Joya VS PCGG

G.R. No.
96541 August 24, 1993
DEAN JOSE JOYA, ET AL, petitioners,

vs.
PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT (PCGG), ET AL, respondents.
FACTS: On 9 August 1990, Mateo A.T. Caparas, then Chairman of PCGG, wrote then President
Corazon C. Aquino, requesting her for authority to sign the proposed Consignment Agreement
between the Republic of the Philippines through PCGG and Christie, Manson and Woods
International, Inc. (Christie's of New York, or CHRISTIE'S) concerning the scheduled sale on 11
January 1991 of eighty-two (82) Old Masters Paintings and antique silverware seized from
Malacañang and the Metropolitan Museum of Manila alleged to be part of the ill-gotten wealth of the
late President Marcos, his relatives and cronies
On 26 October 1990, the Commission on Audit (COA) through then Chairman Eufemio C. Domingo
submitted to President Aquino the audit findings and observations of COA on the Consignment
Agreement of 15 August 1990 to the effect that: (a) the authority of former PCGG Chairman Caparas
to enter into the Consignment Agreement was of doubtful legality; (b) the contract was highly
disadvantageous to the government; (c) PCGG had a poor track record in asset disposal by auction
in the U.S.; and, (d) the assets subject of auction were historical relics and had cultural significance,
hence, their disposal was prohibited by law.
On 15 November 1990, PCGG through its new Chairman David M. Castro, wrote President Aquino
defending the Consignment Agreement and refuting the allegations of COA Chairman Domingo. On 3
the same date, Director of National Museum Gabriel S. Casal issued a certification that the items
subject of the Consignment Agreement did not fall within the classification of protected cultural
properties and did not specifically qualify as part of the Filipino cultural heritage.
After the oral arguments of the parties on 9 January 1991, we issued immediately our resolution
denying the application for preliminary injunction to restrain the scheduled sale of the artworks on
the ground that petitioners had not presented a clear legal right to a restraining order and that proper
parties had not been impleaded
ISSUES: All thirty-five (35) petitioners in this Special Civil Action for Prohibition and Mandamus with
Prayer for Preliminary Injunction and/or Restraining Order seek to enjoin the Presidential
Commission on Good Government (PCGG) from proceeding with the auction sale scheduled on 11
January 1991 by Christie's of New York of the Old Masters Paintings and 18th and 19th century
silverware seized from Malacañang and the Metropolitan Museum of Manila and placed in the
custody of the Central Bank
HELD:
Clearly, the cultural properties of the nation which shall be under the protection of the state are
classified as the "important cultural properties" and the "national cultural treasures." "Important
cultural properties" are cultural properties which have been singled out from among the innumerable
cultural properties as having exceptional historical cultural significance to the Philippines but are not
sufficiently outstanding to merit the classification of national cultural treasures. On the other hand,
19
a "national cultural treasures" is a unique object found locally, possessing outstanding historical,
cultural, artistic and/or scientific value which is highly significant and important to this country and
nation. This Court takes note of the certification issued by the Director of the Museum that the
20
Italian paintings and silverware subject of this petition do not constitute protected cultural properties
and are not among those listed in the Cultural Properties Register of the National Museum.
We agree with the certification of the Director of the Museum. Under the law, it is the Director of the
Museum who is authorized to undertake the inventory, registration, designation or classification, with
the aid of competent experts, of important cultural properties and national cultural
treasures. Findings of administrative officials and agencies who have acquired expertise because
21
their jurisdiction is confined to specific matters are generally accorded not only respect but at times
even finality if such findings are supported by substantial evidence and are controlling on the
reviewing authorities because of their acknowledged expertise in the fields of specialization to which
they are assigned. 22
In view of the foregoing, this Court finds no compelling reason to grant the petition. Petitioners have
failed to show that respondents Executive Secretary and PCGG exercised their functions with grave
abuse of discretion or in excess of their jurisdiction.
WHEREFORE, for lack of merit, the petition for prohibition and mandamus is DISMISSED.

Joya VS PCGG

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Joya VS PCGG

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Joya VS PCGG

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G.R. No.

96541 August 24, 1993

DEAN JOSE JOYA, ET AL, petitioners,

You might also like