WHAT IS THE RIZAL LAW?

The Rizal Law, also known as RA 1425, mandates the study of Rizal’s life and works, as
shown in section 1. This Republic Act calls for an increased sense of nationalism from the
Filipinos during a time of a dwindling Filipino identity. According to the judicial system, a
republic act is a law that has already been passed and implemented. In contrast to this, a bill
is merely a proposed law, in other words it may or may not be passed by the Congress.

The Republic Act was signed by the President on June 12, 1956. From the notes preceding
the body of the document, one may infer that the bill was originally proposed in the Legislative
arm of the Philippine Republic, in the Senate and House of Representatives. According to
the Official Gazette, the law was made effective thirty days after its implementation. The mere
fact that the Act was passed on the date of our independence seeks to stir up a greater sense
of fervor in the Filipino, to believe in their own country and national identity—who we are as a
nation. It was this time when the Philippines was heavily dependent on the American
government for support and guidance. Also, based on the fact that Jose Rizal is honored by
the Philippines as the Philippine national hero, it is but appropriate that the document written
to commemorate his accomplishments is written here, in the land of his birth.

It is Senator Claro M. Recto who authored the Rizal Bill. While Senator Jose P. Laurel, Sr.,
who was then the Chairman of the Committee on Education, sponsored the bill in the
Senate. Both of them were known for their great sense of nationalism. This nationalism
served as the foundation to come up with this republic act, to set our country free from the
hands of others and stand up on our own—exactly the ideals and values that Rizal strove to
fight for. It was written for the Filipino people, specifically the Filipino youth, who may have
lost their sense of nationalism. The writers endeavored to rekindle a lost spark in each
Filipino’s belief in their country. A republic act as drastic as the Rizal Law, which requires the
study of Rizal’s life and works—something that does not need to be required in the first
place—can only be born out of the fact that Rizal and his works were not given a high priority
in the educational system of the country prior to the release of this act. It is clear that the
government had to make drastic changes to resolve the issue. This is evident in section 3 of
the act, legalizing all forms of translations for Rizal’s works, as well as section 2, obligating all
schools, colleges and universities to keep an adequate number of copies of Rizal’s works.
This makes them more accessible to a greater audience.

It is hard to make out any form of emotion from any legal document; however, the choice of
words is still able to convey a fiery passion. To highlight this, they also use words or concepts
that can easily relate to the common Filipino man. Such passion is vital, as the audience is
presumably of dwindling nationalism. In this regard, the writer attempts to show the audience
the identity they have slowly been losing, and show them how they can undo this.

There are important points that the author cited in this republic act that is worth noticing. First,
“Whereas, today, more than 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.” This document
was written in the year 1956 during Magsasyay’s regime when the country was still recovering
from the Japanese occupation and still very dependent on US governance. Ideals of freedom
and nationalism were very essential during those times since the Philippines was still
struggling for independence, and the country was still gradually developing its national identity
and integrity. During those times havoc also existed within the Filipinos since there were
numerous uprisings against the Philippine government. Moreover, even though this document
was written decades ago, it is still striking because this clause is very timely for this present
generation when our culture is being overpowered by foreign influence and Filipino diaspora
is widespread.

Another important point from RA 1425 is “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.”
It is very important to use our educational institutions to instill these values to the children who
are at their prime years of growing and learning. During one’s educational years especially
the college level is when individuals formulate their priorities and career tracks in life, and it is
essential that institutions make students realize that the country should be a part of their
priorities and serving one’s country is an innate and inborn duty for all. Also, embedding a
profound and authentic moral character and a strong sense of personal discipline in the youth
would yield proficient, genuine, and selfless Filipinos of the future who would turn the
Philippines from an impoverished country to a globally competitive nation.

Lastly, “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 Philippine 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 the Barrio Councils throughout the country.” To provide a specific way to
carry out this act is very helpful. It makes the goal very SMART – specific, measurable,
attainable, realistic and time-bound. It is also important that the effects of this act would be
experienced by all students even those who are financially troubled. It is commendable that
in the context of this act, the poor is well represented and that it is attainable regardless of
ethnicity, social stature, and language barriers.

This document was obviously written during a time when patriotism and nationalism was lost
and needed, and a time when people were inspired by the initiative of the authors of this act.
It was during this time when the Philippines and its’ citizens relied on the United States for
guidance, support and welfare. It was written in order to seek aide from the same brilliant mind
that drove the Filipinos of the past to fight for freedom from colonists entails another need for
another meaningful revolution in spite of the absence of invaders; the country may have
needed a slow-paced revolution driven by patriotism against dormancy, apathy and futility.

Republic Act No. 1425, known as the Rizal Law, mandates all educational institutions in
the Philippines to offer courses about José Rizal. The full name of the law is 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. The
measure was strongly opposed by the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines due to the
anti-clerical themes in Noli Me Tángere and El Filibusterismo.

Senator Claro M. Recto was the main proponent of the Rizal Bill. He sought to sponsor the
bill at Congress. However, this was met with stiff opposition from the Catholic Church. During
the 1955 Senate election, the church charged Recto with being a communist and an anti-
Catholic. After Recto's election, the Church continued to oppose the bill mandating the reading
of Rizal's novels Noli Me Tángere and El Filibusterismo, claiming it would violate freedom of
conscience and religion.
In the campaign to oppose the Rizal bill, the Catholic Church urged its adherents to write to
their congressmen and senators showing their opposition to the bill; later, it organized
symposiums. In one of these symposiums, Fr. Jesus Cavanna argued that the novels
belonged to the past and that teaching them would misrepresent current conditions. Radio
commentator Jesus Paredes also said that Catholics had the right to refuse to read them as
it would "endanger their salvation".
Groups such as Catholic Action of the Philippines, the Congregation of the Mission,
the Knights of Columbus, and the Catholic Teachers Guild organized opposition to the bill;
they were countered by Veteranos de la Revolucion (Spirit of 1896), Alagad in Rizal, the
Freemasons, and the Knights of Rizal. The Senate Committee on Education sponsored a bill
co-written by both José P. Laurel and Recto, with the only opposition coming from Francisco
Soc Rodrigo, Mariano Jesús Cuenco, and Decoroso Rosales.
The Archbishop of Manila, Rufino Santos, protested in a pastoral letter that Catholic students
would be affected if compulsory reading of the unexpurgated version were pushed
through. Arsenio Lacson, Manila's mayor, who supported the bill, walked out of Mass when
the priest read a circular from the archbishop denouncing the bill.
Rizal, according to Cuenco, "attack[ed] dogmas, beliefs and practices of the Church. The
assertion that Rizal limited himself to castigating undeserving priests and refrained from
criticizing, ridiculing or putting in doubt dogmas of the Catholic Church, is absolutely gratuitous
and misleading." Cuenco touched on Rizal's denial of the existence of purgatory, as it was
not found in the Bible, and that Moses and Jesus Christ did not mention its existence; Cuenco
concluded that a "majority of the Members of this Chamber, if not all [including] our good
friend, the gentleman from Sulu" believed in purgatory. The senator from Sulu, Domocao
Alonto, attacked Filipinos who proclaimed Rizal as "their national hero but seemed to despise
what he had written", saying that the Indonesians used Rizal's books as their Bible on their
independence movement; Pedro López, who hails from Cebu, Cuenco's province, in his
support for the bill, reasoned out that it was in their province the independence movement
started, when Lapu-Lapu fought Ferdinand Magellan.
Outside the Senate, the Catholic schools threatened to close down if the bill was passed;
Recto countered that if that happened, the schools would be nationalized. Recto did not
believe the threat, stating that the schools were too profitable to be closed. The schools gave
up the threat, but threatened to "punish" legislators in favor of the law in future elections. A
compromise was suggested, to use the expurgated version; Recto, who had supported the
required reading of the unexpurgated version, declared: "The people who would eliminate the
books of Rizal from the schools would blot out from our minds the memory of the national
hero. This is not a fight against Recto but a fight against Rizal", adding that since Rizal is
dead, they are attempting to suppress his memory.
On May 12, 1956, a compromise inserted by Committee on Education chairman Laurel that
accommodated the objections of the Catholic Church was approved unanimously. The bill
specified that only college (university) students would have the option of reading
unexpurgated versions of clerically-contested reading material, such as Noli Me
Tángere and El Filibusterismo. The bill was enacted on June 12, 1956, Flag Day.

The Noli and Fili were required readings for college students.
Section 2 mandated that the students were to read the novels as they were written in Spanish,
although a provision ordered that the Board of National Education create rules on how these
should be applied. The last two sections were focused on making Rizal's works accessible to
the general public: the second section mandated the schools to have "an adequate number"
of copies in their libraries, while the third ordered the board to publish the works in
major Philippine languages.
After the bill was enacted into law, there were no recorded instances of students applying for
exemption from reading the novels, and there is no known procedure for such exemptions. In
1994, President Fidel V. Ramos ordered the Department of Education, Culture and Sports to
fully implement the law as there had been reports that it has still not been fully implemented.
The debate during the enactment of the Rizal Law has been compared to the Responsible
Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012 (RH Law) debate in
2011. Akbayan representative Kaka Bag-ao, one of the proponents of the RH bill, said,
quoting the Catholic hierarchy, that "More than 50 years ago, they said the Rizal Law violates
the Catholic's right to conscience and religion, interestingly, the same line of reasoning they
use to oppose the RH bill."