Newly elected student council officers will undoubtedly face a gargantuan number of issues, from state-backed attacks to specific woes like lacking class slots, once they assume their offices in the next academic year.

But the upcoming term will be different. With the University Student Council (USC) and local college councils mired with vacancies—either due to lack of candidates or abstentions—UP Diliman’s newest set of student leaders will be forced not just to juggle multiple council roles, but also represent significantly more students.

Student leaders are expected to “advance the interests, welfare and aspirations” of their constituents, per the UP Charter. However, such a responsibility could become even more difficult when some council members try to represent hundreds—even close to a thousand—of their peers.

While there is no exact metric on just what point a constituency is already too big for an individual council member, an analysis of existing local college council seats reveals key insights. By dividing the number of voters per college by the number of seats in that college’s student council, the Collegian obtained the voter-per-seat ratio (see sidebar 1).

The college student council’s constitution sets the number of seats in their council. The Collegian did not count the freshie council’s representation to their local council as they are elected separately.

The median voter-per-seat ratio as of the 2024 elections is 51.34. In other words, a student leader generally represents around 51 students.

Large colleges tend to have a larger voter-per-seat ratio. The College of Science (CS) leads this tally, having 2,582 voters over 18 possible seats in the CS Student Council. The College of Music Student Council (CMuSC), meanwhile, has the smallest ratio, with only 306 voters apportioned across 21 seats.

But that is the ideal ratio. Reality is far from it. The USC will remain vacant after abstentions dominated all of its 14 university-wide seats. At the college level, meanwhile, seats generally remained vacant as no one ran for them.

Following the results of the recently concluded polls, the Collegian calculated the actual voter-per-seat ratio, with the number of voters divided by the number of elected council officers. This new quantity was compared with the ratios in sidebar 1 to show how many additional voters a student leader will represent (see sidebar 2).

The results are dramatic. For one, all of the College of Business Administration’s (BA) voters will currently be represented by only one BA Council member—that’s an additional 855 voters on top of the usual ideal 40.72 voter-per-seat ratio. Special elections will be held at a later date to fill the vacancies. 

The largest college, Engineering, comes in with the second-highest voter-per-seat ratio at 886, with each of the six elected council members representing 796 more students than usual. The Engineering Student Council typically appoints students to fill vacancies.

The dwindling of student representation at the college level paints a starkly different picture of the discourse surrounding abstentions at the university level. If in the USC, no one won because of abstentions, at the colleges, urging students to run in the first place is often the first roadblock.

Worse, at least four colleges have canceled their college-level polls as not even a single candidate ran for their college student council. The College of Architecture, Asian Institute of Tourism, and School of Statistics plan to hold special elections, while the College of Human Kinetics will fill vacancies through appointments.

And even in councils where a considerable number of posts were filled, students will still be forced to contend with fewer representatives to forward their concerns and campaigns (see sidebar 3).

The Law Student Government saw the highest college-level turnout in the last elections at 65.74 percent. But with two seats vacant, the remaining officers will represent 11 more voters than the expected 80.37 voter-per-seat ratio.

The actual effects of the wide gap between the ideal and actual voter-per-seat ratio at the college level are yet to be seen. But the math is clear: council officers will have to cater to more constituents than usual, and students could expect less-than-ideal representation in their democratically elected institutions.

Special elections slated in the weeks to come may partially bring down these metrics. But these polls—and even a call for appointment—may not strike at the root of dwindling participation in campus politics. And unless that is addressed, leaders and constituents alike will be trapped in a difficult situation, where genuine student representation is imperiled. ●

First published in the June 19, 2024 print edition of the Collegian