at issue. No one can be sure just what the Marcoses got away with, what form it is to be found in, or where it is all stashed.

Problem or not, no effort at recovery should be spared. Larceny is a universal crime, and it is simply wrong that the Marcoses, the Duvaliers and others of that ilk should be allowed to live luxuriously ever after on what they stole. It is a complicated issue, but the same legal standard that applies to purse snatchers, bank robbers and tax evaders certainly ought to apply to felons who once practiced their trade from presidential palaces. Morally they are all the same, and that is how the law and society ought to regard them.