Republic Act No.

1425
June 12, 1956
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 1425

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 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 writing 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,

SECTION 1. Courses on the life, works and writings of Jose Rizal, particularly his novel 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. The Board shall promulgate rules and regulations providing for the exemption of students for
reasons of religious belief stated in a sworn written statement, from the requirement of the provision contained in the second part
of the first paragraph of this section; but not from taking the course provided for in the first part of said paragraph. 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 in their libraries an adequate number of copies of
the original and unexpurgated editions of the 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 translations 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 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 Barrio
Councils throughout the country.

SECTION 4. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as amendment or repealing section nine hundred twenty-seven of the
Administrative Code, prohibiting the discussion of religious doctrines by public school teachers and other person engaged in any
public school.

SECTION 5. The sum of three hundred thousand pesos is hereby authorized to be appropriated out of any fund not otherwise
appropriated in the National Treasury to carry out the purposes of this Act.

SECTION 6. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

Life Works of Rizal | Notes from Asst. Prof. Melanie D. Turingan, PhD
Grace R. Hernandez | 2A-PH
Approved: June 12, 1956
Published in the Official Gazette, Vol. 52, No. 6, p. 2971 in June 1956.
THE TRIALS OF THE RIZAL BILL
Jose B. Laurel, Jr.

Few legislative measures have elicited as much interest or provoked as much discussion as Republic Act No. 1425 known as
the Rizal Law. The heated disputes that raged around this legislation, the bitterness and recrimination that attended its enactment,
are almost unparalleled in the annals of Congress.

When it was filled by the Committee on Education on April 3, 1956, Senate Bill No. 438 was supported by all but 3 of all the
members of the Upper House and seemed, to all appearances, a non-controversial measure. But when on April 17, 1956, Senator
Jose P. Laurel, as Chairman of the Committee on Education, began his sponsorship of the measure the rumbles of the fathering
storm sounded an ominous warning. This was to mark the start of the long-drawn disputations, both enlightened and acrimonious,
that would engross and divide the nation for three tense weeks.

The original version of Senate Bill No. 438 reads as follows:

AN ACT TO MAKE NOLI ME TANGERE AND EL FILIBUSTERISMO COMPULSORY READING MATTER IN ALL PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Jose Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo are hereby declared compulsory reading matter in all public
and private schools, colleges and universities in the Philippines.

SECTION 2. The works mentioned in Section 1 of this Act shall be in the original editions or in their unexpurgated English
and Natural Language versions.

SECTION 3. The Department of Education shall take steps to promulgate rules and regulations for the immediate
implementation of the provisions of this Act.

SECTION 4. No provisions of this Act shall be constructed as prohibiting or limiting the study of the works of other Filipino
heroes.

SECTION 5. Any public or private college or university found violating, failing to comply with, or circumventing the
provisions of this Act shall be punished accordingly:

a. The head of any public college or university charged with implementing the provisions of this Act, who shall have been
found guilty of violating, failing to comply with, or circumventing the provisions thereof, shall be dismissed immediately
from the service and shall be disqualified from teaching in any public or government recognized private school, college
or university.

b. Government recognition of any private college or university found

Life Works of Rizal | Notes from Asst. Prof. Melanie D. Turingan, PhD
Grace R. Hernandez | 2A-PH
THE RIZAL LAW AND THE CATHOLIC HIERARCHY

Recto’s next big fight was over the Rizal bill. Though this did not directly affect our colonial relations with America, his
championship of this measure was an integral part of his nationalism. It was his belief that the reading of Rizal’s novels would
strengthen the Filipinism of the youth and foster patriotism.

Recto was the original author of the bill which would make Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo compulsory
reading in all universities and colleges. Reported out by the committee on education, it was sponsored by Senator Laurel, committee
chairman. The measure immediately ran into determined opposition from the Catholic hierarchy spearheaded in the Senate by
Senators Decoroso Rosales, brother of Archbishop, now Cardinal Rosales; Mariano J. Cuenco, brother of Archbishop Cuenco; and
Francisco Rodrigo, former president of Catholic Action. Their argument was that the bill would violate freedom of conscience and
religion. The Catholic hierarchy even issued a pastoral letter dealing its objections to the bill and enjoining Catholics to oppose it.
Despite the fact that public hearings had already been conducted. Rodrigo proposed that the education committee hold a closed-
door conference with the Catholic hierarchy to search for a solution to the dispute.

Laurel and the other supports of the bill rejected the proposal inasmuch as the public hearing had already afforded the
church the opportunity to be heard fully. Recto said that Father Jesus Cavanna of the Paulist Fathers, who had written the pastoral
letter, had himself testified against the bill during the public hearing. A closed-door conference was obviously one of the means by
which the hierarchy hoped to exert pressure against the bill. Lobbies from various Catholic organizations as well as the clerics
themselves were very active in the Senate throughout the discussion of that Rizal bill. These clerics, many of them foreigners, were
seeking conferences with senators to convince them to oppose the Rizal bill.

A more organized campaign against the bill was launched under the auspices of the Catholic Action of Manila. Its first
activity was a symposium and open forum in which two announcements were made: first, that the Sentinel, official organ of
Philippine Catholic Action, would henceforth be published daily instead of weekly, and second, that Filipino Catholics would be urged
to write their congressmen and senators asking them to “kill” the Rizal bill. Speakers at the symposium offered a variety of
objections to the measure. Fr. Jesus Cavanna, introduced as an authority on Rizal, said that the novels “belong to the past” and it
would be “harmful” to read them because they presented a “false picture” of conditions in the country at that time. He described
the Noli Me Tangere as “an attack on the clergy” and said its object was to “put to ridicule the Catholic Faith.” He alleged that the
novel was not really patriotic because out of 333 pages only 25 contained patriotic passages while 120 were devoted to anti-Catholic
attacks. Jesus Paredes, a radio commentator, declared that since some parts of the novels had been declared “objectional matter”
by the hierarchy, Catholics have the right to refuse to read them so as not to “endanger their salvation.” Narciso Pimentel, Jr.,
another radio commentator, offered the interesting speculation that the bill was Recto’s revenge against the Catholic voters who,
together with Magsaysay, were responsible for his poor showing in the 1955 senatorial elections.

Against this background of bitter opposition, one can more fully appreciate the integrity and courage of Recto in
championing the bill. He stubbornly persisted in his defense, unmindful of the fact that he was antagonizing a vital electoral
element.

In a three-hour speech on the Senate floor, he attacked the hierarchy of the Catholic church for its pastoral letter. He
declared that the pastoral letter had been “more severe” in its condemnation of the novels than a committee of Spanish Dominican
priests whose findings had resulted in Rizal’s execution. In support of his contention, he brought up the fact that the pastoral letter
had cited 170 passages from the Noli and 50 from the Fili which it regarded as attacks on the doctrines and dogmas of the Catholic
church. He said he could understand the foreign clergy taking such a position but he found it difficult to understand how Filipino
bishops “who will not be bishops now were it not for Rizal” could adapt such a stand when Rizal exalted the Filipino clergy in his
novels.

Rodrigo interpellated the speaker and in the process found himself the butt of Recto’s allies, to the delight of the gallery.
Rodrigo said he had read the books at twenty after securing special dispensation from church authorities, having taken advanced
scholastic philosophy and religion, he declared his faith was then firm enough. “But I cannot allow my son who is now 16 to read the
Noli Me Tangere and the El Filibusterismo lest he lost his faith.” Rodrigo said. He proposed instead compulsory reading of footnoted
editions of the novels.

Commenting on the opening paragraph of the pastoral letter which praised Rizal as our greatest hero, Recto charged that
these laudatory phrases were being used “to hide the real intentions of the pastoral which us to separate the people from Rizal.”
When Rodrigo agreed to his appeal to the people to scrutinize the pastoral letter. Rodrigo said this would arouse the people to

Life Works of Rizal | Notes from Asst. Prof. Melanie D. Turingan, PhD
Grace R. Hernandez | 2A-PH
appose the measure. Recto retorted that on the contrary the reading of the hierarchy’s letter “should open the eyes of the people to
the real enemies of Rizal and true nationalism.”

While others were beginning to yield to pressure, no threats could frighten Recto. In reply to a threat that Catholic schools
would close should the Rizal bill pass, Recto went on record in favor of the nationalism of all schools. He contended that
nationalization might be just the step needed to foster a more vibrant nationalism among Filipinos. He did not really believe the
threat. “They are making too much profit which they call ill-afford to give up,” he said.

Tempers flared during the continuous debates and opponents attacked each other with greater virulence. Recto was in the
thick of the fight, his tirades against the church growing ever more bitter. On May 3, in a privilege speech, he recalled that during the
days of Rizal, religious orders dominated the government. “Is this a new attempt to deliver that State to the Church?” he asked.
Reacting to a Philippine News service report that Bishop Manuel Yap had warned that legislators who voted for the Rizal bill would
be “punished” in the next election, Recto tool the floor for the seventh time to warn against church interference in state affairs. He
branded Yap as “the modern-day Torquemada.”

Finally, on May 12, the month-old controversy ended with unanimous approval of a substitute measure authored by
Senator Laurel and based on the proposals of Senators Roseller T. Lim and Emmanuel Felaez. The bill passed was clearly an
accommodation to the objections of the Catholic hierarchy and Laurel said as much. Though it still provided that the basic texts in
the collegiate courses should be the unexpurgated editions of the two novels, it was now possible for students to be exempted from
using the unexpurgated editions on grounds of religious belief. Opponents of the original Recto version jubilantly claimed a
“complete victory.” Proponents felt they had at least gained something.

Life Works of Rizal | Notes from Asst. Prof. Melanie D. Turingan, PhD
Grace R. Hernandez | 2A-PH
Life Works of Rizal | Notes from Asst. Prof. Melanie D. Turingan, PhD
Grace R. Hernandez | 2A-PH