U.P. Diliman Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo is finally granted tenure by the U.P. Board of Regents, ending two years of waiting

U.P. Diliman Professor Sarah Raymundo 

(Source: http://tenureforsarahraymundo.blogspot.com/)

The University of the Philippines (U.P.) Board of Regents (BOR) voted today by a vote of 5 in favor, 2 against and one abstention, granting U.P. Diliman Sociology Professor Sarah Raymundo tenure, ending two years of waiting for the professor, when her department initially recommended her for tenure in February of 2008, and whose latest appeal, dated January 15, 2010 finally reached the BOR. Professor Raymundo's case has gained widespread sympathy, both inside U.P. and internationally.

BOR Chairman Emmanuel Y. Angeles, who was present in the meeting, did not vote. The new Student Regent, Cori Alessa Co, who took her oath of office today, and  replaced outgoing Student Regent Charisse Bañez was able to vote; thus restoring student representation to the BOR, as Ms. Bañez was disallowed by the U.P. Administration from voting ever since December 18, 2009 (See Diliman Diary, February 25, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/36gxb9b)

The Diliman Diary observed Regent Abraham Sarmiento and Regent Nelia Gonzales exiting Quezon Hall in U.P. Diliman after the meeting. The total number of regents present in the May 27, 2010 BOR meeting were nine (9) regents, including  U.P. President Emerlinda Roman and BOR Chairman Emmanuel Angeles. There are eleven (11) regents in the BOR. However, Regent Francis Chua left before the voting began, while Rep. Cynthia Villar, representing the House of Representatives sent in a written vote, and Senator Mar Roxas, representing the Senate, did not attend or send in any vote at all.

(Faculty Regent Taguiwalo. Source: 

Facebook page of Laban PGH Movement)

The basis of the BOR decision was a motion made last January 29, 2010 by Faculty Regent Taguiwalo which was tagged by her to the Diliman Diary and which we are reproducing below in full:

"On the appeal for tenure of Prof. Sarah Raymundo

Judy M. Taguiwalo
Faculty Regent
January 29, 2010

As the Faculty Regent my mandate is to represent the faculty, both tenured and untenured, of the University at the Board of Regents.

Prof. Raymundo’s appeal has ramifications vis a vis the parameters of the right of tenured faculty to make judgment on tenure application and the right of untenured faculty members to expect fairness and justice in the tenure process and decisions. In studying the appeal for tenure of Prof. Sarah Raymundo, I am guided by the existing policies approved by the University at various levels and previous decisions made by the Board.

According to the document "Shaping Our Institutional Future: A Statement on Faculty Tenure, Rank and Promotion" (OVPAA, 2004), there are two rights at stake in considering appeals regarding the non-award of tenure, to wit, "the right of tenured colleagues to make a qualitative judgment on the candidate's performance and record and the right of temporary faculty to expect fairness, both in the process by which the tenure decision is reached and in the substance of that decision. The appeal procedure should take into account both these rights." The same document states that the consideration of tenure should be made "solely on academic grounds" and that the use of any other criteria may lead to a "violation of academic freedom" (I.F.4.a).

The UP Diliman University Council in December 15, 2008 upheld the right of all untenured faculty to be informed upon employment of the criteria for their evaluation and to be evaluated on the basis of these criteria. The UPD UC also spelled out the elements of transparency in the tenure process.

The primacy of academic standards as basis for the grant of tenure is affirmed by the Board of Regents’ decision on the case of Lorraine Carlos Salazar. In the BOR meeting of January 27, 2005 the Board reviewed the case of Prof. Salazar and decided that:

Taking note of the department’s definition of collegiality as explained by Prof Noel Morada, Department Chair, in his letter to President Nemenzo, the Board asked about the weight given to collegiality vis-à-vis Prof. Salazar’s academic credentials (e.g. PhD, international publications). The Board was not satisfied with the department’s argument that the best, though, implicit, measure of collegiality is the confidence vote of two-thirds of the tenured faculty. Since the basis of the vote is not explained in the letter, the Board could only conclude that collegiality outweighed academic credentials. The Board maintained that academic credentials should not be ignored.

Why should the BOR intervene on this matter?

As a young UP faculty member, Prof. Raymundo has spent the past nine years serving the university well and has worked hard to fulfill all the requirements for tenure . The justification provided by the Department of Sociology in April 2008 recognizes Prof. Raymundo’s academic qualifications and in fact, the Department approved her promotion from Assistant Professor 1 to Assistant Professor 2 in June 2008.

After initially providing strong justification for the recommendation to grant tenure to Prof. Raymundo, the majority of the tenured faculty of the Department of Sociology then decided to deny the grant of tenure without providing any reason. In a past case, the BOR had overruled a similar refusal by the Political Science department to grant tenure because the Board deemed the reason given (in that case "lack of collegiality") unacceptable as basis for withholding tenure to one who is otherwise duly qualified. If the BOR can pass upon the acceptability of a reason given to withhold tenure, it must pass upon the unacceptability of no reason being given for a similar act. Otherwise, the BOR is telling departments that the way to avoid BOR oversight and intervention is to simply decide without any declared reason. This gives permission for departments to become whimsical and arbitrary in their decisions on the grant of tenure to faculty.

In pursuit of the appeals process, Prof. Raymundo appeals to the University President who denies her appeal by simply asking the department to vote again and to treat the negative vote result as basis for denying the appeal, again without seeking to determine the substantive reasons for the vote. If the appeal process does nothing to determine and weigh the substantive basis for the action being appealed and instead simply repeats the action, for what purpose do we have an appeals process? Is it merely to torture the affected party with the repetition of the act being appealed?

I am thus requesting my colleagues in the Board of Regents to support the following:

• Declare as a matter of policy that the absence of any reason to deny tenure from a temporary faculty who has otherwise met the declared requirements for tenure is not an acceptable exercise of departmental autonomy that should be uncritically respected.

• Given the lack of any substantive reason declared to deny tenure in this case from the original process as well as from the appeals process and given that Prof. Raymundo met the requirements for tenure, grant the appeal for tenure of Prof. Raymundo."

However, Faculty Regent Taguiwalo told the Diliman Diary that dissenting members of the Sociology Department are expected to file a motion for reconsideration to the BOR pleading that Professor Raymundo not be granted tenure. The next meeting of the BOR is scheduled for June 2, 2010.

Outgoing Student Regent Charisse B. Bañez

(Source: Facebook page of Laban PGH Movement)

The new Student Regent Cori Alessa Co

takes her oath of office before Regent

Sarmiento, President Roman and her mother.

 (Source: Faculty Regent  Taguiwalo)

SUCCESS! - The Diliman Diary finally gets copies of the Malacañang appointments of the three U.P. Regents

By Chanda Shahani

The Diliman Diary has finally been able to get copies of the March 2010 "midnight" appointments by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to the University of the Philippines (U.P.) Board of Regents (BOR) of Regents Francis Chua, Nelia Gonzales and Abraham Sarmiento from the Malacañang Records Office even as the Office of the Secretary of the University has been acting in very slow motion on the Diliman Diary's requests for the same information.

Quezon Hall's reluctance to disclose copies of the Malacañang "midnight" appointments of the regents before this morning's regular meeting of the BOR is set within the context of several other regents questioning the legitimacies of these three regents. The U.P. Administration is mandated to disclose the action taken by the President in view of the fact that the previous action taken by the BOR in its last February 25, 2010 meeting was to recommend the appointment of these three regents to the President before the March 10 constitutional ban on presidential appointments. But in disclosing the presidential action, Quezon Hall also lays itself open to questions arising from the data contained in the presidential "midnight" appointment papers.

To let our readers get an appreciation of the implications of the information contained in the 2010 Presidential appointments, we have scanned the documents and put them side-by-side with the 2008 scanned Presidential appointments of the same regents (the 2008 copies were obtained during a press briefing held at the College of Social Work and Community Development on March 3, 2010 by the sectoral regents).

Below are the 2010 and 2008 scanned Presidential appointment papers of Regent Francis Chua (Left to right. To see an enlarged image just click on the scan ):

Below are the 2010 and 2008 Presidential appointment papers of Regent Nelia Gonzales (Left to right. To see an enlarged image just click on the scan ):

And below are the 2010 and 2008 Presidential appointment papers of Regent Abraham Sarmiento(Left to right. To see an enlarged image just click on the scan ):

The Diliman Diary's interpretation of the 2010 "midnight" Presidential appointment papers versus the earlier 2008 Presidential appointment papers is influenced by the operational word, "Acting," which is appended to the titles of all the regents when they were appointed in 2008.

In a March 1, 2010 report, Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo said she questioned in the February 25, 2010 BOR meeting the validity of the vote taken by six regents to remove Student Regent Charisse Bañez as Student Regent, and replace the duly selected Ezxecutive Director of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) Dr. Jose Gonzales with a replacement, Dr. Enrique Domingo.

Regent Taguiwalo said that the three regents were appointed as "Acting" regents in 2008 and that under Executive Order 292, "acting" or "temporary" regents only enjoyed a one-year term. This means that the "Acting" regents were all former regents when they voted in the February 25 BOR meeting. Since only six regents voted in that meeting and three of them had expired papers, then the results of the votation were null and void.

Other developments:

• The U.P. System's Vice President for Legal Affairs, Atty. Theodore Te has asserted in the website of the U.P. System (http://www.up.edu.ph/features.php?i=190) that the three regents enjoyed two-year and not one-year terms starting in 2008.
• In the February 25 BOR meeting BOR Chairman Angeles stated that the BOR should recommend to Malacanang that the three regents be given regular appointments and it was President Roman who made the motion to do so. This action would be in accordance with R.A. 9500 or the U.P Charter of 2008 which requires that the BOR make such recommendations to the President of the Philippines.
• But the copy of Regent Abraham Sarmiento's 2008 appointment signed by President Arroyo and showed that President Arroyo signed the appointment in September 29, 2008 and, adopting President Roman's and Atty. Te's logic, should expire only this coming September 29, 2010. Thus the submission by the U.P. Administration of Sarmiento's appointment papers for a “midnight” appointment” by President Arroyo before the March 10, 2010 constitutional ban took effect shows that the U.P. Administration publicly disagreed with Faculty Regent's argument that a one-year rule on such appointments was in effect, but privately agreed with her by submitting Sarmiento's papers to the Palace for a regular appoinment, as they had already expired on September 29, 2009. This is supported by the 2010 March “midnight” appointment which stipulates that the appointment is good only until September 29, 2010. It also means that U.P. itself is admitting that Regent Sarmiento was already a former regent when he voted on February 25, 2010 to render the Student Regent a former regent as well, and to vote for Dr. Enrique Domingo as the new Executive Director of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH), replacing Dr. Jose Gonzales.
• Regent Francis Chua's appointment was signed by President Arroyo on January 1, 2008, which means that since U.P. already impliedly agreed with Faculty Regent Taguiwalo's one-year argument by submitting Regent Sarmiento's papers for regular appointment, then Regent Chua's term likewise expired on January 1, 2009 and he was a former regent when he voted to remove the Student Regent and Dr. Gonzales.
• Under the one-year rule, therefore, Regent Nelia Gonzales' appointment was signed by President Arroyo on March 18, 2008 and expired on March 18, 2009 and she was also a former regent when she voted to remove the Student Regent and Dr. Gonzales. The application of the one year rule means that every single decision of the BOR, including the removal of the Student Regent, the removal of Dr. Gonzales, and the appointment of Dr. Domingo may be questioned for the period when the terms of individual regents expired; potentially tilting the balance of voting in every instance, and affecting the validity of decisions previously made by the BOR.
• Even if we applied the two-year rule instead of the one-year rule, there still would not have been a majority vote to recommend the three regents to Malacanang because Faculty Regent Taguiwalo said that only five participated in the voting, with BOR Chairman Eduardo Angeles, President Roman and Regents Chua, Gonzales and Sarmiento participating. But of the three Malacanang regents, only Regents Sarmiento and Gonzales were eligible to vote under the two-year rule, as their appointments would not yet be deemed expired; as Regent Chua's tenure would have expired on January 1, 2010 under the two-year rule. Neither did a majority vote exist to remove the Student Regent or remove Dr. Gonzales as PGH Executive Director and replace him with Dr. Domingo, because only four out of the five regents who participated in the voting were eligible to vote.
• Additionally, President Arroyo reappointed Regent Gonzales on March 9, 2010 or nine (9) days BEFORE Regent Gonzales' term expired. This could render President Arroyo's appointment of Regent Gonzalez null and void, and with the March 10, 2010 ban on Presidential appointments already in effect, U.P. will have to wait until the country finishes electing a new President when the presidential elections start on May 10, 2010, before the newly elected President fills up Regent Gonzales' vacant slot with the same or a new appointee.
• Although the March 24, 2010 BOR meeting had not yet begun as of the posting of this dispatch, the issue of the legitimacy of regents' terms of office is an issue that is likely to be extensively discussed by the sectoral regents, such as Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo, Student Regent Charisse Banez, Staff Regent Clodualdo “Buboy” Rivera, Alumni Regent Alfredo Pascual and other regents such as U.P. President Emerlinda Roman, the U.P. Legal Office and the affected regents, such as Regents Abraham Sarmiento, Nelia Gonzales and Francis Chua.
• A possible rendering of the February 25, 2010 vote by the BOR as null and void due to the lack of a majority vote taken due to the ineligibility of certain regents to vote means that Student Regent Charisse Banez's removal as Student Regent was null and void and that Dr. Gonzales' removal and Dr. Domingo's installation (in both instances) as PGH Executive director were also null and void.

The Diliman Diary will continue to provide updates to this story as it continues to develop.

(Chanda Shahani is the editor of the Diliman Diary. He finished A.B. Comparative Literature from U.P. Diliman)

March 22 Third UP Sectoral Regents Forum Tackles Important Issues at the Faculty Center, U.P. Diliman

By Sigrid Salucop

The University of the Philippines (U.P.) Board of Regents (BOR) is caught in an administrative and legal controversy that has been the talk of the UP Community for the past few weeks. The issue of the nullification of the December 18 election of the Executive Director of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) Dr. Jose Gonzales and the removal of Student Regent Charisse Bañez due to a technicality however, goes beyond UP itself.

Being a microcosm of the Philippines, U.P. is not only caught in a string of bad practices but a defiance of democratic governance and a trampling of Republic Act 9500 or the 2008 U.P. Charter.

Here are the higlights of discussions sponsored by Student Regent Charisse Bañez, Staff Regent Clodualdo “Buboy” Cabrera, and Faculty Regent Judy M. Taguiwalo during the Third UP Sectoral Regents’ Forum held on March 22, 2010 at Recto Hall, Faculty Center, U.P. Diliman:

The Student Regent’s issue was discussed in detail. Last February 25, 2010, the Student Regent was removed by a vote of six regents during a BOR meeting on the grounds that she was no longer a student and therefore could not act as a Student Regent since the last December 18, 2009 BOR meeting when she voted in favour of ousted PGH Director Jose Gonzales.

Ms. Bañez clarified during the forum that she has already applied for residency but has not heard of any word with regards to her application even up to now. She said that for enrollment prurposes, it was only the UP Los Baños College Secretary’s signature that was needed for the rest of the student population; but that in her case her papers were forwarded to the office of UPLB Chancellor, Luis Rey I. Velasco, a known ally of President U.P. President Roman. Chancellor Velasco was quoted as asking the Student Regent’s camp “Alam niyo bang wala na kayong Student Regent? Ano nang gagawin ninyo ngayon?” Left with no more avenues, students from UP Diliman, Los Baños and Manila marched to the Commission on Higher Education and Development yesterday to assert their rights. CHED Chairman Emmanuel Y. Angeles also conceurrently holds the position as U.P. BOR Chairman. Another protest, the UP Democratization Movement is also set to happen on March the 24th.

(UP-PGH FMAB contract signing by Pres. Roman and

Dr. Edwin Mercado, CEO of the Daniel Mercado Medical

Center (DMMC) on June 18, 2009 Source: http://www.dmmcinc.com/uppgh.html)

Why the Student Regent was removed

Apart from the residency issue, the Student Regent would not have been removed from her office if not for the December 18 election involving the PGH directorship. Dr. Jose Gonzalez was elected on the said date but by February 25, his appointment was nullified by the same body who voted for him a few weeks before. Serving only a mere 7 weeks as PGH Director, Dr. Gonzalez was “replaced” by Dr. Eric Domingo, who according to insiders was supposed to run for Congress representing the province of Pampanga. People who attended the forum was shocked by this revelation – the issue was no longer only about the BOR being drunk in power, it was already an intricate web involving the President of the Philippines herself.

U.P. President Emerlinda Roman and President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo

U.P. President Emerlinda Roman won the election for UP President in 2005 against a Malacañang candidate. With promising beginnings, President Roman was well-received by all UP sectors much like President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo after Edsa 2. President Roman, however, is accountable for the tuition hike, the large class project in UPLB, and laboratory fees for Physical Education subjects. The latter did not go through due process and is now for approval in the next BOR meeting which is scheduled on March 25, 2010.

Much like President Arroyo, the U.P. Administration is now manipulating everything and everyone around itself to work for itsr own agenda and whether what it is doing is legal or not, according to critics, it can always use legal jargon to fight those who oppose it.
These glaring similarities between Quezon Hall and Malacañang is not just an idle comparison. It also means that even the University of the Philippines which is supposed to be a true champion of freedom and democratic rights can have this ideal thwarted within its own backyard.

Other Details of the Third UP Sectoral Forum

Governance issues with regards to the BOR and the UP Diliman University Council on the withdrawal of graduation of students found guilty of misconduct were also discussed but not in detail. According to the Student Regent, these students will not be able to graduate because they have cases at the Student Disciplinary Tribunal. The issue of UP Mindanao Chancellor Gilda Rivero’s second term was also discussed along with the lack of consultation of the BOR recommendation for new appointees.

(Sigrid Salucop is a freelance writer and a B.A. Public Administration graduate from U.P. Diliman)

Announcement: Office of the U.P. Student Regent, Staff Regent and Faculty Regent to hold U.P. sectoral regents forum on March 22, 2010 at U.P. Diliman

(From top to bottom: U.P. Regents Charisse B.

Bañez, Clodualdo Cabrera and Judy Taguiwalo)

An announcement has been released by the Office of the Office of the U.P. Student Regent, Staff Regent and Faculty Regent that a U.P. sectoral regents forum will be held on March 22, 2010 from 1 to 5 p.m., at Claro M. Recto Hall, Faculty Center, U.P. Diliman.

The announcement also says that that Section 3 (Purpose of the University) of the 2008 UP Charter stipulates that the University's function is to "(h) Provide democratic governance in the University based on collegiality, representation, accountability, transparency and active participation of its constituents, and promote the holding of fora for students, faculty, research, extension and professional staff (REPS), staff, and alumni to discuss non-academic issues affecting the University.”

“However, democratic governance, or rather the undemocratic governance in the university has become a serious issue under the administration of UP President Emerlinda R. Roman. Already, two cases have been filed against the University: one by Student Regent Charisse Bernadine Bañez and the other by PGH Director Dr. Jose Gonzales.”

“It is in this light that, the UP Sectoral Regents (Faculty, Staff, and Student Regent) are sponsoring a forum on "THE BOARD OF REGENTS AND (UN)DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE IN THE UNIVERSITY."

Some of the governance issues to be discussed are:

• The UP Diliman University Council and the Board of Regents (BOR) on withdrawal of graduation of students found guilty of misconduct
• The removal of student representation in the BOR
• The removal of Dr. Jose Gonzales as Executive Director of the Philippine General Hospital
• The reappointment of the UP Mindanao Chancellor (Dr. Gilda Rivero)
• The expired appointments of the three Malacanang appointed Regents (Francis Chua, Nelia Gonzales, and Abraham Sarmiento).
• The lack of consultation in the BOR recommendation for new appointees to Malacañang to the BOR.

Undemocratic Governance by the University of the Philippines System Leadership is Lambasted by Faculty, Staff, and Students at U.P. Diliman Press Briefing

U.P. Faculty, Staff and Students giving their
thumbs down to the incumbent U.P. Administration

By Chanda Shahani

From the joyous year-long 2008 University of the Philippines (U.P.) Centennial Celebrations peaking with the passage into law of the U.P. Charter of 2008 (R.A. 9500). To this. Perhaps U.P. President Emerlinda R. Roman should start popping a series of Extra-Strength Tylenol tabs as prophylaxis for a projected series of headaches; as a growing number of U.P. System Faculty, Students and Staff are becoming increasingly vocal about what they call her leadership's lack of democratic governance consequently creating a host of long-term problems for the premier state university and its constituents.

A press briefing was held on March 3, 2010 at the 3rd floor of the College of Social Work and Community Development (CSWCD) at U.P. Diliman 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, several PGH doctors, concerned University of the Philippines (UP) faculty and students, and the All U.P. Workers Union. They have all been united by converging interests centering on the following key issues involving decisions involving the U.P. System Administration which they are questioning.

Some of the key highlights of the briefing include:

• For the first time in UP’s history, students were stripped of their representation from the UP Board of Regents (BOR) as the current student regent was prevented from attending the board meeting and removed from her position due a technicality.
• For the first time in UP’s history, three regents overstayed their temporary designations to the BOR which lapsed in 2009.
• For the first time in UP’s history, the appointment of a University official was revoked without due cause. In UP Manila, the sitting PGH director, Dr. Jose Gonzales, was removed from his post a month after he was appointed by the board and sworn in as director.
• For the first time in UP’s history, classes as large as 300 will be the norm at UP Los Baños, leading to a degradation in each student's quality of education.

Jacqueline Eroles, the University Student Council of U.P. Diliman Vice Chair said during the press briefing that Student Regent Charisse Bañez was removed due to a technicality by several members of the BOR, acting as one, in order to nullify her swing vote in favour of U.P. Executive Director Jose Gonzales who they did not support.

She commented that copies in the press kit of several students' Form-5s which are U.P. students' proof of enrollment showed conclusively that unlike Student Regent Bañez, other students at U.P. Los Baños were allowed to enroll late beyond the claimed absolute and non-negotiable deadline of November 17, 2009 of the U.P. Administration for all UPLB students. One student enrolled for residency on February 2, 2010 and the other enrolled on February 16, 2010. Thus the unwillingness of the UPLB administration was due to pressure from the U.P. Administration which was not to give the Student Regent equal treatment as other UPLB students which was in turn was directly linked to her independent stand on the issue of who should be U.P. PGH Executive Director.

During the press briefing, Student Regent Bañez was even more emphatic in characterizing the linkage between her attempted ouster as Student Regent and Dr. Gonzales as Executive Director of U.P. PGH: "Malacañang at Roman itaksil sa Pamantasan. Education not for sale. U.P. not for sale," she said.

In a March 1, 2010 report also released during the media briefing, Faculty Regent Judy M. Taguiwalo said that she raised the issue during the February 25, 2010 BOR meeting, of the legitimacy of the three Malacañang appointed regents, Abraham Sarmiento, Nelia Gonzales and Francis Chua. She said that all three were appointed as "acting" regents on September 2008, March 2008 and January 2008 respectively by Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

Faculty Regent Taguiwalo cited the Administrative Code of 1987 (E.O. 292) which said that the President of the Philippines has the power to "issue temporary designations" but "(i)n no case shall a temporary designation exceed one (1) year."

She said that Vice President for Legal Affairs Atty. Theodore Te said during the February 25 BOR meeting that this issue could not be tackled by the BOR because the status of the three is included in a court case filed b y the Student Regent in the Quezon City Regional Trial Court and any discussion would be considred sub judice and that "temporary designation" is different from an acting appointment based on Supreme Court rulings. Taguiwalo said she consulted a lawyer afterwards, who showed her an excerpt from a Supreme Court ruling, Pimentel vs. Ermita (GR 164978 13 October 2005) which expressly ruled that "Acting appointments cannot exceed one year as expressly provided ... (in) EO 292."

However, based on Atty. Te's explanation, the BOR Chairman, Eduardo Y. Angeles denied Faculty regent Taguiwalo's motion, she said in her report. She said that during the whole process of deliberations made by the BOR, the three regents with expired appointments remained as regular voting members even as they voted for the selection of Dr. Enrique Domingo as the new Executive Director of PGH; consequentially removing Dr. Gonzales as PGH Executive Director, and also approving the minutes of the January 29, 2010 BOR meeting which contained a draft resolution nullifying the legitimacy of Student Regent Bañez's vote for Dr. Domingo during the December 18, 2009 BOR meeting and which provided the basis for the removal of Dr. Domingo.

Regent Taguiwalo said that she put her objection on record to the participation of the three Regents on the grounds that their appointments have already expired. The U.P. Administration is claiming that a unanimous vote of the BOR on February 25 resulted in the removal of Dr. Gonzales and the approval of a draft resolution voiding the legitimacy of Student Regent Bañez's right to vote from December 18, 2009 onwards on the grounds that she is no longer a student and therefore no longer a Student Regent. That may be an exaggeration. Nine regents attended the February 25 BOR meeting but three regents - Staff Regent Cabrera, Faculty Regent Taguiwalo and Alumni Regent Pascual abstained from voting leaving six regents who particpated in the voting. However three regents had expired appointments at the time of the voting, meaning that only three regents voted on February 25 which does not constitute a majority of the BOR.

"Parang sampal sa mga doctors ng PGH ang ginawa nila," said Dr. Jonas del Rosario, an Assistant Professor of the Department of Surgery at the U.P. College of Medicine who spoke during the press conference. He was referring to the ouster of  Dr. Jose Gonzales by the BOR last January 29, 2010 or about a month after he won in the voting by the BOR for the selection of a new Executive Director last December 18, 2009. "They are not respecting the civil service law," he said.

A March 2, 2010 resolution of the College Council of the U.P. College of Medicine also threw its support behind Dr. Gonzales. A resolution of any College Council in the U.P. System is considered especially important, by U.P. standards, in view of U.P.'s historic commitment to the principles of college and departmental autonomy. The resolution said that "Dr. Gonzales has already served as PGH director and has performed responsibly since January 4, 2010 with honor, integrity and transparency."

The resolution said the College Council resolved to "recognize and support Dr. Jose Gonzales as the duly appointed UP PGH director from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012 in accordance with his original appointment."

A statement dated March 3, 2010 and released by CONTEND during the press briefing criticized President Roman for her "unrelenting effort to transform the University into a private commercial educational institution." One example is the proposal for large class sizes of 150 to 200 in general education courses starting in UPLB which "considerably lowers the expectations for quality while blatantly hewing to the logic of mass marketing."

The CONTEND statement openly criticized President Roman,  a faculty member of the U.P. College of Business Administration in Diliman with a Ph.d. in Business Administration from the same college, for "her unrelenting effort to transform the University into a private commercial educational institution ... Her philistine imposition of the narrow parameters of profitability for measuring or evaluating academic excellence in the University is simply unacceptable for any institution dedicated to teaching, learning and the deepening of knowledge. Her desire to transform the University into a privatized educational corporation is incompatible with the ideals of the University to serve the people and provide education for the poorest and least privileged in Philippine society."

A press kit handed out at the ground floor of CSWCD at the same time of the press briefing by the U.P.'s Office of the Vice President of Public Affairs contained several statements from the Office of President Roman to the Philippine Collegian, specifying President Roman's actual comments on many of the same issues, and also posted on U.P. own website at: http://www.up.edu.ph/ Here are her comments:

• On the complaint of Student Regent Bañez for a temporary restraining order where she said the votes cast in the January 29 BOR meeting to remove her eligibility to vote as Student Regent starting December 18, 2009 were invalid in the January 29 BOR meeting because there was no quorum: "The minutes of the January meeting of the Board were approved by the Board in its February meeting. Nobody questioned the quorum precisely because there was a quorum. Ms. Bañez was wrong when she said there was no quorum," Roman said.
• On the issue of the report of Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo where she raised an issue regarding the legitimacy of the three Malacañang-appointed regents since they have expired terms. Roman said that, "The terms of the three regents appointed by Malacañang are the subject of a court case filed by the Student Regent. This case is before the court now. Therefore I shall not be able to comment on this. Suffice it to say that our arguments regarding their tenure have been firmed up and U.P.'s lawyer will present these to court."
• On the issue of Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo objecting to Regent Nelia Gonzales' motion to appoint another PGH Director other than Dr. Gonzales, since the board cannot remove an official who has taken his oath of office except for cause, Roman said that: "The rule they are citing does not apply in the case of Dr. Jose Gonzales. His appointment has been voided by the Board because Ms. Bañez was not qualified to vote by virtue of her not being a student at the time of the election. If Ms. Bañez' vote is not counted, Dr. Gonzales would have lost in the vote. Hence the need to elect another director."
• On the issue of the Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo being unable to understand why the Chancellor of U.P. Los Baños continues to deny Bañez’s appeal for late filing of residency as it had been granted to other students similarly situated nor has President Roman advised the UPLB Chancellor to grant the appeal as it would ensure continued student representation in the BOR, Roman's reply was:
  
  "Judy Taguiwalo chooses to blame me for everything. I don‘t know what her motive is. She may not be fully aware of all the rules. For example, application for residency is decided finally by the Chancellor, not by the President. Does she expect me to tell the Chancellor to approve Ms. Bañez’s appeal even if the student has not complied with the requirements?"
  
  "The Chancellor informed me that Ms. Bañez applied for residency on December 16 (way beyond the last day for registration which was November 17) and this letter did not reach the Chancellor until January (remember, UP was on vacation starting the 19th). On January 11, Ms. Bañez‘ representative (a certain Ms. Elena Carlos) withdrew her application for residency. Ms. Bañez has denied withdrawing this application but Ms. Carlos signed the withdrawal of the application. So what was there for the Chancellor to act on if she withdrew her application?"
  
  "Instead Ms. Bañez, represented by her lawyer, chose to go on leave of absence. The lawyer wrote to her dean on January 12 (the day after Ms. Carlos withdrew her letter applying for residency) about Ms. Bañez "intention" to go on leave. Note that it was not even Ms. Bañez who wrote and applied for a leave. It was her lawyer. This was denied by her dean because she did not comply with the requirements to go on leave. According to College rules, she has to submit her clearance, and her parents‘ permission for her to go on leave."
  
  "Now the Faculty Regent wants me to tell the Chancellor to approve Ms. Bañez‘ appeal even though the requirements are not complied with? I am very surprised by this. Why doesn‘t she instead advise the Student Regent to comply with the requirements? Why does she tolerate the non-compliance with the rules by Ms. Bañez and instead ask me to pressure the Chancellor to approve Ms Bañez leave?"
  
  "The latest news is that Ms Bañez has again changed her mind and is filing for residency again!"
  
  "The rules for the selection of Student Regent were formulated and ratified by the students themselves. You have rules for the SR to continue to qualify. My question is: why did Ms Bañez not work on this during the registration period? Her reason was that she was busy. Could she not have spent a day to work on this? Or did she think it was not important to comply with the rules? By her action or non action on her enrollment, residency or leave (yes, she acted but much too late) there is no one representing the students in the Board. Should we be blamed for this? What about her? What is her culpability here?"

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