Filipinos who revere Jose Rizal and want their national hero’s final resting place treated with respect and dignity were shocked to learn that the Supreme Court had given its assent to the construction of a ‘photobomber’ – a structure that has the effect of disrupting or spoiling a view – in the vicinity of the monument in the park named after this country’s national hero. In countries that value their historical legacies monuments as important as the monument to Jose Rizal are kept free of structures of the ‘photobomber’ kind. How did the Rizal Park monument – the most important monument to an individual in this country – get to have a ‘photobomber’ in its vicinity?
The answer is simple. The government institutions involved – the National Historical Commission (NHC), the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) and the cultural affairs office of the City of Manila – did not get their act together. They should have acted in unison from the moment that the building permits office of the City of Manila received an application from the developer DMCI for a permit to build the 49-storey Torre de Manila.
The height of the proposed building and its location should have sounded alarm bells in the building permits office, which should then have alerted the city government’s cultural affairs office about the possibility of a controversy over the proposed building’s becoming a ‘photobomber’ vis-à-vis the monument to the national hero.
But that didn’t happen. Had it happened, the cultural affairs office should have forthwith informed the NHC and the NCCA, and the three bodies should then have jointly assessed the proposed 49-storey structure’s desirability vis-à-vis the Rizal monument.
It was only when the Knights of Rizal raised its objection to the photobomber that the national government – the NHC and the NCCA – sprang into action, decrying the building project’s negative impact on the Rizal monument and questioning the process that made it possible for the project to proceed.
By then it was too late. The construction of Torre de Manila was well in progress and most of the floors of the structure were already in place. A judicial order – by now a case had been filed in court – would have entailed an enormous demolition job. In deciding in favor of DMCI and against the Knights of Rizal, the Supreme Court was almost certainly guided to a considerable degree by considerations of practicality.
It is not enough that government institutions concerned with historical matters do the right thing. They must do the right thing in unison. It is not only the Rizal Park situation that would have been prevented if the PHC, the NCAA and other related governmental institutions had operated in an in-unison manner; they would have prevented the destruction of structures of great significance for this country’s historical and cultural legacy.
A case in point – undoubtedly the most prominent case, is the demolition several years ago of Manila’s Jai-Alai Building, which, because of its unique architectural design, was considered an iconic structure. Although the plan to demolish the Jai-Alai Building – a structure that not only was unique architecturally but had seen so much of Philippine social history – had been accorded much publicity, it was only when the demolition had started that the concerned government institutions proceeded to oppose the project. The opposition had come too late.
Can the Jai-Alai fiasco happen again? It can because (1) the legacy-related government institutions have yet to get their act together and (2) there still are numerous historically significant structures that are being eyed covetously by property developers. Many of these structures are in danger of demolition in the near future, given the demand for well-located sites for high-rise commercial and residential buildings.
To prevent further erosion of this country’s historical and cultural legacy, I suggest that the NHC, the NCCA and the National Museum draw up a list of structures deserving preservation for posterity – most of these structures would be located in Metro Manila and the immediately surrounding provinces – publish the list and invite reactions from the public as to the justification for the listed structures’ inclusion in the list. Once the list is finalized and receives official sanction, the real estate development community will be on notice that the structures in the list are not available for redevelopment.
If this approach is not adopted – if the suggested list is not drawn up – one Jai-Alai Building after another will fall victim to the wrecker’s ball, lost to posterity forever.
E-mail: romero.business.class@gmail.com