READING PHILIPPINE HISTORY Date: October 24,2024

Name: King James V. Tubigon BSN – 1A

“The Struggle for Sovereignty: Key Laws and the Philippine Path to Independence”

The path to independence for the Philippines was essentially defined by landmark

legislative events under U.S. rule-the Philippine Organic Act of 1902, the Jones Law of 1916,

and the Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934. These laws were integral to laying the basis for political

development in the Philippines that would, in due time, propel it to complete independence in

1946. Of course, not without a lot of political travail. While the Philippines was doing well in

terms of governance, they had to struggle through many complex political, economic, and social

challenges. Using this essay, the ability of these three key laws to shape the political landscape of

the Philippines will be in focus, and examine some of the challenges that the Filipinos faced as

they transitioned from colonial rule to independence.

The first major legislation that set up a formal civil government in the Philippines was the

Philippine Organic Act of 1902, otherwise known as the Cooper Act. Through this act, the U.S.

government established a bicameral legislature formed of an appointed Philippine Commission

and elected Philippine Assembly to administer its government in the Philippines. This law also

ensured some civil rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, which had an early concrete

framework for Filipino involvement in the system of government (Golay, 1997).

The Organic Act has expanded political representation to Filipinos but substantially

retained the vast majority of power within the U.S. colonial system. The American governor-

general appointed by the United States had the power to veto any legislation of the Philippine

Assembly, and the United States held supreme power over the foreign relations and defense

apparatus of the country. For these reasons, emerging Filipino leaders, such as Manuel L.

Quezon and Sergio Osmeña, whose positions were nonetheless deeply subordinate, found

themselves an island in a sea of democratic principle under the Act.

The importance of the Organic Act lies in paving the way for the political participation of

Filipinos and the emergence of a national political consciousness. Creating the Philippine
Assembly could enable the politicians to voice their intention to have greater autonomy, it

nurtured the political movement that would later require full independence. At any rate, this

period is marked by much difficulty in the political situation. Nationalism was further inflamed

by the limited power of the Assembly and American exploitation of Filipino resources by

American corporations (Karnow, 1989). The concentration of capital and land ownership in the

hands of a few elites further deteriorated social divisions and ignited the urgency of fighting for

true political and economic autonomy.

This was the Jones Law of 1916, officially the Philippine Autonomy Act; a step from the

foundation laid down by the Organic Act of 1902 and promised eventual independence for the

Philippines. For the first time, the U.S. government officially declared that it would grant the

Philippines independence when a "stable government" could be established. This legislation also

replaced the appointed Philippine Commission with a fully elected bicameral legislature

consisting of a Senate and a House of Representatives, hence giving Filipinos greater control

over their domestic affairs (Constantino, 1975).

The Jones Law was a biddable nodal point in Philippine political life. It was an absolute

and objective lead toward granting them independence, but it was conditional. Besides, this

opened Filipino leaders to significant governance and legislation experience, better preparing

them for the job of self-rule. Quezon, Osmeña, and other key political leaders would utilize this

opening to advance more profound demands for autonomy and to reinforce the political power of

the Filipino elector.

But despite all this, the Jones Law was still very problematic. The promise of

independence was vague in that the definition of a "stable government" was left open to

interpretation by the U.S. Moreover, those areas that held the most authority, including foreign

policy and military affairs and commerce and navigation, would continue to be conducted by the

United States and thus the extent of the sovereignty gained by the Philippines remained very

limited. In the economic phase, the Philippines remained heavily dependent on the American

market that complicated efforts towards complete autonomy (Golay, 1997).

Social tensions also continued to reverberate in this period. Widespread landlessness

among peasants and unequal wealth distribution created peasant movements, among which the

Sakdalista movement demanding immediate independence and substantial social changes. Most
of the country's population was excluded from most of the fruits of political development by the

rural poor. And, amidst this growing discontent, the poor began to challenge the dominance of

the elite-controlled political system. The complexity of social dynamics, which played a very

crucial role in piling on challenges as the transition towards independence went about, became

apparent (Constantino, 1975).

The Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934, otherwise called the Philippine Independence Act,

was the last legislative step to full independence. This created the Commonwealth of the

Philippines, an interim government intended to lead eventually toward a fully independent

country ten years down the road. Under the Commonwealth, Filipinos were to assume full

control over their internal affairs while the U.S. was to maintain control over foreign affairs and

defense until the official date of independence set for July 4, 1946 (Karnow, 1989).

Tydings-McDuffie Act, for instance, was the end product of decades of struggles of

Filipinos towards self-governance. The act meant to Filipino leaders like Quezon, who became

the first president of the Commonwealth, the realization of long-cherished nationalist aspirations.

This means that the Commonwealth government pursued the development of the country's

political institutions, especially those pertaining to and involved in infrastructure, among others

and together: land reform, education, among many more pressing issues. But the independence

was by no means a smooth transition. The start of World War II and the Japanese occupation of

the Philippines from 1941 to 1945 interrupted the work of the Commonwealth government and

delayed the actualization of independence. War brought much destruction to the Philippines:

heavy infrastructure destruction, and it heaved the population under. Weakness of its political and

economic institutions immediately stood out, and post-war reconstruction was slow and painful

(Karnow, 1989).

Beyond the external problem of war, there remained internal problems in the

Commonwealth period. The agrarian crisis characterized by alarming poverty and landlessness

remained unaddressed. Although land reform was an important concern for the Commonwealth

government, attempts to redistribute land and resolve rural poverty fared badly. That failure left

many of the Filipinos, most especially in the countryside, disappointed with the promises of

independence. On the other hand, despite all the reforms implemented during this period,
corruption and political patronage still marred the government, hindering its ability to create a

stable and transparent political system in the country (Constantino, 1975).

The Philippine Organic Act of 1902, the Jones Law of 1916, and the Tydings-McDuffie

Act of 1934 would determine the route that the Philippines would take to independence. These

included institutions of democracy and limited participation by Filipinos in the government

under the Organic Act, while the Jones Law provided for eventual independence with increased

political representation. The Tydings-McDuffie Act set the final stride for independence, which

made the establishment of a definite schedule for independence possible, eventually leading to

the establishment of the Philippine Commonwealth and declaration of the independence of the

Philippines in 1946.

Such legislative reforms notwithstanding, many more hurdles needed to be crossed,

however before independence was achieved. It was bound to be so: political development would

always be accompanied by social and economic inequality, and the country's pursuit of

independence under nationalists was complicated both by internal struggles and external events

like World War II. In the end, though, the resilience of Filipino nationalists triumphed over the

bottlenecks and materialized a goal so long sought: independence. This legacy speaks to the

intricate complexities of colonialism and the Filipino spirit that has survived and transcended.

References:

Constantino, R. (1975). The Philippines: A past revisited. Tala Publishing Services.

Golay, F. H. (1997). Face of empire: United States-Philippine relations, 1898-1946. Ateneo de

Manila University Press.

Karnow, S. (1989). In our image: America's empire in the Philippines. Random House.