Candidates aiming for a seat in the University Student Government (USG) Special Elections (SE) went head-to-head in the Harapan SE Debate last November 17 at the Yuchengco Hall.
In three rounds of discourse, representatives from political parties Santugon sa Tawag ng Panahon (Santugon) and Alyansang Tapat sa Lasallista (Tapat) presented their political stances, discussing pressing problems in the University as well as social and political issues in the country.
On eligibility of candidates
The first round of debate was between JP Argana from Tapat and Sean Pe from Santugon, candidates for Legislative Assembly (LA) Representatives in 73rd ENG and CATCH2T22, respectively. The discussion revolved around the question of whether or not candidates who have ongoing charges, who have records of being acquitted, or who have been found guilty of criminal acts should still be permitted to run for office in the upcoming Philippine elections in 2019.
Argana expressed that senatoriables facing ongoing charges and those vindicated are still qualified to run, whereas those who have been convicted should no longer be allowed. Pe, sharing Argana’s sentiments, argued that the problem lies in the constituents of the country. “The problem with the Philippines is that the population is easily corrupted. That’s the flaw with democracy. Everyone has equal rights, but it’s not necessarily true that every single voter is an informed voter and understands the process and what the candidate should be,” he stated.
Questioned on the probability of the same circumstance happening in the USG setting, Pe asserted that same standards should be observed—candidates found guilty should also be forbidden, and their eligibility for office should automatically be relinquished once the verdict is given.
Argana agreed and expounded on how the USG share similarities with the Philippine government, citing how the Judiciary process of the USG is not as transparent with regards to cases filed against candidates. “Our difference? We have more integrity. We need to uphold that,” he argued.
Moreover, both Argana and Pe affirmed that if they were to face criminal charges, they would still decide to run for office. Argana clarified that this is because he is confident that he would not commit such acts, and that his innocence would be proven in court because he believes the justice system works. Pe, meanwhile, also emphasized the importance of the legal system, arguing that there is a difference when it comes to the court of public opinion and court of law.
On anonymity against transparency
The next round, a matchup between BLAZE2018 Batch President candidate Elly Felizarta from Tapat and EXCEL2021 Batch President candidate Joshua Arao from Santugon, focused on the question of how the USG hopefuls plan to regain the trust of the student body and encourage them to raise their concerns outside of social media. The topic was brought up in light of the recent influx of posts and memes in social media sites expressing the dismay and distrust of students in the USG.
Felizarta believed that the most appropriate approach to the issue is to treat it as a “big idea case”, further explaining that the real problem is the existence of common hearsay. She expressed her plans of directly addressing the issue by giving an official statement to stop hearsay, formally disclosing transactions, and involving students in the evaluation of elected officials.
For Arao, comments circulating on social media should be seen as opportunities rather than discouragements. “I would still encourage our fellow students to stand more and give a more formal opinion on how they stand on these things,” he asserted. Further, he referred to transparency as something that the USG owes the student body.
Arao also addressed a question raised by Tapat FAST2015 Batch President candidate Flo Del Agua on the memes targeting Santugon’s alleged corruption scandals, which Del Agua attributed to the party’s silence on the issue. Arao pointed out that their party had already released a statement in the past, further arguing that he sees no need for reiterating the same statements on the issue, given that it has been three years since the allegation first circulated.
Adjudicator Mika Reyes then brought up the concern of students filing cases of grievance against a certain professor, asking the candidates how they can ensure safety for the student complainants and what they plan to do if their complaints are not acted upon. Arao said he would find a solution by working with his LA Representative to ensure that Judiciary processes are followed. Felizarta, meanwhile, highlighted safeguarding the anonymity of filing grievances as the solution, stressing that “that’s the main thing why they’re (students) scared to voice out what they’ve been through (being victimized)—it’s because they’re scared what the accused will do after.”
Felizarta closed the round by reiterating the importance of anonymity in grievance filing. Arao followed by encouraging students to stand for their beliefs but also to be better informed in doing so.
On the USG’s autonomy
The third and final round was between Santugon’s Jess Magaoay and Tapat’s Isa Topacio, College President candidates for the Ramon V. del Rosario College of Business. The debate question centered on USG’s resolution in maintaining the balance between representing the students and adhering to the demands of the admin, highlighting concerns that the student government may not be given enough autonomy.
Magaoay communicated the recent approval of the resolution endorsing Student Consultative Bodies, stating that the USG will always prioritize student interests. Magaoay sought to consolidate divisions of the University Student Government, citing the alignment of the legislative and executive functions as one of her goals.
On the other hand, Topacio emphasized the importance of the USG’s autonomy, and cited the lack of student trust in the USG as an effect of the lack of autonomy. With that, Topacio raised three points of improvement for the USG: the establishment of autonomy at every level, transparency to the student body, and better assessment and data collection methods.
Posed with the question regarding harassment cases in the University and problems the student body faces, Topacio endorsed more qualitative academic evaluations and faculty sit-ins to encourage reporting of issues. She added that business students face a lack of opportunities and stated her aim to create more business partnerships outside the University.
On her part, Magaoay cited the lack of avenues for business students to effect change, and shared her aim of creating Lasallian business pioneers for the country. Magaoay also shared the potential of Student Consultative Bodies to help resolve harassment cases.
Krisvin Briones, Santugon FAST2018 LA Representative candidate, questioned the candidates on the relevance of past issues to current leadership and corruption allegations on either parties. Magaoay stressed the importance of avoiding past mistakes and applying learnings to improve services offered to the student body. Magaoay also ensured that consequences are meted out to candidates convicted of corruption, going on to state, “In Santugon, we don’t tolerate cases such as corruption.”
Topacio, meanwhile, believed that responsibilities from past issues must still be borne by current leadership. She emphasized the need to address such issues when raised by the student body, further adding that corruption allegations are taken seriously within the party.
Topacio closed by reiterating her three key points: autonomy, transparency, and emphasis on research and assessment. Magaoay reiterated the necessity of practicing autonomy within the context of student government matters and coming into consensus with other sectors of the University.
Argana, Arao, and Magaoay were the winners of their respective rounds, while Argana was also awarded the Overall Best Speaker.
