It's almost a month later and I still can't get over the UP Lantern Parade. The fireworks display at the end was the best I've ever seen - even better than those at Ayala during the Millennium celebration eight years ago.
I still remember laughing out loud when a marching band playing "Stars and Stripes Forever" came after a long line of protesters carrying banners screaming "Defend the OSR". The irony was really amusing.
Back then, I had absolutely no idea why we have to defend the Office of the Student Regent. Back then, I was annoyed at having activists screaming and chanting during one of the most festive days of the year.
Now that I know why, I'm even more annoyed.
The protesters were right. We have to defend the OSR. However, I believe that we have to defend the OSR from those who are crying "Defend the OSR".
Why?
The campaign being spearheaded by STAND-UP is misleading at best, blatant disinformation at worst. There is no threat to the Office of the Student Regent stemming from the passage of the UP Charter last year.
What the 2008 Charter calls for is a referendum on the rules for the selection of the Student Regent. This is what the "Defend the OSR" campaign is all about. They are telling us to vote "yes" in the referendum two weeks from now - a vote that, if successful, will institutionalize the existing Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS).
A "no" vote in that referendum will not lead to the abolition of the Office of the Student Regent. The OSR is a part of the UP Charter and as the Charter is a law (Republic Act 9500) passed by the Philippine Congress, it cannot be removed by a mere student referendum. A "no" vote will, in effect, open up the CRSRS to review and possible amendment.
And that is what I believe to be the "threat" that the "Defend the OSR" campaign is calling us to "defend" against.
The two other major political parties in UP, ALYANSA and KAISA, are calling for amendments to the CRSRS. These amendments include having a minimum academic requirement for would-be Student Regents, the inclusion of the duties and responsibilities of the Student Regent, the removal of KASAMA sa UP from the CRSRS as secretariat, and the revision of the Student Regent selection process which would give every UP college one vote each.
So what is the threat here?
A minimum academic requirement that would prevent the likes of a Joseph Estrada from leading and representing the UP students at the Board of Regents?
The definition of what the Student Regent can and should do for his or her constituents?
The removal of a partisan political body from a position wherein it could influence or even control who can become Student Regent?
The democratization of a selection process that today gives disproportionate votes to each UP unit?
I don't see any threats here, other than the removal of certain advantages from a certain political movement we all know and love. But that is just me speculating.
This referendum gives us the perfect excuse and opportunity to review and amend the CRSRS to further professionalize and democratize the Office of the Student Regent. Now what could be wrong with that?
Those in the "Defend the OSR" camp say that a failure of the referendum will lead to the abolition of the OSR or at least open up the OSR to a Malacanang appointee. If the referendum fails, the sitting SR will remain until a replacement is selected.
However, that replacement will have to be chosen by the students in accordance with rules and qualifications approved in a referendum by the students as written and enforced in the UP Charter. A failure of the referendum will leave current SR Shahana Abdulwahid as SR until her replacement is selected by the UP students. Her replacement will have to wait until another referendum is held to ratify the CRSRS or an amended version of it.
The bottom line here is that there can be no Malacanang appointee or abolition of the OSR. The "Defend the OSR" people are only using this bogey as a scare tactic, plain and simple. And what they are doing is blatant disinformation. They are being dishonest with us.
They are lying to us.
Yes, we should defend the Office of the Student Regent. The Student Regent represents us and fights for us at the Board of Regents. It is our sole voice in the highest policy-making body of the University of the Philippines.
We should defend the OSR from those who would use it for their own partisan ends. We should fight for its professionalization. We should call for the further democratization of the SR selection process.
If the referendum for the ratification of the CRSRS scheduled on January 26-29, 2009 asks me whether or not I want to keep the Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection as flawed as they are right now,
I will vote no.
I still remember laughing out loud when a marching band playing "Stars and Stripes Forever" came after a long line of protesters carrying banners screaming "Defend the OSR". The irony was really amusing.
Back then, I had absolutely no idea why we have to defend the Office of the Student Regent. Back then, I was annoyed at having activists screaming and chanting during one of the most festive days of the year.
Now that I know why, I'm even more annoyed.
The protesters were right. We have to defend the OSR. However, I believe that we have to defend the OSR from those who are crying "Defend the OSR".
Why?
The campaign being spearheaded by STAND-UP is misleading at best, blatant disinformation at worst. There is no threat to the Office of the Student Regent stemming from the passage of the UP Charter last year.
What the 2008 Charter calls for is a referendum on the rules for the selection of the Student Regent. This is what the "Defend the OSR" campaign is all about. They are telling us to vote "yes" in the referendum two weeks from now - a vote that, if successful, will institutionalize the existing Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS).
A "no" vote in that referendum will not lead to the abolition of the Office of the Student Regent. The OSR is a part of the UP Charter and as the Charter is a law (Republic Act 9500) passed by the Philippine Congress, it cannot be removed by a mere student referendum. A "no" vote will, in effect, open up the CRSRS to review and possible amendment.
And that is what I believe to be the "threat" that the "Defend the OSR" campaign is calling us to "defend" against.
The two other major political parties in UP, ALYANSA and KAISA, are calling for amendments to the CRSRS. These amendments include having a minimum academic requirement for would-be Student Regents, the inclusion of the duties and responsibilities of the Student Regent, the removal of KASAMA sa UP from the CRSRS as secretariat, and the revision of the Student Regent selection process which would give every UP college one vote each.
So what is the threat here?
A minimum academic requirement that would prevent the likes of a Joseph Estrada from leading and representing the UP students at the Board of Regents?
The definition of what the Student Regent can and should do for his or her constituents?
The removal of a partisan political body from a position wherein it could influence or even control who can become Student Regent?
The democratization of a selection process that today gives disproportionate votes to each UP unit?
I don't see any threats here, other than the removal of certain advantages from a certain political movement we all know and love. But that is just me speculating.
This referendum gives us the perfect excuse and opportunity to review and amend the CRSRS to further professionalize and democratize the Office of the Student Regent. Now what could be wrong with that?
Those in the "Defend the OSR" camp say that a failure of the referendum will lead to the abolition of the OSR or at least open up the OSR to a Malacanang appointee. If the referendum fails, the sitting SR will remain until a replacement is selected.
However, that replacement will have to be chosen by the students in accordance with rules and qualifications approved in a referendum by the students as written and enforced in the UP Charter. A failure of the referendum will leave current SR Shahana Abdulwahid as SR until her replacement is selected by the UP students. Her replacement will have to wait until another referendum is held to ratify the CRSRS or an amended version of it.
The bottom line here is that there can be no Malacanang appointee or abolition of the OSR. The "Defend the OSR" people are only using this bogey as a scare tactic, plain and simple. And what they are doing is blatant disinformation. They are being dishonest with us.
They are lying to us.
Yes, we should defend the Office of the Student Regent. The Student Regent represents us and fights for us at the Board of Regents. It is our sole voice in the highest policy-making body of the University of the Philippines.
We should defend the OSR from those who would use it for their own partisan ends. We should fight for its professionalization. We should call for the further democratization of the SR selection process.
If the referendum for the ratification of the CRSRS scheduled on January 26-29, 2009 asks me whether or not I want to keep the Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection as flawed as they are right now,
I will vote no.
