aldric de ocampo,
Opinion: They may be leftist, but they still have rights
Photo credit: Ulap Coquilla
Going against the government is not news when it comes to our nation.
Due to the history of revolution in our society since the Spanish colonization, talks of insurgencies and dissenting movements have long been happening here in the Philippines. This can be seen in the manifestation of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), New People’s Army (NPA), and National Democratic Front (NDF) in the modern era.
It is not hard to see why our government would oppose the people affiliated with these so-called leftist groups for they may pose a threat to the integrity of our country’s current structure.
People in conflict with the government’s principles and ideals make it difficult for our government to preserve national unity, a necessity for the development of the Philippines.
This opposition by the government is evident in the statement of National Youth Commission (NYC) chair Ronald Cardema last Tuesday, February 19, when he called on President Rodrigo Duterte to revoke the scholarships of “rebellious” students.
Cardema, who headed the Duterte Youth group before he was appointed NYC chair in 2018, called for an Executive Order which would remove government subsidies in scholarships for these students who are “anti-government,” and called on officials of Sangguniang Kabataan (SK), Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC), and Citizen Army Training (CAT) to report scholars who are linked to the CPP, NPA, and NDF.
“The Filipino People formed the Government to govern, to regulate, to discipline, to collect taxes, and to allocate the Filipino People’s funds into government scholarships & programs. Fighting the government means fighting the majority of the Filipino People,” he said.
He believes that the students who go against the government which pays for their education do not deserve the perks they obtain from them, and should be disqualified as such.
This is reasonable yes, since students who receive benefits from the government have an obligation to give back to the country that helped them by strengthening its structure and organization.
But this isn't always the case. Take University of the Philippines (UP) as an example.
All people, regardless of “age, gender, nationality, religious belief, economic status, ethnicity, physical disability, or political opinion, or affiliation” according to RA 9500 or “An Act to Strengthen the University of the Philippines as the National University,” are eligible for admission in the National University.
This means UP does not discriminate, even against those politically affiliated with leftists. They are still bestowed by law the right to education, which is universal.
Along with this is another law called RA 10931 or the “Universal Access to Quality and Tertiary Education Act” (UAQTEA) which also grants free college opportunities for all Filipinos. This similarly provides that political affiliation does not serve as basis for disqualification of scholarships.
Besides, even without RA 9500 or RA 10931, depriving people of this right is still unconstitutional. Cardema's proposal violates both Article III, Section 4 and Article XIV, Section 1 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution which talks about the right of all citizens to freedom of speech and expression, and the right of all citizens to quality education respectively.
Cardema may have retaliated with “walang batas-batas o charter-charter (there is no law or charter)” for these “rebellious” students, but it does not mean that we, the people who still follow these laws, should follow suit in their beliefs.
On another note, Department of Education (DepEd) Secretary Leonor Briones brought up another important point against the NYC chair's proposal: instead of political affiliation, academic standing serves as a more definitive basis for the scholarships.
It is more reasonable for academic performance to be used as a determinant for financial aid because this reflects the results of the support provided by the scholarship. This correlation is more important than any other external factor such as political affiliation.
Malacañang through Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo has also given a statement with a similar nuance to Briones’ response, highlighting that the government itself is also against this proposition.
Panelo also said that using political affiliation as a basis is also prone to abuse, since there is no guaranteed way to identify if a student is an insurgent.
Who knows? If the authorities start labeling students without substantial proof, it would again be a violation of our freedom as Filipino people.
In short, this proposal by the NYC chief is a bad idea. It is unconstitutional, hypocritical, and a violation of multiple human rights.
It is not right to strip off any person the right to education whatever context they may come from, even if he or she has opinions in conflict with the government. //by Aldric de Ocampo and Gabe Ulanday
0 comments: