lOMoARcPSD|3635270

Republic Act 1425

Bachelor of Science in Social Work (Leyte Normal University)

StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)
 lOMoARcPSD|3635270

Republic of the Philippines

Leyte Normal University
College of Education
Tacloban City

Written Report
in
SOCSCI_105
Life and Works of
Rizal
Topic: “Rizal Law”

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|3635270

The Rizal Bill of 1956

50 years ago when the most controversial law-making process
happened called R.A. 1425 it was the presidential term of the late President
Ramon Magsaysay.
What is the R.A. 1425? What is the content of this Law and its
importance? What makes this law controversial?
Heracio dela Costa was one of the Historian in the year 1950’s. He was
one of the devotee of the truth about Rizal’s work. Dela Costa wrote several
drafts that contains the importance of reading Rizal’s literary works, namely;
Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo.
There were five (5) drafts. The first draft was called “Draft A”. This was
the original version written by De la Costa. The focus of this draft was on the
moral virtues which together make up true patriotism.
Among all of the patriotic Filipinos who distinguishes themselves for
love and devotion to the country, Dr. Jose Rizal has the highest place of
honor. For he attributes the noteworthy moral virtues that shows true
patriotism.
He presented his great love to the country by dissipating everyone’s
cluelessness and benightedness towards the inequality and injustices on the
country they are residing and labored. When he was condemned to death
because of being a rebel, he choose to die than neglect the principle in which
the state of his countrymen depends. Jose Rizal bravely proclaimed the fact
that a lot of Filipino suffered from the colonialism of the Spaniards but they
were much the victims of their own weakness and the ignorance. He
admitted that there are defects on his novel “Noli Me Tangere” and he did
not denied it. Instead he ones said “no one can dispute the objectivity of my
narrative”. He showed his unswerving devotion to the truth and considered
rationalism because he thought it would led him to the truth. But he correct
himself, accepted his error and embrace the verity himself that God is the
truth. And by this he made a reflection that no Filipinos before him had fully
understood patriotism. The most valuable of Rizal’s idea are contained in his
two novels. Which was disfavored by the Catholic Church as attacking the
Catholic faith. But Rizal himself asserted that there is nothing wrong with the
two novels, he criticized everyone and not only the priest. He criticized all
the aspect of Filipinos flaws and their Spanish counter parts. His book was a
wakeup call for Filipinos to unite and rise again the abuses of the Spanish
colonial government. This claim was fully confirmed by a careful reading and
from the letter seen from his friend Resurrection Hidalgo.

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|3635270

“Draft B” is another copy of A with a few handwritten changes made by

his critic which all of these changes were taken up into “Draft C”. This draft
was considered to be the final or the definitive draft. And there were
quotations that do not appear in A, but do appeared in C. Next draft was the
draft D which is drastically shortened version of C that contains five (5)
pages though it incorporates an additional paragraphs that found in the
previous drafts or ‘statement’ omits all of Dela Costa’s numerous quotations
from the novels of Rizal. However Cavanna had rather made use of C. Draft E
was the copy of C. Dela Costa underlined the phrases and paragraphs to
point out the changes taken from the five(5) pages of the draft C used in part
by Cavanna as the initial implementor into the outright prohibitions of the
novels.

“The Trial of Rizal Bill”

Senator Claro M. Recto proposed the bill in the Philippine Senate called
the Senate Bill No. 438. This was followed the House Bill No. 5561 proposed
by Congressman Jacobo Gonzales. In addition to Recto’s Bill, House Bill No.
5561 aimed to also give importance to study the life of Rizal which results to
our course subject “The Life and Works of Rizal.” This was sponsored by
Senator Jose B. Laurel who was the Chairman of the Committee on
Education.
April 23, 1956 debates on Senate Bill No. 438 began. Senator Jose B.
Laurel was supported by Senator Recto to take side in implementing the bill.
They meet some oppositions. The issue was divided into two groups. The
pro-Catholics and the anti-Catholics. In which Recto and Laurel were labelled
as anti-Catholic forces. And the pro-Catholics were Senators Mariano J.
Cuenco, Francisco Rodrigo, and Decoroso Rosales. Senator Rodrigo said that
he got dispensation from the Catholic Church to read the two novels. And
when he finished reading it, he said that he would not allow his 16 year old
son in reading the novels since it might confused his beliefs. He suggested
though, that one should have the guidance of an expert, if a minor would
read it. He further said that the reading of the novels in schools should be
optional. So as not violate the right of freedom and right of religion. They
need to write a written statement to be allowed.
Senator Recto proved to his opponent that the state should require the
reading of the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo in both public and
private schools. He said that the soul objective of this bill was to foster the
better appreciation of Rizal’s times and of the Role he played in combatting
Spanish tyranny in this country. He derived that the novels had any religious
motivation, he declared:

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|3635270

“Rizal did not pretend to teach religion or theology when he wrote

those books. He aimed at inculcating civic consciousness in the Filipinos,
national dignity, personal pride, and patriotism, and if references were made
by him in the course of his narration to certain religious practices in the
Philippines in those days and to the conduct and behavior of erring ministers
of the church, it was because he portrayed faithfully the general situation in
the Philippines as it then existed. Nobody can dispute that the situation
described by Rizal in those days, political, social, and religious, was the one
actually obtaining in the Philippines, but while he criticized and ridiculed the
unworthy behavior of certain ministers of the church, he made exceptions in
favor of the worthy ones, like the Dominican friar, Padre Fernandez, and the
virtues native priest, Padre Florentino and the Jesuits in general”
Senator Rodrigo, Rosales, and Cuenco derived much support from the
Catholic Church itself and from its hundreds of thousands of adherents
throughout the country. They invoked the need for unity, which they said
would compromise if the bill were approved. Contending that they were no
less lovers of their country because they were devoted children of their
church, Senator Rodrigo remarked:
“Avast majority of our people are the same time Catholics and Filipinos
citizens. As such, they have two great loves: their country and their faith.
These two loves are not conflicting loves. They are harmonious affections,
like the love of a child for his father and for his mother.”
“This is the basic of my stand. Let us not create a conflict between
nationalism and religion, between the government and the church.”
The conflict reach the House of Representatives on April 19, 1956
when the House Bill No. 5561 introduced by Congressman Jacobo Z. Gozales
which was an identical copy of senate Bill No. 438. Debates started on My 9,
1956 recommending approval w/out amendment.
Notable defenders of the bill in the house, besides the author, where
Congressman Emilio Cirtez, Mario Bengzon, Joaquin R. Roces and W. Rancap
Lagumbay. Among the out spoken opponents were Congressmen Ramon
Durano, Jose Nuguid, Marciano Lim, Zossa Lucas, Paredes Godofredo, Ramos
Miguel Cuenco and Congressmen Carmen D. cosing and Teda San Andreas
Ziga.
As the daily debates wore on in congress and throughout the country it
became clearer that no agreement could reached on the original version of
the bill. On May 9 1956, two weeks had passed, new hope for a final
resolution of the issue. This came about when senator Laurel, rose to

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|3635270

propose in his own name an amendment by substitution which read in full as

follows:
An Act to include in the curricula of all public and private schools,
colleges, and universities courses on the life, works and writings of Jose
Rizal, particularly his novels Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo
authorizing the printing and distribution thereof, and for other purposes.
Whereas, today, more than in any other period of our history, there is a
need for a re-dedication to the ideals of freedom and nationalism for which
our heroes lived and died;
Whereas, it is meet that in honoring them, particularly the national
hero and patriot, Jose Rizal, we remember with special fondness and
devotion their lives and works that have shaped the national character;
Whereas, the life, works and writings of Jose Rizal particularly his
novels Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, are a constant and inspiring
source of patriotism with which the minds of the youth, especially during
their formative and decisive years in school, should be suffused;
Whereas, all educational institutions are under the supervision of, and
subject to regulation by the state, and all schools are enjoined to develop
moral character, personal discipline, civic conscience and to teach the duties
of citizenship; Now therefore,
Be it enacted by the senate and House of Representatives of the
Philippines in Congress assembled:
Section 1. Courses on the life, works, and writing of Jose Rizal,
Particularly his novels Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, shall be
included in the curricula of all schools, colleges, and universities, public or
private: Provided, that in the collegiate courses, the original or unexpurgated
editions of the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo or their English
translation shall be used as basic texts.
The Board of National Education is hereby authorized and directed to
adopt forthwith measures to implement and carry out the provisions of this
Section, including the writing and printing of appropriate primers, readers
and textbooks. The Board shall, within sixty (60) days from the effectivity of
this Act promulgate rules and regulations, including those of a disciplinary
nature, to carry out and enforce the provisions of this Act. Said rules and
regulations shall take effect thirty (30) days after their publication in the
official Gazette.
Section 2. It shall be obligatory on all schools, colleges and
universities to keep copies of the original and unexpurgated editions of the

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|3635270

Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, as well as of Rizal’s other works and

biography. The said unexpurgated editions of the Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo or their translation in English as well as other writings of Rizal
shall be included in the list of approved books for required reading in all
public or private schools, colleges and universities.
The Board of National Education shall determine the adequacy of the
number of books, depending upon the enrollment of the school, college or
university.
Section 3. The Board of National Education shall cause the translation
of the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo as well as other writings of Jose
Rizal into English, Tagalog and the principal dialects; cause them to be
printed in cheap, popular editions; and cause them to be distributed free of
charge, to persons desiring to read them, through the Purok organizations
and Barrio Councils throughout the country.
Section 4. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as amending or
repealing Section 927 of the Administrative Code, prohibiting the discussion
of religious doctrines by public school teachers and other persons engaged in
any public school.
Section 5. The sum of the three hundred thousand pesos is hereby
authorized to be appropriated in the National Treasury to carry out the
purposes of this act.
Section 6. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

Senator Laurel explained his amendment that in his substitute bill, he

included not the Noli Me Tangere and the El Filibusterismo but all the works
and writings of Rizal and even those written by other about him. And he
removed the idea of compulsion. That is why you will no longer find the word
‘compulsory’ or ‘compulsion’ in the substitute bill that he filed.
The new measure was also debated in the chamber but with less heat
this time. The discussion centering on the first paragraph of Section 1.
Several members spoke on the substitute bill, among them were Senators
Locsin, Pelaez, Briones, Sabido, Puyat, and Cuenco. Still, Senator Rodrigo
strongly opposed and suggested the deletion of the provision in Section 1,
but this was rejected by the sponsor.
Then Senator Lim proposed the exemption of student from the
requirements of the bill, certain conditions, and the senate seemed headed
again for another lengthy discussion. And then the following proceedings
took place.

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|3635270

ENMIENDA A LA ENMIENDA POR SUSTITUCION

“THE BOARD SHALL PROMULGATE RULES AND REGULATIONS
PROVIDING FOR THE EXEMPTION OF STUDENTS FOR REASONS OF RELIGIOUS
BELIEF STATED IN SWORN WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE REQUIREMENT
OF THE PROVISION CONTAINED IN THE SECOND PART OF THE FIRST
PARAGRAPH OF THIS SECTION; BUT NOT TAKING THE COURSE PROVIDED
FOR IN THE FIRST PART OF SAID PARAGRAPH.”
May 12, 1956, the substitute bill was on the same day, unanimously
approved on the second reading. The House of the Representatives was also
casting about for some kind of compromise. So, on May 14, 1956,
Congressman Tolentino, the brilliant house majority floor leader sponsored
and amendment by the substitution identical to Senator Laurel’s substitute
bill amended and approved on second reading in the Upper House. For this
bill to be approve, there was need of complying with the constitutional
requirement the printed copies thereof be distributed among the
Congressman at three calendar days prior to its final approval by the House.
The opponents takes advantage of this technicalities to defeat the measure.
Bureau of Printing was requested by the speaker with the help of
Congressman Gonzales to order enough copies for the members of the
House. Copies of the measure were distributed in the House even before the
Senate Bill was approved on the third reading.
Senate Bill No. 438 was approved on the third reading with 23 votes in
favor (Senator Briones was absent). House Bill No. 5561 was also approved
on the third reading, with 71 votes in favor, (6 were against, 2 obtained, and
17 were absent) and it was sent to the senate on the same day.
June 12, 1956, the bill was signed into law by President Ramon
Magsaysay and became Republic Act No. 1425 also known as “Rizal
Law”.
Thus, it would seem, were partly fulfilled the words of Rizal himself
who, speaking through Filosofo Tasio in Noli Me Tangere, said:
“I am writing for the generations of Filipinos yet to come, a generation
that will be enlightened and educated, a generation that will read my books
and appreciate them without condemning me as a heretic”
- J. Rizal
“Every country has its morals like its climate and its infirmities”
- J. Rizal

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|3635270

“Open your children’s eyes so that they may jealously guard their
honor, love their fellowmen and their native land, and do their duty. Always
impress upon them that it is better to die with honor than to live with
dishonor”
- J. Rizal

Reference:
Republic of the Philippines. 1956. Republic Act 1425. Available online, http://www.gov.ph/ 1956/06/12/
republic-act-no-1425/.

Laurel, Jose B. Jr. 1960. The trials of the Rizal Bill. Historical Bulletin 4(2): 130–39.

Constantino, Renato. 1969. The Rizal Law and the Catholic hierarchy. In The making of a Filipino: A story
of Philippine colonial politics, 244–47. Quezon City: The Author.

Schumacher, John. 2011. The Rizal Bill of 1956: Horacio de la Costa and the bishops. Philippine Studies
59(4): 529–53.

Downloaded by Arnould Candido (arnouldcndd@gmail.com)