Vandalism is not free speech

While freedom of expression is one of the fundamental human rights enshrined in our laws, the manifestation of which must fall within the bounds of law and not causing destruction or damage to property.

On Tuesday, images of a wall vandalism in one of the recently-cleaned up underpasses of the City of Manila became trending topic online. The writing on the wall, in paint brush, got the ire of Manila Mayor Isko Moreno who did not hide his disappointment and vowed to deal with those responsible for the act. If he catches the culprits, he boldly said he will let them lick the writings until they are erased.

The Lagusnilad Underpass, which was recently cleared of vendors and stalls as part of the city’s cleanup and rehabilitation efforts.
The vandalism on the wall was later owned up by militant cultural group Panday Sining which later offered apologies for writing a protest statement on the wall

However, the defiant group still managed to defend their acts through a statement, saying: “Sorry for the inconvenience, but the matter and issues at hand are urgent. That is why Panday Sining, a cultural organization of the youth, conducted its Graffiesta as a response to this worsening economic and political state of the nation.”

This is a very lame excuse. Clearly, this is unacceptable. How can a cultural group promote itself as a respectable organization that stands up for peace, sovereignty and people’s rights and uses destructive tools to express themselves? Enough of this crap. The culture of destruction for the sole purpose of gaining attention is unjustifiable. This is a deliberate act of damaging public property coming off the heels of a determined campaign by a local government unit to make its environs more pleasant to people. And yet, here comes these vandals, in the guise of expressing their cause, taking advantage of the clean walls of a public property.

Panday Sining should just take the fact — and anyone can guess they are fully aware of this — that wrongful means can never justify a rightful end, nor can a rightful end justify wrongful means.

Urgent? There are many legal and more effective avenues to express an urgent concern if only they opted for what is right.

Urgent? Nah, these issues aren’t new. They are old, rehashed slogans.

Cut the crappy excuse, please.

Leave a Reply

0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments