President BBM’s First Year in Office

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

The Tyranny of Political Correctness

Introduction

Political correctness was originally intended to promote a more representative and reverential society. It has, however, over time, mutated into an unwieldy dogma that restricts free speech and restrains well-intentioned and honest debates. We examine the growing tyranny foisted by political correctness and delve into its negative effects on intellectual honesty, free speech, and finally, the democratic principles it was initially intended to protect.

Political Correctness and Its Effect on Free Speech

One of the most disturbing aspects of political correctness is its ability to dissuade individuals from frankly expressing their views. Society is now witness to the stifling of genuine dialogue, under the threat of reprisal or being categorized as insensitive or intolerant. Accordingly, people are inclined to suppress their thoughts, thus impeding the interchange and examination of different ideas needed to promote society’s advancement.

Political Correctness Suppresses Intellectual Diversity

Political correctness strives to standardize opinions by instituting a set of pre-accepted beliefs, thereby negating the importance of intellectual diversity. When certain standpoints become forbidden or disparaged, individuals are discouraged from questioning dominant norms and defying the status quo. This restraint impedes the development of ideas and stunts intellectual growth, holding back critical thinking needed for societal progress.

Political Correctness Creates an Illusion of Equality

While the rationale behind political correctness is to foster equality, it inadvertently generates a false sense of equality. By regulating how people talk and act, political correctness makes society appear harmonious superficially. But true equality necessitates more than mere obedience to language and behavior guidelines. Thus, individuals become preoccupied with avoiding offense, rather than with participating in frank and no-holds-barred discussions that deal with essential social issues.

Political Correctness Undermines Democratic Principles

Democracy flourishes in the free market of ideas that challenges and refines differing viewpoints. Political correctness, however, clamps down on rebellious and unorthodox viewpoints, eventually emasculating the very basis of democratic discourse. A society that is deprived of intellectual diversity degenerates into a partisan and ideological echo chamber, creating complacency and stagnation in the decision-making process.

Political Correctness Erodes Personal Responsibility

Political correctness every so often clears individuals of personal responsibility by putting blame on social concepts, systems, and structures rather than tackling individual deeds and decisions. This loss of personal accountability chips away at moral development, hindering the moral growth and self-awareness of a people, which is indispensable for national progress.

Conclusion

While the original goal of political correctness may have been to establish a more encompassing democracy, it has developed to become a repressive force that jeopardizes the principles of free speech, intellectual heterogeneity, and democratic dialogue. Instead of inspiring open discourse, it cultivates an ethos of self-censorship and the containment of nonconforming thoughts and sentiments. 

In our struggle for a more civilized society, we must uphold the need for truthfulness, vigorous and healthy debate, and the encouragement of diverse perspectives, unencumbered by the tyranny of political correctness. Only then can society genuinely exemplify a union that espouses the principles of progress, equality, and freedom.

Why did BBM Win?

BBM Won Because the Yellow Narrative Had Underperformed and Had Run Its Course. 

The yellow narrative had two chances to prove its worth. The first chance was the Cory administration.  Cory Aquino proved to be a feeble and indecisive leader: she was not respected by the military and could not win their support. The seven coup d'états ravaged the economy.  Political infighting plagued her fractious cabinet: yet she chose to ignore the squabbles. The result was a directionless government.  

Her legislative initiatives were blocked or watered down by a recalcitrant Congress, particularly her land reform program. To be sure, Cory had her share of legislative accomplishments: she promulgated two milestone legal codes, namely, the Family Code of 1987, which reformed the civil law on family relations, and the Administrative Code of 1987, which reorganized the structure of the executive branch. Another important law that Cory enacted was the 1991 Local Government Code, which was a giant leap in Philippine devolution. 

However, corruption and cronyism, hallmarks of the Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. regime, still got the better of her administration. To top it all, mismanagement, and a lack of vision in the energy sector, epitomized by the mothballing of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) with no practicable alternative, resulted in a debilitating power crisis which hobbled the economy down the stretch of her term. 

Benigno Aquino III "Pnoy" Administration

The second chance was the Benigno Aquino III administration. Benigno Aquino III got elected to the presidency not because of his skills and qualifications, but because of sympathy votes in the wake of his mother’s death on August 1, 2009, and the media exposure he got from repeatedly reading medical bulletins regarding his mother’s condition. 

In fact, he became so popular being his mother’s medical spokesman that, Manuel "Mar" Araneta Roxas II,  the erstwhile front runner, gamely gave way to him as the Liberal Party standard bearer in the 2010 Philippine presidential elections. Aquino won that election by getting 42.08% of the vote. 

Under Aquino III, the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 was enacted, which mandated a 12-year basic education in the country. Aquino III signed the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012 which made contraception universally accessible. “Pnoy”, as he was informally called, launched a “public-private partnership program” which aimed to accelerate infrastructure development. One month after assuming office, he created a truth commission to investigate corruption accusations against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, his predecessor.

Modernization of the AFP

Aquino III signed the Revised Armed Forces of the Philippines Modernization Act, or RA 10349, to strengthen the AFP's capability to address counterterrorism, maritime domain security, and internal threats, and to protect defense modernization against administration changes . Furthermore, Aquino III signed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), which allowed the US to deploy troops in the Philippines for extended stays and which authorized the former to build and operate facilities in Philippine bases.

In September 2014, Aquino III succeeded in getting the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) to renounce violence after decades of armed conflict. He then proposed to Congress the creation of an autonomous Muslim region, in the country’s south, to be called Bangsamoro. This paved the way for the establishment of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao or BARMM.  BARMM was established following the ratification of its basic law, the Bangsamoro Organic Law, after a plebiscite held on January 21 and February 6, 2019, under President Rodrigo Duterte.

Despite these achievements, the popularity of Aquino III’s government declined in its last three years.  For instance, there was widespread negative public reaction to his administration’s handling of funds related to relief and rehabilitation of Typhoon Yolanda victims, which killed more than 7,000 Filipinos in 2013. It was reported widely that hundreds of millions of pesos in funds intended for the victims did not reach them because government offices used them up for operations or kept them in banks. 

Mamasapano Encounter

His popularity took a nosedive following a disastrous police operation against Muslim terrorists in Mamasapano, Maguindanao del Sur, on January 25, 2015.  The “Mamasapano Encounter” resulted in the killing of 44 Philippine National Police (PNP) Special Action Force (SAF) personnel. 

Three months before his term ended, amid public outrage over the Mamasapano operation, Benigno Aquino III’s approval and trust ratings plunged to their lowest levels since 2010, according to a Pulse Asia survey. From 59 percent in November 2014, his approval rating dropped to 38 percent in March 2015 while his trust rating fell from 56 percent to 36 percent.

It is a common perception that popular discontent with the Aquino III government mainly caused the political rise of former Davao Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, a political antagonist of Mr. Aquino.

In the waning days of the Aquino III administration, due in big part to the public’s yellow fatigue, the much-celebrated Ninoy-Cory cult, paid for in blood by Ninoy Aquino, had lost its hitherto splendid glow. 

In the unforgiving language of the streets and the internet, yellow had mockingly become “dilawan”. From a color that originally stood for freedom, justice, solidarity, and all things nice, yellow had morphed into a pejorative term. 

"Dilawan" was now used to denigrate members of the Liberal Party and those associated with the two Aquino regimes, who were perceived, with good reason, as undermining the popular regime of Rodrigo R. Duterte.

This is the reason Leni Robredo did not adopt yellow as her campaign color. 

BBM Won Because as the Yellow Mystique Waned, the Marcos Family Were Steadily Clawing Their Way Back to Power.  

The Marcos family started preparing for their reinstatement not a long time after EDSA. After Marcos Sr.’s demise in Hawaii in 1989, President Corazon Aquino permitted them to return from banishment on November 4, 1991.

They were essentially permitted to come back without having to atone or pay compensation. They lost no time refitting into the mainstream. Soon enough, they were being accorded the status and privileges they formerly had. 

Since those days, the Marcoses have never looked back, save for a dubious defeat by BBM in the 2016 elections. They, including the clan’s third generation, have demonstrated that they have the resources and political savvy necessary to win in the electoral arena. In the succeeding elections, Imelda Marcos won a congressional seat in Leyte, while two children and two grandchildren strengthened the family’s control of Ilocos Norte’s local politics:

Elective Positions Won by Marcos Family

Imelda R. Marcos: Member of the Philippine House of Representatives from Leyte's 1st district (1995-1998).

Imee Marcos: member of the Philippine House of Representatives from the 2nd District of Ilocos Norte (1998–2007); Governor of Ilocos Norte (2010–2019); member of the Philippine Senate (2019–present). 

Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr.: Vice Governor of Ilocos Norte (1980–1983); Governor of Ilocos Norte (1983–1986); member of the Philippine House of Representatives from Ilocos Norte's Second District (1992–1995); Governor of Ilocos Norte (1998–2007); Senator of the Philippines (2010–2016); seventeenth president of the Philippines (2022- present)

Matthew Joseph Manotoc (Imee Marcos’ youngest son): provincial board member of Ilocos Norte  (2016-2019), and governor of Ilocos Norte (2019-present). 

Ferdinand Alexander "Sandro" Araneta Marcos III, (eldest son of Philippine President Bongbong Marcos and First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos): representative of Ilocos Norte's 1st congressional district (2022-present). 

BBM Won Because President Rodrigo Duterte Facilitated the Resurrection of the Marcos Narrative by Consenting to FEM’s Burial in Libingan Ng Mga Bayani

Of all the post-EDSA presidents, it was Rodrigo Duterte who was the friendliest to the Marcos family. During a campaign sortie in Ilocos Norte in February 2016, Duterte was said to have asserted: "Speaking of loyalty and friendship, I am proud to say that my father was a close ally of President Marcos until his 

A little-known fact is that President Duterte’s father, Cebuano born lawyer Vicente G. Duterte, was a cabinet member of President Ferdinand E. Marcos during FM’s first term, having served as Secretary of the Department of General Services.

Add to this Duterte and the Marcoses’ long history of supporting each other’s political candidacies, and you have a rock-solid alliance, exemplified by the “BBM-Sara” tandem in the 2022 presidential elections. 

The previous presidents were hostile, as in the case of the two Aquinos, cautious as in the case of Fidel Ramos, cozy, as in the case of Joseph Estrada, and accommodating, as in the case of Gloria M. Arroyo. 

But Duterte stands out among the former presidents as being the one to promote the Marcos political brand, albeit subtly. For sure, President Rodrigo Duterte, on November 18, 2021, called then-presidential aspirant Bongbong Marcos a “weak leader” and a “spoiled child” in a speech in Calapan, Oriental Mindoro.

Reburial of Ferdinand E. Marcos at Libingan ng mga Bayani

But actions speak louder than words. Barely three months into his term, on August 12, 2016, Duterte all but signified his support for the Marcos family, and fulfilled a presidential campaign promise, by allowing the body of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos to be buried at Libingan ng mga Bayani.

Politically and psychologically for the Filipino people, this single act by Duterte was pregnant with meaning. 

First, it put an end to the EDSA narrative by converting Ferdinand Marcos Sr.’s image from a reviled and deposed dictator to a venerated former president. 

Second, it gave the Marcos family moral and political legitimacy, something they had hankered for after coming back in 1992.

True, the political offices they had won the years before had been expressions of acceptance and forgiveness from Filipinos who had turned a blind eye to their past record or were too young to remember. Worse, the Marcoses could have easily been correctly deprecated as a commonplace political dynasty in Ilocos Norte, with all its ugly connotations. 

The Reburial of FM Changed Everything

But the reburial changed everything. Like it or not for the critics, it ended an infamous Marcos era, and offered a fresh start to another one, bannered by FM’s only son.   In other words, the historic Marcos 2nd entombment at Libingan ng mga Bayani on November 18, 2016, was both closure and commencement. Out came the old, and in came the new. 

Third, the burial came at the nadir of the yellow narrative, after two unappreciated administrations by mother and son, which undoubtedly helped the Marcos redeemer Rodrigo Duterte, enter Malacañang. 

By allowing the burial, Duterte was astutely aware that he would not lose his popularity, because he intuitively knew that the Aquinos were politically kaput, and that the burial would set the Marcoses for a grand political comeback, something akin to Nixon in 1968, Churchill in 1951, Lincoln in 1860, and Napoleon in 1815. 

The Rise of BBM

True enough, BBM, the “loser” in the 2016 vice-presidential contest, saw his popularity rating skyrocketing in the span of the Duterte administration, while the “winner”, Vice-President Leonor “Leni” Robredo languished in limbo that entire time. 

This paved the way for Leni Robredo’s ignominious defeat by BBM in the 2022 presidential polls, which produced the first majority elected Philippine president since the EDSA Revolution, with 58.77% of the vote. This was a humongous mandate, especially considering there were ten candidates.

BBM Won Because of Sara Duterte

It is hard to fathom the enormity of Sara Duterte’s role in BBM’s victory. The most discernible thing is that Sara helped deliver the Mindanao votes for BBM: the “Uniteam” won in 25 of 27 provinces in Mindanao and 32 of its 33 cities.

BBM and Sara Duterte lost in only two Mindanao provinces: Sarangani which voted for Manny Pacquiao (98.24%), and Lanao del Sur and its component city, Marawi, which voted for Faisal Mangondato (77.86%).

Uniteam’s overwhelming victory becomes more significant considering that Mindanao was the lone island grouping in the country that solidly voted against Ferdinand Marcos Sr. in the 1986 snap Presidential elections.

Sara Duterte certainly was also an immense boost for BBM in Luzon and the Visayas, but not as much as in Mindanao.

Sara's Greatest Contribution to BBM Campaign

But perhaps Sara Duterte’s greatest contribution to Bongbong Marcos victory is her decision not to run for president. This historic decision, the reason or reasons for which have never been ascertained, will be pondered and debated by political analysts and historians in the years to come. 

Had Sara run, I’d bet she would have trounced BBM, but not by as wide a margin as BBM crushed Leni Robredo. That’s another story, nonetheless. 

All things considered; the 2022 Philippine presidential election was a mismatch. 

 

 

 

Mathematics, English, and Science Retraining for Philippine Public School Teachers

In the summer of 2001, the UP Diliman Extension Programs in Pampanga and Olongapo (UPDEPPO) held what is called a MENSA (Mathematics, English, and Science Advancement Seminars for Philippine Public School Teachers) seminar for 160 public school teachers from the province of Bataan.

 I am now proposing to the Department of Education (DepEd) to implement the above project on a national basis, adopting it as a nationwide program. 

This is now imperative, as our teachers and students are being left behind globally in mathematics, English, and science instruction.

The abovementioned MENSA seminars were the first of their kind in the country and was sponsored and funded by the provincial government of Bataan, under Gov. Leonardo “Ding” B. Roman. 

Earlier, then Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) Chairman Felicito Payumo expressed his intention of making SBMA, not just an investment center but also an educational and training center, with UPDEPO fulfilling this role.

Gov. Roman then invited UPDEPPO faculty, (myself included) to a meeting at the Bataan Provincial Capitol where he requested us to hold the seminars for Bataan’s public school teachers, whose teaching skills, he underscored, needed improvement.

In response, we in UPDEPPO proposed MENSA.

 The MENSA trainings were facilitated by top-caliber PhDs from UP who gave an intensive weeklong “retooling” training to the 160 Bataan teachers.

The idea was to expose the teachers, many of whom taught in remote Bataan barangays, to the most up-to-date methods and content in the subjects concerned. The subjects covered were Mathematics, English, Chemistry, Physics, and Biology.

Gov. Roman noted the low UP College Admissions Test (UPCAT) passing rate of Bataan students. He then agreed with Chairman Payumo’s proposal to have Bataan’s public school teachers  “retooled” in SBMA. 

Chairman Payumo, for his part, suggested that UPDEPPO’s building in SBMA be used for the “retooling” seminars.   

The seminars gave the organizers many valuable ideas about the conditions of the participants. The most important of these was that the teachers were more concerned about learning content rather than method. 

In response, the participants were given cutting-edge information and teaching technologies in their respective fields.

As a testimony to the effectiveness of the UP-facilitated MENSA seminars, Bataan representatives won first prize in the editorial writing competitions at the Central Luzon public schools press conference, shortly after the training.

To reiterate, I am now proposing to the Department of Education (DepEd) that it utilize the MENSA program, as implemented in 2001, by UPDEPPO, to train teachers in other parts of the Philippines. In other words, MENSA should be adopted by DepEd on a national basis. 

This endeavor will have the following goals:

1. To gain a better understanding of the situation and needs of  Filipino public school teachers as they teach math, English, and science;

2. To make policy recommendations with the above information as the basis;

3. To train trainers that will replicate the seminars in the various provinces, and towns of the                        Philippines;

4. To give the participants a global perspective in which to situate their roles as teachers.

To conclude, the best way to keep the Philippine labor force competitive is to retrain Filipino public school teachers in the latest English, science, and mathematics content and methods. This should be done on a national scale, and at the primary and secondary levels. 

Priority should be given to public school teachers. If we want to advance the English, science, and mathematics proficiencies of our youth, the most cost-effective way is to start with their teachers. 

The Abrogation of the University of the Philippines - Department of National Defense Accord of 1989 (UP-DND Accord) and UP's Academic Freedom

"The different freedoms that make up UP’s academic life are time-tested. They are too institutionalized to be affected by the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord of 1989.  These freedoms have been practiced and implemented repeatedly through the years and are part of UP’s organizational culture."

"These freedoms are too embedded within the UP system and collective psyche to be affected by mere physical and operational conveniences and short-cuts afforded by the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord of 1989."

What is academic freedom?

Academic freedom, as defined by Encyclopedia Britannica, is:

“..the freedom of teachers and students to teach, study and pursue knowledge and research without unreasonable interference or restriction from the law, institutional regulations, or public pressure. Its basic elements include the freedom of teachers to inquire into any subject that evokes their intellectual concern; to present their findings to their students, colleagues, and others; to publish their data and conclusions without control or censorship, and to teach in the manner they consider professionally appropriate. For students, the basic elements include the freedom to study subjects that concern them and to form conclusions for themselves and express their opinions.”

This rationale for academic freedom is the greater interest of society.  Academic freedom advances knowledge, knowledge improves society, and knowledge is best promoted when an inquiry is free from restraints by the government, by the church, by or by special-interest groups.

Why is Academic Freedom Important?

The benefits of academic freedom reach not only professors, students, and institutions but the broader society through the creation of new knowledge and innovations, and ultimately, through political, economic, social, and technological progress. In short, academic freedom serves the common good.

Academic freedom is indispensable to the mission of higher education institutions and to those individuals involved in teaching, learning, and research.

Without academic freedom, critical thinking cannot develop. Without critical thinking, higher learning is impossible. Given this importance, it is not surprising that academic freedom has been a pillar of higher education since its inception in European universities during the Middle Ages, particularly at the University of Leiden in 1575.

Academic freedom is a basic human right. Academic freedom prescribes the freedom to teach and the freedom to learn, both of which are essential to higher education.

For faculty, academic freedom includes the right to pursue intellectual inquiry attendant to their areas of study and research, and to teach in ways they consider as most befitting to the course and to the core values of the university. For students, academic freedom includes the freedom to formulate their own conclusions and viewpoints.

It is to be noted that, academic freedom includes the right of students and faculty to teach and publish in their areas of expertise without intervention; to write or speak on any topic, and protection for free expression inside the campus.

An indispensable principle of academic freedom holds that the untrammeled traffic of ideas on the campus is essential to a good education. In particular, academic freedom includes the right of the faculty, as individuals or as a body,  to freely determine: (1) curriculum; (2) course content; (3) teaching; (4) student evaluation; and (5) the approaches or methodologies of scholarly research.

These rights embodied in academic freedom are protected by two cherished practices in the academe — common governance and tenure.  These two practices guarantee that universities are "safe havens" for research, sanctuaries where students and scholars can subject any conventional wisdom of any field, be it in the arts, sciences, or politics to unrelenting scrutiny. 

Academic Freedom In the Philippine Constitution

Article 14, Sections 5.2 to 5.4 of the Philippine Constitution provides that: 5.2 Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning. 5.3 Every citizen has a right to select a profession or course of study, subject to fair, reasonable, and equitable admission and academic requirements. 5.4 The State shall enhance the right of teachers to professional advancement.

Academic Freedom in Philippine Higher Education

RA 7722, otherwise known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994” states in its Declaration of Policy (Section 2): “The State shall likewise ensure and protect academic freedom and shall promote its exercise and observance for the continuing intellectual growth, the advancement of learning and research, the development of responsible and effective leadership, the education of high-level and middle-level professionals, and the enrichment of our historical and cultural heritage.” 

Academic Freedom At the University of the Philippines

Section 5 of RA 9500 Titled “An Act to Strengthen the University of the Philippines as the National University: states:  “The national university has the right and responsibility to exercise academic freedom.” Section 27 further states: “Any case of doubt in the interpretation of any of the provisions of this Charter shall be resolved in favor of the academic freedom and fiscal autonomy of the University of the Philippines.” 

Section 2.2 of the UP Diliman Faculty Manual states: Academic freedom is the right of the teacher to teach the subject of her/his specialization according to her/his best lights; to hold, in other subjects, such ideas as she/he believes sincerely to be right; and to express her/his opinions on public questions in a manner that shall not interfere with her/his duties as a member of the faculty or render her/him negative in her/his loyalty to the school, college, or university that employs her/him.

Within the above framework, the following principles are further declared in the UP Diliman Faculty Manual. It is, to this writer, the most concise definition of academic freedom to come from UP Diliman. I have italicized some phrases for emphasis.

a. The University of the Philippines shall not impose any limitation upon the teacher's freedom in the exposition of his/her own subject in the classroom or in addresses and publications;

b. No teacher may claim as his/her right the privilege of discussing in his/her classroom controversial topics that are not pertinent to the course of study that is being pursued;

c. UP should not place any restraint upon the teacher's freedom in the choice of subjects for research and investigation undertaken on his/her own initiative;

d. UP should recognize that the teacher, in speaking or writing outside of the institution on subjects beyond the scope of his/her own field of study, is entitled to the same freedom and is subject to the same responsibilities as attached to all other citizens but in added measure;

e. It is clearly understood that the UP assumes no responsibility for views expressed by members of its staff, and the faculty members themselves should, when necessary, make it clear that they are expressing only their personal opinions;

f. If the conduct of a teacher in her/his classroom or elsewhere should give rise to doubts concerning her/his fitness for her/his position, the question should in all cases be submitted first to a committee of the faculty, and in no case should any member of the teaching staff be dismissed before the normal termination of her/his period of appointment without a full and open hearing before the Board of Regents, should s/he desire it, and only upon sufficient notice.

The Mandate of the Department of National Defense of the Philippines (DND)

The DND’s mandate is to serve and protect the Filipino people, protect the State, and to ensure security and peace where the sovereignty of the Philippines is present.

The DND is the executive department of the Philippine government  tasked with guarding the Republic of the Philippines “against external and internal threats to national peace and security, and to provide support for social and economic development.”

The DND exercises executive supervision over the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), the Office of Civil Defense (OCD), the Philippine Veterans Affairs Office (PVAO), the National Defense College of the Philippines (NDCP), the Government Arsenal (GA), and Veterans Memorial Medical Center (VMMC). It is also responsible for disaster preparation and management in the country.

The DND is headed by the Secretary of National Defense, who is a member of the President's cabinet. The current Secretary of National Defense of the Philippines is Delfin Lorenzana as of June 30, 2016.

We will assume that the DND means what it says when it declares its mandate. After all, we are living under a legitimate liberal, democratic, and constitutional system of government. The DND, as an indispensable part of this government,  has changed a lot since the martial law days , and we are inclined to believe that it too is a legitimate state agency that serves and protects the Filipino people.  

It is in the latter spirit, therefore,  that we view Sec. Delfin Lorenzana’s statement regarding his decision to abrogate the UP-DND Accord. He said that the decision was dictated by the love of country and we quote: "Abrogating the DND agreement with UP is a fulfillment of patriotic duty. Even though it is an unpopular move, my intentions are pure. My goal is simple -- to minimize the threat to the youth."

The DND is charged with the duty of supervising the National Defense Program of the country. It also has responsibility for overseeing field operations to ensure the judicious and effective implementation of National Defense and Security Programs.

The DND and the Local Armed Communist Insurgency

The Philippine government has so far failed to establish authority in large parts of the country due to the ongoing communist insurgency.   The struggle has gone on for more than 50 years and has caused the death of more than 40,000 combatants and civilians. The New People’s Army (NPA) is still a force to contend within the different regions where they operate.  The government has succeeded in reducing their numbers but it can’t be said that the NPA is a destroyed entity; far from it. 

The NPA attained its greatest strength was in the 1980s, as the dictatorial government of Ferdinand Marcos collapsed and was replaced by the Corazon Aquino administration. The NPA has developed into a  mass movement,  which is in coordination with legal organizations operating principally in the urban areas, under the guidance of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP).   An internal struggle in the Nineties hobbled the organization briefly and decreased its mass base. However, in the present time, the NPA, if it has not increased in numbers, has nevertheless succeeded in surviving and stifling government development efforts.

The National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF - ELCAC)

President Rodrigo R. Duterte created NTF-ELCAC in December 2018 as his administration’s definitive vehicle that mobilizes the entire bureaucracy, its networks, and resources to crush the 50-year-old communist rebellion. President Duterte hopes to end the 53-year-old insurgency before his term ends, or greatly weaken it.   

With NTF-ELCAC, the Duterte government is taking the fight against communist insurgents to villages and communities with more intensity than in previous administrations. This would include the UP Diliman campus, we can suppose. The task force tracks down rebel presence and influence in all areas of society and shapes public opinion against them. Through the NTF-ELCAC, the government conducts a campaign to hasten the development of the rural countryside so that poor barangays whose livelihoods have been affected by the insurgency can experience sustainable growth.

The 1989 UP-DND Accord

The 1989 UP–DND Accord was a bilateral agreement between the DND and UP. It restricted military and police access and operations inside the different UP campuses.

Some years earlier, on October 28, 1981, an agreement between then UP student leader Sonia Soto and then-defense minister Juan Ponce Enrile, known as the Soto–Enrile Accord, was signed to protect students from the presence of the military and police in any of UP's campuses.

Shortly before the signing of the UP-DND Accord, on June 16, 1989, Donato Continente, a  Philippine Collegian staffer and suspected communist, was arrested inside the UP Campus for his involvement in the assassination of US Army Col. James Rowe on April 21, 1989. Continente was subsequently convicted. However, the Supreme Court of the Philippines later shortened his sentence, releasing him on June 28, 2005. He had been in prison for over 14 years.  

Fourteen days after Continente’s arrest, on June 30, 1989, UP President Jose V. Abueva and Defense Secretary Fidel V. Ramos signed the UP-DND Accord. This superseded the 1981 Soto–Enrile Accord. The agreement was made to ensure the academic freedom of UP's students and prevent state officials from interfering with UP students' protests.

The Main Points of the UP-DND Accord of 1989

The main points of the UP-DND Accord of 1989 are:

1. The military or police shall give prior notice to the school administration before conducting operations in any of the UP campuses.

2. No military or police shall enter the premises of any of the UP campuses “except in cases of hot pursuit and similar occasions of emergency.”

3. The military or police will be allowed to enter UP campuses in case the school administration requests their assistance

4. The military or police “shall not interfere with peaceful protest actions by UP constituents within UP premises.”

5. The service of search or arrest warrants on any UP student, faculty, employee, or invited participants in any official UP activity shall, as far as practicable, be done after prior notification is given to the UP President, Chancellor of the constituent university, or Dean of the concerned regional unit.

6. No warrant shall be served without the presence of at least 2 UP faculty members designated by the appropriate UP official.

7. The arrest or detention of any UP student, faculty, or personnel anywhere in the Philippines shall be reported immediately by the responsible head of the military or police unit affecting the arrest or detention to the university official.

8. No UP student, faculty, or employee shall be subjected to the custodial investigation without prior notice to the school administration.

9. A joint monitoring group composed of the UP Faculty Regent, UP Student Regent, UP Vice President for Public Affairs or their representative, UP Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, and military and police officials shall meet at least twice a year to determine compliance with the accord.

10. Nothing in the agreement “shall be constructed as a prohibition against the enforcement of the laws of the land.”

The Termination of The 1989 UP-DND Accord

On January 18, 2021, DND Secretary Delfin Lorenzana announced the unilateral termination of the UP-DND Accord, stating  that the CPP-NPA had been recruiting students inside the campus calling such agreement a "hindrance in providing effective security, safety, and welfare of the students, faculty, and employees of UP."

The DND had communicated the termination of the agreement to UP administration three days earlier. Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) chairman of the joint chiefs Gen. Gilbert Gapay later asserted that at least 18 students of UP who were recruited by the NPA had been killed so far in armed encounters with the military. 

Reactions and Responses to the Termination

President Rodrigo Duterte backed the DND's decision to abolish the agreement in a statement read by Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque.  When asked by CNN Philippines how he felt after UP professor Danilo Arao questioned his integrity, Roque, a former UP law professor, and human rights lawyer, said that he had already asked the defense secretary Lorenzana and the UP president Danilo Concepcion to settle their differences. 

Pressed about his personal sentiment about the abrogation he implied that he cannot announce it, since he was just a spokesman for the President.

Vice President Leni Robredo criticized the decision and said that it was intended to cow the critics of the administration.

On January 20, Senators Joel Villanueva, Sonny Angara, Nancy Binay, and Grace Poe filed a bill in the Senate to “institutionalize” the UP-DND Accord by making it a law, Republic Act No. 9005, as envisioned.  Some lawmakers from both houses of Congress also verbalized their opposition to the DND's decision.

President Concepcion later told the media that the termination of the UP-DND Accord was "totally unnecessary and unwarranted" and that it was made behind the backs of the UP community.

On January 19, 2021, a rally was held in UP denouncing the termination of the agreement. The most prominent assertion of the rally was that the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord was a threat to UP’s academic freedom.

A trending tweet, #DefendUP, attacked the Duterte administration, saying that "this is another way of the administration to threaten and silence activists who have opposed President Duterte's several policies, especially on supposed red-tagging activities and on the COVID-19 pandemic response.”

Is UP’s Academic Freedom Threatened by the Abrogation of the UP-DND Accord?

Based on our preceding discussion, academic freedom, as rightfully deserved and enjoyed by the UP community is made up of the following components:

1. The freedom of faculty to inquire into any subject that evokes their intellectual concern.

2. The freedom of faculty to present their findings to their students, colleagues, and others. 

3. The freedom of faculty to publish their data and conclusions without control or censorship.

4. The freedom of faculty to teach in the manner they consider professionally appropriate.

5. The freedom of students to study subjects that concern them and to form conclusions for themselves and express their opinions.

6. The freedom of exposition of the faculty’s own subject in the classroom or in addresses and publications.

7. The freedom of faculty in the choice of subjects for research and investigation undertaken on his/her own initiative.

8. The freedom of faculty to speak or write outside the institution (UP) on subjects beyond the scope of his/her own field of study.

9. The right of the faculty, in case of doubts concerning fitness for the position, for his/her case to be submitted first to a committee of the faculty.

10. The right of the faculty not to be dismissed before the termination of his/her period of appointment without a full and open hearing before the UP Board of Regents, should he/she desire it, and only upon sufficient notice.

In turn, the prerogatives or powers gained by the DND after the termination of the UP-DND Accord of 1989 are the following:  

1. DND does not have to give prior notice to the school administration before conducting operations in any of the UP campuses.

2.  The military or police can enter the premises of any of the UP campuses anytime.

3.  The military or police can interfere with peaceful protest actions by UP constituents within UP premises.

4. The DND does not have to notify the UP president, the chancellor of the UP constituent university, or the dean of the concerned UP regional unit when serving a search or arrest warrant on any UP student, faculty, employee, or invited participants in any official UP activity.

5. A warrant can be served without the presence of at least 2 UP faculty members designated by the appropriate UP official.

6. The head of a military or police unit does not have to immediately report the arrest or detention of any UP student, faculty, or personnel anywhere in the Philippines to a university official.

7. UP students, faculty or employee can be subjected to custodial investigation without prior notice to the school administration.

Conclusion

The possibility that DND prerogatives, after the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord of 1989, and as enumerated in the left column, would threaten, or worse, violate the academic freedom of the faculty and students of UP, as enumerated in the right column, is very remote or well nigh impossible. This side-by-side visual comparison facilitates this conclusion. I apologize for its imperfections.  

I studied and protested in UP under the withering conditions of martial law. I can attest to the fact that not even martial law could curtail or diminish UP’s vaunted academic freedom. That is the UP spirit.

Under Marcos’ military rule, UP students and faculty (albeit prudently) still inquired into any subject they chose, faculty presented their research findings in public fora, faculty designed their teaching methods, faculty and students expressed their anti-martial law opinions publicly, faculty and students wrote and published manifestos in the Philippine Collegian, academic organizations sponsored anti-martial law convocations,  pretty much unimpeded by military or police action.

CBCP Youth Survey of 1977 

In fact, as a case in point, in mid-1977, I was one of the initiators and research associates in the first-ever comprehensive and nationwide survey into the social and political awareness of the Filipino youth, which was funded by the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), and conducted by faculty from the Department of Sociology of UP Diliman. It was the path-breaking and historic CBCP Youth Survey of 1977. 

One of the findings of the CBCP Youth survey was that the youth of the land were getting dissatisfied with the martial law regime. But the Marcos government was not able to harass, much less suppress, the project and its report.   

There were quite a few plainclothes military and police on the campus during martial law, obviously conducting intelligence activities. In due time, they were pinpointed by the faculty and students and were avoided or exposed. Never were they able to impinge on the academic life of the UP community, as we have described above. All told, UP academic freedom survived and even thrived under martial law with all its intrusions into the UP campus.   

And of course, during martial law, I never heard of a case where a UP faculty was dismissed or punished for incompetence without due processes, like facing a “committee of the faculty” or the case being considered by the UP Board of Regents. I was an activist under the presidencies of Salvador Lopez and Onofre Corpuz. I would like to consider them as upright administrators and intellectuals who did things by the book, despite their shortcomings.

The EDSA Revolution and the Liberal-Democratic State It Established

What more now, 35 years after the EDSA Revolution, when the nation has a legitimate and popular government, with a legitimate DND and AFP, and with people’s freedoms guaranteed and protected by the legal and respected 1987 constitution?  Is UP’s academic freedom in danger at all? Certainly not. Not even after the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord of 1989.

To reiterate: the new prerogatives of the DND,  acquired after the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord of 1989, are not a threat to, and much less can they curtail, the academic freedom of UP. The above graphic would illustrate this. It only requires logical appreciation.

The different freedoms that make up UP’s academic life are time-tested. They are too institutionalized to be affected by the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord of 1989.  These freedoms have been practiced and implemented repeatedly through the years and are part of UP’s organizational culture.

These freedoms are too embedded with the UP system and collective psyche to be affected by mere physical and operational conveniences and short-cuts afforded by the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord of 1989.

And as for the no. 3 prerogative, namely: “The military or police can interfere with peaceful protest actions by UP constituents within UP premises”: the possibility of this happening is almost zero. The last time I remember a large rally being dispersed by the police inside the UP campus was in January 1976, the height of martial law. 

And it is still subject to reasoned debate whether a protest rally is actually a practice of academic freedom or a political act.

Put plainly, the abrogation of the UP-DND Accord of 1989 cannot limit what UP faculty and students speak, study, teach, research, publish, and yes, rally, about. Academic freedom is not a valid issue in this context.