Reaffirming a Commitment
CMC Student Council Statement in support of the Defend the OSR Campaign
We at the College of Mass Communication (CMC) Student Council express our unwavering commitment to the system-wide campaign for the Student Regent referendum in January. The General Assembly of Student Councils (GASC) held on Dec. 19 stressed the need to work double-time for the campaign. With the third week of January is fast approaching and several interests try to mar the campaign with political clutter, we have no time and effort to spare.
Traditionally, student councils from different units in the university meet twice in a general assembly: first, to discuss any proposed amendment to the Codified Rules for student Regent Selection (CRSRS) and debate whether to include them or not; and second, to select the next student regent. However, it was clarified at the beginning of this year's GASC that the assembly was convened for a special purpose, since peculiar to the previous years, no student council submitted any proposal prior to deadline set by the standing CRSRS (October 1).
Even then, the six student councils (out of the 45 present) that went there with proposed amendments were allowed to present their proposals, and were accepted as recommendations upon the prerogative of the presiding officer, herself the Student Regent.
Since the councils with proposed amendments themselves acknowledge the tradition of expressing any intention to include amendments prior to October 1, it is quite unfair to put the blame on anyone without doing their part. Upon knowing that passing the amendments before October 1 takes precedence for convening a regular GASC, colleges with such proposals could have abided so, and it could have spared the student councils from unnecessary debate during the GASC.
The time expended for such debate could have been used for any discussion on how councils will rise to the challenge of uniting the 50 thousand students to vote for safeguarding the Office of the Student Regent. After all, all the other councils went to the GASC for ensuring a successful referendum campaign.
Also, these colleges with amendments were asked to show the body the quantitative and qualitative data of the consultations they said to have made. As transparency was requested, they refused to show any data. A representative of the Law Student Government even admitted they did not hold consultations with the students of the said college, citing constraints in schedule. We ask: if these amendments did not come from a consensus from the students, how can democracy be ensured, then?
We swore under an oath to echo the interests of the students. We concede that democracy is not a sponge that absorbs just everything. And so the decisions we have made and the programs we have spearheaded have all come from the majority of the students, particularly their clamor and the material conditions from which they are in. The most recent, if not the best example of this is when we presented the amended college constitution in the College Assembly held last Nov. 17. Almost 3/4 of the students who attended voted yes for the removal of a standing item in the college charter that imposed good academic standing for students who wish to run for the council election, and was thus rescinded.
Having in mind that we came to the GASC to represent the students of mass communication, we went there resolved not to allow any amendment that does not at best represent the voices of the CMC students, much so anything that did not come from them. Not doing so is just disrespectful and inconsiderate of the students of our college and all the other colleges which saw nothing wrong of the standing CRSRS and thus recommended no change.
As the biggest stakeholders of the university, students deserve representation before the highest policy-making body, the Board of Regents. If we will let this slip away, chances are organizations can never have the tambayans back, and students lose any chance to avert any move to impose higher tuition and other fees while as the administration resorts to more projects such as a block of call center infrastructures disguised as a technopark. Thus, we find no reason to lose grip over the fight to maintain an institution, created by the students who lobbied and fought for this much-deserved representation before the Board of Regents.
We are then working for a more comprehensive campaign for the five-day referendum, and to ensure the maximum number of yes votes in the college. Doing otherwise is a disservice to the students whose democratic interests have been fought for by the Office of the Student Regent. This is not the time for any divisive tactic, now any show of bitterness. The time is for us to rise for our rights and defend them. And as a council for the students, that is the right thing to do, and thus what we will be doing, come resumption of classes and onward.
VOTE YES TO DEFEND THE OFFICE OF THE STUDENT REGENT
VOTE YES ON THE UP SYSTEM-WIDE REFERENDUM ON JANUARY 26-31, 2009
JOIN: THE CMC ad hoc Committee on the SR Referendum