Case Analysis on the Execution of Andres

Bonifacio: Was it justified?

I. Introduction
This paper deals with the case of Andres Bonifacio, Philippine patriot who founded and led the
nationalist Katipunan society and instigated the August 1896 revolt against the Spanish.
Specifically, it will present an analysis of arguments/evidences related to the execution of Andres
Bonifacio on Emilio Aguinaldo’s orders. The main purpose of this paper is to answer the
question: Was the execution of Andres Bonifacio justified?
II. Presentation of Arguments/Evidences
Based on the case at hand, there are only two possible options to our question.
1. The execution of Andres Bonifacio was justified.
 Because the allegations of Bonifacio burning down a village and ordering the burning of
a church in Indang is true.
2. The execution of Andres Bonifacio was not justified.
 Because the allegations about Bonifacio burning down a village and ordering the burning
of a church in Indang is not true.
III. Synthesis
Based on the arguments/evidences presented above, I am convinced that the execution of Andres
Bonifacio was not justified.
. The following are my refutations against the other option:
 Even though Andres Bonifacio felt that the Magdalo faction maneuvered to rig the
elections and complained about the result being null and void, he was still civil to Emilio
Aguinaldo even after the election.
 The burning down of the village and Bonifacio ordering the burning of a church in
Indang was just pure allegation.
 Bonifacio received the party of Aguinaldo cordially, but they were met with the attack of
Aguinaldo’s men. Bonifacio ordered his men to stand down even though they were
attacked, refusing to fight Aguinaldo’s men since they are his “fellow Tagalogs.”
 Even after Bonifacio refusing to attack them back, Aguinaldo’s men continued to fire on
them, the worst part is that they involved the innocents including Bonifacio’s brother,
Ciriaco, was shot dead. His other brother, Procopio, was beaten. His wife, Gregoria
deJesus, was raped by Bonzon.
 The trial was a farce. The jury was entirely made up of Aguinaldo's men; Bonifacio's
defense lawyer acted more like a prosecutor, declaring Bonifacio's guilt and instead
pleading for less punishment; and Bonifacio was not allowed to confront the state witness
for the charge of conspiracy because the latter had been killed in battle, but the witness
was later seen with the prosecutors.
Given the above arguments and evidences, therefore without doubt I can say that the
execution of Andres Bonifacio is unjustified.
 Case Analysis on The Death of General Antonio
Luna: Who was responsible?

I. Introduction
This paper deals with the case of the death of General Antonio Luna, was a Filipino army general
who fought in the Philippine–American War. Specifically, it will present an analysis of
arguments/evidences related to the death of General Antonio Luna. The main purpose of this
paper is to answer the question: Who was responsible to his death?
II. Presentation of Arguments/Evidences
Based on the case at hand, there are only three possible options to our question.
1. Capt. Pedro Janolino and members of the Kawit Battalion of Cavite Province.
 Because they were the one that refused to attack when General Luna given the order. The
men told him they only took orders from General Emilio Aguinaldo, their townmate. So
General Luna promptly disarmed them.
2. Emilio Aguinaldo
 Because Aguinaldo relieved Luna's officers and men from the field, including General
Venacio Concepción, whose headquarters in Angeles, Pampanga were besieged by
Aguinaldo on the same day Luna was assassinated.
3. Felipe Buencamino
 Since he was the secretary of foreign affairs, had once been an ardent defender of Spanish
rule and became a founding member of the pro-American Partido Federal, in contrast,
General Luna strongly advocated a fight to the finish for independence. General Luna
called him traitor and his son coward. They also exchanged heated words before General
Luna died.

III. Synthesis
Based on the arguments/evidences presented above, I am convinced that the one who was
responsible for Genereal Luna’s death are Capt. Pedro Janolino, members of the Kawit Battalion
of Cavite Province and Emelio Aguinaldo
The following are my refutations against the other option:
  A rifle shot was heard and General Luna rushed downstairs to investigate, and there,
waiting for him, were Capt. Pedro Janolino and members of the Kawit Battalion of Cavite
Province. These were the same soldiers who had refused to take orders from Luna during
the battle at Caloocan on Feb. 10, 1899.
 The members mobbed Luna. He was stabbed with daggers and shot. Mortally wounded,
he still managed to stagger to the street, away from his assassins. He fired his pistol, but
did not hit anybody. Colonel Roman came to his defense but was shot to death. Captain
Rusca also tried to assist the stricken general but was shot in the leg.
 While investigations were supposedly made concerning Luna's death, not one person was
convicted.
 Following General Luna's death, Aguinaldo arrested all brigade commanders under Luna.
Major Manuel Bernal, was tortured and assisinated first, followed by his brother Captain
Jose Bernal, who was later released but assassinated on June 16, 1899, in Candaba,
Pampanga Province. Aguinaldo also ordered the disarmament of two companies
suspected of being pro-Luna. Later, General Pantaleon García said that it was he who was
verbally ordered by Aguinaldo to conduct the assassination of Luna at Cabanatuan. His
illness at the time prevented him from taking part in the assassination.

Given the above arguments and evidences, therefore without doubt I can say that the responsible
for General Antonio Luna’s death are Genereal Luna’s death are Capt. Pedro Janolino, members
of the Kawit Battalion of Cavite Province and Emelio Aguinaldo.