Scribd
Upload
131 views16 pages

The Trials of The Rizal Bill

The document summarizes the trials of passing the Rizal Bill into law in 1956. [1] The bill aimed to make Jose Rizal's novels Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo compulsory reading in schools but faced opposition. [2] Proponents argued it would disseminate Rizal's ideals of nationalism, while opponents said it threatened religious freedom as Rizal criticized the Catholic church. [3] After debates, the bill was amended to include all of Rizal's works and exemptions for religious objections, and was passed as Republic Act 1425.

Uploaded by

CIELO OTADOY
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
131 views16 pages

The Trials of The Rizal Bill

The document summarizes the trials of passing the Rizal Bill into law in 1956. [1] The bill aimed to make Jose Rizal's novels Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo compulsory reading in schools but faced opposition. [2] Proponents argued it would disseminate Rizal's ideals of nationalism, while opponents said it threatened religious freedom as Rizal criticized the Catholic church. [3] After debates, the bill was amended to include all of Rizal's works and exemptions for religious objections, and was passed as Republic Act 1425.

Uploaded by

CIELO OTADOY
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 16

THE

TRIALS OF
THE
RIZAL
BILL
 Do we really still know
Rizal?
 Are the teachings of Rizal
still relevant today?
 Do we still remember
why he was a hero?
 Why should we not forget
him?
APRIL 3, 1956 – Committee on Education
filed Senate Bill No. 433

April 17, 1956 – tension started when Sen.


Jose P. Laurel sponsored the Bill.

The original version of the Bill was to make


NOLI and EL FILI a Compulsory Reading
Matter in all Public and Private Colleges
and Universities
The Bill entails that any Schools that does
not comply with the provisions shall be
dismissed immediately from the service
Objectives:

Disseminate the ideas and ideals of


Jose Rizal through the reading of his
works
Noli and El Fili will reminds us of our
defects, strength, virtues and vices.
Be conscious with the painful
sacrifices which lead to self-reliance,
self-respect and freedom.
Foster the better appreciation of
Rizal’s times and of the role he
played in combatting Spanish
Debates:

Debates began in Senate on April 23,


1956, Senator Laurel who sponsored
the bill was supported by a brilliant
and nationalist Sen. Claro M. Recto
who authored the bill.
Opposition Sen. Mariano Cuenco,
Sen. Francisco Rodrigo and Sen.
Decoroso Rosales are all identified as
Catholics. Supported by the Catholic
elements in and outside Congress.
Arguments:
Proponent Sen. Recto:
Rizal did not pretend to teach
religion and theology rather he just
wrote and describe the real
situations of the country. He was just
inculcating civic consciousness in the
Filipinos, national dignity, personal
pride and patriotism. (Politics, Social,
Equality and Religion)
Rizal ridiculed and criticized the
unworthy behavior of the minister
but praises and favor the worthy
Opposition:

 The Rizal Bill is an attempt to


discredit the catholic religion. It is
violative of religions freedom.
 Synonymous to compelling a
religion to salute the flag which is
against in their faith.
 Majority of the filipinos are catholic
and Filipino citizens, therefore, must
not create conflicts between religion
and nationalism
Warnings:
Catholic priest warned the politicians who
will support the Bill that they are not going
to support them in their political career.
The Catholic schools threatened to close
down if the Bill was passed
Recto did not believe these threat stating
that schools were too profitable to be
closed and insisted that the threat is not a
fight against him but a fight against Rizal
by attempting to suppress his memory and
his teachings.
IDENTICAL BILL in the HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVE
 On April 19, 1956 – Cong. Jacobo Z.
Gonzales introduce an identical copy
of the Bill 438, the House Bill 5561.

 Debates started on May 9, 1956. the


discussions were livelier and more
impassioned that there was even an
abortive fist fight on the floor
IDENTICAL BILL in the HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVE
 On April 19, 1956 – Cong. Jacobo Z.
Gonzales introduce an identical copy
of the Bill 438, the House Bill 5561.

 Debates started on May 9, 1956. the


discussions were livelier and more
impassioned that there was even an
abortive fist fight on the floor between
Cong. Emilio Cortez and Cong. Ramon
Durano.
FINAL RESOLUTION
 On May 9, 1956 Sen. Laurel propose
an amendment by substitution. An act
to include Life, Works and writings of
Rizal in the curricula in all public and
private schools, colleges and
universities.
 The substitute bill included not just
the Noli and El Fili but all the works
and writings of Rizal.
 Sen. Laurel eliminated the word
“compulsory”
 Senator Lim proposed the exemptions
of students from the requirements of
the bill for reasons of religious belief.

 May 12, 1956, the substitute bill was


approved on second reading in the
Senate

 On May 14, Cong. Tolentino


sponsored an amendment by
substitution identical to Sen. Laurel’s
bill was also approved on second
reading at the lower house
 On May 17, 1956, the Senate Bill 438
and House Bill No. 5561 was
approved on the third reading.

 On June 12, 1956, the Bill was signed


into law by Pres. Ramon Magsaysay
and became Republic Act No. 1425.
Ayon kay Dean Gloria Santos ng
Philippine Historial Association,
bahagi sa krimen ng pagkabigo ng
Batas Rizal na maipunla ang
nasyunalismo ang mga guro ng
kasaysayan dahil hindil naituro ng
maayos ang kurso.

Aaanhin ang kaalaman sa detalyeng


buhay ni Rizal kung patuloy ang
korapsyon, walang pagpapahalaga
sa bansa at mananatiling nakagapos
sa mga dayuhan? Hindi sya nagbuhis
THANK YOU! 
THOUGHT PAPER

COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE


VIEWS OF THOSE IN FAVOR AND
AGAINST RA 1425. WOULD
SIMILAR ARGUMENTS STILL
RELEVANT TO THIS DAY AND AGE?

You might also like