Update: Outgoing U.P. Administration engineers last-minute dismissal of Student Regent Co, preventing Student participation in today's BOR election of a new U.P. President

In a stunning case of déjà vu, Student Regent Cori Alessa Co has been dismissed as a University of the Philippines (U.P.) student by the U.P. Administration at the last minute, preventing her from acting as Student Regent in today's elections for a new U.P. President by the Board of Regents, which normally has eleven members.

Regent Co's predecessor, former Student Regent Charisse B. Bañez was also prevented from voting last February 25, 2010 by the U.P. Administration, on the grounds that she failed to enroll by the requisite deadline, thus making her a former student and therefore a former Student regent when she voted for Dr. Jose Gonzales as Director of the Philippine General Hospital (PGH). Dr. Gonzales was later ousted on the strength of that one lost vote from the Student Regent. As a member of the BOR, U.P. President Emerlinda R. Roman did not vote for Dr. Gonzales.

The official reason for Regent Co's dismissal has to do with her supposed academic delinquency. She is currently enrolled in U.P. Baguio. However, the BOR itself only received notice today, on the first round of elections for U.P. President, from U.P. Baguio (through the U.P. Administration which controls the rate of dissemination of such documents). This move is therefore being seen by observers as a preemptive move to deprive some 50,000 U.P. students of representation in the elctions of a new U.P. President.

Current rules allow Student Regent Co to replace herself, and in fact Co can nominate the second nominee for the position of Student Regent, former UP Diliman USC vice-chair Jaqueline Eroles. However, there is also a necessity of acceptance by Ms. Eroles of the position, and this would require an oath-taking (normally before President Roman) which would be highly unlikely to take place until after the elections are finished.

The outgoing U.P. Administration has therefore succeeded in eliminating one critical vote from among the ranks of the eleven-member BOR in what was previously seen as a more uncertain outcome, in view of the appointment by President Benigno S. Aquino III of new Malacañang Regents last November 17. However, it is also true that two of the three Regents - former Chief Justice Renato Puno and former College of Business Administration Dean Magdaleno Albarracin are Roman nominees as well. The third new regent, Ms. Elizabeth Orteza-Siguion Reyna was not nominated by President Roman.

In a statement in her Facebook page, Student Regent Co said that: "Wala tayong ilusyon sa susunod na UP President. Ang tunay na mapagpasya sa panahon na patuloy na nasasadlak sa krisis ang mamamayan, patuloy na ginagawang inutil ang kabataan, at patuloy na isinasawalang bahala ang ating mga karapatan ay ang lakas at diwa ng ating sama-samang pagkilos. Ngayong patindi nang patindi ang bigwas sa ating hanay,hinihingi muli ng kasaysayan ang ating mapagpasyang pagtindig."

(Sources: Twitter updates and the Facebook page of the Philippine Collegian)

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)

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.

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.

Have they all gone underground or what? Quezon Hall neither confirms nor denies appointments of three (3) U.P. Regents despite Malacañang confirmation of appointments last March 11, 2010

By Chanda Shahani

The "midnight" appointments by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo of three regents to the University of the Philippines (U.P.) Board of Regents (BOR) remain neither confirmed nor denied as of today by Quezon Hall despite a categorical confirmation to the Diliman Diary by the Office of the Executive Secretary, Leandro Mendoza last March 11 that such appointments were issued by President Arroyo right before the March 10, 2010 constitutional ban on such appointments kicked in.

Telephone calls made by the Diliman Diary to the office of the Secretary of the University right before the publishing of this dispatch at 4:30 p.m. on March 19, 2010 drew the rejoinder from the staff that they could not report anything because the proper procedure was that they had yet to receive a formal communication to that effect from BOR Chairman Emmanuel Y. Angeles, who currently holds Cabinet-level rank as Chairman of the Committee on Higher Education and Development (CHED).

Quezon Hall's response is highly unusual, in that the office of the Executive Secretary told the Diliman Diary that the appointment papers of Regents Francis Chua, Abraham Sarmiento and Nelia Gonzalez had already been dispatched to the U.P. Administration as of March 11, 2010 or six working days ago.

But the refusal so far by Quezon Hall to admit the existence of the appointment papers after such a huge time lag, despite the fact that the Office of the President enjoys an infrastructure that also includes a fleet of messengerial vehicles and messengers to very quickly deliver Presidential directives and appointments to all government offices including U.P. Diliman indicates that the U.P. Administration is embarrassed by the information contained in those papers if they are compared against other available information and statements made by U.P. officials themselves.

Here are the combined facts pieced together from a variety of different sources. However, the full discloure of copies by the U.P. Administration of the official “midnight” appointment papers of the three regents would put to rest any charges of a lack of transparency, but would also open a very large can of worms for them. Here's why:

• Student Regent Charisse Bañez filed a legal complaint on February 22, 2010 at RTC # 215 in Q.C. and submitted the 2008 appointment papers of the three U.P. regents as part of her annexes attached to her legal complaint. In so doing, she made public the original appointment dates of these three regents which she mentioned as part of the background to her complaint, had all expired. During the court hearing, the Diliman Diary observed the presence of University Secretary, Dr. Lourdes Abadingo holding copies of the 2008 appointment papers to provide to U.P.'s legal counsel, which is an indication that the U.P. Administration was caught by surprise by the complaint of the Student Regent, possibly due to the fact that all sides were quickly summoned to court because Bañez filed a temporary restraining order. It also indicates that U.P. was concerned that the judge might agree with the Student Regent's argument that the one year rule applied to the three regents.
•  Faculty Regent Judy M. Taguiwalo also asserted in a March 1, 2010 report on the February 25 BOR meeting that these three regents all had expired terms because the one-year appointment rule applied to them and thus their terms of office expired in 2009. She cited Executive Order 292 in support of her position.
• 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 appointment signed by President Arroyo and forming part of the annexes of the Student Regent's complaint, 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 what the Office of Executive Secretary Leandro Mendoza said when they stressed that President Arroyo signed Regent Sarmiento's “midnight” appointment on March 9, 2010 but 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.

The implications of the U.P. Administration's allowing the Presidential appointment papers to surface are therefore far-reaching for Quezon Hall, as they put their objective of legitimizing the lengths of tenures of the three regents at risk during certain periods when they made critical decisions for the University which may now be openly and legally challenged. Additionally, with the term of U.P. President Emerlinda Roman ending in November 2010, these three (3) regents are perceived by many observers as constituting a reliable voting bloc who would constitute a critical mass of voting regents who, together with President Roman, can be expected to maximize the probability of delivering the winning vote for President Roman's chosen successor as U.P. President and for eventual appointment by the next Philippine President.

Photo credits:

1) Pictures of dwarfs: http://florentinofloro4.blogspot.com/

2) Picture of Oblation by Chanda Shahani.

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

Public Service Announcement: "IBALIK ANG TONO para IBALIK ANG TAMA," Protest Concert on March 19, 2010 at U.P. PGH Quadrangle/Atrium

IBALIK ANG TONO para IBALIK ANG TAMA

This Friday 5pm March 19 at the PGH Quadrangle/Atrium.

Featuring: Noel Cabangon, Datu's Tribe, The UP Med Choir and more

Entrance is Free

Ibalik ang Tono is an impromptu protest concert produced by the coalition of various groups from UP and PGH that have come together in protest of the unjust and oppressive removal of the PGH Director Dr. Jose "Joegon" Gonzales and the the UP Student Regent Ms. Charisse Bañez. Music is has the great power to strengthen our unity and our resolve to fight for what is right. Kaya Ibalik ang Tono para Ibalik ang Tama.

Other artists are still welcome to volunteer their talents for this concert. Please call Dr. Iggy Agbayani at 09175318648 asap.

Sponsored by Laban UP-PGH, the All UP Workers Union of Manila and the Coalition for truth, justice and good governance in UP-PGH: All UP Academic Employees Union Manila, PGH Head Nurses League, , PGH Nursing Attendants Association, University Student Council-UP Manila, PGH Utility Workers Association, Alternative Students’ Alliance for Progress- Katipunan ng mga Progresibong Mag-aaral ng Bayan (ASAP-KATIPUNAN) and all the advocates of our cause.

COMMENTARY: Blogger's analysis sheds light on Sen. Manny Villar's personal financial track record and opens up questions about U.P. Diliman's "Wednesday Club."

(Manny Villar, BSBA, U.P. Diliman 

(1970) and U.P. MBA (1973)

Source: http://www.wikipedia.org/)

By Chanda Shahani

She's done it again. Lila Shahani, whose incisive blogs about national issues in "Notes from an Insomniac" (http://lilashahani.blogspot.com/) now commands a large following, leads us down the money trail in pusuit of presidential candidate, Senator Manny Villar's personal finances. She asks questions about Senator Villar's personal financial statements which he submitted as a public official - She asks if it is a case of perjury or money laundering? And why not? As an individual who has fairly good chances of making it to the top slot, even Villar himself, a former analyst at SGV and a BSBA graduate (1970, U.P. Diliman) and an MBA graduate (1973, U.P. Diliman) could hardly disagree about the necessity of undertaking due diligence before making an important decision. And what decision is more important for us Filipinos than choosing our next top leader and closely scrutinizing his and even all the other candidates' records?

You can read all about Lila Shahani's analysis of Senator Villar's personal financial track record at:
http://lilashahani.blogspot.com/2010/03/concentric-circles-private-musings-on.html#comments

Notice of Full Discloure: Lila is my lovely and very intelligent sister and a Senator Noynoy Aquino partisan. I also admit to being partial to voting for Noynoy Aquino in the next elections. However, her analysis is very well written and well-researched and raises the kinds of questions regarding the ethics of our leaders that we like to ask at the Diliman Diary. We assure our readers that if we came across an equally substantive analysis of Senator Noynoy Aquino's finances or any other candidates' finances, we would post it here due to our policy of going out of our way to provide balanced coverage on any issue. If and when Senator Villar refutes or challenges the assertions raised in her blog, we will dutifully post them as well.

But what "Notes from an Insomniac" also does for a community weblog like the Diliman Diary is to provoke the thought that if some have characterized the Philippine economy and our very own social and political fabric as being dominated by an interlocking and a very exclusive series of relationship-based webs excluding the vast majority of our countrymen from anything other than the barest of crumbs at the dinner table; while others have more than their fill of the national repast (at the expense of others); then down home here in the Diliman area, what are the interlocking series of webs in our own backyard and are they helping or hurting the national interest or even both?

(College of Business Administration, U.P. Diliman

Source: http://www.upd.edu.ph/~cba/building.htm)

We are interested in ferreting out more relationship-based webs, and their possible impact on public life, beginning with the Diliman area. For example, Senator Manny Villar graduated BSBA from U.P. Diliman (1970) where he also met the current U.P. Regent representing the House of Representatives, Rep. Cynthia Villar (earlier, Cynthia Aguilar (BSBA, 1970)), whom he later married. Their fellow batchmate was SSS Chairman Romulo Neri (BSBA, 1970) (Sources: http://tinyurl.com/ydhhsp6  and http://www.upd.edu.ph/~cba/alum_net.htm), who was once the Chairman of the U.P. Board of Regents when he was the Chairman of the Commission for Higher Education and Development (CHED), and whom Senator Villar investigated in the recent ZTE telecommunications controversy, when Neri was Director-General of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) (http://tinyurl.com/y94fra9).

Siginifcantly for U.P. Diliman and the U.P. System, Senator Villar also took his MBA at U.P. Diliman, and ultimately became the President of the U.P. MBA Alumni Society, which automatically guaranteed him immediate entry into the fabled "Wednesday Club," of U.P. Diliman, where drinking sessions were held every Wednesday evening at the U.P. Diliman College of Business Administration (CBA). We bring up the issue of the "Wednesday Club" since many of our readers want to understand the inner dynamics of the current power structure running U.P. Diliman and its role in influencing the next President of the Philippines in choosing the next U.P. President after current U.P. President Emerlinda Roman (DBA, U.P. Diliman) steps down this November. It is this "Wednesday Club," that is in danger of thwarting democratic and legitimate dissent within U.P. about the future and directions of the University being set by the current U.P. Administration; based as it is on "very exclusive series of relationship-based webs excluding the vast majority."

We need to ask the question, "What is the 'Wednesday Club'"?  Is it really true that in U.P. Diliman, power radiates not only from Quezon Hall, but also from the faculty lounge in the CBA, which is the site of the "Wednesday Club?" Is it, in fact, true that the "Wednesday Club" literally runs U.P. Diliman like a corporate entity, which could account for the current rash of corporate-style board room antics at the BOR resulting in the unceremonious removal of Student Regent Charisse Bañez and PGH Executive Director, Dr. Jose Gonzales? But for all we know, the "Wednesday Club" never existed and is nothing but the product of this writer's feverish imagination. Nevertheless, the "Wednesday Club" serves as an appropriate metaphor for the "very exclusive series of relationship-based webs excluding the vast majority" in U.P. Diliman. After all, why are so many people demonstrating in favour of the Student Regent? Or for Dr. Gonzales? Why do people keep on bombarding the Diliman Diary with outraged comments about what is happening now to the entire U.P. System under the current U.P. Administration? If Senator Villar wins the May elections and becomes the next President, will this ensure that the current "Wednesday Club" will be able to perpetuate itself by determining, as early as now, that its chosen nominee shall wear the crown, the robe and the ruby slippers of the next U.P. Presidency, who shall be appointed by one of its very own?

Assuming, on the other hand, that the other Presidential elections front-runner, Senator Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino wins the Presidency, will he not, in fact be presented with a fait accompli of a simple majority of "Wednesday Club"-friendly warm bodies from the U.P. Board of Regents whose terms of office have all been recently updated; but whose legitimacies are being questioned in various administrative and legal fora (See Diliman Diary, March 11, 2010)? We do not yet know the complete answers to these questions, but we invite our readers to send in any infomation they have about the "Wednesday Club," and its activities, so that we can conduct a more thorough analysis. The analysis of Senator Villar's finances have opened up more questions about the "Wednesday Club," and the tax-paying public deserves more answers.

An Open Letter to the Philippine Daily Inquirer regarding the University of the Philippines V.P. for Legal Affairs Theodore Te's March 15, 2010 letter regarding Student Regent Charisse Bañez

(Quezon Hall, U.P. Diliman)

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE PHILIPPINE DAILY INQUIRER

 

March 15, 2010

Mr Jorge V. Aruta
Opinion Editor
Philippine Daily Inquirer
1098 Chino Roces Street
corner Mascardo Street
Makati City, Metro Manila

Dear Mr. Aruta:

The Diliman Diary (http://www.dilimandiary.com/) is a community blog that covers the Diliman area which includes the University of the Philippines, the Katipunan stretch bordering Ateneo and Miriam College, and associated communities. Despite our extremely limited number of writers, we have been doing our best to cover developments in the University of the Philippines, as we believe that it is our public duty to report to our readers how their tax remittances are being put to use by the public institutions located in their community (whether wisely or not too wisely). We also feel obligated to report all sides of an issue and to add more information when less information is in danger of distorting a holistic appreciation of the facts at hand.

In this regard, therefore, I would like to comment on the portion of the statement of Atty. Theodore Te, Vice President for Legal Affairs of the U.P. System who has posted an open letter to the Philippine Daily Inquirer, dated March 15, 2010 on the government-owned and tax-payer funded U.P. website at (http://www.up.edu.ph/features.php?i=190) where he said that:

“On the three regents whose continued stay in the BOR (U.P. Board of Regents) has been questioned by (Student Regent) Ms. (Charisse) Bañez indirectly in her Complaint for Injunction, it is sufficient to say simply that two of those regents were appointed before the UP Charter took effect and so their term of office is defined by the law prevailing at that time, which prescribes that they stay in office up to two years or until replaced. For the third regent whose acting appointment was issued in September 2008, the acting appointment is for a public office with a fixed term, two years; that term ends in September 2010. The only effect of an acting appointment is that the holder of the acting appointment can be replaced at any time before the two year period. None of the three regents holding acting appointments have been replaced. By law, their continued membership in the BOR is legal and they remain fully qualified. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of Bañez.”

Unfortunately, the above statement does not go into the details, including the timeline, which is important in understanding who among the once-upon-a-time regents remained regents during critical voting periods and whether they continue to exist as regents, and whether they will continue to remain as regents. For the sake of the taxpayer, this issue needs to be clarified and not obscured.

If Atty. Te was so sure of the strength of U.P.'s legal position on the validity of the terms of all the regents; spanning the continuum of the disputed period, then why did the U.P. System submit the three regents' names for “midnight” appointments at the last minute to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and only after the Student Regent brought up the issue in a court case she filed with RTC # 215 in Quezon City on February 22, 2010? Glaring gaps remain on the legitimacy of certain regents' eligibility to vote during critical periods when important decisions were made, such as the removal of the Student Regent and the removal of the Executive Director of the PGH. It is during these periods when regents morphed into former regents only to be legitimately (or in one case not legitimately) appointed regents anew.

The “midnight” appointments are official and therfore a given and are a fact and this has been covered by the Diliman Diary at: http://diliman-diary.blogspot.com/2010/03/breaking-news-three-3-malacanang.html

Here are the details, as confirmed by the Office of the Executive Secretary, Leandro Mendoza to the Diliman Diary as well as actual documents:

• Regent Francis Chua's appointment was signed by President Arroyo on January 1, 2008, which means that if you follow U.P.'s two-year argument, then his term expired on January 1, 2010, and his vote to remove the Student Regent on February 25, 2010 was null and void since President Arroyo only signed her “midnight” appointment on March 1, 2010 for a period of two (2) years.
• Regent Abraham Sarmiento's appointment was signed by President Arroyo on September 29, 2008 but the Office of Secretary Mendoza stressed that President Arroyo signed Regent Sarmiento's “midnight” appointment on March 9, 2010 but good only until September 29, 2010.” Why then did the Board of Regents recommend Regent Sarmiento for reappointment at a time when he was supposed to be enjoying the length of his term from September 29 2008 to September 29 2010? Would not Arroyo's appointment have been redundant? That is, unless U.P. itself is admitting that Regent Sarmiento, was already a former regent when his papers were submitted by U.P. itself, to President Arroyo for reappointment which impliedly means that it was supporting Faculty Regent Taguiwalo's position that the one-year and not the two-year rule applied (http://upissues.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/up-faculty-regents-report-on-the-february-25-2010-bor-meeting/), meaning that his papers expired in September 29, 2009 and that he was a former regent when he voted on February 25, 2010 to render the Student Regent a former regent as well. The other alternative is that President Arroyo, upon U.P.'s recommendation, committed a faux pas when she reappointed a Regent whose term had not yet expired. The Diliman Diary's analysis of this is that if this is the case, then this is an attempt to extend Regent Sarmiento's term beyond the alloted two year period (from September 2008 to September 2010) so that he can be counted upon to vote for the next U.P. President, when U.P. President Emerlinda Roman's term ends in November, 2010.
• Regent Nelia Gonzales' appointment was signed by President Arroyo on March 18, 2008 and expires on March 18, 2010 but President Arroyo reappointed Regent Gonzales on March 9, 2010 for a period of two (2) years 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.

In support of my statements, I am attaching the scanned copies of the three regents' appointment papers in 2008 (Diliman Diary Readers please refer to the embedded scans in this post).

I am of the opinion that more scrutiny on this issue by a newspaper of the Inquirer's caliber is needed since it has the necessary expertise and resources to scrutinize the politics in U.P. in greater depth, and this is always to the country's advantage.

The Office of the Executive Secretary informed us that the appointment papers have already been forwarded to U.P., but this has not yet been announced officially by the U.P. administration through its website. Nevertheless, it is always possible to verify this and to dig much deeper in depth to get to the heart of the story. I am sure the U.P. officials won't mind this at all. As Atty. Te says: "The UP has been transparent on this issue. A factual chronology is available on the University website; UP officials are always available for comment or reaction."

Thank you very much.

Best regards,


Chanda Shahani
Editor
The Diliman Diary
http://www.dilimandiary.com/

Copy furnished:

Atty. Theodore Te
Faculty Regent Judy Taguiwalo
Other U.P. Alumni

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 (Part 4): The U.P. Administration's latest choice of Executive Director of U.P PGH may be procedurally flawed and their motives are questionable. But why?

By Chanda Shahani

In what is now known as the Day of the Long Knives in U.P. Diliman, or on February 25, 2010, the U.P. Board of Regents (BOR) turned on its own Student Regent, Charisse Bañez, and University of the Philippines Philippine General Hospital (U.P. PGH) Executive Director Jose Gonzales, finishing them off quickly by removing them from their posts in an act that essentially punished Banez for casting the swing vote that resulted in the selection of Dr. Jose Gonzales as the new Executive Director of PGH in a very close fight with outgoing Executive Director, Dr. Carlos Alfiler. Dr. Gonzales was not the preferred choice of the U.P. Administration, but their motives will become clearer later on.

Last January 22, 2010 however, in an attempt to fight back, Bañez filed an Injunction with prayer for issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order (TRO) in the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch # 215, attempting, in part to have the court bar the BOR from deciding on her case. But Bañez's case opened a can of worms. She claims in her pleadings before the court that at least three “Acting” regents have expired terms, citing a provision of the law that says the term of office is one year for the “Acting” regents. This is disputed by no less than U.P. President Emerlinda R. Roman, who said in an email to Dr. Silvestre Cabellon, the Chairman if the U.P. Medical Society of America (UPMASA), on March 10, 2010 that the term of office for an Acting regent is two years.

There is therefore now a dispute on the interpretation on the word “Acting” as to whether this term of office for an “Acting” regent refers to one year or two years. Perhaps the court itself will make this final determination.

Citing EO 292 (Administrative Code of 1987) the Student Regent states in her complaint that:

“SEC. 16. Power of Appointment. — The President shall exercise the power to appoint such officials as provided for in the Constitution and laws.

SEC. 17. Power to Issue Temporary Designation. — (1) The President may temporarily designate an officer already in the government service or any other competent person to perform the functions of an office in the executive branch, appointment to which is vested in him by law, when: (a) the officer regularly appointed to the office is unable to perform his duties by reason of illness, absence or any other cause; or (b) there exists a vacancy;

and

(3) In no case shall a temporary designation exceed one (1) year.”

The U.P. Legal Department is possibly prepared to back up its claim (in court) that “Acting” means two years, and not one year in the case of a U.P. Regent

What is indisputable, however, is that Dr. Roman herself says that the term of office of “Acting” regents is two years and not a day longer than that.

If we assume the correctness of the claim of the Student Regent in her complaint that:

1) Regent Sarmiento was appointed by President Arroyo as an “ACTING MEMBER, BOARD OF REGENTS, UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES SYSTEM” on September 29, 2008.

2) Regent Gonzalez was appointed by President Arroyo as an “ACTING MEMBER, BOARD OF REGENTS, UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES SYSTEM” on March 18, 2008.

and

3) Regent Chua was appointed by President Arroyo as an “ACTING MEMBER, BOARD OF REGENTS, UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES SYSTEM” on January 1, 2008,

Then, assuming all of the above dates of appointment by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo are factually correct, and assuming for the sake of discussion that President Roman's assertion that “Acting” Regents have two year terms is correct or even ruled upon favourably by the courts, then:

1) Regent Chua's term of office as an Acting Regent expired last January 1, 2010, since he was appointed on January 1, 2008;

2) Regent Gonzales' term of office as an Acting Regent will expire a few days from now, or on March 18, 2010, since she was appointed on March 18, 2008;

3) Regent Sarmiento's term of office as an Acting Regent will expire on September 29, 2010, since he was appointed on September 29, 2010

If the next BOR meeting takes place on March 29, 2010, as has been scheduled, then both Regents Gonzales and Chua will be former Regents, alongside Student Regent Banez, because they would have all been casualties of having expired credentials. This is a cause for concern, unless President Arroyo reappoints them before the two month election ban for the President to appoint officials kicks in on March 10, 2010, which then solves the problem for the U.P. Administration. It being March 1, 2010 as I write this, the U.P. Administration has exactly six working days to get Presdient Arroyo to sign the papers of the Regents.

On the other hand, if the Student Regent's assertion that the one year rule is correct, and if the Court decides in her favour (next Court hearing is March 17), then it would be kind of academic already, if President Arroyo already signed the papers. Given the fact that the average court case in this country takes eight years to be resolved. Its already almost academic already, given the fact that the natural term of the Student Regent would expire this April, assuming she was enrolled.

However, if the Student Regent is legally correct in her assertion that the one year rule applies to all three Regents, then even Regent Sarmiento will join his colleagues in terms of having expired credentials. The argument applied to the case of the Student Regent – that is, that her vote was null and void due to her expired credentials may equally be applied to that of the three “Acting” Regents who may also have had expired credentials when they voted for Dr. Alfiler on December 18, 2009, and when they claim to have had a quorum on January 29, 2010.

Equally, when they state that six Regents voted for Dr. Enrique Domingo, on February 25, 2010 with three abstaining; it may be interpreted that three Regents voted for Dr. Domingo, three abstained and three “Acting” Regents with expired terms should have been shown the door, to join the Student Regent. This is assuming, of course that the one year rule applied in this case. If the one year rule applied in this case, then we cannot see how Dr. Domingo is the duly selected Executive Director of PGH when he only got three votes out of a possible total of ten votes.

A protest could be lodged by some Regents before the March 29 BOR meeting to ensure that consistent treatment applies to all, and not just the Student Regent. It's entirely up to them to do so.

What is is absolutely necessary and critical that a legitimate round of voting amongst the BOR take place where all concerned have the proper credentials and right to be there to prevent endless litigation that will only serve to tie the hands and feet of our premier government hospital, where there is already an existing disruption of programs and plans, and a revolving door of executive directors, as is starting to be the case. The hard-working and heroic doctors and medical staff of PGH, and the thousands of disadvantaged people they serve deserve the best possible democratic and principled decision in the U.P. Board of Regents' choice of an Executive Director. The U.P. BOR must defend the integrity of the University of the Philippines and show that it is made of the right stuff, with the People's welfare in mind, and show that it does not only excel in corporate-style board room manuevers and legal technicalities to get its way in the end and at our expense – the taxpayer's expense.

Side by side with the need to ensure that all decisions made by the BOR are in the interests of the people, especially the disadvantaged patients who still come from a delographic that constitutes the majority of our population; a closer look must really be made on the claim of members of the Laban UP-PGH Movement who said that Executive Director Jose Gonzales was ousted since he was not clear about where his loyalties lay in the “disadvantageous deal made between UP's BOR and the Daniel Mercado Medical Center that would soon operate a private laboratory, diagnostics, pharmacy and outpatient clinic within PGH itself.”

"He (Gonzales) has been singled out as the main stumbling block to the estimated hundreds of millions of pesos in profit that is grossly slanted to favor only a non-PGH entity," said Laban UP-PGH.

If only to protect the U.P.'s reputation, then the BOR needs to show that the charges of Laban UP-PGH are unfounded and that there is absolutely no causality or correlation between what Laban UP-PGH claims or what the U.P. Diliman Student Council calls “the micro-privatization of PGH” and the removal of Student Regent Charisse Banez because of her “inconvenient” vote in favour of Dr. Gonzales who was himself not clearly in favour of the U.P. BOR-backed deal with the Daniel Mercado Medical Center. It can only do this by ensuring that there was a truly democratic vote by a quorum of regents who have the proper credentials, backed up by the courts, so that busy bodies like the Diliman Diary will not ask so many questions. We truly wonder: Why is the U.P. Administration is moving heaven and earth to remove Dr. Gonzales, given his professional qualifications and the fact that so many of his medical colleagues were prepared to demonstrate against his removal today, March 1, 2010 at the U.P. PGH?

We may never know the answers.

What we do know, however, is stated in the website itself of the Daniel Mercado Medical Center at:
http://www.dmmcinc.com/uppgh.html which admits that:

“After three (3) years and nine (9) months of bidding and negotiations, the UP-PGH Faculty Medical Arts Building (FMAB) Project finally became a reality. On June 18, 2009, in celebration of the 101st anniversary of the University of the Philippines (UP), the contract for the UP-PGH FMAB Project was signed by UP President Emerlinda Roman and Dr. Edwin Mercado, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Daniel Mercado Medical Center (DMMC). The historic ceremony was witnessed by UP Regents Abraham Sarmiento and Nelia Gonzalez, UP Manila Chancellor Ramon Arcadio, PGH Director Carmelo Alfiler and other System-Wide, UP Manila and PGH officials. The DMMC Board of Directors was also in attendance led by its Chairman, Mr. Zosimo Malabanan, as well as top management officials from DMMC.”

“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 FMAB Project, after DMMC complied with all the requirements of the bidding process. The Notice of Award (NOA), signed by UP President Emerlinda Roman last February 5, was received by Dr. Mercado on February 17, 2009.”

“The UP-PGH FMAB project is a pioneering 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.”

We do not know what correlation there was – if any – between the action that occurred on the infamous Day of the Long Knives on January 25, 2010 when the U.P. Board of Regents turned on its own Student Regent, and removed her, on an easily correctible technicality, after she cast a critical swing vote on December 18, 2009 (By 6 to 5) giving Dr. Gonzales the nod as Executive Director of PGH over Dr. Alfiler, who would have served two three-year terms by December 31, 2009.

With the Student Regent out of the way, we also do not know what correlation there was – if any – between the removal of the Student Regent on that infamous Day of the Long Knives on January 25, 2010 when the U.P. Board of Regents turned on its own duly selected Executive Director, Dr. Carlos Gonzales whose short term from January 4, 2010 to February 25, 2010 never straddled the signing of the contract between the PGH and the Daniel Mercado Medical Center. We may never know.

Even with millions of pesos worth of a lucrative multi-year contract at stake; we still do not know if there was any correlation between the high stakes money involved and the amount of effort expended by the U.P. Administration to remove a sitting Student Regent with expired papers; reverse a decision selecting a preeminently qualified doctor to head the PGH who has had more experience and replacing him with somebody who may be good, but with much less experience; and oh – yeah – after figuratively disemboweling the Student Regent; expends even more effort in justifying the retention of three “Acting” regents, with credentials whose shelf lives have either expired or are about to expire, depending on how you look at it.

We do not know if all or any of these seemingly random acts have anything to do with the bottom line.

We leave it up to you, dear reader.

To connect the dots.