This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
I, MANUEL DAYRIT, Filipino, of legal age, with address at #4 Gen. Capinpin Street, San Antonio Village, Brgy. San Antonio, Pasig City, under oath, state: That I am the Chairman of ANG KAPATIRAN PARTY (ALLIANCE FOR THE COMMON GOOD), a political organization registered pursuant to law, organized to promote the common good and the politics of virtue and duty; That I am initiating this criminal complaint for violation of Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code against the following respondents who are public officers, namely: Name 1. Emily A. Abrera 2. Raul M. Sunico 3. Florangel Rosario-Braid 4. Jaime Laya 5. Isabel Caro Wilson 6. Zenaida R. Tantoco 7. Cristina Turalba 8. Antonio S. Yap 9. Carolyn Espiritu 10. Karen Ocampo-Flores and Address Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City Cultural Center of the Philippines Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City
11. MIDEO CRUZ Philippines
Care of Cultural Center of the Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City
That respondent EMILY A. ABRERA is the Chairperson of the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP for brevity), a government agency created by Presidential Decree No. 15; That respondent RAUL M. SUNICO is the President and Artistic Director of CCP; That respondents FLORANGEL ROSARIO-BRAID, JAIME LAYA, ISABEL CARO WILSON, ZANAIDA R. TANTOCO, CRISTINA TURALBA, ANTONIO S. YAP, and CAROLYN E. ESPIRITU are members of the Board of Trustees of CCP, while respondent KAREN OCAMPO-FLORES was the Head of the Visual Arts Division of CCP during the duration of the art exhibit described herein; That respondent MIDEO CRUZ is an artist who availed of the use of the premises of the Cultural Center of the Philippines for an exhibit of his art works; That according to the CCP website http://www.culturalcenter.gov.ph/page.php?page_id=545 (print-out marked Annex A and A-1 herewith), CCP launched the exhibit “Kulo” on July 17, 2011 as part of the celebration by CCP of national hero Jose Rizal’s 150th birthday; That among the works exhibited in “Kulo” are the works of respondent MIDEO CRUZ entitled “Poleteismo” which is a collage or mixture of various images and objects, as shown in ANNEXES B, B-1 and B-2; That said exhibit offends the Christian religion and is against the law, morals, and good customs; That said exhibit was opened to the public with free admission from July 17, 2011 until it was closed on August 9, 2011 and were viewed by many people including herein COMPLAINANT and the members of the Ang Kapatiran Party; That in said works, respondent MIDEO CRUZ made a blasphemous and offensive use of sacred icons, pictures, and representations of Jesus Christ who is worshiped by Christians, the Blessed Virgin Mary who is revered and loved by Christians, as well as religious articles such as the holy rosary, the Christian cross, crucifix, scapulars and medals which are sacred instruments of Christian faith and tradition in a vulgar, insulting and blasphemous manner as follows. ANNEX C and C-1 show a statue of Christ the King, where attached to the tip of the nose of Jesus Christ is a red ball and on the head is a pair of red ears resembling a popular comic character; ANNEXES D, D-1 and D-2 show a religious image of the Sacred Heart of Jesus where, attached to its face is a protruding wooden replica of the male genital organ draped with a wooden rosary; ANNEXES E and F are two (2) other images of the Sacred Heart of Jesus in another part of the wall with a male genital organ protruding from the face; ANNEX G is a religious image of Jesus Christ with eyes dripping with black tears; 2
ANNEXES H, H-1 and H-2 show a large wooden cross draped with a rosary, scapulars and other religious objects and at the bottom part of the cross is a protruding male organ in red; ANNEXES H-3 and H-4 show assorted objects below the wooden cross, which objects include a wooden replica of the male genital organ; ANNEXES I and I-2 condom; show a wooden cross draped with a stretched
ANNEX J is an image of the Sacred heart of Jesus on whose forehead is pinned a plastic bag containing packs of condoms; ANNEX K is an image of the Last Supper showing Jesus Christ and his disciples where the figure of Jesus Christ at the center is draped in black with a Mickey Mouse logo pasted on its head; ANNEX L is an image of the crucified Christ and adjacent to it is a photograph of a pin-up girl in provocative attire; ANNEX M is an image of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the crucified Christ next to a photograph of a woman in a scanty attire and large rosary beads; That in using, depicting and vandalizing Christian images, religious icons and sacred Christian representations of faith and religious belief in a vulgar, indecent, and blasphemous manner, the works of respondent MIDEO CRUZ offend the Christian religion and the faithful of the Christian faith. The said works insult and mock Christian belief and Christian worship, and offend the religious sensibilities and faith of the Christian faithful comprising an overwhelming majority of the Filipino population as in fact, strong protests were widely expressed condemning the said works; That the said exhibit was done by respondent MIDEO CRUZ together with the public respondents who, in relation to their function as officials of CCP, allowed the said exhibit to take place at the CCP Main Gallery at the CCP Building, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City; That the said exhibit of respondent MIDEO CRUZ was done in conspiracy with the respondent public officials who are officers and/or members of the board of trustees—the governing board of CCP; That the acts of respondents constitute a violation of Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, Republic Act No. 6713 (The Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees), in relation to Pres. Decree No. 15; That Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, provides, to wit:
ART. 201. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions, and indecent shows.—The penalty of prision mayor or a fine ranging from six thousand to twelve thousand pesos, or both such imprisonment and fine, shall be imposed upon:
(1) Those who shall publicly expound or proclaim doctrines openly contrary to public morals; (2) (a) The authors of obscene literature, published with their knowledge in any form; the editors publishing such literature; and the owners/operators of the establishment selling the same; Those who, in theaters, fairs, cinematographs or any other place, exhibit indecent or immoral plays, scenes, acts or shows, whether live or in film, which are proscribed by virtue hereof, shall include those which
1. glorify criminals or condone crimes; 2. serve no other purpose but to satisfy the market for violence, lust or pornography; 3. offend any race or religion; 4. tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited drugs; and 5. are contrary to law, public order, morals, good customs, established policies, lawful orders, decrees and edicts. Those who shall sell, give away or exhibit films, prints, engravings, sculpture or literature which are offensive to morals. (As amended by PD Nos. 960 and 969)
(3) That on August 7, 2011, Catholic faithful did a prayer-protest against the above exhibit, held at the entrance of the CCP which protest was reported as front page news in the August 10, 2011 issue of The Philippine Star (copy marked ANNEX N and N-1 herewith); That to corroborate the herein criminal and administrative charges, I attach herein newspaper reports of public reactions to the said exhibit; That Manila Archbishop, Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales protested the above exhibit, as reported in the August 10, 2011 issue of The Philippine Star (ANNEX N-1 herewith) as follows: But Manila Archbishop Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales said Cruz and his supporters may have abused their freedom of expression. He told church-run Radio Veritas on Monday that freedom entails “the responsibility not to attack cultures and the responsibility not to destroy the values of people.” That offense against religion by respondent MIDEO CRUZ was the subject of the main editorial of the Philippine Daily Inquirer in its August 8, 2011 issue (copy marked ANNEX O) that reads in part, to wit: “Art as terrorism
“VIOLENCE SHOULD not be condoned, but the vandalism inflicted on Mideo M. Cruz’s ‘Polytheism” art work at the Cultural Center of the Philippines last Aug. 4—an unidentified couple smashed a penis-motif wooden ashtray glued onto the poster, and tried but failed to set fire to the collage that formed part of the installation—is understandable. The work is deeply offensive to Catholics, and even non-Catholic Christians are shocked and disgusted at the installation’s wooden cross with a movable penis and condom. If all of this does not constitute sacrilege, blasphemy or attack on religion, we don’t know what is.” x x x In the end, Cruz is an “iconoclast.” His art smashes perceived false idols. The danger here is that his art could become arrogant and terror-prone. The Church has experienced a tumultuous history of iconoclastic revolutions across the centuries x x x that have destroyed priceless items in man’s cultural heritage. And the Church is not alone among religions victimized by iconoclasm All of this could be talking points for a civilized discourse about Curz’ art, but instead of calling for dialogue, the CCP ha made matters worse by pooh-poohing the protest. Karen Ocampo Flores, visual arts head of the CCP, arrogantly called it “moralist hysteria” and “religious myopia.” Flores seems unaware that the CCP is a state instrumentality; its exhibit of a work deemed offensive to religious sensibilities makes it complicit to an attack on religion.
That reactions to the above exhibit by Senators was reported in the August 10, 2011 issue of the Manila Bulletin (ANNEX P and P-1 herewith) as follows: At the Upper Chamber, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile ordered a full-blown investigation into the management of the CCP following Senate President Pro Tempore Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada[‘s] privilege speech wherein he called for the resignation of the CCP board members who allowed the exhibit called “Kulo.” “What does it serve a viewers’ mind and soul to see the images of Christianity’s bedrock, Jesus Christ, his mother the Virgin Mary, and of the Cross that symbolizes the supreme sacrifice offered by Christ to redeem mankind, treated so insultingly and with such shocking disrespect by a group of people who believe they have the absolute artistic license to do so?” Estrada stress in his speech. x x x Enrile agreed and said he supports the move since the CCP board members allowed the exhibit to be showcased publicly sans observing moral ethics and considering the country’s reputation as a Christian nation.
That the same August 10, 2011 issue of Manila Bulletin (ANNEX P-1) reported President Benigno Simeon Aquino III’s reaction to the exhibit, as follows: "I was in contact with several board members [of CCP] yesterday AND I TOLD THEM I AM Christian and the country is at least 85 percent Christian then there is this depiction of Christ that offends people, that’s wrong.” Aquino emphasized that “CCP is funded by public money and should be in the service of the people. So when you insult the beliefs of most of the people, where is that service.” Aquino stressed his position: “very clear” to the CCP board that one’s freedom ends when it tramples another.” “There is no freedom that is absolute. There are limits that our laws set that as to what you are allowed to do” he said. “ I am not after censorship when it is supposed to be ennobling and when you stroke conflict that is not an ennobling activity,” he added.
That the same August 10, 2011 issue of Manila Bulletin (ANNEX P-1) reported strong protests and public outcry from various sectors of the Filipino population, to wit: Edwar Llanes, a graphic artist supervisor and a devout Catholic, dismissed the artwork as “stupid.” “That is stupid because the artist lost respect to the religion and its beliefs. The Philippines consists of mostly Catholics and we deplore phallic symbols in religious images. We must respect the culture of each religion,” he said. The above exhibit of respondent MIDEO CRUZ also became the subject of a privilege speech in the Lower House by Rep. Amado Bagatsing as quoted in the August 9, 2011 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer (ANNEX Q herein) as follows: “Where in the world can you see the images of Jesus Christ with a penis? This is sacrilegious. It’s a very obscene exhibit. I don’t think they can call this art. There is a difference between art and insanity,” Bagatsing said. That the same August 9, 2011 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer (ANNEX Q) carried a report on the reaction of former First Lady, Imelda R. Marcos to the above exhibit. The report said of Mrs. Marcos: “It was a shameful exhibit, especially so since it was placed in the Cultural Center of the Philippines. We build that to be the sanctuary of the Filipino soul and a monument to the Filipino spirit.” She said the flag at the CCP symbolized “KKK”— katotohanan, kabutihan and kagandahan—or “the true, the good and the beautiful
“After seeing the exhibit I was really shocked because it was not only ugly, it was not true, it was not at all beautiful because there were statues and pictures of saints and Christ with horns and with his penis up and it was really a desecration of a spiritual symbol for Catholics.” Comments were also posted online such as the following emailed comments posted at http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=715131 as of August 10, 2011 (print-out marked ANNEX R , R-1 and R-2 herewith) that read as follows: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=715131 (Accessed August 10 2011) bluejec posted on Aug 10, 2011 10:15 AM “sa mga nagtolerate sa artist na yan sana mag volunteer na lang kayo. mukha nyo ang ipinta lagyan ng kung anu ano gaya ng titi at puke sa mukha nyo. or sa mga asawa nyo habang kinakantot ng aso. hindi porket imahe ng mga catholics ang nanyan sasabay din kayo dahil okay lang at hindi naman kayo ang nasaktan. eh kung yung pinapaniwalaan mo kaya ang ipinta nila at babuyin ano sa tingin myo mararamdaman nyo.” dzing wrote: Is freedom of expression absolute? Coz it seems that it can not be restricted by any law. dzing: Absolutely NOT. It is subject to limitations according to the laws of a country. tweety wrote: FOX: You are correct about that statue of Moses and the Hebrew mistranslation. Quite similar to the misrendering of YWH to Jehovah instead of Yahweh. However, our freedom (of speech, of expression, or democratic freedom) also ends where the rights of others begins. You are free to go just about anywhere because this is a free country, but are you free to enter you neighbor's yard just about anytime? I agree that FREEDOM is one of the essence of democracy. But the way so many of us think of and use this freedom is a very sick indicator of where our country is right now. We severely lack discipline and almost everyone thinks that just because we're free we can simply express, say, and do what we like. Anarchy is not the same as freedom. And this sorry state of our mindset explains why we're at the cellar in economy and in culture. bluejec wrote: dennis_2980: hoy dennis hindi porket mahilig ka sa arts gawin mo ng excuse yun para sa tinatawag mong freedom of expression. oo may kaibahan ang pornography s arts. pero dapat mo rin malaman ang kaibahan ng art sa pambaboy.
Badajosnon Macabaian posted on Aug 10, 2011 09:57 AM “There is no freedom that is absolute. There are limits set as to what you’re allowed to do. I made my position very clear to them, and I did stress the idea that you have rights, but if you trample upon the rights of others, I think there is something wrong there, ” the President said." Agree. Freedom is never absolute. Precisely, we have various laws in our lives to regulate our various freedoms.
That on August 1, 2011, St. Thomas More Society sent a letter (ANNEX S herewith) was sent to respondent RAUL SUNICO demanding the closure of the said exhibit and conveying the outrage and protest of representatives of the following religious and civic organizations: St. Thomas More Society, Inc., represented by Atty. Jo Imbong, Executive Director, and Atty. James Imbong, General Counsel Solidarity Foundation, represented by Eric Manalang, its President Biblemode International and the Metropolitan Bible Baptist Church represented by Congressman & Senior Pastor Bienvenido Abante Lighthouse Bible Baptist Church, and Biblemode International, represented by Senior Pastor Reuben Abante Prolife Phil. Foundation represented by Lorna Megrito, Exec. Director TEODORA-The Authentic Woman represented by Maribel Descallar Cardinal Sin Assembly of the Knights of Columbus, represented by Dr. Primitivo Chua, M.D. Couples for Christ Foundation for Family & Life, Laguna District, represented by Atty. George Dee Diocesan Commission on Family & Life, San Pablo City, represented by Rev. Fr. Jerry Oblepias Women of Asia for Development & Enterprise, represented by Ma. Fenny Tatad Mary’s Army to Save Souls Media Movement, represented by Ma. Fatima Nebrida-Ballesty and Gene Ballesty Kilusang Kabataan Para Kay Kristo, represented by Johma Villahermosa Bicol Graduate School Student Board, represented by Prof. Marvin Julian Sambajon, Jr., and Human Life International-Pilipinas, represented by its Country Director, Dr. Rene Josef Bullecer; That the said demand letter (ANNEX S), states, in part, to wit: “A description of these works surely does not do justice to the actual viewing of the work, but for the purpose of this complaint, a simple description of the images therein is sufficient to reveal the predominant theme of the exhibit: the callous trivialization, ridicule and disrespect for religious sentiments of Christians and the outrageous blasphemous rendition and use of religious images/representations of divine relation with Christian faith, belief, and worship.
“It is in this light that we communicate the moral and emotional injury experienced by Christians from the exhibition of
these works. The religious images of Jesus Christ, Mary the Mother of Christ, the Holy Family, the Saints, and the Rosary— these are actual images that are a sacred part of various Christian denominations which intimately communicate and embody the central figures of their Christian faith and tradition. These images pertain not only to historical persons of the Christian faith, but of divine personages of worship and veneration. The mockery and ridicule exhibit by these works exhibit a sense of violation that strikes at a Christian’s very being—a sense of moral and emotional wounding against the Christian person’s dignity.
“The exhibit, taken as a whole, mocks and makes a travesty of religious sentiments of the Filipino people—their Christian sentiments—that are inextricably part of our Filipino culture and values that define our national identity—values that the CCP is mandated to foster, nurture and protect.
“The exhibition and hosting of an exhibit hostile to the very mandate of that agency—on public property and by a public agency—is an abuse of public authority and a breach of public trust. It does no public service except to subvert the common good, appealing as it does to the baser instincts rather than to higher and more edifying dispositions of the human person. “Consider this, therefore, as a formal complaint and demand for the discontinuance and closure of the said exhibit within forty-eight (48) hours from your receipt of this letter, otherwise, we shall be constrained to pursue all forms of judicial relief to restrain the further exhibition of these works and hold the CCP and its officers responsible thereon.”
That public respondents refused to close the exhibit as requested in the letter dated August 1, 2011 (ANNEX S); That on August 2, 2011, I led a group of civic leaders, together with Atty. Jo Aurea Imbong, Executive Director of St. Thomas More Society, Inc., to personally convey our outrage and protest to respondent RAUL M. SUNICO at the CCP where we requested for the closure of the said exhibit but Mr. Sunico did not act on our request contrary to his promise to us that he will respond “immediately”; That public respondents acted with grave abuse of authority, in violation of Pres. Decree No. 15 and Rep. Act 6713; That according to Presidential Decree No. 15 (CREATING THE CULTURAL CENTER OF THE PHILIPPINES, DEFINING ITS OBJECTIVES, POWERS AND FUNCTIONS AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES): “Section 2. Purposes and Objectives. - The Center shall have the following purposes and objectives: (a) To construct, establish and maintain in a single site a national theater, a national music hall, an art gallery and such other buildings and facilities as are necessary or
desirable for the holding of conferences, seminars, concerts and the like; (b) To awaken the consciousness of our people to our cultural heritage, and to encourage them to assist in its preservation, promotion, enhancement and development; (c) To cultivate and enhance public interests in, and appreciations of, distinctive Philippine arts in various fields;” (Emphasis ours) That according to the http://www.culturalcenter.gov.ph : Mission Statement of CCP posted in
“The Cultural Center of the Philippines nurtures and promotes artistic excellence, Filipino aesthetics and identity and positive cultural values towards a humanistic global society.” That CCP has a Performance Pledge that it will— “Take pride in the continued promotion of artistic excellence, cultural values, Filipino aesthetics and national identity towards a humanistic global society.” That according to Republic Act No. 6713 (The Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees): Section 4. Norms of Conduct of Public Officials and Employees. - (A) Every public official and employee shall observe the following as standards of personal conduct in the discharge and execution of official duties: (a) Commitment to public interest. - Public officials and employees shall always uphold the public interest over and above personal interest. All government resources and powers of their respective offices must be employed and used efficiently, effectively, honestly and economically, particularly to avoid wastage in public funds and revenues. (b) Professionalism. - Public officials and employees shall perform and discharge their duties with the highest degree of excellence, professionalism, intelligence and skill. They shall enter public service with utmost devotion and dedication to duty. They shall endeavor to discourage wrong perceptions of their roles as dispensers or peddlers of undue patronage. (f) Nationalism and patriotism. - Public officials and employees shall at all times be loyal to the Republic and to the Filipino people, promote the use of locally produced goods, resources and technology and encourage appreciation and pride of country and people. They shall endeavor to maintain and defend Philippine sovereignty against foreign intrusion. That far from nurturing and promoting the Filipino identity and positive Filipino cultural values, respondent public respondents promoted the opposite; 10
That by hosting and allowing the above described exhibit of respondent MIDEO CRUZ to be installed at the CCP Gallery which is a public building, public respondents violated their public trust and duty to the Filipino people. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
(Original Signed) MANUEL DAYRIT Affiant
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.