Local History: becoming articulate from below

           Inarticulate means unuttered of not articulate, and in the context of Constantino it means a lot about history of the Philippines dating back before the Spanish regime. In one of his works, he talked much about the local history here in the country which he emphasized as a very vital thing to study because as I see it, we can’t construct a history book with accurate information and can be understand by many if it does not contain something that came from local stories. I believe that this is a big deal in making our history more understandable and comprehensive in which it will give a more specific story which are important and that have been left out due to lack of research.

            Local history is an issue whether academicians/historians focus on it, in another field of history or focus on rewriting our past starting from below. I do agree with the historians who understand the importance of our local history and I say that these really pose a real challenge to our historians because our country lacks its background. We have much about our great heroes; why not make more about those locals who also make a resistance during the Spanish era. They have stories to tell too and that they may also have something to tell about the pre-Spanish era which is a very important piece of writing a comprehensive history of the land. But somehow this is not an easy task to do; we may not see the obstacles ahead of knowing this. If it’s about the evidence written by the Spanish, it will be easy to be debunked by the experts but if it’s about the story before their arrival, it will be so difficult, because somehow, stories which were not written down were sometimes the invention of the imaginative mind of the locals who sought in a supernatural being. It might lead only to exhaustion of the story. 

        There were sometimes stories made for literary purposes and yet somehow contains historical background but it takes time to find it out with thorough investigation and analysis. And another was that our country is compose of diverse cultures and languages which make it more difficult because one who studies the local history should also be fluent of the dialect of the locals because sometimes this languages pose something historical.

            To sum up the things regarding local history, there were instances that stories were merely invention of the mind who sought through the magical world but somehow they were helpful in constructing a good story of the past, they just need to examine it. Local history was an important aspect of learning the overall framework of our history for they support the events that took place before. Having an in-depth study of the localities will help us make a great researched statement of our past. We won’t only rely on the events written down by the chroniclers because the resources were available here, they are just waiting to be found and study.

Philippine Normal University: A Brief History

At the turn of the century, a new revolution took place in the country. Filipinos were no longer revolting against the Spaniards but with the new rising power, the United States. During the American occupation of the land, one of the things brought by the new regime was the American style of Education. This was the best tool to control the Filipinos spirit of fighting against the new colonizer. Schools were founded and one of these was the Philippine Normal School (PNS) created on January 21, 1901 by Americans through Act No. 74 of the Philippine Commission. It, however, formally opened on September 1, 1901, as an institution for the training of teachers. The school was used to train young Filipino educators. For more than two decades, PNS offered a two-year general secondary education program. It was only in 1928 when it became a junior college offering a two-year program to graduates of secondary schools and was converted into the Philippine Normal College (PNC) in 1949 through Republic Act 416 (the Charter of the College), the four-year Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education (BSEE) program was introduced. Then, other undergraduate programs ensued such as the Bachelor of Science in Education (BSE) with specialization in Elementary Education; a BSEE major in Home Economics; and a three-year Combined Home Economics diploma. In 1953, the Graduate School was established. Equipped with a legal mandate, PNC included the Master of Arts (MA) in Education curriculum in the academic program. However, the organization of a full-fledged Graduate School came five years later. It was only in 1970 when the Bachelor of Science in Education curriculum, offering major and minor subjects, was introduced. The passage of Republic Act 6515 which amended Republic Act 416 in July 1972 paved the way for the offering and conferment of the Doctor of Education (Ed. D) and the Doctor of Philosophy (Ph. D.) degrees and the provision of other academic programs relevant to the in-service training of teachers, school supervisors, administrators, researchers, and other educational specialists and personnel. Curriculum development, revision, adaptation played an important role in ensuring high scholastic standards for the institution. As it gained its foothold in teacher education, PNC established branches in Agusan del Sur, Isabela and Negros Occidental. Aside from the creation of campuses, the College expanded its services, most significant of which was its designation as the Curriculum Development Center for Communication Arts (English and Filipino) under the Language Study Center-Educational Development Projects Implementing Task Force (LSC-EDPITAF) Project and afterward as Center of Excellence (CENTREX) in English, Filipino and Values Education. Its major functions included the development of English and Filipino textbooks and teacher manuals for use in public elementary and secondary schools nationwide, and the conduct of national level trainers-training programs for the Bureau of Secondary Education Department of Education, Culture and Sports and the Fund for Assistance to Private Education. The school was elevated to university status on December 26, 1991, under Republic Act 7168. A fourth campus was born in Quezon Province. Since its foundation a century ago, PNU’s dynamism has been vigorously sustained. It continues to serve as collaborative partner in various government and private-sector educational projects. In further recognition of its leadership role, the University was designated as Center of Excellence in Teacher Education (COE) for the National Capital Region and Center of Excellence in Filipino at the national level.

Francisco Balagtas The First Nationalist Epic by Mona Lisa H. Quizon History Researcher II

     NOTE: no parts of the Article were omitted or erased. This is an article from the NHC (national historical commission)

     

      If France has the Song of Roland, England has Beowulf and Spain hasEl Cid; the Philippines has Florante at Laura.  This Filipino literary masterpiece was written by Francisco Baltazar. Known by his pen name Balagtas, Baltazar has been described as the “Prince of Tagalog Poets.” 

      Balagtas was born in the barrio of Panginay, Bigaa, Bulacan on April 2, 1788 to Juan Balagtas and Juana de la Cruz. He obtained his early education at the parochial school in Bigaa, where he learned the cartilla, prayers and catechism. Later, he enrolled at the Colegio de San Jose while working as a helper in Tondo, where he took up humanities, theology, philosophy and canon law. He continued his studies at the Colegio de San Juan de Letran where he became a popular poet. Balagtas used to write poems and love letters to his friends. He met Jose de la Cruz, popularly known as “Huseng Sisiw”, a prominent poet, who helped in editing his works. Balagtas had written various comedias that were staged in Tondo and in other parts of Luzon. Unfortunately, many of Balagtas’ manuscripts were burned when the ancestral house of the Tiambeng Family in Orion, Bataan was destroyed by fire in May 1892.   


    Passionate in his writings as well as expressive of his love for someone, Balagtas wrote love letters, romantic verses, and sweet sonnets. He fell in love many times with different women like Lucena and Bianang of Tondo District. But the one he loved most was Maria Asuncion Rivera. Historical tradition, though, has it that Mariano Capuli, his rich rival for Maria Asuncion’s love, had plotted to put him in prison. 


      While incarcerated, Balagtas lamented the cruelty of his destiny. He wept more upon hearing that Maria Asuncion married Capuli. With all the sorrow and misery of his life, Balagtas wrote Florante at Laura which he dedicated to “Celia” whose real identity was indicated by her initials, M.A.R. Released in 1838, Balagtas went to Bataan and married Juana Tiambeng of Orion. He served as the town’s head lieutenant, judge of seeded lands and then court translator. Unfortunately, Balagtas was sent again to prison for another crime – shaving the head of rich man’s helper. He stayed in prison for four years.  He spent the remaining years of his life writing poetry and translating Spanish documents. He died penniless on February 20, 1862. It is said that his parting words to his wife were, “don’t ever permit any of our children to become poet.” Two of his sons, however, became poets like him – Ceferini and Victor. 


      More than a romantic story; Florante at Laura his poem mirrored the social problems of his time.  Beyond the love story of the protagonists Florante and Laura, and of Prince Aladin and Flerida, Balagtas expressed his angst towards the existing injustices in the society. According to Teodoro Agoncillo, Balagtas was the first Filipino to express the real circumstances of the country under the colonial rule. It was believed that the abuses and evil-doers pointed out by him in his poem were in truth his observations and of his own experiences under the Spaniards.  Balagtas succeeded in awakening his countrymen to the realities of their lot. Years later, Jose Rizal, Andres Bonifacio and Apolinario Mabini were inspired by Balagtas’ works. Rizal recalled the meaning of Balagtas’ epic poem in his novel, the Noli Me Tangere. Florante at Laura and Noli Me Tangere are somewhat similar; Ibarra, the principal character of the Noli, and Florante both studied in another country, returned to their native lands and were envied by some compatriots. Both loved a woman who made their misadventures more dangerous. The epic of Balagtas and Rizal’s novel were both entwined by colonial oppression. Mabini even wrote down the poem from memory and translated the Florante at Laura into English during his exile in Guam.
 
 
      The poem also shows that Balagtas was ahead of his time in terms of religious tolerance and teaching that religious differences should not be used to discriminate against others. Aladin, who was a Muslim, helps Florante during the latter’s suffering. And even Flerida, Aladin’s lady love, who was also a Muslim, saves Laura from being raped. In this sense Balagtas was a universalist, for his message encompasses culture and religion. In his poem, he found ways to unify divergent beliefs and mores. Perhaps Balagtas was reminding Christian Filipinos the need to reunite with our Muslim brothers in Mindanao. 
 
 
      In commemoration of the 150th Death Anniversary of Francisco Balagtas, let us be inspired and up hold his dedication to his work. Filipinos, young and old, who treasured the poetry of Balagtas, will not forget these immortal lines. 

 
 

      “Ang laki sa layaw, karaniwa’y hubad
      Sa bait at muni’t sa hatol ay salat;
      Masaklap na bunga ng maling paglingap
      Habag ng magulang sa irog na anak”

Sources:
Filipinos in History Vol. 1. by National Historical Institute
Great Filipinos in History by Gregorio Zaide
Poet of the People Francisco Balagtas and the Roots of Filipino Nationalism by Fred Sevilla

A Black American Hero in the Philippines by Peter Jaynul V. Uckung, Senior History Researcher

NOTE: this article was published by National Historical Commission of the Philippines. No part was changed or erased.

 

     
     Heroes and history are a volatile mix. They tend to induce a radical change to an oppressed society dulled into insensitivity by the inequitable system of the ruling class. 
      A hero is an anomaly rising from a society suffering from unbearable social problems that cannot be remedied by the government. When the public begins to remember the legacy of a hero in a regular basis, it becomes a moral sentinel from which all aspect of governance is measured upon. For is not human happiness the ultimate purpose of heroism and the study of history? Peace, racial equality, economic security, and freedom of culture and expression are the values on which humanity base justifiable happiness, without which civilization becomes cancerous and self destructive.   

      In the Philippines, heroes there are many. Jose Rizal exemplified those who fought oppression and were killed for their convictions. 

      Rizal was a fighting writer who unleashed broadside after broadside of scathing articles, essays, and novels dead-aimed to penetrate the armor of indifference that beclouded the minds of colonial officials, to no avail.

      But Rizal’s novels were very effective in releasing the anger within a suppressed and abused people, not only of his country, but of others as well.


      Rizal was also evidently aware of the colonial injustices being enforced on the other people. In his novel, El Filibusterismo, his main character and anti-hero Simoun, after verbally downsizing the imperious friars, is derisively called “American mulatto”, and “British Indian”. Rizal even intimated a sense of consciousness to the discriminating practices being legally enforced upon the North American Indians.

      The term “mulatto” means the first generation of a pure negro and a white, having the yellowish brown color.

      Rizal was no stranger to race issue in the United States. He had visited the country first in 1888, arriving in San Francisco, passing through Sacramento, Reno, Denver, Salt Lake City, Colorado, Missouri, Chicago, Boston, Niagara Falls, and finally New York. 

      With the places he has visited in the United States, it was impossible for him to miss the institutionalized degradation that was bestowed upon American negros. 

      The Black American people during Rizal’s time suffered a more dehumanizing form of social denigration – slavery. Afro-American families were often broken up, the members sold to different white families. A slave’s frequent destiny was to never see his family again once he was sold. Mothers, fathers, sons and daughters, even children were sold as if they were pieces of furnitures to do labor without being paid.

      This generally was the accepted social treatment of black Americans when a regiment of black American soldiers, the Twenty-Fourth Infantry, was sent to the Philippines in 1899.

      Black soldiers had shown their mettle in the short Cuban War of 1898 when they rescued colonel Theodore Roosevelt and his rough riders during the Battle for Santiago.

      In the Philippines, the Afro-American soldier (called Buffalo soldier) now had to contend with the fact the he was now helping impose on another non-white people the same kind of racial oppression which have been abusing him and the likes of him at home. 

      The black soldier undoubtedly felt the united determination of the Filipinos to win their freedom by waging war. Something that black Americans have never done. 

      Black American soldiers and Filipinos usually developed friendly relations partly due to the derision and contempt they both experienced from white soldiers and civilians alike.

      The Filipinos recognizing the sentiments of black American soldiers to racial issues, offered unequivocal brotherly relation and offered military commission to would-be defectors.

      Only a few black American soldiers defected and joined the Filipinos due to the threat of capture (death or long imprisonment for defection). Also the prospect of forgoing all cultural and social ties was a great deterrent to those who entertained the thought of defecting. 

      Corporal David Fagen was the most celebrated black American soldier who defected to the Filipinos. It was still unclear why he defected, but studies reported that “Fagen’s position in the company was extremely uncomfortable”and that “personal difficulties” might have driven him to his decision. His military records cancelled incompetency as the reason for defection.

      He was described as dark brown, five feet six inches, with a carved scar in his chin. He was in the middle twenties. 

      On November 17, 1899, Fagen, assisted by a Filipino officer, jumped into a horse and went galloping into the jungles of Arayat. He was promoted from lieutenant to captain on September 6, 1900 by Gen. Jose Alejandrino, the Filipino commander in Nueva Ecija. He was referred to by his men as General Fagen.

      Newspapers in the United States featured him on front page and brought his exploits to a fascinated audience. Not a few black Americans praised Fagen’s decision to side with the Filipinos. He was described as “cunning and highly skilled guerrilla who harassed and evaded large conventional American units and their Filipino auxiliaries”.

      Often clashing with his former comrades, he once captured a steam launch on the river in Pampanga. He was so elusive that even the then best known guerrilla chaser, Frederick Funston, the man who captured Emilio Aguinaldo, never did capture him. 

      So daring was Fagen that he was reported to have visited   Manila and always escaped dragnets with ease.

      His reputation as a torturer of captured white American soldiers was repudiated by a former prisoner. If he could not be labelled as a butcher, the Americans did call him with other deregatory names. They described him as having a small head, a good for nothing whelp, a bad man, a rowdy soldier, unintelligent ingrate.

      Black American defectors who were captured were indeed executed and there were Edmund Du Bose and Lewis Russell of the Ninth Cavalry for example. They were considered criminals engaged in inciting servile resistance. Also a black officer, Major John Calloway who wrote a friendly letter to a Filipino patriot, Thomas Consunji, was dishonourably discharged from the army. 

      Gen. Alejandrino, however, surrendered in May 1901. He was reported to have asked pardon for Fagen as one of his surrender terms. It was refused by the Americans. Fagen would not be considered a prisoner of war. He was to be court-marshalled and executed. 

      With most of the Filipino generals surrendering, Fagen left the camp with his Filipino wife. They went hiding in the mountains of Nueva Ecija. 

      The Americans hunted him with a vengeance. He was declared a bandit. Six hundred dollars was authorized as a reward for Fagen “dead or alive”.

      On December 5, 1901, a Filipino hunter, Anastacio Bartolome brought a decomposing head of a Negro, together with some weapons, clothing, binoculars, documents and a west point ring of one of Fagen’s former captive.     

      Bartolome’s story was that he and his companion hacked Fagen to death in Dangalan Cove. His wife reportedly jumped into the sea and drowned.

      The evidences were considered strong. The Americans reported a positive identification, but there were no record of reward going to Bartolome.

      However, many expressed doubts about whose head Bartolome had delivered. It was too small. There were talks of Fagen orchestratig the whole thing so he could finally be free of his dogged pursuers. A report about the continued pursuit of Fagen was unearthed months after his supposed killing. 

      Jose Rizal might not have dabbled more seriously with the issue on social discrimination inflicted on black Americans, but his fleeting mention of Simoun being mistaken for an “American mulatto” hints of the kind of degrading racial treatment that was being given to non-white people in America. It was the proverbial tip of the iceberg. 
 
      When a retelling of a social crime disturbs and angers people and moves them to denounce and condemn this particular social occurrence it is often sufficient enough to assuage the hunger for justice that will be generated by the critically reflecting people. 

      Remembering David Fagen and his revolutionary exploits in the Philippines reveals a lot more than the revolution itself. 

      As a country suffused with the memories of heroes who fought against the inhumanities of colonialism, the Filipinos will readily discern the social problems that the likes of Fagen symbolized. 

      For Fagen, by fighting the US, not only fought for the freedom of his adopted homeland, he fought against a most cruel enemy of mankind. He fought against slavery and racism which were then still being practiced in the US.

      Although, outlawed and condemned in the US after a devastating civil war that almost tore that country in half, slavery survived and had been carried out discreetly through legal and extra legal terror. 

      The American Civil War ushered in a euphoric interlude of freedom for most Black Americans. But slavery, though outlawed, survived in other forms. After their emancipation and the reconstruction era, Black Americans now had to suffer segregation. 

      Slavery was evil and unsurpassable in its social malignancy. Family members were separated at will by owners. The slightest resistance was met with inhuman tortures designed to break the toughest of fighting spirit. 

      With the outlawing of slavery; some states devised legal efforts to keep Black Americans intimidated, submissive and “in their place”. Laws were created with mechanisms designed to disenfranchise blacks, and with no political and legal rights black Americans had no real hope for economic advancement. 

      Segregation was legalized. It was a system of norms that dictated every aspect of human behavior between two different races. It was an etiquette system whose purpose was always to imply that blacks were inferior to white men, and that Black Americans were content to be inferior.

      This was the oppressive and unbearable world that David Fagen finally confronted when he joined the Filipinos in their war for independence.

      In honoring the memory of the Philippine Revolution we must remember that there were men who fought not only against colonialism, but also against the tyranny of slavery and racism. 

      For that David Fagen is a monument of a hero

The Role of Ethnic Chinese in the Philippine Revolution by Borj

Note: this discussion was presented during the issues and problems in Philippine History class and most of the contents were based from books and researched articles.

Issues against Chinese in the Philippine history:

·         “Chinese are a conservative people, docile and quiet, obedient, always afraid of getting involved (especially in political issues), and the only thing they know how to do is to make money.”……

·         “Chinese had mostly stayed as neutral bystanders, uninvolved and uncommitted.”…….

Philippine Historical events involving Chinese:

Ø  Seventy-two years after Lapu-lapu defeated the Spanish in the battle of Mactan, in 1593; P’an Ho Wu led the more than 250 conscripted galley rowers to mutiny against the ship captain, Governor General Luis Perez de Dasmariñas, after realizing that they would die either from the atrocious conditions in the ship.

Ø  There were several Chinese rebellion against Spanish oppression that led to  at least six incidents of massacres of the immigrants, one was during 1639, which was carried out to squash a people’s revolt against the Spanish colonialists’ harsh treatment and persecution of the conscripted Chinese laborers who were forced to open up the frontiers of Calamba, Laguna.

Ø  Another Chinese participation in the Filipinos’ struggle against colonial rule was in far away Sulu in 1773. There were 4,000 Chinese immigrants who helped and supported the natives of Jolo in their struggle against Spain.

Known Chinese Mestizos and pure-blooded Chinese in Philippine History

The Chinese mestizos or offspring of Filipino-Chinese intermarriages were natural product of Chinse immigration to the Philippines.

§  Dr. Jose P. Rizal

§  Marcelo H. del Pilar

§  Graciano Lopez Jaena

§  Emilio Aguinaldo

§  Pedro Paterno

§  Gregorio Sanciangco

§  Roman Ongpin

§  Pio Valenzuela

§  Three Martyred Priest

§  Trece Martires

§  Julian Felipe

§  Jose Ignacio Paua- a pure blooded Chinese who became general of the revolution in Cavite and became one of the 52 signatories of the Biak-na-Bato Constitution in 1897.

These mestizos recognized themselves as Filipinos and they fought the revolution not as mestizos but as Filipinos. Being Chinese descent or mestizos, to them, was secondary.

Debunking the Issue:

1.       “Chinese are a conservative people, docile and quiet, obedient, always afraid of getting involved (especially in political issues), and the only thing they know how to do is to make money.”……

§  Chinese were known to be business minded people but during the revolution, most of them sympathized to the Filipinos and fought side by side with them while some of them financed the revolution. They were not afraid of getting involved in the uprising due to the atrocities that the Spanish committed on their race, and one example of this was the 1987 rebellion in Cavite which was joined by the Chinese people mostly residing there. The known leader of the uprising was Jose Ignacio Paua, a Chinese general who fought bravely against the forces of the Spanish army and was heavily wounded in his left chest but manage to fought back which terrified the enemies causing their retreat.

2.        “Chinese had mostly stayed as neutral bystanders, uninvolved and uncommitted.”…….

§  Most of the Chinese did not stayed as neutral bystanders, uninvolved and uncommitted people during the 333 years of Spanish rule in the Philippines; in fact they were part of the Spanish rebellion staged by the Filipinos and even by some Chinese descent. For almost a thousand years, it was part of their revolutionary traditions to stage a rebellion or revolt against oppressors and conquerors and even to their Emperors who ruled tyrannically to its subject. Though some of them escaped from the Colonizers atrocities most of them contributed in the revolution and their contributions to the cause can be divided into: Direct participation, financial assistance and material procurement or assistance like the assistance coming from the mainland China during the revolution which was did not happen because the ship carrying the assistance sunk and the other was captured. This overseas assistance was the help given by Dr. Sun Yat Sen who is also a revolutionary leader in China.

Pro’s of the study:

                Knowing the contributions of the Chinese people in the revolution, Filipino’s will certainly change their perspective towards them throughout the history. They were not just business minded people that settle along the Parian but also the part of the long history of struggle of the Filipino people against the Spaniards. They were also adversely affected and like the Filipinos before, also suffered great damage and personal losses.

It was not the Filipino who suffered the Spanish atrocities alone but also the Chinese. Knowing their history makes us think and rethink again that we’re not alone in the struggles. According to Dr. Antonio Tan in his work on the Chinese Meztizos: “the recorded history of the Philippines would be incomplete as a basis for understanding contemporary society unless it takes into account the Chinese mestizos’ contributions to our development as a nation”, and that was true, because they greatly affect the development of our culture and even our race due to the intermarriages.

                The aim of knowing the Chinese contribution was not to hide the facts or highlight them, but to mention the truth that like Filipinos, the ethnic Chinese also paid heavy prices during such periods of unrest in the country.

Con’s of the study:

               

                Knowing the contribution of the ethnic Chinese and the Mestizo Chinese highlighted their great contribution to the building of our nation which is obvious but we can’t hide the fact that they fought side by side with our Heroes because of some motives, not all of them fought because of their love for country but to free from the laws that limit their businesses.

                Aside from the motives, the term Mestizos was mentioned to indicate the existence of the middle class which was formed mostly from them and highlighted their so called contribution that without their race, revolution would be nothing. This pertains to the ilustrados who were produced by the middle class from Chinese descent and was mostly educated, a discrimination against the locals knowing that they were indios and have no total access to the education before.

                Mestizos should not pertain to this Chinese because, knowing that they live in the Philippines, they eventually become Filipinos. The term only dividing the unity of the Filipino race and was no good at all. Filipino, whether a mixture or pure, should be considered Filipino because he lives here and he is a citizen of the country.

Conclusion:

                Chinese, pure or mixture had long settled here even before the Spanish Landed on the soil of Homonhon, they were naturally our economic partner and for centuries helped us fought against the oppressors. They should also be recognize not just as business minded people but as our friend in bitterness and glory for our history was not complete without them. Most of our great men and presidents have their Chinese ancestry but they became what they were not because of their blood but because they strive as a Filipino. Chinese people only need recognition from its friend and that the issues surrounding them changed. 

Ang Pagtatapos

larawan sa grasslandia,..... 

     Masaya na malungkot ang araw ng aming pagtatapos. Mahabang panahon din na kami ay magkakasama, halos sa araw-araw na ginawa ng Diyos, kalahati noon ipinamamalagi na namin sa pamantasan. Gala dito, gala doon,..... minsan nga yung ibang magulang nagtatanong na kung border na lang ba kami sa bahay di kaya siguro may mga syota kami na kinakatagpo. Pero heto't tapos na kami sa buhay kolehiyo, tapos na yung mga araw na magpupuyat kami dahil sa research/thesis, assignments, lesson planning at kung ano-ano pa na ginawa kaming parang mga zombie.
     Bukas makalawa, tatahakin na namin ang kanya-kanyang landas ng buhay. Gagawa ng sariling pangalan (sana) sa larangan ng edukasyon at kung saan pa mang larangang napili. Ang hamon naman ngayon ay maging matagumpay kami sa aming piniling bokasyon at sabi pa nga ni Rev. Flores, "be faithful to your first and true vocation". 

26 years After

     History thought us to remember our past for so we're not doomed to repeat it and to learn whatever lessons it thought us. EDSA people power (as it was known) was one of the events that deserves to be remembered since it has a significant effect to the nation as it toppled the old regime and gave freedom to those souls which lived in misery during the era of dictatorship. But after 26 years, did things really change or it just gotten worst?