Let us be one. VOTE NO TO THE SR REFERENDUM

Last Friday, UP Student Regent Shahana Abdulwahid released her statement rejecting the appeal made by some councils across the UP System calling for the addition of the five crucial proposals in the ballot for the upcoming SR Referendum. Hah! Talk about REJECTION

I dare answer her.
And my answer is a resounding NO.

Why? Because:

1. The current CRSRS does not protect the genuine interests and welfare of the students by not imposing a minimum academic requirement, thus allowing students not academically good to hold such office of high esteem, giving probability that student representation would be compromised (remember SR Ferdinand Zafranco?)
2. The current CRSRS does not guarantee transparency because the role and responsibilities of the student regent is not defined. In any guiding rules for election or selection, the responsibilities of the position being selected should be well-defined so that the panel that shall elect or select will be guided accordingly.
   
3. The current CRSRS allows for power monopolization by the inclusion of KASAMA sa UP in the selection process. As I quote Mr. Ernest Calayag: "The existence of the KASAMA sa UP which takes the secretariat seat on default breaks the essence of a democratic selection. We acknowledge the alliance’s contribution to the SR history but giving it a major participation without any process is like stealing from the students their right to democratically select who they truly want to represent them."
4. The current CRSRS does not call for maximum student participation by limiting the voting process to 2 votes for all autonomous units and 1 vote for all regional units. The selection of the student regent is a truly student affair and the students should have the final say in the selection of THEIR student regent. Giving voice to local councils is tantamount to giving voice to the students who democratically elected them and submitted themselves to be represented by the local councils.
   
5. The current CRSRS and its contents did not pass through genuine student consultation.

The Office of the Student Regent is an office very precious and crucial to us students. Only by allowing it to be democratized will it be a truly representative institution. However, the current system does not allow it to be truly representative. It only serves the interests of the few, and not the genuine interests of the student body.

WE CALL FOR A GENUINELY DEMOCRATIC STUDENT REGENT SELECTION PROCESS.

NO TO UNPROTECTED STUDENT INTERESTS!
NO TO POWER MONOPOLIZATION!
NO TO UNGUARANTEED TRANSPARENCY!
NO TO UNDEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS!
NO TO THE FLAWED CRSRS!


VOTE NO TO THE SR REFERENDUM!

Remove the Atmosphere of Deception

"The councils belonging to the Defend the OSR Alliance have created an atmosphere of deception in the whole UP System."
~an anonymous UPLB student

This may be a glaring statement from an anonymous source, but it is true. What has transpired these past days in the University of the Philippines' political arena is nothing but a big DECEPTION. Yes, DECEPTION with the capitals D-E-C-E-P-T-I-O-N.

In whatever angle you look at the issue regarding the Office of the Student Regent, the members of the Defend the OSR Alliance have misinformed, misguided, and mislead the whole student community of the University, especially by claiming that a negative vote to the Student Regent Referendum is affirming the abolition of the Office of the Student Regent.

(excuse me for the term) BULLSHIT!

The only way to abolish an office mandated by law is to repeal the law that created it.

They are just afraid that the selection process will become a genuinely democratic one, henceforth lessening or even eliminating their chances to monopolize the Office of the Student Regent.

Why? Because there are five genuine reforms that the truly progressive student councils are pushing for:

1. The addition of a minimum grade requirement as one of the qualifications of the student regent nominee(s);
2. The inclusion of an express enumeration of the roles and responsibilities of the student regent;
3. The removal of the Kasama sa UP in the selection process;
4. The widening and democratization of the voting process; and
5. The rationalization of the rules by extending its effectivity to a set period (at least three years or as set by the GASC).

The members of the Defend the OSR Alliance reject these proposals.

The people who support an educated vote, those people calling for a halt to the MISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN being launched by the members of the Defend the OSR Alliance are being called anti-student.

The question is: Is pushing for a genuinely democratic student regent selection process anti-student?

in glaring capital words again:
I DON'T THINK SO!

Logic would in fact tell us that pushing for a genuinely democratic selection process is the pro-student one. Rejecting such is the anti-student one.

Pro-student because it protects the office of the student regent, henceforth protecting the representation of the student community and its genuine interests.

Pro-student because it calls for transparency and proper delineation of responsibility.

Pro-student because it removes power monopolization by the few.

Pro-student because it calls for wider and more representative participation.

Of course as UP students, we want our representation to the Board of Regents, the highest policy making body in the University. But we want our representative to be TRULY REPRESENTATIVE - democratically selected and will carry the true interests of the students.

STOP GUESSING. START KNOWING.
DEFEND THE OFFICE OF THE STUDENT REGENT BY AN EDUCATED VOTE.

REMOVE THE ATMOSPHERE OF DECEPTION.