Tuesday, July 22, 2008 Architects note violations of law defining profession’s functions
DESPITE the passage of Republic Act (RA) 9266, or the Architecture Act of 2004, architects report that there are still several violations of professional regulations.
This is why the United Architects of the Philippines (UAP) has decided to intensify its efforts to raise awareness among academic and government institutions, said UAP secretary general Gil Evasco.
Evasco said RA 9266 has created a “landmark change” by providing a “clear dividing line” between the functions of civil engineers and architects.
“RA 9266 virtually stopped the travesty of several professionals. We (UAP) are now an instrument in checking on the abuse committed by other professionals against the law,” he added.
But UAP national president Medeliano Roldan noted that “a lot of problems came out” after the law was passed, “affecting 85 percent of the civil engineers” in the country.
As a result, he said, the UAP—since 2005—has had to face court cases filed by the Philippine Institute of Civil Engineers, which “could not attack the law (but) are looking for loopholes where they can still practice what (should be) ours (architects).”
Roldan did not further discuss these cases but said the UAP is hoping that the court will decide in its favor since it believes in the strength of RA 9266.
The implementing rules of the Architecture Act states that the practice of architecture encompasses: “the provision of professional services in connection with site, physical and planning, and the design, construction, enlargement, conservation, renovation, remodeling, restoration or alteration a building or group of buildings.”
The services of an architect, under the same set of rules, include: “planning, architectural designing and structural conceptualization;” “schematic design, design development, contract documents and construction phases, including professional consultancies, and; preparation of architectural plans, specifications, bill of materials, cost estimates, general conditions and bidding documents.”
The UAP said, though, that non-registered and non-licensed individuals—architecture students, graduates undergoing diversified training, and unsuccessful examinees—violate the law by making architectural plans without the direct supervision of a registered and licensed architect.
These plans are still used, compromising the safety and posing a “detrimental” effect on the lives of building owners and users, said UAP officials in a press conference last Friday.
They said some individuals even use fake Professional Regulatory Commission registration numbers.
Jose Mari Cañizares, deputy project director for UAP Task Force RA 9266, said the public ought to choose an architect in the same way they choose their doctor or lawyer—which is by checking on his or her years of experience, track record of specific projects, as well as standing and service to the community, apart from legal documents that certify him as a registered and licensed architect.
UAP Regional District for Cebu (C1) director Alan Choachuy said that UAP—an integrated and accredited organization with 8,000 to 9,000 active members out of more than 20,000 architects in the country—plans to set a meeting with officials of the cities of Mandaue, Lapu-Lapu and Cebu to discuss RA 9266, among others. (NRC)
