The Constitution is replete with provisions calling for the promotion of culture and the arts and the preservation of Filipino culture.
The Local Government Code imposes upon local government units the duty to ensure and support the preservation and enrichment of culture.
In 2002, the Department of Interior and Local Government issued a circular encouraging LGUs to create local councils for culture and the arts to ensure the preservation and promotion of Filipino culture. The idea was for these councils to incorporate culture and the arts in the development plans of LGUs.
Despite this circular, awareness about cultural heritage among local officials remains low. In 2006, I tagged along with a colleague who was speaking at a seminar for local officials. A vice mayor who joined the training asked if preservation of cultural heritage was allowed under the rules of the Commission on Audit. He was afraid that preserving cultural heritage would land him in jail. He argued that since there was no code for expenses pertaining to cultural heritage, it was prohibited.
The current version of the Cultural Heritage Bill does not make things clearer for LGUs. It is silent as to what its effect will be on the existing cultural heritage laws. It provides for a category called "local heritage" but leaves its determination with the NCCA. Local government units will just be "consulted" on cultural heritage matters.
What the bill has a lot of are increased penalties for all kinds of violations and a mechanism whereby owners of structures at least 50 years old are effectively deprived of property rights until the NCCA decides that it's okay to demolish them.
I am not a fan of laws that exhibit a knee-jerk reaction to current problems without examining why the situation is so. I do not see how increasing the penalties in a law can translate to increased awareness of its subject matter. In the first place, very few people know what cultural heritage is and why it is necessary to preserve it. I would rather that the law emphasize what cultural heritage is, what can be done to preserve it, and include the real stakeholders in the process of conservation.
The "Heritage Caravan" project of the Committee on Sites, Relics and Structures (a committees under the Cebu Provincial Tourism and Heritage Council created by Governor Gwen Garcia in 2004) is a program that should be made part of heritage laws.
Under this project, municipalities and component cities of Cebu were given basic training on heritage preservation. A typical caravan starts with a talk by Architect Melva Rodriguez-Java, the chairman of the committee, on basic principles of conservation. She related these with problems in Cebu that resulted from development plans that did not take history and heritage into consideration.
Experts on preserving built heritage, archaeology, museums, law, and tourism were also invited to lecture on these subjects.
Mr. Ruel Rigor, who heads the training team, taught participants the techniques involved in cultural mapping and the inventory of tangible heritage. In between sessions, team-building exercises were conducted.
After the heritage caravan, the participants conduct an inventory of their town's natural and historical sites, its relics and artifacts, crafts, stories, and other information relevant to local culture. They are then given another workshop on Conservation Management Planning to teach them to conserve what they themselves have identified as valuable to them.
It's too early to judge whether the Heritage Caravan project is a success if the criteria is the number of heritage sites and artifacts preserved. What I do know is that it is a wonderful first step towards putting cultural heritage where it belongs: the community.
* * *
Email: lkemalilong@yahoo.com