Ombudsman junks raps vs CCP execs over ‘Kulo’

MANILA, Philippines - The Office of the Ombudsman, citing insufficient grounds, has junked the criminal and administrative charges filed against 10 Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) officials for allowing the exhibit of supposedly blasphemous artwork in 2011.

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales said the complaints lodged by religious groups against members of the CCP Board of Trustees Emily Abrera, Raul Sunico, Florangel Rosario-Braid, Jaime Laya, Isabel Caro Wilson, Zenaida Tantoco, Maria Cristina Turalba, Antonio Yap, Carolyn Espiritu, and then Visual Arts and Museum Division head Karen Ocampo Flores should fail for lack of probable cause.

Also absolved was artist Mideo Cruz, who was behind the controversial “Poleteismo,” a collection of works that included a religious image of Jesus Christ with a wooden replica of the male genital. The artworks formed part of the “Kulo” art exhibit.

The questioned wall collage also consisted of religious statuettes, religious icons, graduation photos, calendars, maps, and images of actors, politicians, sports stars and pop celebrities.

Kulo, which opened on June 17, 2011, featured the artworks of select University of Santo Tomas (UST) alumni. It was prematurely closed on Aug. 9, 2011 because of the controversy it created.

Flores resigned from her post.

Manuel Dayrit, chairman of the Ang Kapatiran political party-Alliance for the Common Good, first filed an administrative complaint against the CCP officials and Cruz for alleged violations of Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standard for Public Officials and Employees.

Eusebio Dulatas Jr., a preacher at the Christ is the Answer church of Liciada, Bustos, Bulacan, followed suit by filing a separate complaint accusing Abrera and Sunico of grave misconduct and conduct unbecoming of a public officer or employee.

Dulatas and Dayrit also filed criminal complaints for violation of Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, which punishes acts of “immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions and indecent shows” against all the respondents.

In a 34-page joint resolution and a 30-page joint decision both signed on Feb. 28, 2013, Ombudsman Morales found neither probable cause to indict respondents nor substantial evidence to hold them administratively liable, respectively.

The Ombudsman also found no sufficient ground on the criminal aspect.

The decisions stated that Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code applies only to live shows or moving images, since the provision uses the phrase “whether live or in film.”

It added that the medium used in Poleteismo may be covered by paragraph (3) of Article 201, which refers to films, prints, engravings, sculpture or literature but to constitute a violation thereof, it must be offensive to morals and not merely offensive to religion.

Citing the case of People versus Go Pin, the Office of the Ombudsman found that “the context of Poleteismo – as part of the Kulo exhibit that aimed to showcase the artists’ contribution to the discourse in art and social reality in line with Jose Rizal’s 150th birth anniversary – was intended to provoke thought and discussion on the perception that society has adored the gods of money, personalities and sex...”