National Artists row reaches Supreme Court
MANILA, Philippines—The tempest over President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s purported disregard of the legally prescribed selection process for National Artists has reached the Supreme Court.
A group of petitioners Wednesday sought a temporary restraining order on the conferment of the rank and title of National Artist to National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) Executive Director Cecille Guidote-Alvarez, architect Francisco Mañosa, fashion designer Jose “Pitoy” Moreno and cartoonist-filmmaker Carlo J. Caparas.
The petitioners—National Artists Virgilio Almario, Benedicto “BenCab” Cabrera, Napoleon Abueva and Arturo Luz, academicians, and members of the Concerned Artists of the Philippines—asked that hearings on the matter be conducted and that the restraining order be subsequently made permanent.
Part of the petition read: “The appointment to the Order of National Artists is a discretionary power on the part of the President. Clearly, however, the discretion is not absolute nor is it unlimited.
“For instance, the President has no discretion motu proprio to appoint one who has not been recommended by the [Cultural Center of the Philippines] and the NCCA boards; proof of this is that the award is not given every year—the last batch of National Artists was named in 2006.”
According to the petitioners, it was the CCP board that named Fernando Amorsolo the first National Artist of the Philippines.
The petition was prepared by Marvic Leonen and Theodore Te, the dean of the University of the Philippines College of Law and UP vice president for legal affairs, respectively.
Dialogue planned
Malacañang had earlier said it would not withdraw its contested nominations, and both Caparas and Guidote-Alvarez had vigorously defended their being named National Artists.
Hours after the petition was filed in the Supreme Court, Malacañang said it would conduct a dialogue with the protesters.
But Press Secretary Cerge Remonde did not indicate that the Palace was willing to strike a compromise and reconsider its decision.
If anything, he said, the announcement of a planned dialogue should send the message that Malacañang “is always willing, ready and able to engage citizens who want to discuss things of national or social import.”
“In a situation like this, I think everybody has to be open,” Remonde said at a media briefing. “Me, I will just listen and see what will come out of it.”
Asked about the possibility of Ms Arroyo conferring the award on more deserving artists, he said: “I don’t want to speak ahead of what might happen in the meeting.”
He added: “We welcome the move of certain sectors to go to court so this issue can be put to rest once and for all.
“It is the right of every citizen to go to court, and it is a much better way of seeking redress for grievances. And therefore, [the matter] will be up to the court to decide.”
Main beef
The petitioners’ main issue is Ms Arroyo’s decision to nominate Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Mañosa and Moreno despite the fact that their names were not on the list of artists submitted by the CCP-NCCA selection committee to Malacañang after a multilevel process.
“By naming private respondents Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Mañosa and Moreno National Artists, the President added to the list four names given by the CCP and NCCA and, at the same time, deleted one name from the original list,” the petitioners said.
“The choices of the President, thus, now constitute a majority of the conferees, in utter disregard of the choices of the NCCA and CCP Boards and the arts and culture community, which were arrived at after a long and rigorous process of screening and deliberation,” they said.
No explanation given
The CCP-NCCA selection committee had nominated Manuel Conde for film and broadcast arts, Lazaro Francisco for literature, Federico Aguilar Alcuaz for visual arts, and Ramon Santos for music.
But when Malacañang announced the National Artists for this year, its list showed that Santos’ name had been deleted and those of Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Moreno and Mañosa added.
“No explanation was also given for putting on the list ... Carlo Caparas and Francisco Mañosa, who both did not make it to the first short list of 32; neither was there any explanation given for putting on the list ... Jose Moreno who made it only to the first short list but not to the subsequent short lists,” the petitioners said.
Illegal, unethical
“Finally, no justification was given for the inclusion of a person whose name was never included in the list from the very start, and was thus never subjected to the prescreening, deliberation and selection process, ... Guidote-Alvarez,” they said.
The petitioners said Guidote-Alvarez was excluded from the selection process because of her position in the NCCA.
They said her inclusion in the short list was “clearly illegal and unethical.
“What is notable is that she even sat as a member of the final deliberation panel. This makes her inclusion in the final list all the more irregular and patently illegal,” they said.
The petitioners asked that the cash awards be withheld and that the conferment ceremonies be deferred.
“Arts and culture are constitutionally protected fields. They are, thus, greatly impressed with public interest, and public policy should be directed toward this,” the petitioners said.
“For this reason, any act of the President or officers and/or agencies acting under her or on her behalf that would diminish arts and culture would be compelling reason for [the Supreme Court] to act,” they said. With a report from Christian V. Esguerra
コメント