So is taking pictures in Rizal Park prohibited?
"Sir, Ma'am, do you have a permit? It's not allowed to take pictures unless you have a permit."
These are the words we hear every time Security Guards and authorities caught you taking photos, this time in public places especially to those carrying DSLR cameras. And somehow I even think of it as weird especially to think that taking pictures in a public place is also a human right to take upon.
However, some would think that it's ok to take if you're using a point-and-shoot digital camera or a camera from your cellphone; but how come through DSLR is prohibited? Might also as well the former two. "It's still a camera for goddamn sake" as camera and photography guys ought to think upon, especially as he/she justifies taking pictures in a public place such as Rizal Park, Fort Santiago or even in UP Diliman. Worse, to see foreign tourists taking pictures without hindrances such as permits, permissions, and money to be paid before taking.
And upon asking them "why is it not allowed, or in need of a permit or requiring a fee to pay with, how come they can't speak it all except "a policy to be implimented upon." Ok, let's say that they're been told by the authorities about that policy, but then taking cameras in a public place is different from doing spraypainting, sticker bombing or smashing the glass in its lamppost and disturbing the peace around it. Or simply having a "harmless" job such as having a photographs! For sure they are thinking that the one being taken will die easily as its own end up as a picture; and how about the painter or sketch-artist if there is, is painting or sketching also not allowed?
Well, these event such as in Rizal Park would think that the entire plot is entirely and unofficially privatized. There are guards guarding the place but why not the policemen since the place is a public domain. We even afford to pay taxes to have infrastructures such as roads, bridges, government buildings and parks being built, it all belonged to the public but why ought not to take pictures of it? What harm would cause in it? Will its subject die of having its own end up in a picture?
After all, the system is aloof in it as the parks are left alone to other authorities such as security guards who issues reprimands without a cause.
And according to Junerey P. Baladhay, he said that:
"We don't see any damages or infraction of taking photos in different places in our country especially if we deliver excellent digital results. All that it contributes are good for our country especially in tourism."
The authorities rather insist not to take pictures or be compelled to pay a fee plus a written permission involving that responsibility. I even think that Rizal himself would think "that's the system's fault" in venerating him without understanding from having a monument to placing flowers and cermenonial guards guarding it while the system thinks entirely of tourism as an income generating project than of a family-affair to enjoy with. What's next? Pay before you enter? Some people did it especially to those who guard the plank during floody days with a can in hand and be compelled to pay a peso before you enter.
For sure the late Ka Doroy Valencia would think of it "weird" as he himself helped making Rizal park good as ever to take pictures upon. And perhaps that right of taking pictures in Rizal Park is better than taking pictures in front of the mirror, with breasts covered and be described as "delicious".