ON May 12, 1962, President Diosdado Macapagal, through Proclamation 28, declared June 12 as Philippine independence day.

A year later, on Aug. 4, 1964, the Philippine Congress enacted Republic Act 4166, “An Act changing the date of Philippine Independence Day from July 4 to June 12, and declaring July 4 as Philippine Republic Day.”

In explaining his proclamation, President Macapagal declared: “Whereas, the establishment of the Philippine Republic by the revolutionary government under Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo on June 12, 1898, marked our people’s declaration and exercise of their right to self-determination, liberty and independence;

“Whereas, such a historic and inspiring action was a legitimate assertion by the Filipino nation of their natural and inalienable claim to freedom and independence, which is an inherent right of every people not dependent upon the will and discretion of another; and

“Whereas, the transcendental importance of the event demands that it be observed throughout the land with fitting ceremonies to the end that it will be cherished forever in the hearts of the Filipino people and inspire them and posterity to greater dedication and endeavor for the welfare of the country and the well-being of mankind.

“Now, therefore, I, Diosdado Macapagal, President of the Philippines, by virtue of the authority vested in me by Section 30 of the Revised Administrative Code, do hereby declare Tuesday, June 12, 1962, as a special public holiday throughout the Philippines in commemoration of our people’s declaration of their inherent and inalienable right to freedom and independence.”

Until that fateful day in 1962, since July 4, 1946, our people and our country had been celebrating Philippine independence day on the fourth of July every year, on the same day that the American people marked their own independence. Which was all to the good, some among us must have thought.

No outcry of historical revisionism

It is instructive and striking that when the government, on President Macapagal’s lead, officially declared the shift of Philippine independence day from July 4, 1946 to June 12, 1898, there was no outcry of historical revisionism from any of our people to protest the change. There was no lament about missing the chance to sing the US anthem.

There was universal assent, nationally and internationally, to the change of dates on the grounds of historical truth, national pride and honor.

Unlike the persistent controversy today over the events of February 1986 and EDSA People Power, and the abiding contention over the presidency of Ferdinand Marcos and martial law, our people have unanimously bowed to the necessity and wisdom of transferring the observance of Philippine independence day from July 4, to June 12.

This was principally because in 1962, our national leadership and official historical agencies did their sworn duty of ensuring the integrity of and preserving the nation’s history and heritage.

Role of National Historical Commission

We do not get the service now, but there was a time when the National Historical Commission (NHC) provided the nation with reliable instruction and guidance on the dates and events that inform our history and heritage.

Before the National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP) lazily transferred its attention to dubious claims and trivialities, the commission did its work quietly and competently.

It is the NHCP that is chiefly accountable for the egregious lapses, mistakes and oversights in the national observance and remembrance of events. Among the glaring lapses are:

– The bizarre and official initiative to enforce a Filipino-centric commemoration of the quincentennial of Ferdinand Magellan’s circumnavigation of the globe, and discovery of the Philippine archipelago on March 16, 2021. This, as much as the pandemic, turned the quincentennial into a nothingburger, denying the Department of Tourism a bonanza.

– The elevation of Mactan chieftain Lapulapu to our Rushmore of Filipino heroes, and his overnight representation as a Tausug warrior.

– The effort to validate President Rodrigo Duterte’s claims of a Filipino Muslim lineage, and to diminish the significance of the Christianization of the archipelago.

– The substitution of the Battle of Mactan as the centerpiece of the centennial commemoration.

– The official validation by NHCP of the fictitious Jabidah massacre of Muslim youth trainees, and the establishment of a Jabidah marker on Corregidor Island, per the request of President Benigno Aquino 3rd.

– The documentation of what national hero Jose Rizal ate for breakfast and other meals, and other such trivia.

Presidential tinkering

The history of the NHCP itself requires a historian. There has been much presidential meddling in its work. It has been organized and reorganized many times, apart from the normal appointment of commission members and chairmen.

The NHCP’s mission is “the promotion of Philippine history and cultural heritage through research, dissemination, conservation, sites management and heraldry works.” As such, it aims to inculcate awareness and appreciation of the noble deeds and ideals of our heroes and other illustrious Filipinos, to instill pride in the Filipino people and to rekindle the Filipino spirit through the lessons of history.

The present-day NHCP was established in 1972, initially as the National Historical Institute, as part of the reorganization of the government after President Marcos’ declaration of martial law. The roots of the institute can be traced back to 1933, when the American colonial Insular Government first established the Philippine Historical Research and Markers Committee.

With the establishment of the Philippine Commonwealth in 1935, the PHRMC was replaced by the Philippines Historical Committee (PHC), which took over the functions of its predecessor.

Reconstituted six months after Philippine independence in 1946, the committee was first placed under the Office of the President, and then transferred to the Department of Education. During this time, it installed over 400 historical markers all over the archipelago; named and renamed various streets, plazas, towns and other public places; and acquired places and relics of heroes.

In 1972, President Marcos’ declaration of martial law resulted in a reorganization of government and the renaming of the NHC as the National Historical Institute.

On May 12, 2010, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed Republic Act 10086, or the law reverting the National Historical Institute (NHI) into its original form as the NHCP.

This is the commission we have today.

June 12, 1898 documents

As the NHI, the commission left us a most precious legacy — a pamphlet entitled “June 12, 1898, and other related documents.”

The pamphlet gathers in one publication the major documents and records surrounding the proclamation of Philippine independence on June 12 1898, the restoration of Philippine independence by the United States on July 4, 1946, and the unassailable argument for the replacement of July 4,1946, by June 12, 1898, as the date of the proclamation of Philippine independence.

Act of rectification

It was Esteban de Ocampo, the president of the Philippine Historical Association who described the transfer from July 4 to June 12 as an act of rectification.

He wrote: “There is an urgent and imperative need of rectifying the present practice of the Filipinos of observing and celebrating their independence day on July 4 of every year, which is not the correct historical date of their declaration of independence. But that is merely the date of recognition by the United States of America.”

I will discuss in my next column the important difference between revisionism and rectification, and why it should matter in our public life.