Revolutionary in more ways than one: The progressive principles of the Kartilya ng Katipunan

July 7, 2025 marks the 133rd anniversary of the Kataas-taasang, Kagalang-galangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan, more commonly known as the Katipunan or KKK. Alongside its founding came one of the most important ideological documents of the revolution—the Kartilya ng Katipunan. Written in 1892 by Emilio Jacinto, the Kartilya served as the official primer and moral compass of the Katipunan, outlining the core values, ethical conduct, and revolutionary principles expected of its members.

July 7, 2025 marks the 133rd anniversary of the Kataas-taasang, Kagalang-galangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan, more commonly known as the Katipunan or KKK. Alongside its founding came one of the most important ideological documents of the revolution—the Kartilya ng Katipunan. Written in 1892 by Emilio Jacinto, the Kartilya served as the official primer and moral compass of the Katipunan, outlining the core values, ethical conduct, and revolutionary principles expected of its members.

More than just a set of rules for the Katipuneros, the Kartilya embodied the progressive ideals the revolutionaries carried ahead of its time,  particularly on social, racial, and gender equality. These principles, far ahead of their time, would only be formally recognized in Philippine law nearly a century later. 

Equality regardless of color and social status

The fourth rule of the Kartilya provides: Maitim man at maputi ang kulay ng balat, lahat ng tao’y magkakapantay; mangyayaring ang isa’y higtan sa dunong, sa yaman, sa ganda…; ngunit di mahihigtan sa pagkatao. (Whether our skin be black or white, we are all born equal: superiority in knowledge, wealth and beauty are to be understood, but not superiority by nature.)

This affirmation of racial equality in the KKK predated by over seven decades the formal dismantling of Jim Crow laws  and segregation policies in the United States. In fact, no less than the US Supreme Court in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) infamously upheld the “separate but equal” doctrine, consequently institutionalizing racial segregation. While other “more economically developed” countries were still enforcing discriminatory policies, the Katipunan had already embedded racial and social equality into its founding principles.

This is further reinforced by the Kartilya’s 13th rule, which also impliedly referred to indigenous communities: “Ang kamahalan ng tao’y wala sa pagkahari, wala sa tangus ng ilong at puti ng mukha, wala sa pagkaparing kahalili ng Dios wala sa mataas na kalagayan sa balat ng lupa; wagas at tunay na mahal na tao, kahit laking gubat at walang nababatid kundi ang sariling wika, yaong may magandang asal, may isang pangungusap, may dangal at puri; yaong di napaaapi’t di nakikiapi; yaong marunong magdamdam at marunong lumingap sa bayang tinubuan.” (Man is not worth more because he is a king, because his nose is aquiline, and his color white, not because he is a priest, a servant of God, nor because of the high prerogative that he enjoys upon earth, but he is worth most who is a man of proven and real value, who does good, keeps his words, is worthy and honest; he who does not oppress nor consent to being oppressed, he who loves and cherishes his fatherland, though he be born in the wilderness and know no tongue but his own.)

Unfortunately, American colonial policies deeply influenced the development of Philippine law during the Commonwealth period. In 1907, Act No. 1639 was enacted by the Second Philippine Commission (also known as the Taft Commission) under the authority of the American government. This law explicitly prohibited the sale of liquor to so-called “non-Christian tribes,” institutionalizing a discriminatory policy rooted in racial and cultural bias. The Supreme Court, still under American rule, upheld the constitutionality of this law in a 1939 decision, describing members of these indigenous communities as having a “low grade of civilization living in tribal relationships apart from settled communities.” Such language did not merely reflect prejudice—it codified it, reinforcing a legal framework that treated Indigenous peoples as second-class citizens and legitimized social hierarchies based on race and culture.

In today’s Philippine law, racial and social equality can be found in Article III, Section 1 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. It says: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.” Additionally, Article VI, Section 31 states: “No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted.”, affirming the Philippine stand against special classes plainly based on birth or social status. It was only in 1997 that the rights of Indigenous Peoples were formally recognized and protected through the passage of the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA).

Women as equal partners

In contrast to many national charters of the time that excluded women from the political and social narrative, the Kartilya recognized the equal dignity of women and recognized them as partners, stating: “Ang babae ay huwag mong tignang isang bagay na libangan lamang, kundi isang katuang at karamay sa mga kahirapan nitong kabuhayan.” (Do not regard a woman as merely an object of amusement, but as a partner and companion through the hardships of life.)

Today, this view is part of many Philippine laws. The 1987 Constitution, in Article II, Section 14, states that “The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men.” This constitutional provision marks a significant leap compared to earlier constitutions. The 1935 Constitution, for instance, did not contain a broad declaration on the role of women in nation-building or their fundamental equality. While it conditionally granted women the right to vote only through a plebiscite in 1937 (Article V, Section 1), this was a grant of suffrage rather than a comprehensive recognition of inherent equality. The 1973 Constitution made progress by explicitly mentioning “equality in employment regardless of sex” (Article II, Section 9), but it still lacked the expansive declaration found in the 1987 Constitution.

More recent laws also embodied the protection for women Emilio Jacinto envisioned for the country a hundred years ago. For example, the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act (Republic Act No. 9262), enacted in 2004 (112 years after the Kartilya), provides strong legal protection against abuse, while the Safe Spaces Act (Republic Act No. 11313), passed in 2019 (127 years after the Kartilya), directly addresses gender-based sexual harassment in public and online spaces. These laws are clear reflections of the Kartilya‘s call to respect women and protect them from harm.

However, despite these advancements, some laws still show a gap in achieving full gender equality. For instance, the provisions on concubinage and adultery in the Revised Penal Code, which dates back to 1930, still apply different standards for men and women regarding marital infidelity.

Conclusion

The Kartilya ng Katipunan is more than just an old document; it showed us how Filipino revolutionaries envisioned our country outside colonial rule — one without imperialist standards of racism/colorism and sexism. In declaring the fundamental equality of all people, regardless of skin color, social status, education, or gender, and recognizing the dignity and role of women as co-equals in nation-building, the Kartilya defied the dominant ideologies of its time.

More than a historical reflection on the legacy of the Katipuneros, the Kartilya ng Katipunan should serve as a moral compass for today’s government in shaping just and inclusive policies. It stands as a powerful reminder that the struggle for human rights in the Philippines was not a foreign import, but rather deeply rooted in our own revolutionary history, advocated by our own Filipino heroes who believed in equality, dignity, and justice long before these ideals were codified in law. (RVO)

The post Revolutionary in more ways than one: The progressive principles of the Kartilya ng Katipunan appeared first on Bulatlat.