Kent Limmuel B. Tan March 3, 2015

2010-44012

Opinion Essay: Pambansang Photobomb (by Conrado de Quiros)

Pambansang Photobomb, Indeed!

Conrado de Quiros’ article on DMCI Torre de Manila as the “pambansang photobomb” or

something that grabs the attention in the background or destroys the picture, to one of the

Philippines’ iconic and historic monuments, the Rizal Shrine, presents the issues of cultural

preservation, compliance to laws and regulations, economic growth and on how the Filipinos of

today give value and appreciation to their history. After reading the article, I asked myself, “It is

really proper to give up or worst, destroy a part of a nation’s heritage to pave way for economic

growth or “development”, as they would say?”, “Are there no laws or regulations that would

pertain to the construction of buildings and structures near historical monuments?”, and “Do

Filipinos of the present even care if Rizal (Rizal Shrine) be “photobombed” by this high-rise

building?”.

In answering these personal questions, I took some time reading about the history the Rizal

Shrine and the Rizal Park. National Parks Development Committee highlighted the history of the

park starting from the Spanish period, to the American and on President Magsaysay regime, to the

development initiated by First Lady Eva Macapagal followed by the period of Teodoro F.

Valencia, then by the First Lady Imelda Marcos and on what it is now on the present. The park in

the Spanish period has been a venue of social gatherings and a witness to flirtations among the

Manila elite as well as the execution ground used by Spaniards for what they labeled the “rebels

and mutineers” including the three martyr priests, Gomez, Burgos and Zamora and the Trece

Martires or Thirteen Martyrs. Between 1823 and 1897, 158 patriots and martyrs were felled on the

square by Spanish infantrymen and the morning of December 30, 1896 was considered a most

memorable day. It was the time when Dr. Jose P. Rizal was executed by the Spanish friars. It is

said that the blood they shed served as a “spiritual fertilizer which invigorated the Filipino people’s

yearning for liberty. In the American period, the Bagumbayan field was chosen to be the site of

the proposed American Government center. It was also the Americans who set about building a

memorial to honor Dr. Jose P. Rizal, the national hero. The monument was built with money raised

by popular subscription and with the cooperation of Governor-General William Howard Taft. The

memorial is the work of Swiss sculptor Richard Kissling who cast the bronze figure in Switzerland.

It was completed in 1913, fully 17 years after the hero's execution. Today, it remains the most

revered of the numerous monuments honoring Rizal. Through the years, the park had been bare

and unkept and worst, had been a seatbed of crime and immorality until it was developed to be a

national park and that major improvements had been done both for the park and the monument.

The approach to the monument was cemented, lights were installed and a few trees were planted.

Valencia got the Philippine Army’s approval to put an honor guard and until the National Parks

Development Committee was organized to officially head the development projects.

Both the Rizal Park and the monument were backed up by a rich history that we Filipinos

could be proud of but on my opinion, this present “development” made by DMCI is not

development at all. It’s a major disgraced not just for Dr. Jose Rizal but also for our heroes who

shed their lives in the area and also for all others who took great time and effort to help develop

the park and the monument. The construction of the Torre de Manila, I would agree, was obviously

to capitalize on Luneta being a premier tourist spot. This destruction to the face and landscape of

Rizal Shrine could in return have its negative drawbacks than the positive one in terms of tourism,

especially that one of the top contributors to the country’s economic growth is the sector of

tourism.

On her privilege speech at Senate Plenary Session last November 18, 2014, Senator Pia S.

Cayetano reiterated Rizal Monument as one of the present’s threatened world heritage sites. I agree

with her argument about the wrong notion on heritage preservation as an obstacle for economic

progress. Economic development and heritage preservation can, and indeed, must coexist side by

side.

The Huangzhou Declaration released by UNESCO in 2013 reaffirms the role of culture

and its preservation as an integral part of sustainability and development. On the declaration, it

further noted that, “culture should be considered to be a fundamental enabler of sustainability,

being a source of meaning and energy, a wellspring of creativity and innovation, and a resource to

address challenges and find appropriate solutions. The extraordinary power of culture to foster and

enable truly sustainable development is especially evident when a people-centred and place-based

approach is integrated into development programmes and peace-building initiatives”. It futher

reaffirmed that “the potential of culture as a driver for sustainable development, through the

specific contributions that it can make – as knowledge capital and a sector of activity – to inclusive

social, cultural and economic development, harmony, environmental sustainability, peace and

security. This has been confirmed by a wealth of studies and demonstrated by numerous concrete

initiatives”. These provisions, on my opinion, only proves the negligence and fault on the side of

the local government and the national government. It is not proper that the minds of our leaders

and legislators are enclosed only on economic growth and progress and disregarding cultural and

heritage preservation.

In 2011, the National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP) have its

Guidelines on Monuments Honoring National Heroes, Illustrious Filipinos and Other Personages,

it was stated that, “Monuments are landmarks of our cities, towns and provinces. They must be

honored, preserved and protected. Monuments should be given due prominence since they

symbolize national significance.” Certain provisions were also stated to achieve and protect the

dominance of the monuments including, the retrofitting of a uniform design for the façade of the

buildings around the monuments as well as the regulation of the heights, volume and design of the

buildings that would be constructed around the area, keeping the vista points and visual corridors

to monuments clear for unobstructed viewing appreciation and photographic opportunities and

using strong contrast between the monument and its background. This will enhance the monument

as a focal point of the site. Having the authority given to NHCP, the commission has the right to

implement these rules and regulations.

Unfortunately, despite the rules and regulations that protect the national monuments as our

national heritage, DMCI had able to acquire permission form the local government of Manila for

the construction of the said building. It is a clear violation of the regulation set by the NHCP. An

argument presented by DMCI stated that Torre de Manila is not ruining the view of the Rizal

Shrine and that the pictures were allegedly “photoshopped”. Looking into the pictures and

assessing the height and structure of the building, it is clear that it can be seen on the background,

and with the building having 19 floors already constructed, it is somewhat impossible on my

opinion to say that the pictures online were just “photoshopped” or edited. Still, the questions are

on how the builder had acquired the permit? Was there negligence or ignorance on the part of the

City of Manila? Was the builder on bad faith and what could be the remedies? Hoping that this

issue would be given immediate judicial and legislative actions especially knowing how long could

government cases and trials be solved in the Philippines.

Lastly, on my question, “Do Filipinos even care if Rizal will be photobombed?”, I asked

myself, “Why did I asked so?”. In this issue, it is inevitable that we must care and it is our

responsibility as Filipinos to take part on preserving our culture and heritage. I cannot deny the

fact, that more and more Filipinos are becoming ignorant on issues pertaining to culture and the

Filipino identity (even I myself sometimes is an inclusion) but this aspect, cultural preservation, is

and must a collective effort, not just by our leaders and legislators but of all.

References:

National Parks Development Committee (n.d.). History of Rizal Park. Retrieved from

http://rizalpark.nationalparks.ph/history.htm on February 28, 2015.

Cayetano, Pia S. (2014). Rizal Shrine one of world’s threatened sites. Retrieved from

http://senatorpiacayetano.com/?p=2531 on February 28, 2015.

Requejo, Rey E., Damaso, Jerrylyn B., Araneta, Macon R. (2014). Stop Torre de Manila

building, SC asked. Manila Standard Today. Retrieved from

http://manilastandardtoday.com/2014/09/13/stop-torre-de-manila-building-sc-asked/ on

February 28, 2015.

National Historical Commission of the Philippines (2011). Guidelines On Monuments Honoring

National Heroes, Illustrious Filipinos And Other Personages. pp 1-3. Retrieved from

http://nhcp.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/GLmonuments2011.pdf on February 28,

2015.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (2013). The Hangzhou

Declaration: Placing Culture at the Heart of Sustainable Development Policies.

Retrieved from

http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/images/FinalHangzhou

Declaration20130517.pdf on February 28. 2015.