Keep or let go?:Patria debate reaches NHCP

CEBU, Philippines — The Cebu City Cultural and Historical Affairs Commission (CHAC) has asked comments and recommendations from the City Legal Office and the National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP) on the proposed demolition of the decades-old Patria de Cebu building.

CHAC chairman, Vice Mayor Edgardo Labella, said the move came after the Cebu City Office of the Building Official (OBO) endorsed to CHAC the archdiocese’s application to have the more than 60-year-old building razed to pave way for a new edifice with commercial functions.

“We referred it to National Historical Commission of the Philippines and the Cebu City Legal Office to look into the laws governing it and to submit to us a report in due time within a reasonable period,” Labella told The FREEMAN.

As this developed, the head of the Cebu Archdiocesan Commission for the Cultural Heritage of the Church has maintained that pushing through with the redevelopment project was a “collective” decision.

“It’s not just my stand but of the archbishop and his administration board,” wrote Father Brian Brigoli, the commission’s chairperson, in a text message.

Cebu Archbishop Jose Palma had said it was not a personal judgment, but the decision of the entire administration board to continue with the proposed project -- a modern, commercial center.

Though a compromise was raised -- retaining the front portion -- the developer, Cebu Landmasters Inc., reportedly signified withdrawing from the project if this would be considered.

Palma, during a dialogue with other board members on January 9, resorted to a voting, which resulted in favoring the developer’s plan to redevelop the entire old building instead of the other option of keeping Patria’s façade.

With this, Palma said the archdiocese is firm on continuing the project.

Fr. Brigoli reiterated Palma’s stand as to the classification of the Patria building.

“The archbishop has stated that Patria is not a structure that the Church considers it as a heritage. Unlike the church edifice and its adjunct structures which are considered as heritage, Patria is out of it,” he went on.

But other lay members of the commission think otherwise.

Eileen Mangubat, one of the two members who tendered resignation, wrote in the letter that the Patria is “a piece of heritage” in need of protection.

Mangubat and Architect Melva Java, who earlier expressed leaving the commission, have been vocal in opposing the demolition of the entire building. They and the other lay members have pleaded to keep the front block facing the Cebu Metropolitan Cathedral.

“Your decision in the third dialog last Jan. 9, 2019 to proceed with the design plan of Cebu Landmasters Inc. -- and to demolish the whole pastoral center -- filled me with regret,” Mangubat wrote in a Jan. 16 letter addressed to Palma.

Since December, three dialogues have been held with the board and CLI for heritage advocates to appeal to Palma to retain a part of the Patria, which is the main administration building along P. Burgos Street.

Mangubat expressed dismay after this compromise was “no longer entertained” when CLI announced during a meeting that it would back out from the project if the original building will be kept.

Palma also admitted that CLI representatives indeed manifested this during the meeting, that was why the Hiligaynon prelate opted for the board, who were native Cebuanos, to decide and vote.

But Mangubat wrote: “Your Grace, it is not my place to countermand your decision to favor the CLI's position. As a 'corporation sole,' you alone have full authority to decide on property matters of the Archdiocese. However, my role as a Cebuana, taypayer and a daughter of faith compels me to continue advocating to spare the Patria de Cebu from total demolition. I have not given up hope that this heritage building can coexist with new commercial buildings rising in a redeveloped Patria block.”

Meanwhile, CHAC said it has also asked the opinion of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts regarding the proposal.

CHAC convened on Monday to discuss OBO’s endorsement.

Labella said the body decided to make a joint referral to look into the laws that govern heritage and legal dimensions of the building.

“That was the consensus of the body, and I don’t want to preempt whatever is the decision and the report of the NHCP on the heritage and legal dimensions on this matter,” he added.

In its website, the NHCP says that by virtue of Republic Act 10086, it is responsible for the conservation and preservation of the country’s historical legacies. Its major thrusts encompass an ambitious cultural program on historical studies, curatorial works, architectural conservation, Philippine heraldry, historical information dissemination activities, restoration and preservation of relics and memorabilia of heroes and other renowned Filipinos.

On a personal note, Labella said he agrees with the proposed compromise of Architect Java and Mangubat.

Labella, however, said he will just wait for the comments and recommendations of the NHCP and the legal office on the matter.

“I am hopeful that there will be a win-win solution because the proposal of Architect Java and Ms. Mangubat and the rest of the heritage advocates, they were proposing for a compromise to retain the frontage of the building,” he added.

As of yesterday, OBO head Josefa Ylanan said the office has not issued a demolition permit pending CHAC’s recommendations.

The FREEMAN tried to contact CLI last night but received no response as of this writing. — JMD (FREEMAN)