Court of Appeals uplholds Q.C. RTC ruling in U.P. PGH Directorship case, Joegon to remain as Director

THE COURT of Appeals has upheld a trial court ruling that prevented the director of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) from assuming his post after his appointment was questioned in court.

In a decision promulgated March 18, the appellate court’s Special Sixteenth Division affirmed the resolution of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court that granted a writ of preliminary injunction on Dr. Rolando Enrique D. Domingo from assuming his post as director of PGH.

In his stead, the trial court ordered Dr. Jose C. Gonzales to continue serving as the director of the hospital in Manila.

Read the rest here: Court of Appeals upholds Q.C. RTC ruling in U.P. PGH Directorship case, Joegon to remain as Director

Diliman Video of the Year: Joegon Home for Christmas

Editorial: If Dr. Jose Gonzales is not (yet) the Director of the Philippine General Hospital, then neither is Dr. Enrique Domingo. Then who should it be?

Even as this editorial is being written, reports streaming in from the field indicate that there is now a standoff today at the University of the Philippines (U.P.) Philippine General Hospital (PGH) with two directors attempting to occupy the same physical office. Members of the All U.P. Workers Union, students and doctors are providing peaceful passive resistance and protection to ousted PGH Director Dr. Jose Gonzales, who continues to occupy the Director's office, while Dr. Eric Domingo and several security guards opened the director's office without Dr. Gonzales' consent.

Who has the legal rights to occupy the office? This question must be answered decisively and in such a manner that there are no questions about the integrity of the selection process itself.

Ironically, it is the bumbling but arrogant bureaucrats from the University Administration ensconced in Quezon Hall in U.P. Diliman who appear to be the chief instigators of a crisis that nobody wanted in the first place. Even as the University Administration-dominated Board of Regents voted to remove the Student Regent Charisse Bañez on February 25, 2010 on grounds that her credentials were expired, three of the Malacañang-appointed regents themselves had expired papers. Talk about hypocrisy. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Talk about the sheer incompetence of the Administration of U.P. President Emerlinda Roman and its inability to track and renew their own regents' papers after the one-year legal period had lasped after their original acting appointments in 2008.

The U.P. Administration adamantly insisted on a legally questionable two-year rule interpretation saying it applied to the acting appointments of Regents Francis Chua, Nelia Gonzales and Abraham Sarmiento in 2008. But it was the same U.P. Administration that also applied to the Office of Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for a renewal of terms of the same regents last March 2010, for even those regents whose terms would not have been deemed expired under a two-year interpretation; which shows that even they did not have a faith in their own spurious arguments.

On February 25, 2010, Six regents - namely Commission on Higher Education and Development (CHED) Chairman Emmanuel Angeles, U.P. President Emerlinda Roman, Rep. Cynthia Villar and Malacanang Regents Chua, Gonzales and Sarmiento voted to oust Student Regent Bañez as a regent on the grounds that she was no longer a student and thus no longer a Student Regent.

To be more detailed about it, out of a total of eleven regents, the other five did not participate in the voting for the following reasons:

1) One regent, Senator Mar Roxas, was already on the campaign trail, and could not participate in the voting on that day, as he was campaigning for Vice-President under the Liberal Party.

2) Student Regent Charisse Bañez was not allowed to attend the BOR meeting, not even as an observer.

3) Alumni Regent Alfredo Pascual was not physically present in the board room when the voting took place.

4) Staff Regent Clodualdo "Buboy" Cabrera abstained from voting.

5) Faculty Regent Judy M. Taguiwalo abstained from voting.

The remaining six regents voted anyway to remove Student Regent Bañez and had a new round of votes to choose a new director of the PGH under the argument that the duly selected director, Dr. Jose Gonzales only had five votes when the round of votes took place on December 18, 2009, and not six votes, as the Student Regent's vote was void. As a result, Dr. Enrique Domingo was chosen as the new PGH Director.

However, the Diliman Diary has been able to do a comparison of the 2008 appointment papers of Regents Chua, Gonzales and Sarmiento and compared and contrasted them with the appointment papers of these same regents in 2010 (see Diliman Diary, March 23, 2010: http://diliman-diary.blogspot.com/2010/03/success-diliman-diary-finally-gets.html).

Based on a one-year tenure argument for an acting regent which the Diliman Diary subscribes to, the following problems emerge with respect to the ouster of Student Regent Bañez:

1) Regent Chua's papers had expired on January 1, 2009 or more than a full year before he voted to remove Student Regent Banez on February 25, 2010 for having expired papers.

2) Regent Sarmiento's papers had also expired on September 29, 2009 and was also not a regent when he voted to remove Student Regent Bañez on February 25, 2010.

3) Regent Gonzales also had expired papers which expired on March 18, 2009 and was therefore not a regent when she voted to remove Student Regent Bañez on February 25, 2010.

Thus, out of the six regents who voted to remove Student Regent Bañez and install Dr. Domingo as the new Director of PGH, only three had the legitimate right to vote: Chairman Angeles, President Roman and Rep. Villar. There was therefore no majority vote to remove the Student Regent and Dr. Gonzales. There was also no majority vote to select Dr. Domingo.

However, if the U.P. Adminisration still adamantly insists that the three Malacañang regents enjoyed two year terms, and if for the sake of dicussion, we adopt their point of view, then there was still no majority vote anyway, as Regent Chua's term would have expired on January 1, 2010 under a two-year term; thus depriving the U.P. Administration dominated BOR of a single vote, resulting in five votes cast out of eleven which is no longer a majority vote.

Under a two-year term argument, Regent Nelia Gonzales' term should have expired on March 18, 2010, but she was appointed by President Arroyo on March 8, 2010 before there was any vacancy. Given that President Arroyo was banned by the Constitution from making any more appointments beginning March 10, 2010, then there now exists a vacancy in the BOR and Regent Gonzales is now not a current but a former regent and she clearly does not have the authority to participate in any future BOR meetings.

Since there was no legitimate majority vote to remove Student Regent Bañez, then she remains - by default - unousted as the Student Regent - unless a legitimate majority of the BOR decides otherwise.

In view of the legal infirmities bedevilling both sides regarding the legitimacies of various regents as well as the growing anger, the outrage in U.P. Manila and the entire U.P. System over what has happened so far and the potential for long-term damage to the reputation of the institution as well as the disruption of services to 500,000 indigent constituents over legitimate concerns that remain unaddressed; we believe that the only solution is for the BOR itself to enter into a new round of voting or a "sudden death" vote choosing between Dr. Gonzales and Dr. Domingo, with both sides agreeing to abide with the outcome. After all, both doctors have actually had the chance to run PGH for more than a month so that recent track record, as well as their previous performances as distinguished doctors elsewhere can be taken into account and seen in a fresh light.  Meantime, so as to put to rest any disputes, the vote by the Board of Regents must be undertaken by regents with updated and legitimate credentials to choose who should be the director of PGH, with both sides abiding with the outcome; and taking into consideration sentiments from the U.P. College of Medicine and U.P. Manila faculties.

Then and only then can we have a credible selection process and we can then all put closure to the longest running dispute ever regarding the Directorship of the PGH, and concentrate on the main task at hand, which is to close ranks behind the glorious PGH doctors and its medical staff and to put into action U.P.'s most famous motto: which is to "Serve the People."

(Chanda Shahani is the editor of the Diliman Diary)

Analysis: Malacañang, the BOR, PGH Executive Director and the Student Regent: This particular tale could be one of the convergence of interlocking interests

By Chanda Shahani

Former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill once famously said in a radio broadcast in October 1939 about Russia that: "I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.”

He could have been describing the seemingly baffling moves of the University of the Philippines (U.P.) Administration to deliberately remove representation for 50,000 U.P. students by ousting Student Regent Charisse Bañez on an easily correctible technicality, remove a highly qualified PGH Executive Director Dr. Jose Gonzales and install a less experienced and more junior Dr. Enrique Domingo as the new PGH Executive Director. These have been met with loud and vigorous opposition from many quarters, but the U.P. Administration has kept a stiff upper lip and soldiered on. But why?

In the case of Soviet Russia, Churchill provided a clue. He said, “There is a key. That key is Russian national interest." And that's where 1939 Russia and the U.P. Administration in 2010 part ways. For the U.P. Administration and its allies, national interest is clearly not a priority in its recent controversial decisions involving the tax-payer funded premier state university. Instead, the key here is a series of converging parochial and ideological interests as well as relationships among the U.P. Administration and its allies in Malacanang Here's why:

To begin with the recent U.P. Administration saga involving PGH and the Student Regent begins when Student Regent Bañez voted for Dr. Jose Gonzales as part of a swing vote (6 votes) in a BOR meeting last December 18, 2009 besting outgoing PGH Executive Director Carlos Alfiler (5 votes). This was a major inconvenience, to say the very least, for the Administration of U.P. President Emerlinda Roman. Roman, who did not vote for Gonzales, worked closely with Dr. Alfiler to privatize portions of U.P. PGH in a deal that is now being questioned by the Department of Justice (DOJ) (although the DOJ opinion is not binding). Dr. Gonzales is against the overall deal as he says it detracts from the essential mission of PGH which is to service indigent patients.

The U.P. Administration has however adopted a revisionist approach to the swing vote of the Student Regent. It has focused on singling out the Student Regent and invoking technicalities thus making it impossible for her to enroll in continuing residency beyond the alloted deadline despite the fact that there are numerous instances of other students who were not Student Regents being allowed to enroll in residency. In so doing, it has succeeded in disqualifying her as a student, and thus as a Student Regent and also in disqualifying the validity of her swing vote such that Dr. Gonzales no longer enjoyed a majority of six (6) votes, and has been removed and replaced with a dark horse candidate, Dr. Enrique Domingo, who was more junior than either Dr. Alfiler and Dr. Gonzales.

Significantly, Dr. Domingo was a former assistant of Dr. Alfiler, and is a card-carrying member of Mu Sigma Phi, a U.P. College of Medicine medical fraternity which counts among its members, Dr. Alfiler himself and Dr. Edwin Mercado, President of the Daniel Mercado Medical Center (DMMC), which is the private company that signed the deal with President Roman to construct the U.P. PGH Faculty Medical Arts Building (FMAB) wherein portions of PGH will be privatized. Dr. Domingo is also in favour of the FMAB project, and is expected to carry out the policies of Dr. Alfiler in privatizing portions of the premier state hospital, which Dr. Gonzales is not in favour of.

The current U.P. Administration, headed by President Roman, a professor of business administration at U.P. Diliman, is in favour of an overall approach of essentially bringing a more corporate character to the premier state university due to chronic budget shortfalls from the national government.

But as far as interlocking relationships go, it doesn't stop there. Diliman Diary writer Sigrid Salucop reported last March 22, 2010 that a sectoral forum organized by the Office of the Student, Staff and Faculty regents in U.P. Diliman revealed that Dr. Domingo had planned to run for congress against the incumbent Congressman in the 3rd congressional district of Pampanga, Rep. Aurelio Gonzales, Jr. (Lakas-KAMPI-CMD), a close political ally of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who herself is running for Congress in the 2nd congressional district (http://tinyurl.com/yfz9fqn).

Dr. Domingo does not represent just any idle threat to Rep. Gonzales. His mother, former Bureau of Immigration Commissioner Andrea Domingo is also a former Congresswoman from Pampanga's 3rd district (1992 to 1995) and his brother, Board member Karl Domingo (also representing the 3rd district) is running for reelection (http://gg.tigweb.org/choyg8/2735/ and http://tinyurl.com/yf4sq3u). By taking Dr. Domingo out of the running by offering him a reasonably attractive alternative (such as Executive Director of the PGH) by instructing BOR members under her control to vote for Dr. Domingo, President Arroyo guarantees that a tactical alliance is forged with the Domingo family so that they do not upset the balance of power in Pampanga and thus eliminate a threat to Rep. Gonzales.

Even though President Arroyo is running in the 2nd district in Pampanga and Rep. Gonzales in the 3rd, she would need to have allies as a Pampanga congresswoman to consolidate her political leverage over vote-rich Pampanga province when she steps down in order to seek any political accomodations against possible investigation for wrongdoing while in office, since the current two top front-runners in the Presidential derby, Senator Benigno Aquino III (LP) and Senator Manny Villar (NP) belong to two different parties.

Additionally, it is the incumbent President's partymates in both houses of congress who are usually given top priority by in the release of “pork barrel” funds, otherwise known as Priority Development Assistance Funds (PDAF) which Congressmen rely on to woo the loyalty of voters in their districts by implementing local projects. Arroyo could find herself out in the cold by becoming a congresswoman from a minority party since the majority of congressmen are expected to shift alliances to the party of the new President. She can minimize this problem by having a good relationship with the incumbent governor who can guarantee local funding for projects in her district.

And that's where the PGH power play combines with a Pampanga power play and even a national power play. The Macapagal-Arroyo political clan is now headed by incumbent President Gloria M. Arroyo. With two sons of President Arroyo in the House seats Diosdado “Dato” Arroyo (1st District, Camarines Sur) and incumbent Rep. Mikey Arroyo (2nd District, Pampanga) – who may run for congressman under a still unspecified party-list group as well as reelectionist Rep. Ignacio “Iggy” Arroyo, a brother-in-law, regaining his seat (5th District, Negros Occidental), she is guaranteeing a minimum number of core group loyalists supporting her within congress. And that's not even counting other allies in congress.

In the Pampanga front, however, Arroyo and her allies also need to make sure that Governor Lilia Pineda wins in the new square-off against former Governor Ed Panlilio, the first Catholic priest elected in government (http://tinyurl.com/ylbhy5y). That's where it's important to make sure that potential political threats such as Dr. Domingo toe the line by rewarding them with government positions

President Arroyo has direct control over four out of the six regents who voted for Dr. Domingo. The BOR Chairman, CHED Chairman Emmanuel Angeles sits in Arroyo's cabinet while Arroyo appointed Regents Abraham Sarmiento, Nelia Gonzales and Francis Chua in 2008 and reappointed them again, in March 2010.

On another level, President Roman and the other swing vote in the BOR in favour of Dr. Domingo, Rep. Cynthia Villar (NP), would also want to have Dr. Domingo as PGH Executive Director independent of Pampanga and Mu Sigma Phi politics for the reason that he is in favour of the deal inked between President Roman and DMMC President Mercado last July 2009 which fits well with the current U.P. Administration's mindset of giving the University system a more corporate character. But even if the U.P. Administration actually possesses a free-market ideology, it does not mean that it is any less political since it has recommended the three Malacanag regents for “midnight” appointments by President Arroyo before the March 10, 2010 constitutional ban on presidential appoinments kicked in.

The three (3) regents recommendations by the BOR for reappointment by President Arroyo are being protested by the Student Regent Charisse Bañez, Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo Staff Regent Clodualdo “Buboy” Cabrera and Alumni Regent Alfredo Reyes who say that the sectors should have first been consulted to diversify the gene pool of nominations to the Palace for regent appointments.

The sentiments of the sectoral regents have been brushed aside by the U.P. Administration in favour of the the holdover regents since they constitute part of a power bloc within the U.P. System that is loosely known as the “Wednesday Club,” (See Diliman Diary, March 17, 2010) and comprise another key set of interrelationships that runs the U.P. System and is gearing up to continue running the University into the next U.P. Presidency.

The Diliman Diary will continue writing about the “Wednesday Club” in greater detail in the future, in view of the impact of its policies on the tax-payer funded premeier state university. That's a promise.

Department of Justice: U.P. Board of Regents cannot ignore U.P.'s own U.P. Charter of 2008 when it signed 2009 deal privatizing portions of PGH

(L to R: Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo, PGH Executive

Director Jose Gonzales and Student Regent Charisse Bañez)

By Chanda Shahani

 The Department of Justice (DOJ) has stated in a February 9, 2010 legal opinon released during a March 3, 2010 media briefing held at the College of Social Work at U.P. Diliman that a contract signed by University of the Philippines (U.P.) President Emerlinda R. Roman in 2009 to privatize portions of Philippine General Hospital (PGH) goes against U.P.'s own Charter of 2008 (Republic Act (RA) 9500).

 The DOJ opinion said RA 9500 requires that any such plan must protect U.P. "from undue influence and control of commercial interests" and that it should be "approved by the Board subject to a transparent and democratic process of consultation with the constituents of the national university."

By issuing such an opinon, the DOJ has practically sided with U.P. Philippine General Hospital (PGH) Executive Director, Dr. Jose Gonzales who was voted and selected by the BOR last December 18, 2009 but who has consistently opposed the privatization of portions of U.P. PGH; leading to what observers say is an attempt by disgruntled elements of the BOR to remove Gonzales last February 25, 2010 by engaging in legal acrobatics through the U.P. Legal Office in order to remove the validity of the swing vote of Student Regent Charisse Bañez.

The media briefing, was held to represent a coalition of groups including the Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo, Student Regent Charisse Bañez, Staff Regent Buboy Cabrera, Dr. Jose Gonzales of the PGH, concerned University of the Philippines (UP) faculty and students, and the All U.P. Workers Union.

During the media briefing, Dr. Gonzales said that the contract signed on June 18, 2009, for the UP PGH Faculty Medical Arts Building Project by President Roman and Dr. Edwin Mercado, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Daniel Mercado Medical Center (DMMC) and witnessed by UP Regents Abraham Sarmiento and Nelia Gonzalez, UP Manila Chancellor Ramon Arcadio, then U.P. PGH Director Carmelo Alfiler and other U.P. officials while beneficial in some respects, would nevertheless still hurt the essential constituents of U.P. PGH, who are the disadvantaged poor, by siphoning away much-needed income needed by PGH for its programs and benefitting DMMC instead.

The UP Board of Regents, during its 1239th meeting on December 17, 2008, confirmed the awarding of the Project to DMMC. The recommendation was submitted to the BOR by Dr. Yolanda Robles, Chair of the Special Bids and Awards Committee for the UP-PGH Faculty Medical Arts Building (FMAB) Project, after DMMC complied with all the requirements of the bidding process. The Notice of Award (NOA), was signed by President Roman last February 5.

The UP-PGH FMAB project is an activity of the University designed as a retention and incentive program for the faculty members of UP Manila (UPM), as a source of additional income for PGH’s budget, a venue for the geographic practice of profession among faculty members of UPM, an accessible and affordable ambulatory facility for private patients and to strengthen the distinction of UPM and PGH as the National Health Sciences Center and as the National University Hospital, respectively.

The contract entails the lease with conversion, rehabilitation, development and operation of the PGH Dispensary Building as the UP-PGH FMAB for a period of 25 years. DMMC is given an 18-month rent-free construction period starting from the time of contract signing. Under the Terms of Reference, DMMC shall lease the building from UP-PGH and sub-lease the clinic spaces to accredited PGH consultants. There is no need for the consultant to buy stocks to practice or buy/advance lease of clinic. DMMC is responsible for the fiscal and non-medical operations of FMAB and is allowed to manage and operate the concession areas which include the following: Laboratory, Radiology, Pharmacy among others.

 As originally envisioned, the FMAB would, among others, (1) generate additional resources to supplement PGH's budget allocation for hospital operations from the national government; (2) provide affordable, accessible high-quality, competent, comprehensive, integrated and humane health care services to ambulatory pay patient clientele of PGH; (3) provide a centralized teaching, training, and research-related facility for the faculty, trainees and relevant staff; (4) strengthen the geographic practice of profession among faculty members; (5) provide a faculty incentive package of affordable clinic spaces and income opportunities to UPM faculty in order to augment the faculty's regular compensation package from the University; (6) promote faculty retention and career development, (7) strengthen the distinction of UPM as the National Health Sciences Center, and; (8) serve as an essential component of a strong National University Hospital.

Dr. Gonzales said that while he was for the FMAB, which addressed the needs of consultant doctors at PGH who were not given any compensation, the part of the contract which allowed DMMC to manage and operate the concession areas which include the following: Laboratory, Radiology, Pharmacy among others, removed a source of funds for PGH which they needed badly to help pursue their mission to serve thousands of indigent patients every year.

Dr. Gonzales said that diagnostics alone at PGH makes up to PhP 8 million a month that would be lost to DMMC. He said that the Commission on Audit (COA) has reported that while PGH's annual budget is PhP 1.3 billion a year, it actually needs up to PhP 3 billion a year if it is to operate effectively.

Dr. Gonzales and the All U.P. Workers Union supports the geographical/private practice/clinic of PGH Medical Consultants/UP Manila Faculty at the Faculty Medical Arts Building (FMAB). They also support the expanded and efficient operation of PGH laboratory pharmacy, radiologic, endoscopic, laparoscopic, arthroscopic and other diagnostic services to serve the needs of the FMAB, the PGH and of the Filipino people.

However, in the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed between Daniel Mercado Medical Center (DMMC) and the University of the Philippines last June 18, 2009, the University would allow the operation by the DMMC of privately run laboratory, pharmacy, radiologic, endoscopic, laparoscopic, arthroscopic and other diagnostic services at the FMAB. This is objectionable to Dr. Gonzales, because it imperils not only the long term viability of PGH services but the operation of the whole hospital itself. These services that are intended to be privatized at the FMAB are the heart and soul of hospital operations, and to alow allow the operation of private entities right inside its the PGH compound that will directly compete on its own laboratory, pharmacy and other services.

In a statement released to the media during the press briefing, the U.P. Democratization Movement said that President Roman “is turning the BOR into a highly politicized body by initiating the attack to remove the Student Regent, by conspiring to reverse a BOR selection of the PGH Director that she did not want, by acting as the President only of some segments of the university instead of the whole university. She is demonstrating all the weaknesses of her appointing authority which is to divide and confuse instead of leading and governing. The crisis of the University is really a gross failure of executive leadership of President Roman.”

Observers are saying that some segments of the BOR strategized to remove Executive Director Gonzales by first eliminating the validity of the swing vote of Student Regent Banez because of Gonzales' lack of all-out support for the privatization of PGH. The U.P. Democratization Movement is calling for the BOR, whom it voted to select Dr. Gonzales as U.P. PGH Executive to recognize Dr. Gonzales' term of office from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012.

The DOJ legal opinion, Opinion No. 8, S. 2010, dated February 9, 2010 was signed by DOJ Secretary Agnes VST Devanadera and was issued due to three (3) separate requests for opinion relating to the contract of lease by and between U.P. as lessor and the Mercado General Hospital, Inc. (DMMC) as the lessee. The opinion was issued at the request of Emmanuel Y. Angeles, Chairman of the Commission on Higher Education and Development (CHED). U.P.'s Vice President for Legal Affairs, Theodore Te, and the Manila Chapter of the All U.P. Workers Union.

The opinion sought to address the question of whether the new requirements provided in the U.P. Charter of 2008 or R.a. 9500, which took effect only in May of 2008, or three years after the approval of the FMAB project applied retroactively to the FMAB Contract which was signed in 2009.

The DOJ opinion said that the request originated from the claims of the All U.P. Workers Union that the BOR was ill-advised when they rushed for the confirmation of the Contract of Lease without conasidering the provisions of the new U.P. Charter of 2008.

The DOJ opinion said that U.P. is the owner of a historical three-story concrete building known as the PGH Dispensary Building, situated at the PGH Complex, Taft Avenue, Manila and that part of the area is being utilized as the PGH Main Pharmacy; that U.P. entered into a contract with DMMC for the lease, conversion and development of the remaining area as the UPM-PGH Faculty Medical Arts Building (FMAB) which was approved by the BOR on September 29, 2005, with the Terms of Reference for the lease with conversion, development and operation of the PGH Dispensary Building approved by the BOR on October 26, 2006.

Furthermore, bidding ensued with DMMC as the only pre-qualified bidder, but the bid was below the internal government estimate of a desired rental of PhP 1 million per month; therefore a second round of bidding was undertaken and was even extended to allow more bidders to participate but that a failure of bidding was declared on September 5, 2007. This failure paved the way for U.P. to enter into a negotiated contract for the UPM-PGH FMAB and recommend DMMC as the only remaining and potential bidder.

The DOJ said that RA 9500 became effective on May 2008 and that Section 23 prescribed the procedure for the lease of assets for more than 5 years which included:

•  The transactions must be based on a mukti year comprehensive development plan undertaken by qualified urban planning professionals;
• In the case of two failed biddings and negotiated transactions, the BOR must secure a fairness opinion from respected third party bodies;
• If the contract amount exceeds more than PhP 50 million, then 3/4 of the BOR and not a simple majority must approve the contract and breaking up the contract into smaller parts will not be allowed.

The All U.P. Workers Union said none of the above conditions existed as part of the due diligence required prior to the signing of the contract by President Roman, as required by R.A. 9500 and that the contract is grossly disadvantageous to ther U.P. community.

U.P. insists that Section 23 does not apply to the FMAB contract and that to apply it would be to give retroactive effect to a provision that was not yet existent when the parties negotiated the terms of the contract of lease in 2007 and 2008, thus violating the non-impairment of contracts clause of the 1987 Constitution.

However, the DOJ opinion said that U.P.'s arguments did not appear to be sustainable.

It said that the parties were still at the negotiation stage at the time the U.P. Charter was passed. "No contract was entered into, no agreement was yet in effect. It (U.P.) approved the renegotiated terms fo the contract months after the effectivity of the U.P. Charter of 2008. It was only at that time that the contract was prefected between the parties. Hence the non-impairment clause, as claimed by U.P., would not apply."

The DOJ opinion said that all parties should be guided accordingly by its legal opinion.

(Chanda Shahani is the Editor of the Diliman Diary).

OP-ED: The Day of the Long Knives: U.P. Board of Regents turns on its own duly Selected U.P. PGH Executive Director

By William H. E. Romero, M.D.

February 25, 2010 was the day of the long knives for the University of the Philippines Philippine General Hospital (U.P. PGH) Executive Director Jose Gonzales, who was finished off quickly by the very same U.P. Board of Regents (BOR) that had voted and selected him last December 18, 2009.

The BOR, in a meeting held on February 25, 2010 declared the Dec. 18, 2009 election of Executive Director Jose Gonzales as being null and void and held a new election during which they elected Dr. Rolando Enrique "Eric" Domingo as the new PGH Director.

Here's a chronology of events, with comments:

Dr. Carmelo Alfiler, was on his second-three-year term as PGH Director, ending Dec. 31, 2009. Normally, PGH Directors should have a maximum of two terms, unless with exemplary or extraordinary performance.

The search process for new director started sometime in August, with initially just two candidates:

1) The incumbent director: Dr. Carmelo Alfiler

2) The former Chairman of the Dept. of Surgery: Dr. Jose Gonzales

A third candidate eventually emerged:

This was the incumbent Deputy Director for Administration (only for the last 2 years): Dr. Eric Domingo.

Comment: a lot of eyebrows were raised when Dr. Eric Domingo joined the candidates because he was close to Dir. Alfiler, and was still a neophyte in the UP-PGH Admin.

A few days prior to the Dec. 18 election of the BOR, Dr. Eric Domingo was "pulled out" from the list of nominees upon U.P. Manila Chancellor Ramon Arcadio's notification of to the BOR that Dr. Domingo was not qualified because his appointment in the U.P. College of Medicine was only part-time, and he was not tenured. Even when Dr. Eric Domingo was already taken out from list, he was calling Regents to vote for him, showing the obvious reason for his run: to take away votes from Dr. Gonzales in what they predicted would be a close fight. The group of U.P. President Emerlinda Roman probably knew before the election about the results of the possible vote, which now relates to a case filed against the Student Regent, which was related to her failure to enroll.

Before the vote, Regent Sarmiento raised the issue that the Student Regent is not enrolled and should not be allowed to vote. The BOR did vote, and the majority decided to allow the Student Regent to vote.

On the actual BOR election on Dec. 18, 2009 this was the resulting vote:

5 votes for Dr. Alfiler:

• Pres. Emerlinda Roman - Presidential appointee
• Regent Abraham Sarmiento - Presidential appointee
• Regent Nelia Gonzales - Presidential appointee
• Regent Francis chua - Presidential appointee
• Cong. Cynthia Villar - Chair, Congress Committee on Education

5 votes for Dr. Gonzales:

• Student Regent Charisse Banez - sectoral rep for students
• Regent Judy Taguiwalo - sectoral rep for faculty
• Regent Santos - sectoral rep for staff and employees
• Regent Pascual - sectoral rep for alumni
• Sen. Mar Roxas - Chair, Senate Committee on Education

To break the tie, Commission for Higher Education and Development (CHED) Chairman Emmanuel Y. Angeles, who sits as the Chairman of the BOR, voted for Dr. Gonzales. Regent Sarmiento raised objections again on the ground that the Student Regent should not have been allowed to vote, and that he was submitting a formal letter of protest on Dec. 23, 2009.

During the Dec. 18, 2009 BOR meeting, three other appointments were made, aside from that of Director
Gonzales:

1. U.P. Diliman College of Business Administration, Prof. Joselito Florendo, as Director, System Budget Officer.
2. Dr. Flordeliza Lantican, as Dean, College of Economics and Management.
3. Dr. Vicente Medina III, as Dean, College of Dentistry.

All three other appointees immediately received their notice of appointment, but none was received by Dr. Gonzales. At that time, CHED Chairman Angeles knew that the main supporter of Dr. Alfiler was Sen. Manuel Villar and his wife, Rep. Cynthia Villa, who has publicly said that Dr. Alfiler will most likely be the next Secretary of Health if Senator Villar becomes the next Philippine President.

Sensing the possible problem, CHED and BOR Chair Angeles asked Dr. Gonzales to come to his CHED Office on Dec. 21, during which time he administered his oath of office as PGH Executive Director, effective January 1, 2010 to Dec. 31, 2012. He belatedly knew that Dr. Alfiler was also a personal friend and physician to the children of Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

• On Jan. 4, 2010, first day of office after the holidays, Dr. Gonzales was supposed to be offically introduced to the PGH staff at the usual Monday flag ceremony. This did not happen because Director Gonzales was called to the CHED Office by CHED Chairman Angeles, who told him that the BOR is holding his appointment until the objection of Regent Sarmiento has been resolved.
• Chairman Angeles, who now obviously has changed his support for Dr. Alfiler, upon orders from President Arroyo, who is a personal friend of Dr. Alfiler. Chairman Angeles grilled Director Gonzales on why Senator Mar Roxas, chairman of the Senate Committee on Education, and also a U.P. Regent, voted for him. The Students and All UP Workers' Union did a rally in front of PGH protesting the holding back of Dr. Gonzales' appointment.
• On Jan. 5, 2010, Pres. Roman issued Memo No. PERR-2010-001 withholding the appointment of Dr. Gonzales as PGH Executive Director, and appointing Chancellor Ramon Arcadio as OIC PGH Director, until further advice. A flurry of protests was again started by students and workers, which eventually resulted in the decision to appoint Dr. Gonzales. Chancellor Arcadio administered the oath of office to Dr. Gonzales on January 7, 2010, and as Executive Director of U.P. PGH, he performed his official function, including the day-to-day operations of the U.P. PGH. The hospital was already running at near-normalcy, but the clinical department chair appointments were temporarily put on hold until the BOR dealt with finality on the issue during the January 25, 2010 BOR meeting.      
• On January 29, 2010, Regent Sarmiento proposed to nullify the Dec. 18 election of PGH Director Jose Gonzales, and for which, the 4 sectoral regents walked out. The BOR meeting was stopped due to a lack of quorum. Students and the All U.p. Workers Union were actually rallying outside.

In the meantime, PGH operations were going on unhampered, and the U.P. College of Medicine dean, with the concurrence of Dir. Gonzales recommended the appointment of the new clinical department chairs by Chancellor Arcadio.

On the day of the February 25, 2010 BOR meeting, the BOR decided first on the matter of removing the Student Regent, Charisse Banez, from the BOR since she was not an officially enrolled student. Having made that decision, there were now only 9 BOR members counted in the meeting (5 presidential appointees, including CHED Chair Angeles, Rep. Cynthia Villar, and the three sectoral representatives). They then proceeded to vote for the nullification of the Dec. 18 election of Director Gonzales, and held a new election, resurrecting Dr. Eric Domingo as a contender again. The three sectoral regents abstained from the voting, and the 6 remaining regents all voted for Dr. Eric Domingo, who was earlier deemed not eligible for the position last December.

Note that the other elected positions decided upon in the Dec. 18 BOR meeting (Prof. Joselito Florendo, as Director, System Budget Officer; Dr. Flordeliza Lantican, as Dean, College of Economics and Management, and Dr. Vicente Medina III, as Dean, College of Dentistry) were not considered null and void. The BOR acted with swift dispatch this time, giving Dr. Domingo his appointment papers effective the same day, Feb. 25, and administering his oath of office on Feb. 26, 2010.

Dr. Domingo is supposed to be offically presented to the PGH community as the new Executive Director on Monday, March 1, 2010 but will be met by a rally of employees, faculty, and students who are protesting the unfair, unjust and oppressive moves of the BOR, so uncharacteristic of academic freedom and truth that U.P. stands for.

The political intervention of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and Senator Manny Villar in U.P. PGH is deplorable!

(William Romero, M.D. is a UP graduate, BS Zoology in 1977 and Medicine in 1981. He currently practices in the United States).

U.P. Officials Remain in Administrative Limbo as Board of Regents Members dispute facts of January 29 Meeting

(Japanese Oiginal Poster of "Rashomon" released on 

August 25, 1950 in Japan. Source: http://www.wikipedia.org)

By Chanda Shahani

The 1950's Japanese cult classic film, "Rashomon" is about the rape of a woman and the apparent murder of her samurai husband through the widely differing accounts of four witnesses, including the rapist and even a narrative through a medium representing a dead man. The stories are mutually contradictory, leaving the viewer to determine which, if any, is the truth as the story unfolds in a series of flashbacks as the four characters recount the events of one afternoon in a grove.

But now in 2010, some 3,000 kilometers away from Japan at the University of the Philippines (U.P.) at Diliman, several U.P. officials are being left in administrative limbo as members of the U.P. Board of Regents (BOR) perform their own version of "Rashomon." Some regents are disputing the assertion of U.P. President Emerlinda Roman that the BOR actually met at 9:00 a.m. as a corporate body on January 29, 2010, constituted a quorum and proceeded to vote to remove the eligibility of Student Regent Charisse B. Bañez to participate in BOR proceedings on the premise that she is no longer a U.P. Student and therefore no longer a Student Regent. All of this supposedly took place before several Regents walked out.

This version is being disputed by other Regents who say that the walkout itself removed any possibility of a quorum and consequently, any ballotting to remove the Student Regent never took place due to the lack of a quorum. If Roman's version holds sway, then the implication is that Bañez's votes on any issue from December 18, 2009 onwards would no longer be valid, as she was no longer a Student Regent on that date. If the dissenting Regents' version carries the day, then Bañez remains on board as a voting member of the BOR.

50,000 STUDENTS, PGH DIRECTOR AFFECTED

One potential casualty in this debate would be the more than 50,000 U.P. students who would be deprived of a representative in the BOR, as personified by the Student Regent. Republic Act 9500, or the Charter of the University of the Philippines requires that there shall be one Student Regent chosen by the students from their ranks in accordance with the rules and qualifications approved in a referendum by the students.

Another potential casualty would include the legitimacy and binding selection of U.P. Philippine General Hospital (PGH) Executive Director Dr. Carlos C. Gonzales who was chosen by a vote of six (6) to five (5) over by the BOR last December 18, 2009 over outgoing Executive Director Carlos Alfiler. The potential elimination of Bañez's vote as a bona fide voting member of the BOR creates a real dilemma for Quezon Hall because it would result in a hung jury of five (5) remaining votes for Gonzales and five (5) votes for Alfiler and could reverse a de facto acknowledgement by Quezon Hall, published by on U.P. own website at: (http://www.up.edu.ph/features.php?i=176) that Gonzales is the Executive Director of PGH which is based on the premise that six (6) and not five (5) Regents voted for him.

On the one hand, if Quezon Hall continues to maintain that Gonzales remains the Executive Director, then it also impliedly acknowledges the legitimacy of Bañez's vote as a Student Regent which contradicts its other claims, also on the U.P. website, that Bañez is no longer a U.P. Student or a Student Regent. On the other hand, by pushing its own interpretation of existing rules to remove Bañez, Quezon Hall could be seen as setting the stage to undermine a majority decision of the BOR for Gonzales by implementing President Roman's yet-unacted-upon January 5, 2010 memo installing U.P. Manila Chancellor Ramon L. Arcadio as Officer-in-Charge of PGH (please see Diliman Diary, February 5, 2010).

Roman has not officially declared whom she voted for in the December 18, 2009 balloting for the PGH Executive Director Position. According to the Manila Times.Net (http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/top-stories/8673-new-pgh-director-takes-oath-of-office) those who voted for Dr. Gonzales were Student Regent Charisse Bañez, Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo, Alumni Regent Alfredo Pascual and Admin Staff Regent Cabrera. Sen. Manuel “Mar” Roxas 2nd also sent a written vote in favor of Gonzales.

Alfiler, however, received votes from U.P. President Roman, as well as Regents Abraham Sarmiento, Nelia Gonzales and Francis Chua and Rep. Cynthia Villar of Las Piñas City through a letter.

PRESIDENT ROMAN'S VERSION OF EVENTS

In the meantime, Dr. Silverio Cabellon, Chairman of the The University of the Philippines Medical Alumni Society of America (UPMASA) forwarded to the Diliman Diary an email to him by President Roman dated February 8, 2010 claiming that, “In the last meeting of the Board (January), there was still a quorum when the decision to disqualify the Student Regent was made. This can be attested by the Secretary of the Board.”

An email sent by the Diliman Diary to the Facebook Account of the Secretary of the University, Dr. Lourdes Abadingo, on February 12 asked Dr. Abadingo “if there was a quorum when the decision to disqualify the Student Regent was made. Is this claim ... accurate in view of the fact that there was supposed to have been a walkout by some Regents resulting in no quorum at all? On behalf of our readers a clarification on this question would be very much appreciated.” To date, there has been no reply by Dr. Abadingo to the Diliman Diary independently confirming the claims of President Roman.

OTHER REGENTS HAVE DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS

Other regents are openly disputing Roman's claims that the BOR met on January 29 and voted to disqualify the Student Regent before four regents walked out resulting in a lack of a quorum. These regents were: Faculty Regent, U.P. Professor Judy M. Taguiwalo, Staff Regent Clolualdo E. Cabrera, Alumni Regent Alfredo E. Pascual, and Student Regent Bañez.

According to Staff Regent Cabrera in a February 12, 2010 email sent to Dr. Cabellon, the BOR never voted to disqualify Bañez: “Gud am! Bago ako lumabas ng BOR room natitiyak ko na walang naganap na botohan para idisqualify ang student regent sa nakaraang Jan. 29, BOR meeting.”

A more detailed account of what happened was given by Faculty Regent Judy M. Taguiwalo on January 31, 2010:

“The BOR meeting started with CHED Chair Angeles presiding. President Roman, Malacanang- appointed Regents Sarmiento, Chua, and Gonzales, Alumni Regent Pascual, Staff Regent Cabrera, Student Regent Bañez and myself were present.”

“The agenda of the meeting was approved with the inclusion of the UP Cebu High School issue in other matters. The minutes of the December 18 BOR meeting was also approved.”

“The first item placed on the agenda for discussion was the protest of Regent Sarmiento dated January 29, 2010. Regent Sarmiento protested the election of Jose Gonzales as PGH Director on the grounds that “The Student Regent is not only under suspension but is in fact not a student as defined by the University. Ms. Bañez tried to register for the second semester but (sic) was only on November 17, 2009 that she tried to register…… “

“We, the Sectoral Regents and the Alumni Regent, were not against discussing the current status of the Student Regent prior to deliberating on the matters on the agenda for the January 29, 2010 meeting. But we found it highly irregular that the question on the status of the Student Regent during the December 18 meeting, which had already been decided was being revisited for the purpose of nullifying the election of Dr. Gonzales as PGH Director.”

“The irregularity of the protest on the status of the Student Regent by Regent Sarmiento tying it with the election of the PGH Director, who was not the choice of President Roman, Regent Sarmiento, Regent Gonzales and Regent Chua, is better understood by what occurred after the December 18 meeting. The term of outgoing PGH Director Alfiler was to end on December 31, 2009. There was no issuance of the appointment of university officials right after the BOR meeting on December 18, when previous BOR decisions on appointments were announced on the same day as the BOR meetings (e.g. October 21 OSU Memorandum on Appointment of University Officials and November 23 OSU Memorandum on Appointment of University Officials). When I inquired about this failure to issue a similar memorandum on the December 18 decisions of the BOR on the appointment of University Officials, the Secretary of the University said that because it was the last working day of the year, the issuance would be made on January 4, 2010. This clarification was not consistent with the fact that the December 18 decision of the BOR on the appointment of UP Artists was posted on the UP official website on December 18 itself.”

“The memorandum on the appointments of new university officials made during the December 18 meeting came out only on January 4. Early on that day, Dr. Gonzales was informed by the UP Manila Chancellor that he (Dr. Gonzales)would take his oath of office at 2:00 pm of January 4. But prior to the scheduled oath-taking, the UP Manila Chancellor sent a message to Dr. Gonzales that his oath was reset for January 5 as President Roman wanted to meet with them in Diliman that afternoon. There was neither an oath taking on January 5 because on that day President Roman issued Memorandum No. PERR-2010-001, appointing Chancellor Ramon L. Arcadio as Officer-in-Charge of PGH. The Sectoral Regents immediately issued a statement dated January 6 protesting the deliberate refusal of President Roman to install Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as PGH Director, duly elected by the Board of Regents. There was an emergency meeting held at the Manila Hotel in the afternoon of January 6 attended by Chairman Angeles, President Roman, Chancellor Arcadio and Dr. Gonzales. At noon time of January 7 at the height of the protests of PGH personnel, medical students and staff against the refusal to install Dr. Gonzales as Director, the formal notification of appointment of Dr. Gonzales dated December 18, 2009 was sent to the UP Manila Chancellor. At two in the afternoon of that day, Dr. Gonzales took his oath before the Chancellor with other university officials and staff of PGH in attendance.”

“One cannot but surmise, given these series of events, that some very powerful people are intent on preventing the installation of Dr. Gonzales as PGH Director. The protest of Regent Sarmiento was clearly aimed at nullifying the election of the PGH Director but it has been overtaken by events. The fact is Dr. Gonzales has taken his oath of office for a fixed term of three years and has actually discharged his duties for more than three weeks. He cannot be removed or suspended except for cause as provided by law. Moreover, an appointment once made and completed, is not subject to reconsideration or revocation.”

“When a Regent moved for a vote supporting Regent Sarmiento’s protest against the Student Regent’s participation in the December 18, 2009 meeting and nullifying the appointment of Dr. Gonzales, the Staff Regent, Alumni Regent, Student Regent and I protested. But there was no more room for discussion as one of the Regents insisted on putting an end to more talk and to proceed to the voting. I asked for a break and conferred with the other Sectoral Regents and the Alumni Regent. We discussed the consequences of participation in the unlawful removal of an elected University official, without cause and without due process, as proposed by Regent Sarmiento, and the subsequent election of another PGH director in spite of the fact that the post is not vacant. I decided that I could not countenance being part of a process which was clearly aimed at reversing the decision on the choice of the PGH Director made last December and which could be considered illegal. It left me physically ill. I opted to leave the meeting.”

“The Staff Regent, Student Regent and Alumni Regent after a while also left leaving the meeting without a quorum.”

“We are open to deliberating on the status of the Student Regent but it should not be used to overturn a decision not palatable to the powers that be.”

“Let me reiterate: we, the Sectoral Regents and the Alumni Regent, were open to a discussion of the current status of the Student Regent prior to deliberating on the matters on the agenda for the January 29 meeting. But what we found highly irregular was that the question on the status of the Student Regent involved the nullification of decisions of December 18, in particular the selection of the PGH Director, undermining the integrity of decision-making processes in our institution.”

“Our university faces a range of burning issues which we as Regents, through our collective wisdom, must deliberate and decide on. But we must do so with the highest respect for due process and respect for decisions, especially on appointments, arrived at by the Board even in the rare case that the decision goes against the wishes of the highest executive official within or outside UP.”

THE UNIVERSITY STUDENT COUNCIL OF U.P. DILIMAN ISSUES A STATEMENT

The University Student Council of U.P. Diliman said in a February 5 statement that, “Currently, even President Roman and the Malacanang appointees in the BOR have their own interests in making the SR position vacant. They have currently cited the ratified CRSRS to discredit our SR (Student Regent), but we must not forget that nine months ago, they had explicitly violated the same document when they kept our SR from representing us in the Board for two months. They have proven to us that they can implement the rules when it suits them; they disregard the same rules when it is in conflict with their interests.”

“Their interests lies in the Directorship of the Philippine General Hospital and the micro-privatization of PGH. The PGH Directorship became a highly-contested position during the BOR vote-casting last December 2009, such that some members of the BOR who lost in the vote tried to move to rescind and invalidate the decision to appoint Dr. Jose Gonzales as the new PGH Director, in order to field their own bet. Pres. Roman even issued a memorandum in January to hold the oath-taking of Dr. Gonzales but was defeated by the mass movement in UP Manila. Now, despite the decision of the BOR to permit our SR to participate and vote in the December BOR meeting, they are now moving to invalidate all BOR decisions since November where our SR have participated, including the votation for the PGH Directorship.”

“The ill motives are clearly laid down in front of us. We shall be disenfranchised of our right to representation as Ms. Bañez is attacked and discredited just so the few can secure their interests in the BOR. This move from the administration to discredit our SR is a curtailment of our right to genuine representation as they are aware that Ms. Bañez does not have a successor and that the GASC (General Assembly of Student Councils) shall not convene until April 2010 to select a new SR.”

“They have proven once again, that for the powers that be led by Pres. Roman and the Malacañang bloc, self-interest gains more weight than our fundamental right to be represented. They have committed a grave disrespect not only to Ms. Banez and the institution she represents, but as well as to the University that expects a transparent and democratic governance from its administration.”

OTHER U.P. OFFICIALS AFFECTED BY BOR FALLOUT

Other issues affected by a successful removal of Bañez that could potentially result in a hung jury, according to Faculty Regent Judy M. Taguiwalo are the selection of a new Chancellor for U.P. Mindanao and the appeal to the BOR by U.P. Diliman Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo for tenure after her appeal was previously turned down by President Roman and U.P. Diliman Chancellor Sergio Cao.

U.P. ADMINISTRATION CITES CONDITIONS FOR STUDENT REGENT SLOT VACANCY BUT DOES NOT CLEARLY ESTABLISH INCAPACITY

On February 4, 2010 the U.P. administration said in the U.P. website with a headline entitled, “Further clarifications on the issue of the Student Regent and other matters” that Bañez was not qualified to sit as Student Regent:

“There is no irregularity involved here. Regent Sarmiento had indicated his intention to file the protest as early as December. The protest was included in the agenda of the January 29 meeting. This Agenda was unanimously approved by the Board. It therefore came as a surprise to the rest of the Board when some regents chose to leave the meeting when the protest was being taken up, resulting in the absence of a quorum.”

“… As of 29 January 2010, Ms. Bañez has not enrolled for residency and is not on leave of absence. She is not a bona fide student of the University, as defined by the CRSRC, and thus not qualified to sit as Student Regent, an Office whose occupant, under the UP Charter, must come from the ranks of the students.”

U.P.’s website said that in 2009, the students overwhelmingly ratified the Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS) through a referendum called for the purpose.

Article I, section 6 of the CRSRS defines a bona fide student as one who is “taking up academic units for bachelor’s degree, masters’ degree, doctorate degree, non-degree (sic), or certificate courses in the university, including those who are on residency status or on leave of absence (LOA).” Article III, section 1 provides, as part of the qualifications to be nominated, current enrollment at the time of his/her nomination. Article IX, section 7 provides for grounds to consider the position of SR-elect or the incumbent SR vacant, to wit:

• permanent disqualification from the university;
• incapacity to enroll or file an LOA the following semester (underscoring supplied by the U.P. website
• death, illness or any other cause which prevents him/her from discharging functions

But clearly, Bañez has not been permanently disqualified from the University which is a specific act known as “dropping a student from the rolls,” and requires the Secretary of a student’s college to undertaken the necessary action. If this had already occurred, then U.P. would have cited this as one of the conditions currently existing in the case of Bañez in order for the position of Student Regent to be declared vacant.

Additionally, the mere fact that Bañez showed up for the January 29, 2010 BOR meeting and had the necessary energy to participate in a “principled walkout,” along with other Regents showed that she was neither conclusively dead nor so grossly ill such that she was not able to discharge her functions as a BOR member.

The bone of contention rests on the second condition being cited by the U.P. administration which says that Bañez’s “incapacity to enroll or file an LOA the following semester” necessarily leads to her disqualification. However the burden of proof rests on the U.P. administration through U.P.’s Legal Office to show that the condition of “incapacity” existed in the case of Bañez. One well-known online dictionary defines the legal term of incapacity as "the quality or state of being incapable; especially: lack of physical or intellectual power or of natural or legal qualifications (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incapacity). Additionally, while the CRSRS requires that a student be currently enrolled at the time of nomination, it is not clear about what the Student Regent's status must be during the entire term of the Student Regent's incumbency. This is a grey area leading to a possible test case.

Moreover the mere fact that Bañez has not been dropped from the rolls of the University which means that she is still a U.P. student nor had any pre-existing mental or physical conditions that would render her unfit to function as a regent highlights the challenge that U.P.'s legal department faces to credibly justify the U.P. administration's policy to remove the Student Regent as a U.P. student and as a regent

Bañez has also filed an application and appeal for Residency and then an LOA, both pending the approval of the UPLB Chancellor Luis Rey Velasco even before the January 29 BOR meeting. Contrary to the claims of the UP administration, Bañez says that she has never withdrew her application for residency.

The U.P. Board of Regents' Clash of Civilizations: Democracy vs. Victory-at-any-Cost?

                                    (Artwork by: Pam Liban)

The Diliman Diary has been furnished with several letters and position statements from the Faculty Regent Judy M. Taguiwalo, Staff Regent Clodualdo “Buboy” Cabrera, Student Regent Charisse Bernadine Bañez  and concerned U.P. Faculty, Reps, and Staff over the issues of the opposition by the U.P. Administration of the eligibility to vote in the U.P. Board of Regents of Student Regent Bañez.

Other issues hanging in the balance and depending on Bañez's eligibility to vote are  the selection of Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as Executive Director of U.P. PGH, the unresolved appeal of U.P. Diliman Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo to the Board of Regents to grant her tenure, and the validity of the appointment of 27 individuals by the BOR last December 18, 2009 with the official title of Artist with corresponding grades or ranks. The appointment of the U.P. Artists was announced officially by the U.P. Administration on its own website last December 18, 2009 at: http://www.up.edu.ph/features.php?i=170

The letters and position statements have been provided by Faculty Regent Taguiwalo through Silverio Cabellon, Jr., M.D., Chair of the Board of Governors of The University of the Philippines Medical Alumni Association (UPMASA).

In view of significant reader interest on the matter, we are posting the letters and position statements below without comment because they are compelling enough to make them rise above mere "propaganda." However. in light of our policy of providing balanced content, we will also provide updates of the side of the U.P. Administration and other important viewpoints as they are made available.

Here are the letters and position statements:

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE BOARD OF REGENTS

CONCERNED UP FACULTY, STUDENTS, REPS AND STAFF

JANUARY 29, 2010

THE UNIVERSITY IN CRISIS

A crisis is well underway when people who make up an institution are responsibly aware of shared values that facilitate the attainment of their common goals and recognize that the same values are threatened. The issues being raised by various sectors in the different constituent units of the University of the Philippines System are sufficiently alarming for they cast considerable doubt on the UP Administration's commitment to good governance and democratization.

The Large Lecture Class Scheme (LLCS) which converts the regular class size of every General Education subject from 30-40 to 150-200 in UP Los Banos will be effective by the first semester of AY 2010-2010 according to a memorandum released by Chancellor Luis Velasco on January 4, 2009. This decision was arrived at without substantive and participative consultation with students and faculty. The LLCS has ushered in the largest, most relentless opposition in UPLBs recent history.

In January 14, 2009, Dean Enrique Avila of UP Visayas Cebu College (UPVCC) announced the suspension of the UP Visayas Cebu High School (UPVCHS) admission test in consonance with his proposal to phase out the secondary institution. The reason for this drastic move is UPVCC's bid for becoming an autonomous constituent unit of UP, hence the need to rechannel resources.

Both cases reveal the setbacks of commercialization espoused by the Roman Administration and the violation of the principles of democratic governance which the University is supposed to uphold. When proposals are turned to decisions made behind closed doors, and when the same decisions bear the effect of the abolition of educational institutions in the case of UPVCC and the contractualization of labor or even job loss for the untenured faculty; and the steady decline of general education on account of large class size in the case of UPLB, any university aiming for survival must rethink its dogmatic commitment to rationalization schemes.

A series of huge and furious protests earlier this month were undertaken by hospital staff, students and concerned faculty from the Philippine General Hospital, UP-Manila and UP-Diliman to condemn the refusal of President Emerlinda Roman to install Jose C. Gonzales PGH Director. The vigorous protests based on sound arguments and just ground resulted in the swearing in of Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as the PGH Director, duly elected by the Board of Regents on December 18, 2009.

UP students across the nation are outraged by what they claim as a systematic violation of their right to representation in the University's highest policy-making body. The various charges against Student Regent Charisse Banez, now under appeal, have also been used to threaten her of a denial of participation in the BOR. This situation is reflective of the Administration's proclivity to silence the voice of the studentry in crafting decisions that greatly shape the quality of education.

The long and drawn-out tenure application of Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo, that had gone through the process of appeal and denied twice by the offices of the Chancellor and the President have elicited the most unyielding objections from local and international scholars, students and university unions. Professor Raymundo's has proven that when the university institutionalizes and proclaims its academic standards, the public stakes its claim on it. Her tenure application has exposed not only the arbitrariness of the tenure process but also the Administration's disposition on not granting permanency on activist professors. Despite the series of denials from different administrative levels, Professor Raymundo's case has not been discussed in a manner that is substantive and observant of the procedures approved by University bodies.

The cases stated above are by no means disparate. They are testimonies to the crises of good governance and democratization that plague the UP system. They raise fundamental questions, beyond political stakes, on our ability as members of an academic institution to oppose grave abuses of discretions and to assert that the ideals of a democratic institution should be actualized. It is in the spirit that we call upon the Board of Regents to heed our call to question the corporatist claims of the Roman Administration. There is no better time other than this moment of crisis to take another look at another vision of our pact to good governance and democratization.

=============================

Offices of the Faculty, Staff and Student Regents

University of the Philippines

Diliman, Quezon City

Protest Against Deliberate Refusal of President Emerlinda R. Roman to Install Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as the PGH Director, Duly Elected by the Board of Regents January 6, 2010

We, the Regents representing the faculty, staff and students of the University, call upon all concerned members of the University of the Philippines community, particularly those from the Philippine General Hospital, to express their united condemnation of President Emerlinda R. Roman’s illegal, undemocratic and unfair refusal to install Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as the PGH Director who was duly elected by the Board of Regents last December 18, 2009. We call upon everyone to protest this blatant violation of the University’s standards of good governance.

We wish to remind President Roman that the Board of Regents at its December 18, 2009 meeting duly elected Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as director of the Philippine General Hospital. The Office of the Secretary of the University in its January 4, 2010 notification of the decisions of the BOR on appointments of UP officials included the appointment of Dr. Gonzales as PGH director.

Despite these facts, President Emerlinda R. Roman issued Memorandum No. PERR-2010-001, dated January 5, 2010, appointing Chancellor Ramon L. Arcadio as Officer-in-Charge of PGH. This memorandum cannot supercede a BOR decision and is therefore in direct defiance of the BOR. President Roman cannot fill up a position that is not vacant. We shall be taking steps to hold President Roman legally liable for possible violation of the University Charter that she is obligated by her oath of office to uphold

We acknowledge that one Regent has expressed his intention to protest the election of Dr. Gonzales. The presence of such protest, however, cannot overturn the decision already made by the BOR. By refusing to implement a duly approved decision of the BOR, President Roman has prejudged by herself alone an issue that should also be decided by the BOR as a body at its regular meeting. She has no legal or practical justification to withhold implementation of a BOR decision as the term of the previous PGH Director has already expired

We regard President Roman’s January 5 memorandum refusing to implement a BOR decision to appoint Dr. Gonzales as PGH Director as a very dangerous precedent. Here is one individual member of the Board, by the mere issuance of a memorandum, exercising a power that effectively frustrates the implementation of a duly authorized decision by the BOR.

We should not allow such autocratic actions to be exercised without resistance. We call for the immediate withdrawal of said memorandum and for the recognition of Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as the duly elected PGH Director starting January 1, 2010.

Faculty Regent Judy M. Taguiwalo (SGD) Staff Regent Clodualdo “Buboy” Cabrera (SGD)
Student Regent Charisse Bernadine Bañez (SGD)


=============================


What happened during the January 29, 2010 UP BOR meeting?

Judy M. Taguiwalo
January 31, 2010

January 29 was the first BOR meeting for 2010. And the start of my second year as Faculty Regent.

The weeks prior to the meeting were hectic as I prepared my report on my 2009 stint as Faculty Regent and received appeals from faculty, staff and students from all constituent universities of UP, with UP Baguio and the Open U as the only exceptions

When I arrived at Quezon Hall at around 8:30 that morning (the BOR meeting was set at 9 am) scores of students, faculty, REPS and staff from Diliman, PGH, Manila and Los Banos were already there. They circulated a statement entitled “A University in Crisis”. (see below)

The BOR meeting started with CHED Chair Angeles presiding. President Roman, Malacanang- appointed Regents Sarmiento, Chua, and Gonzales, Alumni Regent Pascual, Staff Regent Cabrera, Student Regent Banez and myself were present.

The agenda of the meeting was approved with the inclusion of the UP Cebu High School issue in other matters. The minutes of the December 18 BOR meeting was also approved.

Regent Sarmiento protests the December 18 election of new PGH Director

The first item placed on the agenda for discussion was the protest of Regent Sarmiento dated January 29, 2010. Regent Sarmiento protested the election of Jose Gonzales as PGH Director on the grounds that “The Student Regent is not only under suspension but is in fact not a student as defined by the University. Ms. Banez tried to register for the second semester but (sic) was only on November 17, 2009 that she tried to register…… “

The “Final Prayer” of Regent Sarmiento’s written protest was:

“….the election of Dr. Jose Gonzales as Director of the Philippine General Hospital is hereby declared null and void on the following grounds: that an unqualified person claiming to be the Student Regent, although she is not even a student, Charisse Banez was allowed to vote for Dr. Gonzales giving him winning margin

“….the Board declare that the Student Regent be deemed to have ceased, the Student Regent not being a student

“…and items taken up by the Board at the 1252nd meeting on December 18, 2009 including the appointment of the University officials under B of the agenda, without considering, as a vote that of the Student Regent because she is no longer a student of the UPLB, she being thus is no longer a regent, she being no longer a student, all remain approved.”


The Alumni Regent, Staff Regent and I voiced our position that the issue of the Student Regent voting last December 18, 2009 was resolved when the Board voted on the motion of President Roman. In that meeting, the UP President presented the December 15 letter of the Chancellor of UPLB (received by her office on December 17) informing her of the non-student status of the Student Regent on account of her failure to register for the second semester of Academic Year 2009-2010. The UP President also presented the December 17 memorandum of Vice President for Legal Affairs Theodore Te on the status of the Student Regent. The memorandum stated that “considering the information given by the UPLB...that the incumbent SR is not enrolled during the second semester, even for the purposes of residency”…then, “this would be a ground to declare the position vacant”. When asked, VP Te confirmed that under the UP Charter, the BOR has the power to prescribe rules for it own governance.

Discussions ensued in an executive session and at some point the SR was asked to step out while the rest of the Regents deliberated on her status. Then President Roman moved that the SR be allowed to sit in the meeting as an observer. I and several other Regents objected to the motion as it was the first time that the Student Regent was informed of the letter of the UPLB Chancellor and the December 17, 2009 memorandum of Vice President Te. I said that the Student Regent has not been given the chance to consult with a legal adviser regarding her status and due process requires that she be given the opportunity to do so. The Staff Regent said that this was an alarming precedent as a charge could be raised against any of the Regents on the actual day of a meeting set to decide on contentious issues and that Regent would be disenfranchised without the chance to prepare for his/her answers. The Alumni Regent also objected stating that even if the allegations raised against the SR were true, the hold over rule, meaning the incumbent continues to sit until a replacement is named and qualified, would allow her to remain as a voting member of the board.

The SR was called in and Chairman Angeles informed her that the Board would take a vote on whether she would assume an observer status or continue as a voting member of the Board. Right before President Roman’s motion was put to a vote; it was clarified that a YES vote would mean that the SR sits on the Board as an observer until the issue about her enrolment is settled and a NO vote, that she continues as a voting member until the same issue is resolved. The SR was allowed to vote on the motion she continues to be a regular voting member of the Board unless the Board decides to make her an observer as proposed in the motion. In a secret voting, with all of the nine (9) Regents present casting their votes, four voted YES and five voted NO. The motion was not carried so the Student Regent continued to sit as a voting member of the Board at the December 18 meeting.

Regent Sarmiento participated in the voting on the SR’s status and did not question the propriety or jurisdiction of the BOR deciding on the fate of the SR’s participation in the December 18 meeting. Neither did he object when the SR was asked to return to the meeting and participated in the voting on the motion of President Roman. Regent Sarmiento subsequently also participated in the voting for the new PGH Director where Dr. Jose Gonzales was elected by a vote of six (6) while then incumbent PGH Director Dr. Alfiler (who had already served a total of two consecutive terms) garnered five (5) votes. [1] It was only after the remaining items in the agenda were voted upon and when the meeting was about to be adjourned that Regent Sarmiento expressed verbally his intent to protest the election of the new PGH Director.

January 29 protest of Regent Sarmiento: Latest attempt to prevent Dr. Jose Gonzales from assuming the position of PGH Director

We, the Sectoral Regents and the Alumni Regent, were not against discussing the current status of the Student Regent prior to deliberating on the matters on the agenda for the January 29, 20101 meeting. But we found it highly irregular that the question on the status of the Student Regent during the December 18 meeting, which had already been decided was being revisited for the purpose of nullifying the election of Dr. Gonzales as PGH Director.

The irregularity of the protest on the status of the Student Regent by Regent Sarmiento tying it with the election of the PGH Director, who was not the choice of President Roman, Regent Sarmiento, Regent Gonzales and Regent Chua, is better understood by what occurred after the December 18 meeting. The term of outgoing PGH Director Alfiler was to end on December 31, 2009. There was no issuance of the appointment of university officials right after the BOR meeting on December 18, when previous BOR decisions on appointments were announced on the same day as the BOR meetings (e.g. October 21 OSU Memorandum on Appointment of University Officials and November 23 OSU Memorandum on Appointment of University Officials). When I inquired about this failure to issue a similar memorandum on the December 18 decisions of the BOR on the appointment of University Officials, the Secretary of the University said that because it was the last working day of the year, the issuance would be made on January 4, 2010. This clarification was not consistent with the fact that the December 18 decision of the BOR on the appointment of UP Artists was posted on the UP official website on December 18 itself.

The memorandum on the appointments of new university officials made during the December 18 meeting came out only on January 4. Early on that day, Dr. Gonzales was informed by the UP Manila Chancellor that he (Dr. Gonzales)would take his oath of office at 2:00 pm of January 4. But prior to the scheduled oath-taking, the UP Manila Chancellor sent a message to Dr. Gonzales that his oath was reset for January 5 as President Roman wanted to meet with them in Diliman that afternoon. There was neither an oath taking on January 5 because on that day President Roman issued Memorandum No. PERR-2010-001, appointing Chancellor Ramon L. Arcadio as Officer-in-Charge of PGH. The Sectoral Regents immediately issued a statement dated January 6 protesting the deliberate refusal of President Roman to install Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as PGH Director, duly elected by the Board of Regents. There was an emergency meeting held at the Manila Hotel in the afternoon of January 6 attended by Chairman Angeles, President Roman, Chancellor Arcadio and Dr. Gonzales. At noon time of January 7 at the height of the protests of PGH personnel, medical students and staff against the refusal to install Dr. Gonzales as Director, the formal notification of appointment of Dr. Gonzales dated December 18, 2009 was sent to the UP Manila Chancellor. At two in the afternoon of that day, Dr. Gonzales took his oath before the Chancellor with other university officials and staff of PGH in attendance.

One cannot but surmise, given these series of events, that some very powerful people are intent on preventing the installation of Dr. Gonzales as PGH Director. The protest of Regent Sarmiento was clearly aimed at nullifying the election of the PGH Director but it has been overtaken by events. The fact is Dr. Gonzales has taken his oath of office for a fixed term of three years and has actually discharged his duties for more than three weeks. He cannot be removed or suspended except for cause as provided by law. Moreover, an appointment once made and completed, is not subject to reconsideration or revocation.

When a Regent moved for a vote supporting Regent Sarmiento’s protest against the Student Regent’s participation in the December 18, 2009 meeting and nullifying the appointment of Dr. Gonzales, the Staff Regent, Alumni Regent, Student Regent and I protested. But there was no more room for discussion as one of the Regents insisted on putting an end to more talk and to proceed to the voting. I asked for a break and conferred with the other Sectoral Regents and the Alumni Regent. We discussed the consequences of participation in the unlawful removal of an elected University official, without cause and without due process, as proposed by Regent Sarmiento, and the subsequent election of another PGH director in spite of the fact that the post is not vacant. I decided that I could not countenance being part of a process which was clearly aimed at reversing the decision on the choice of the PGH Director made last December and which could be considered illegal. It left me physically ill. I opted to leave the meeting.


The Staff Regent, Student Regent and Alumni Regent after a while also left leaving the meeting without a quorum.
We are open to deliberating on the status of the Student Regent but it should not be used to overturn a decision not palatable to the powers that be
Let me reiterate: we, the Sectoral Regents and the Alumni Regent, were open to a discussion of the current status of the Student Regent prior to deliberating on the matters on the agenda for the January 29 meeting. But what we found highly irregular was that the question on the status of the Student Regent involved the nullification of decisions of December 18, in particular the selection of the PGH Director, undermining the integrity of decision-making processes in our institution.
Our university faces a range of burning issues which we as Regents, through our collective wisdom, must deliberate and decide on. But we must do so with the highest respect for due process and respect for decisions, especially on appointments, arrived at by the Board even in the rare case that the decision goes against the wishes of the highest executive official within or outside UP.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[1] Senator Mar Roxas and Rep. Cynthia Villar voted through signed letters sent to Chairman Angeles and President Roman, respectively.

U.P. Dictates the Script on Student Regent's Vote Eligibility, Preempts its own Board of Regents Meeting on January 29, 2010

                                                   (Artwork by: Pam Liban)

By Chanda Shahani

In its own version of writing on the wall, the University of the Philippines (U.P.) top administration has effectively signalled its objections to the appointment of Dr. Jose C. Gonzales who was selected by the Board of Regents last December 18, 2009 as the new Director of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) over the then incumbent director, Dr. Carmelo Alifiler, who was going for a third term, by emasculating the vote of Student Regent Ms. Charisse B. Bañez who voted in favour of Dr. Gonzales; thus throwing into doubt the validity of a closely-won contest where Gonzales garnered only six (6) votes and Alfiler five (5) votes.

The U.P. administration has tilted the balance of votes away from Dr. Gonzales when it already announced on its own website at http://www.up.edu.ph/ on January 29, 2010 that Student Regent Bañez was not eligible to vote in the appointment of the new PGH Director; thus preempting its own Board of Regents (BOR) meeting set at 8:00 a.m. on the same day at Quezon Hall in U.P. Diliman to discuss objections set forth by Regent Abraham Sarmiento last December 18, 2009 on Bañez's eligibility to vote on the selection of Dr. Gonzales. The issues of Sarmiento's objections regarding Regent Bañez's eligibility to vote in the selection of Dr. Gonzales, Gonzales's binding appointment thereof, and other issues were set to be discussed at the January 29 BOR meeting.

The proceedings of the January 29 BOR meeting were disrupted by a walkout by the Faculty Regent, U.P. Professor Judy M. Taguiwalo, Staff Regent Clolualdo E. Cabrera, Alumni Regent Alfredo E. Pascual, and Student Regent Bañez, said Arnulfo Anoos of the All-UP Workers Union in a text message. The walkout occurred because the Student Regent was not allowed to participate and had the resulting effect of a lack of quorum, said U.P. Professor Danilo Arao,a member of CONTEND UP in another text message. This was confirmed by Regent Nelia Gonzalez in a telephone interview with the Diliman Diary who said that the lack of a quorum led to a postponement of the BOR meeting. Regent Gonzales also said that Dr. Gonzales remained as Executive Director of PGH thus far.

“Nagkaroon ng principled walkout ang sectoral regents (faculty, staff, students regents) at yung alumni regent, so no quorum kaya hindi natuloy evil plan ni Roman to nullify Dec. 18 BOR decisions, partcularly PGH directorship,” said Prof. Mykel Andrada of the All-UP Academic Employees Union in a text to the Diliman Diary.

With the possible elimination of Bañez as a voting Regent, the jury still remains out on the eligibility of Dr. Gonzales to continue on as UP PGH Director if a new vote was taken and the Regents still vote the same way they did on December 18 as there would now be a division of the vote with five (5) votes for Gonzales and five (5) votes for Alfiler compared to the alignment of the votes on December 18, 2009 where six (6) Regents, including Regent Bañez voted for Dr. Gonzales and five (5) Regents voted for Dr. Alfiler.

Observers state that with Quezon Hall's unilateral splitting of the vote of the BOR, an interim measure such as President Roman's memorandum appointing of an OIC for PGH will take place until more votes are available in the BOR to reinstall Dr. Alfiler as Executive Director for a third term.

The January 29 walkout has forestalled any plans for both the pro and anti Gonzales supporters to make their respective moves until the next BOR meeting however. This date of the next meeting has not yet been announced, however.

According to the Manila Times.Net (http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/top-stories/8673-new-pgh-director-takes-oath-of-office) , those who voted for Dr. Gonzales were Student Regent Charisse Bañez, Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo, Alumni Regent Alfredo Pascual and Admin Staff Regent Cabrera. Sen. Manuel “Mar” Roxas 2nd also sent a written vote in favor of Gonzales.

Alfiler, however, received votes from U.P. President Emerlinda Roman, as well as Regents Abraham Sarmiento, Nelia Gonzales and Francis Chua and Rep. Cynthia Villar of Las Piñas City through a letter.

The Diliman Diary could not immediately confirm over the weekend the statement of Regent Gonzalez that Dr. Gonzales remained officially as Executive Director of UP PGH in view of Quezon Hall's January 29 website statement questioning Regent Bañez's eligibility to vote and Memorandum No. PERR-2010-001, issued by U.P. President Emerlinda R. Roman dated January 5, 2010, appointing Chancellor Ramon L. Arcadio as Officer-in-Charge of PGH.

However, despite the January 5, 2010 memo of Roman, the website of the PGH (http://www.pgh.gov.ph/ ) confirms that Dr. Jose C. Gonzales assumed his new post as PGH Director last January 7, 2010 after being voted into office last December 18, 2009 by the UP Board of Regents. During his first flag ceremony as Director last January 11, he was even introduced by UP Manila Chancellor Ramon Arcadio. Gonzales has already announced the members of his cabinet, namely Dr. Charlotte Chiong as the Deputy Director for Health Operations, Dr. Rey Ang as the Deputy Director for Administration, and Dr. Virgilio Novero as the Deputy Director for Fiscal Services. Ms. Ma. Rita Tamse remains as the Deputy Director for Nursing.

Dr. Gonzales is a renowned thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon and was the former Chair of the PGH Department of Surgery in 2001-2004. He is a member of the UP College of Medicine Alumni Class of 1972. He was former Director of the Regionalization Program of the UP College of Medicine.

Quezon Hall's attempts to rewrite the entire script on the eligibility of the Student Regent to vote after the vote had already been cast by the BOR; and possibly rescind the official appointment of Dr. Gonzales by creating a hung jury among the BOR is also being met with stiff resistance from U.P. PGH alumni in the Philippines and overseas.

An online petition authored by William H.E. Romero, M.D., a U.P. graduate (B.S. Zoology 1977, Medicine 1981) who practices medicine in the United States, with the name, The INSTALL DR. JOSE GONZALES NOW! Petition to ALL FILIPINOS (http://www.petitiononline.com/JOEGON72/petition.html) that was formed by U.P. College of Medicine Alumni and PGH personnel, asked Roman “to protect the welfare of its underpaid and overworked personnel and strengthen the education of our future doctors, by immediately implementing the decision of the Board of Regents to appoint Dr. Jose C. Gonzales as the new PGH Director and rescind the above mentioned memorandum.” The petition now has more than 1100 online signatures.

Roman's memorandum comes at the heels of another controversial decision involving Roman at U.P. Diliman where U.P. Diliman Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo appealed to Roman to overturn a decision by U.P. Diliman Chancelor Sergio Cao denying her tenure due to a minority protest vote (Please see Diliman Diary, December 10, 2009) despite the fact that the majority of faculty in her department had voted to grant her tenure.

Raymundo's appeal for tenure was denied by Roman in a copy of a resolution of Roman she received last January 4, 2010, according to Raymundo, writing in an update she posted on an online website, Tenure for Prof. Sarah Raymundo (http://tenureforsarahraymundo.blogspot.com/).

On January 15, 2010 Raymundo submitted an appeal to the BOR, asking them to overturn Roman's decision. There has been no decision yet by the BOR, in view of the postponed January 29 BOR meeting.

In a statement dated January 29, 2010 on U.P.'s own website at: (http://www.up.edu.ph/), the date of the BOR meeting, the U.P. administration stated that:

“The Charter of the University of the Philippines, Republic Act No. 9500, provides that there shall be one Student Regent chosen by the students from their ranks in accordance with the rules and qualifications approved in a referendum by the students (sec. 12[g], RA 9500). In 2009, the students overwhelmingly ratified the Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS) through a referendum called for the purpose.”

“Article I, section 6 of the CRSRS defines a bona fide student as one who is “taking up academic units for bachelor’s degree, masters’ degree, doctorate degree, non-degree (sic), or certificate courses in the university, including those who are on residency status or on leave of absence (LOA).” Article III, section 1 provides, as part of the qualifications to be nominated, current enrollment at the time of his/her nomination. Article IX, section 7 provides for grounds to consider the position of SR-elect or the incumbent SR vacant, to wit:

• permanent disqualification from the university
• incapacity to enroll or file an LOA the following semester
• death, illness or any other cause which prevents him/her from discharging functions.”

Regent Bañez admitted to the BOR that she was not currently enrolled at the time of the date of voting by the BOR on December 18, 2009. However, U.P. also admits in its own website that:

“On 18 December 2009, the Board of Regents met for the 1252nd time. Before discussing the items in the agenda, the President brought Ms. Bañez’s status to the attention of the Board.”

“When asked by the Board if she is enrolled, Ms. Bañez admitted that she is not (Minutes, 1252nd BOR Meeting, 18 December 2009, p. 3). During an executive session, the President moved that Ms. Bañez be allowed to sit during the 1252nd BOR meeting but only as an observer because she was no longer a student and therefore cannot discharge the duties of a student regent. This resulted in a division of the Board.”

“Before the vote, however, one of the regents moved that Ms. Bañez be allowed to vote, in effect, on her own fate. The vote went against the President’s motion, 5-4 (with Ms. Bañez voting for herself instead of abstaining). Thus Ms. Bañez was allowed to “sit as a regular member of the Board until the issue on enrollment is resolved.” ”

“The BOR then proceeded to take up its agenda items with Ms. Bañez participating and voting. Part of the agenda included the appointment of the PGH Director, where the voting was decided by a tie breaker vote cast by the Chairman of the CHED, as Co-Chair and Presiding Officer.”

Thus, by its own admission, the U.P. administration has stated in its own website that Student Regent Bañez was allowed not just to sit as an observer but as a regular voting member of the BOR where her own eligibility to vote was agreed upon by the majority of the BOR and in that same meeting, Dr. Gonzales was selected as the new Executive Director of PGH.

The petition authored by Dr. Romero states that given the fact that Regent Sarmiento protested the eligibility of Student Regent Bañez to vote after voting had already taken place on December 18 and at the very end of the meeting; and that Bañez's eligibility to vote had already been discussed prior to voting, but that she was allowed to vote anyway; that Sarmiento's protest, formalized through an official letter dated December 23, 2009 was scheduled to be taken up in the next BOR meeting scheduled on January 29 in Los Baños; Roman's memo “unilaterally decided the outcome of the protest of a single Regent, before this protest could be acted upon by the full Board”

“The question is why is Dr. Gonzales being removed even before the protest of Regent Sarmiento is discussed in the next BOR meeting?” Romero asked the Diliman Diary.