This case was brought up when a group of Filipino artists and cultural activists intervened to prevent the sale of the Old Masters Paintings and antique silverware that were seized from the Marcos family after the EDSA Revolution. Since these were allegedly acquired through ill-gotten processes, the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) intended to sell these items through Christie’s in New York to recover the ill-gotten wealth. However, the petitioners contended that these items were more than just mere possessions and that it symbolized the history and artistic talent of Filipinos. They were adamant that the sale would deny public access to a significant portion of our history.
In the end, the Supreme Court ruled against the petitioners on three main grounds. First, it found that since the petitioners were not the direct owners of the goods nor directly impacted by the auction, they lacked legal authority to stop the sale. Second, the National Museum did not designate these items as “cultural properties” under RA 5868 or the Cultural Properties Preservation and Protection Act. Lastly, the auction had already occurred prior to the Court’s decision, causing the case to be issued as moot because the Court could no longer stop any action.
While the Court’s decision followed legal standards, I would say that I would not have agreed with it in the interest of cultural preservation. From a heritage perspective, the ruling prioritized legal specifics over the value of the sold items, missing the chance to preserve something that could hold lasting significance for the Filipino identity. Although the sale’s goal was to reclaim funds, a closer evaluation of which items should be preserved might have safeguarded these pieces.