CAPTURING THE FILIPINO SPIRIT IN STEEL & WOOD
Message of Sen. Nene Pimentel to the United Architects of the Philippines on the occasion of its 16th National Conference on October 27, 2007, at the Waterfront Hotel in Cebu City
Mr. President, Medeliano Roldan Jr., Mr. Executive Director, Roger Ong, Ms. Conference Director, Catherine Carunungan, Distinguished Guests, Officers and Members of the Institute, my dear friends:
Thank you for inviting me to your 16th national convention today. Thank you for the support that you have unfailingly extended to the causes I have stood for through the years.
The message that I deliver to you today is something that I have said many times before. But I think it is worth repeating until the message is thoroughly understood not only by you as architects but by the people of the country.
Wider definition
In my speech before the Architecture Advocacy International Foundation on September 15, 2007, I suggested that as a people we should go for the wider definition of the profession of architecture. And that is to include the design of the total build environment from the macro-level of town planning and urban design to the micro-level of construction details.
I would like to see the Filipino spirit captured in structures of steel and wood when our architects do urban planning or landscape architecture.
The fastest way to do this is to insist that Republic Act No. 9266, The Architecture Act of 2004, the law that I authored and sponsored in the Senate, be implemented now.
Man-made obstacles
There are, however, man-made obstacles to the full implementation of the law. Some engineers are blocking its implementation by using false arguments that through a civil case that they had filed - Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers, Inc. vs Hermogenes Ebdane, Jr., they had secured an injunction against executing the law in the country.
To the best of my information, the injunction issued by the court on May 24, 2005 merely covered the suspension of certain sections (Sections 302.3 and 302.4) of the 2004 Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (R-IRR) of the 1977 National Building Code of the Philippines (NBCP), as embodied in Presidential Decree (P.D.) 1096.
A study shows that neither the PICE case nor the injunction they sought was about R.A. No. 9266 (The Architecture Act of 2004). In fact, as Mr. Armando N. Alli, the Chairman of Board of Examiners of Architects of the Professional Regulatory Board of Architecture or (PRBoA) of the Philippine Regulatory Commission, has said, “for the past fifty seven years, there has been a special law governing the preparation, signing and sealing of architectural documents and limiting such acts to only Registered and Licensed Architects (RLAs). This is found basically in R.A. No. 545 of 1950, later modified by R.A. No. 1582 of 1956 and finally by R.A. No. 9266 of 2004."
IRRs don’t supersede law
To repeat, the injunction relied upon by the engineers objecting to Republic Act No. 9266 did not refer at all nor does it apply to R.A. No. 9266, its Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) and derivative regulations.
This is the first time in my experience as a lawyer that some individuals who should know better are foisting upon the people the untenable proposition that implementing rules supersede the provisions of the law that the rules are supposed to implement. That cannot be and should not be.
Bad faith
Moreover, the members of the Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers who are advocating such a position appear to be acting in evident bad faith. PICE was a party to the crafting of R.A. No. 9266, a fact that is shown in the Congressional Records of 2003 through 2004.
Again, let me quote Mr. Alli:
Now, the concerned engineers resort to a strained interpretation of the generic term “building plans” which, in their mind, belongs to their domain as engineers. They forget that “engineering plans” have three main components:
1. architectural documents (prepared/signed/sealed by registered and licensed architects or RLAs under R.A. No. 9266, a special law);
2. engineering documents (prepared/signed/sealed by registered and licensed civil/structural, electrical electronics and communications, mechanical, sanitary engineers and the like), and,
3. allied documents (prepared/signed/sealed by registered and licensed interior designers, landscape architects, environmental planners and the like.
During the discussion of the bill, regarding the balancing of interests of the two professions, it appears that in exchange for the PICE support for the then architecture bill, the architects gave up structural design in favor of the engineers.
Even the old law governing the profession of architects, R.A. No. 544 of 1950 (actually already amended by R.A. No. 1582 of 1956, Sec. 24 of which clearly distinguished the roles of the CE and the architect), does not support the PICE position.
Follow rule of law
I hope that what I have mentioned is enough reminder to all concerned that it is vital that we follow the rule of law in this country. Otherwise, we will be governed by the law of the jungle where the will of the more powerful and, perhaps, the more numerous, would prevail over what is right.
That would be a prescription for disorder and chaos.
Now let us talk about your profession.
Somebody has said and I think it is true that the most important things in life cannot be captured in prose. That is why there is music. And if I might add, architecture, which Goethe, the German poet, has called “frozen music.”
Conceptualization vs implementation
In any case, when I was a young boy, I did not know the distinction between the work of an architect and an engineer. I now know the big difference between the work of an architect and an engineer. The architect conceptualizes things, the engineer implements.
The distinction, however, apparently escapes many government officials who still think the way I did when I was a boy that the engineer’s profession encompasses that of the architect.
Erroneous primacy of engineers
That is the probably reason why in the scheme of things in government, it is the engineer that is given primacy – erroneously, I think - in the construction of the infrastructure needs of the nation. I may be wrong but may I ask if there was ever an architect who was made the secretary of the department of public works and highways? It is probable that somebody who was both an architect and an engineer had occupied that post. But I do wonder if someone who because he or she is an architect has ever occupied the position as secretary of the DPWH.
Esthetics, environment and utility
And yet, I think that an architect as architect should be a primary contender for that position, perhaps, better than any other profession. After all, even in the construction of highways, there should be due consideration to the demands not only of esthetics but of the environment, aside, of course, of utility of the infrastructure being built. And, then, of course, there is the matter of the construction of public works that, to my mind, include public buildings and facilities. Here, in the construction of public buildings and facilities, the demands of beauty and the environment should even more be melded into their utilitarian aspects.
Now, in the construction of public buildings and facilities – whether built by the national or local government - may the people not expect that these edifices bear the brand of the Filipino? In other words, may we not compel that these buildings and facilities reflect the culture or the soul of the people?
If the Iglesia ni Cristo can mandate that its churches bear the distinct characteristics that identify them as INC temples, why can’t the government – national and local - insist that its buildings be built in a manner that somehow carry the mark that these are public facilities constructed by the Filipino, of the Filipino, and principally for the Filipino.
Balancing globalization
If we can get the government to require that the culture, the character and the soul of the Filipino be reflected in all its public works, I suppose that there would be a renaissance of the Filipino spirit that is so badly needed to counterbalance the inroads that globalization make in the lives of people in the world today. To do that, we need the services of the architects of the country.
Needless to say, if we can get the government to require that all public works and facilities should bear the mark of the Filipino, that would require the employment of the talents that you have acquired from our schools of architecture or from experience to advance that aspect of defining our national identity.
Relevance to nation-building
As a lawmaker, I support the development of your profession. I want you to be relevant to the cause of nation-building. That is why I authored the new law governing your profession.
But as a citizen, I wish you, as architects, would take the lead in capturing the essence, the beauty and the character of the Filipino in the edifices that you build.
Aga Khan Awards
Incidentally, the Aga Khan Awards for Architecture for 2004 cited the Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpur for “generating a slender form that responds poetically to the broader landscape.”
That is an eloquent tribute to the architectural design of the Kuala Lumpur twin towers. How I wish we could say the same thing of any building in the country today.
The Jury of the Awards added that “The simple geometrical pattern that generates the plan not only uses space efficiently to maximize exposure to natural light, but also creates a rich spatial expression. The building has become an icon that expresses the sophistication of contemporary Malaysian society and builds on the country’s rich traditions to shape a world city.”
According to the chair of Petronas, Tan Sri Azizan Zainul Abidin, the then Malaysian Prime Minister, Mahathir “wanted a building that would be identifiably Malaysian, that was of world class standards and which Malaysians could be proud of.”
Edifices identifiably Filipino
I am sure that our people want structures that would be identifiably Filipino, of world-class standards, and of which we, as a people, could be proud.
While we envy the poetry of the Petronas Towers, we also know that the designs were made by Carlos Pelli, an Argentinian, not by a Malaysian. That fact should give us an added impetus to dare to dream that one day soon, you, the Filipino architects, would do Pelli better. You would build the Filipino edifices that will do us proud.
You can do it. The Filipino brain is not inferior to the brain of other nationalities. You capture the Filipino Spirit in steel and wood.
God bless and congratulations to the officers and the members of the United Architects of the Philippines.