|
By Augusto V. de Viana
, National Historical Institute
(President Arroyo’s decision to
make June 9, not June 12, an official nonworking public holiday, has
drawn mostly adverse comments. The presidential palace explained
that the transfer, allowed by law, creates a three-day weekend for
Filipinos and boosts the tourism business. While students will go to
school and public and private workers report for work on June 12,
the traditional Independence Day programs shall be observed as
usual, with a “change”—bureaucrats will visit the provinces to
launch new programs or demonstrate current ones. Dr. Augusto de
Viana, senior NHI researcher, explains the institute’s objection
to movable holidays.)
IN his article, “President
trivialized Independence Day,” (The Times, June 11). Sen. Aquilino
Pimentel criticized President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for
transferring the observance of Independence Day to June 9, instead
of June 12, the actual day of the proclamation of independence at
Kawit, Cavite, in 1898. He acknowledged that a law allows the
President to move certain holidays to other dates.
Under the law, holidays like Araw
ng Kagitingan should be observed on the Monday nearest April 9, the
actual historic date for the fall of Bataan to the Japanese army,
now celebrated as the Day of Valor. Labor Day should be celebrated
on the Monday nearest May 1; Independence Day; Monday nearest June
12; National Heroes Day, last Monday of August instead of the last
Sunday of August; Bonifacio Day, Monday nearest Nov. 30 and Rizal
Day, Monday nearest Dec. 30.
The National Historical Institute
has objected twice to moving the observance of holidays, especially
nonworking ones and attaching them to the nearest weekend. The first
objection was manifested when the law was still a bill in the House
of Representatives; the second when the bill was about to be signed
into law.
The Institute’s objection is
rooted on historical grounds. Holidays like Independence Day should
be observed and celebrated on the day when the country’s freedom
was actually proclaimed. Aside from being historically correct, a
proper observance would honor the labors of the heroes who died for
our freedom. Celebrating it on the actual historic date gives it a
deep sense of meaning.
The joke circulating among
Filipinos today is when a child is asked about the date of
Philippine independence, the answer is: “It depends, on the
nearest weekend.” It is like asking, “How many islands does the
Philippines have? “It also depends, whether it is low tide or high
tide.” Conventional wisdom says the country’s important dates
are now “adjustable.”
The bill transferring the
observance of national holidays, “An Act Rationalizing the
Celebration of National Holidays, Amending for the Purpose of
Section 26, Chapter 7, Book 1 of Executive Order No. 292 as Amended,
Otherwise Known as the Administrative Code of 1987,” was signed on
July 25, 2007, as Republic Act 9492.
When the bill was being discussed
in the House, one reason for moving the observance of holidays was
that people would have more time to relax, go to the country’s
tourist spots or engage in some economic activity to earn extra
income. This was called “holiday economics.” According to some
observations, the country’s resorts report an increase in
patronage during long weekends. It was also reported that employees
suffered inconveniences when a nonworking holiday is sandwiched
between two working days. This happens especially if the holiday
falls on a Tuesday or a Thursday.
The NHI’s position was to
commemorate the holidays on the actual historic date. Other resource
persons in the consultation representing the labor sector also
explained that daily wage workers will not be paid if they did not
report for work. Employers too are affected as they would have to
pay the salaries of regular workers who do not report for work or
pay double the salary for the day if the employees report for duty.
When the bill became Senate Bill
2119 and was about to be signed into law, the Office of the
President again referred it to the NHI for comment. In his letter on
July 5, 2007, to Deputy Executive Secretary Manuel Gaite, NHI
Chairman Ambeth Ocampo wrote:
“While we appreciate efforts to
have longer weekends by moving the observation of holidays instead
of the actual days, please be informed that the Institute objects
[emphasis mine] to the proposal to move the observance of holidays
other than their actual dates. Moving the commemoration of holidays
is a distortion of history. The Institute maintains that the
observance of holidays should be done on the actual dates. The
Institute therefore recommends disapproval by Her Excellency, the
President, of Senate Bill 2119.”
The law allowing the transfer of
the observance of important national holidays should be repealed
because increased earnings from tourism or some other economic
activity do not justify the destruction of the Filipinos’ historic
and national consciousness so vital to the identity, pride and
history of the nation.
|
