Students from the University of Santo Tomas (UST) had another taste of repression. This did not result in the murder of another student, as what happened to Mark Chua, the student who exposed the corruption in the Reserved Officers Training Corps (ROTC). But this involved the death of the students’ democratic rights.
BY ZOFIA LEAL
Bulatlat
Students from the University of Santo Tomas (UST) had another taste of repression. This did not result in the murder of another student, as what happened to Mark Chua, the student who exposed the corruption in the Reserved Officers Training Corps (ROTC). But this involved the death of the students’ democratic rights.
Last January 19, 2007 students from the University held an indoor mobilization for the immediate refund of their tuition fee and to oppose the supposed tuition and other fee increases for the school year 2007-2008.
By January 21, three students who have joined the mobilization received a letter from the Office of Student Affairs (OSA) inquiring about the incident. The three students were JC Valleroso, a third year AB-BSE (Bachelor of Arts- Bachelor in Secondary Education) Major in Social Science and then Vice-President for Internal Affairs of the College of Arts and Letters Student Council, Rommel Gerali, a fourth year Economics student and Lucan Villanueva, second year Economics student.
Villanueva sought the assistance of a lawyer from Karapatan (Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights).
The three students were summoned together with their parents on January 23. The OSA explained that they were called because the university administration wanted to know the reasons for the students’ protest action.
Another indoor mobilization was held on January 25 to protest the increase in tuition and other fees and to question the letters sent to the students.
In response, the OSA issued another letter to the three students. The second letter charged Villanueva with violating PPS 1027 (h) that states that students are not allowed to join illegal boycotts or assemblies that tend to create unnecessary noise, and the good grooming policy that indicates that the hair of male students must not touch the collar of their uniforms. The hair of Villanueva is in dread locks.
Gerali and Valleroso were also charged with violating the PPS 1027 (h).
They attended the February 14 hearing set by the administration. But they were not allowed to explain their side, “sinermonan lang nila kame,” (They just scolded us.) Villanueva said.
The investigation panel formed by the administration was composed by professors who are also practicing lawyers, the guard on duty during the mobilization, and the OSA.
After the hearing, the students received another letter on March 9, two weeks before the final examinations, informing them of the resolutions of the investigation panel. Valleroso was placed on a 100-day probation starting June of 2007. He was also required to attend a psycho-trauma clinic, Gerali was also placed on probation until his graduation. Villanueva was suspended for five days, required to attend a psycho trauma clinic, and prohibited from entering the school building until he cut his hair. The OSA also warned Villanueva that they still have three more security journals which could serve as basis for more cases that can be filed against him.
The OSA did not explain the basis for the resolutions but they were given the opportunity to appeal their cases.
When Villanueva asked about the appeal, the OSA said that if they wanted to appeal, they should address their appeal to the rector. All three students have filed an appeal last March 20 through the party organization ACT-Now! (Alliance of Concerned Thomasians). Villanueva filed another appeal last March 22. As of March 23, there has been no response yet from the rector.
Villanueva said that he is saddened by the fact that they were not accorded due process. “There is something wrong with the manner the cases against us were filed and decided upon. The OSA was the complainant, the investigator, and the judge, “Villanueva said.
Villanueva’s mother fears that he might be expelled. His suspension had affected his academic standing. Two of his professors gave him a grade of Failure Due to Absences for getting low scores in his examination and missing the quizzes that were given during the time of his suspension.
Villanueva said that he did try to review during the time he was suspended but he still had difficulties because he did not have the benefit of classroom discussions and the opportunity to ask his professors about lessons which were not clear to him.
While Villanueva is still waiting for the response of the rector, he is firm in saying that the cases filed against them are threats from the administration to stop the students from questioning their policies. He added, “The administration only wants to pacify the students and warn them that if you join these activities, this will happen to you.”
“Hindi kayang harangan ng papel ang pag question ng estudyante. Ang isang magandang eskwelehan ang nagtuturo kung paano magiging kritikal mag isip at magtanong sa established order, kung wala nun walang karapatan magturo ang isang paaralan.” (A piece of paper cannot stop the students from questioning. A good school teaches the students to be critical and to question the established order, if the school does not encourage that, then they have no right to teach.), Villanueva said.
He said that, “What I did was in line with the Thomasian ideals of constant pursuit of truth and justice. They wanted to stop us from questioning by scaring us. They think that the students’ resolve will weaken once they learned of the cases filed against us. But these did not even cause me to falter from what I am fighting for. Every tuition fee increase forces more and more students to quit school. It is, therefore, in my conscience to continue the fight.”(Bulatlat.com)
