26/03/2023
A CALL TO ACTION AGAINST ALL FORMS OF POLITICAL INTERVENTION IN THE UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN PHILIPPINES
[Official Statement of PULSO on the recently concluded USC elections]
In the recently concluded university student council elections, “political intervention” became a buzzword in Northern Samar. Thanks to the ubiquity of social media, screenshots of apparent influence-peddling by persons identified to be aligned with local politicians spread like wildfire online and offline. Threats of withholding student scholarships as consequence of not voting for their favored candidates were justified, as though scholarship programs, funded by public funds, were private property, only to be dangled like candies before poor, but deserving students.
But what is the definition of political intervention in the context of the lived experience of the party, and the historical and institutional memory of the University? What interests do these local politicians have in the University Student Council (“USC”), an office that has no substantial funds, no property, no wide-ranging influence?
Lest we forget, the USC is the highest governing body of the students in the University. Whoever elected as USC President is automatically a candidate for President of the Federation of Student Councils (“Federation”), composed of the USCs of the three campuses of the University. Historically, all USC Presidents of the Main Campus were elected as Federation President, except in 2014. The election of the Federation President has oftentimes been deemed only as ceremonial because the USC President of the Main Campus surely gets elected, as Main Campus officers dominate the Federation. The elected Federation President then assumes the most important position for student representation in the University, the Student Regent.
The Student Regent sits as the sole representative of UEP students in the powerful Board of Regents (“BOR”), the highest policy and decision-making body of the University. The BOR decides on the most crucial policies in the University, including, but not limited to, the annual budget, tuition fee policies, admissions, appointment of university officials, promotions, and most importantly, the election of the University President. In other words, the Student Regent has one vote in all decisions by the BOR.
Much to our disappointment, politicians are not interested in the student elections per se, but in the position of the University President. Curiously, the next (re)election of the University President will be held this year. Thus, the question of who becomes the USC President, the Federation President, and the Student Regent, is crucial to the survival of their influence in the University.
More than 10 years ago, PULSO carried strong condemnation against the then seemingly institutionalization of meddling by local politicians in the conduct of the USC elections. We then warned that surrendering even an inch of the University’s spaces to politicians would have pernicious, irreversible implications to not only the conduct of an otherwise democratic exercise, but more crucially, to the University’s long history of rich and vibrant academic freedom. PULSO wrote statements, built alliances, and conducted student mobilizations against all forms of political intervention in the University. PULSO was the only party that categorically and consistently condemned political intervention, even at the risk of losing in the succeeding elections.
True enough, political intervention has become a norm in the University processes, from appointments in the highest echelon of power down to the general student elections. What a shame to a university that prides itself as a bastion of critical thinking and free thought in the region. During the Martial Law Regime, student leaders of the USC and college student councils led the swelling of protests against the national project of stifling dissent. The USC was closed down. The Pillar was formally dissolved. Student organizations were banned. Thanks to the valiant student leaders who stood their ground, organized the studentry, and pushed back against political repression at the time, we had our USC, student publications, and student organizations back.
Once we allow external forces to influence and determine our democratic processes, the soul and meaning of the University is lost. The University is not a mere government agency that can be filled with politician’s lackeys to serve their interests. The University is a producer of knowledge, a social critic, a safe haven of differing opinions, and a fortress of scientific inquiry. Private, political interests impede the University’s mission. They are an anathema and an insult to the scholars’ quest for truth.
Thus, we enjoin all sectors of the University to expose, condemn, and reject all forms of political intervention in the University. The time is ripe to reassert the position of the students, the faculty, the staff, and the university community in charting the direction of the University’s processes. Politicians, their money, their influence, and their desire to perpetuate themselves in power, have no place in the University.
Expose and oppose all forms of political intervention now!
