To challenge the Presidential Proclamation of the 2009 National Artists, those
opposed to it must first convince the Court that there is actually an unlawful
action already committed. There must actually be a proclamation issued or if
only about to be issued, that there are documents proving executive action has
taken place but not yet fully implemented. Lawyers call this point justiciable
issue. The court cannot act if there is nothing to act upon.

I checked Malacanang's list of Presidential Proclamations and found that the
Proclamation on the 2009 National Artists has not yet been issued, but there is
a bunch of Proclamations numbered 1842 to 1849 which have not yet been made
public on the website of the Office of the Press Secretary. The website of the
Office of the President is not updated well.

The list on the OPS website has Proclamation 1841 about the 2010 national
holidays (dated July 21, 2009) and then jumps to Proclamation 1850 which
declares a national period of mourning over the death of former President
Corazon Aquino (dated August 1, 2009).

We have here a mysterious set of eight Presidential Proclamations of President
Gloria Arroyo which have not yet been made public or not yet numbered and ready
for public release.

What is public knowledge is an OPS press release issued on July 29, 2009 which
said: "Ermita made the announcement minutes before the President and her lean
delegation boarded a commercial Philippine Air Lines flight bound for the United
States for her historic meeting with American President Barack Obama."

Assuming there is justiciable issue, the parties taking it to the court must be
concerned parties. The National Artists are concerned parties, but let us beware
of people like those who keep filing those impeachment cases to immunize
impeachable officials from impeachment cases.

Assuming further that the first two hurdles of justiciable issue and proper
parties are overcome, the next challenge is to prove that President Arroyo acted
beyond her authority as provided by law and by regulations (including Executive
Order 435 – the Honors Code of the Philippines).

EO 435 vests upon two instrumentalities some responsibilities for implementing
the Honors Code. There is the Chancellery and there is the Committee on Honors.
The Chancellery is part of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA). The
Committee on Honors is chaired by the Executive Secretary. DFA officials and
employees are civil servants and many are career officers. It is unlikely that
they will be complicit in desecrating the National Artist Award. But there may
be cause for concern about political machinations in the Committee on Honors. We
are not certain if honorable persons comprise this committee. The task of this
Committee is to 'assist'. This word, 'assist' is simple but in government
service it is a catch-all word for a wide variety of responsibilities.

This Committee, chaired by the Executive Secretary, with the DFA Secretary as
Vice Chairman, has several members: the Head of the Presidential Management
Staff (PMS), the Chief of Presidential Protocol, the Chief of Protocol and State
Visits of the Department of Foreign Affairs, and the Presidential Assistant for
Historical Affairs.

Who is the current Presidential Assistant for Historical Affairs? I have not
found out yet. I do know who had served in that post: Manuel Quezon III. The
current Presidential Assistant for Historical Affairs would know how the 2009
National Artist Award was deliberated and decided upon in Malacanang.

The rules on the National Artist Award provide that there has to be a nomination
to start the process of conferring the award on anyone. There is a nomination
form that must be submitted either to the NCCA or to the Cultural Center of the
Philippines. It is possible that if anyone wants to take a shortcut through the
process, the nomination may have been submitted to the Committee on Honors.

So, if anyone wants to know how the anomaly happened and who is responsible,
find out who the Presidential Assistant is and get hold of the nomination
documentation. The Chancellery at the DFA may have the records because it serves
as the secretariat for the Honors Code implementation.

EO 435 does not state that the President, the Chancellery or the Committee on
Honors can go beyond the list of those nominated by the NCCA or the CCP.

EO 435 says:

"Pursuant to Proclamation No. 1001 dated April 27, 1972 and
Republic Act No. 7356, the Order of National Artists is the highest
national recognition conferred upon Filipinos who have made distinct
contributions to arts and letters, upon the recommendation of the
Cultural Center of the Philippines and the National Commission for
Culture and the Arts (NCCA)."

But there is a curious paragraph which may be cited by Malacanang as their basis
or authority for considering nominations other than those submitted by the NCCA
or CCP. Here is that provision:

"The Committee shall assist the President in evaluating nominations for
recipients of Honors hereunder, as well as of Presidential Awards. For this
purpose, the Committee may authorize relevant departments or government agencies
to maintain Honors and/or Awards Committees to process nominations for Honors
and/or Presidential Awards."

This paragraph may allow the Committee to cast a wider net so to speak. Is this
provision legal?

Within Section 12 of RA 7356 (the law that created the NCCA), there is this
provision on the mandate of the NCCA:

"4) extend recognition of artistic achievement through awards, grants and
services to artists and cultural groups which contribute significantly to the
Filipino's cultural legacy;"

Is this mandate exclusive? Maybe the presumption is that it is exclusive, unless
there is some other law that gives another agency the same mandate.

I hope these ideas and information are of help.


--- In eCulturalCenter@yahoogroups.com, Dino Manrique <thenoid@...> wrote:
>
> Dear fellow artists,
>
> After watching Media in Focus' episode the other night, "Corruption of
> Culture <http://www.vimeo.com/5992376>," and after looking hard into the
> issue, what really struck and surprised me was the fact that "presidential
> prerogative" when it comes to the selection of National Artists is
>
fictional<http://www.filipinowriter.com/thoughts-on-media-in-focus-episode-on-th\
e-national-artist-controversy>.
> In other words, it does not exist.
>
> With this discovery, together with the reality that 1) the recipients are
> unlikely to decline the
>
awards<http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20090807-21912\
1/2-National-Artists-awardees-hit-critics>AND
> that 2) Malacañang
> will not change its mind despite the artist community's
>
protests<http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20090805-218878\
/Palace-firm-on-choices-of-National-Artists>,
> I've come to the conclusion that said community has no other recourse but a
> legal one -- to go to the Supreme Court and file for an injunction against
> the conferment of the awards, as suggested by Atty. Lorna Kapunan of the
> CCP's Board of
Trustees<http://www.pep.ph/news/22724/CCP:-Malaca%C3%B1ang-bypassed-rules-of-the\
-selection-process-for-National-Artists/1/2>.
>
>
> I suggest that Atty. Kapunan et al should push on with this legal remedy once
> they receive the official notice of the
>
proclamation<http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=493242&publicationSu\
bCategoryId=63>,
> since the reason we're raising a howl after all is to stop an illegal act,
> let alone an immoral one, dead in its tracks. In other words, the goal
> should be to declare the act of adding four names, and striking off another,
> illegal. This should have been done a long time ago, when President Ramos
> started messing with the
> process<http://www.newsflash.org/2003/05/pe/pe002652.htm>and we
> allowed an illegal act to continue and become a tradition (perhaps
> due to ignorance or polite deferral or just plain laziness on our part --
> "Let it be since it's just one name after all."). We're just now reaping the
> whirlwind. However, we've learned our lesson, and are now prepared to make
> amends by slaying the monster that our sin of omission has become.
>
> For more details, and for a complete outline of my position, please read my
> article
>
http://www.filipinowriter.com/thoughts-on-media-in-focus-episode-on-the-national\
-artist-controversy,
> including the comments.
>
> Best,
> Dino Manrique
> ---
> http://www.FilipinoWriter.com
> Empowering the Filipino Writer and Reader
>
> http://www.PinoyFilm.com
> The Filipino Filmmaking Portal
>