LYCESGO: United in ImpUnity

by Timothy Gerard Palugod

The current LYCESGO administration prides diversity: two officers hail from Pamana (Partido ng mga Mag-aaral na Nagkakaisa), two officers are from Kalayaan (Kabataang Lakas ay Alay sa Bayan), and President Patrick Sarsalejo represents Partido Independiente, the political party exclusive to the College of International Relations (CIR).

There are two scenarios that may befall this structure: either conflicting opinions will affect their decision-making, or the officers will go beyond partisanship and serve the student body without outside influence.

But if there is one instance where they were united, it’s their indecision during the time when The Sentinel needed them most.

An argument for its subservience

In LYCESGO’s Constitution, it is clearly stated in Art. 2 Sec. 1 (a) that: “The protection and promotion of the rights and general welfare of the LPU Manila studentry and the Filipino people shall be its principal concern.”

By compelling them to make a stand against the administration, LYCESGO may point out Art. 2 Sec. 2 (f) which states that they should: “Establish and maintain a harmonious and peaceful relationship among the studentry, faculty and the administration, based on the mutual trust, respect and equality.”

The student government had a difficult time deciding whether to post an official statement supporting the campus press or not, with 3 of its 5 officers reportedly voting in favor of The Sentinel.

However, the problem is not LYCESGO. Their dilemma is strongly influenced by the fact that LPU is still a private university, and the student government can serve the students better if they have their funds to execute projects. Even the college student councils cannot bear to imagine if they are compromised just because of their support for The Sentinel.

Hence there is no other way to avoid blind allegiance. Student leaders reduced the issue to a mere allegation of irresponsible journalism, blamed The Sentinel for the miserable fate it faced, and escaped from the reality of censorship and loss of professional integrity.

In their eyes, it’s a win-win situation. They post official statements online, the admin can continue with their agenda, and The Sentinel must feel contented with whatever support they can muster.

This is what justice means.

Holding them accountable

If LYCESGO stood true to their own constitution, they would have used their analytical and critical thinking from the beginning.

The Sentinel remained transparent throughout the course of its predicament: a Timeline article, a report on the “revamping” of the student publication, and a series of Factcheck infographics that debunked the claims of the admin.

Regardless of who claimed that they stand with The Sentinel, the powerlessness of some and the hidden agendas of others converged into one: inaction.

Here is how the student government and its councils could have done better: pressure the admin, assist The Sentinel, pursue follow-ups, and oversee the whole process from start to finish.

The definition of “pressure” is limited in scope for student politicians, associating it with holding placards in front of the university and chanting in unison. “Pressure” can be a fight against bureaucracy, where offices would require several levels of paperwork before, for example, a dialogue may ensue. It can also be fast-tracking the recruitment of members for The Sentinel and encouraging students to apply not only online, but also room-to-room or putting posters around classrooms and designated council bulletin boards.

But no, the condescending student leaders choose the middle ground, explaining that they are mediators who see to it that The Sentinel and the LPU admin come to an agreement. It also meant that they are mere voyeurs who have little to no involvement. No plans to evaluate and adjudicate. No plans to announce who won a debate that already had a winner.

For the future student leaders of Lyceum of the Philippines University, a piece of advice: the “middle ground” is not an excuse for ineptitude and inaction.

Embodying duty in times of chaos

by Jillian Shayne L. Dancel

“If the people cannot trust their government to do the job for which it exists - to protect them and to promote their common welfare - all else is lost,” said the former US President, Barrack Obama.

It is a sworn duty of every elected student government leader to prioritize each concern of college and protect the students they govern. But do our leaders embody this duty? Do they really prioritize and protect their jurisdiction? Or are they aware of what’s happening around them in the first place to be able to accomplish this?

The major issues that took place this academic year might answer the question. These include the issues regarding the LPU Independent Sentinel and the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS).

The Independent Sentinel, the official publication of the Lyceum of the Philippines University (LPU) Manila, have ceased its operations during the first semester of this academic year due to the administration’s decision to ‘reorganize’ the newspaper. They have presented reasons for the move through Student Affairs Office (SAO) Dean Jayson Barlan. However, it was not enough to justify the action, tagging it as a “repression” of press freedom by many.

A lot of Lyceans were left confused because of the sudden actions of the administration. Meanwhile, the concerned staff informed the student body on what’s happening and, at the same time, sought for a clearer explanation from the school on its decision.

Various groups from in and out of the campus expressed solidarity with the Sentinel against the decision such as the Collegiate Editors Guild of the Philippines (CEGP), the Lyceum Debate Society (LDS), the College of International Relations (CIR) student council, and many others. Yet at the height of the issue, the majority of the student councils have refused to make a stand for the very reason that they want the administration to clarify first the issue.

It is a commendable move as they wanted to hear first the two sides of the story but the fact that they failed to make the first move to protect the watchdog for the whole student body is a problem. Regardless of our involvement with the university's publication as staffers, are we not under the jurisdiction of the student government as well? Are they that afraid of the Sentinel as it reveals the truth that makes them look weak? Or are they happy that there will be no one to monitor or criticize the moves they make? Let’s hope this is not the case. If so, this would only justify what kind of politicians we train and will have in the future: a coward, someone who only wants the position but no heart to serve its people.

In the case of CAS, there were major changes in the college that students were not aware of, changes that had gravely affected the students, especially those who are graduating.

Of course, internal issues in the college itself shouldn’t be revealed to the public and must be addressed. But the fact that it has an effect to the students makes it reasonable to be out in the open.

Some might argue that it is the newspaper’s responsibility to deliver the news to the students; but there was no “Sentinel” during those moments. Likewise, “information dissemination,” the most cliché platform being said in the elections, is also their job.

Indeed, the council made a move to find a solution to the issue. They communicated with the concerned parties; but the move wasn’t enough to make the necessary change.

In cases like these, the student government, both per college and for the whole university, should stand up and represent the Lyceans to voice out its concerns to the higher ups and not just to concede and give in the decisions they throw as if we don’t have the right to go against it. Actions should be done for the betterment of all; both the students and the administration.

It’s sad to know how much student politicians keep themselves silent concerning the major issues around them but be eager and futuristic to find a solution about many things whenever the elections come. They should also embody their duties in the midst of chaos, serving the people with a heart for their welfare.

If the press is silenced, who will the people rely on for news and other information? Their refusal to comment is akin to a crime witness refusing to stand. As Elie Wiesel once said, "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented."

Fashion Statement: Wear Your Colors

by Mariztela Alyssa Quirubim Domasian

Election season is probably one of the most anticipated events among the Lyceans. By now, students are familiar with the three political parties in the university – PAMANA, KALAYAAN, and Partido Independiente.

The oldest of these three is the Partido ng mga Mag-aaral na Nagkakaisa (PAMANA) which was established in 1982. The second political party in LPU is the Kabataang Lakas ay Alay sa Bayan (KALAYAAN), which has been around for 22 years. The youngest is the party exclusive to the College of International Relations, Partido Independiente, established in 1997. All three parties have been serving the whole LPU community with passion and pride for the welfare of all.

Election season is the time for the supporters or/and other affiliates of these parties and to show their pride by wearing their party’s colors through different paraphernalia.

However, the election season is also the time for violations. Since students are eager to show their support, they neglect their uniforms and opt to wear their “costumes”. Some use this reason to not wear their uniforms despite not actually supporting a party.

Guards, oftentimes, are confused on to whom they should issue violation slips to, because the students use the “trump card” of excuses – they wear civilian clothes because they are part of a political party.

This is not fair. The election season is not a week-long occasion to show off your OOTDs using your pride colors.

Before the campaign period started, the secretary generals of the parties raised their concerns on the plans of the administration to halt the wearing of shirts for the supporters.

As a compromise, the parties are to submit a list to the security office containing the names of students who have responsibilities to fulfill during the elections. These are the candidates, campaign managers, and party heads. Only people who have their names in a permitted list by the party’s executive committee (ExeCom) should be given the permission to wear their party's designated shirts or colors. The guards will then execute their duties to make sure that these students who go through this loophole will not get away from a violation.

However, as people have noticed, no guards on the gates are holding mentioned lists. Students in civilian clothes can come and go as they please without even getting the attention of the guards. The task is harder than it sounds.

Is it really necessary for the supporters of the parties/candidates to wear their pride shirts? There are numerous ways of showing support like spreading their platforms and cheering the candidates during face-offs and room-to-rooms.

Students ought to be responsible and disciplined enough to be aware of the do’s and don’ts in the university. Professionalism must not be exchanged for temporary comfort. How else can a student pride oneself as a person groomed for the professional or corporate world when one cannot follow a simple instruction of wearing designated uniforms?