The UP Board of Regents (BOR), as UP’s highest governing body, dictates the policies of the university and picks the people who will lead it. But the BOR’s ability to wield its immense powers is only as compelling as the trust of the sectors it governs. Without the UP community’s confidence, the board’s dictats are mere scraps of paper.
Such is the situation that the board finds itself in. It hasn’t only defied the UP community’s voice for top university officials, but has also enacted a slew of policies detrimental to the academic community whom the regents should serve: Inaction over attacks against UP and indifference toward the plight of the students and faculty.
The regents must not take lightly the immense role the BOR plays in UP. They must not deviate too extremely from where their constituents stand. And, in the rare cases when the board does so, it must explain itself.
The current BOR does neither. It frequently decides against the university community’s wills and it does so without any apparent reason. By constantly putting itself so high above its constituents, the board has deliberately walked away from its obligation of preserving the integrity of the national university.
Undeniably, the board will not always give decisions favorable to the university constituents. The calculus inside the board skews against us–only three sectoral regents versus the UP president and seven outsiders. But by the nature of its authority, the board should, at the very least, be introspective of the far-reaching repercussions of its decisions. What is politically expedient and convenient today may not be for the good of the university.
Historically, the decisions of the board have always ignited both the powers-that-be and its constituents. The board’s approval of the UP Master Development Plan during the Pascual administration has been the bane of the UP community for nearly a decade now. With its approval, the BOR has greenlighted the displacement of anything it deems nonacademic use of UP lands.
Yet during periods of tumult, the UP community has still secured symbolic victories from the boardroom. In 2005, the BOR resisted pressure from Malacañang to select an Arroyo-appointed diplomat and instead appointed Emerlinda Roman as the 19th UP president. And last year, the board reversed the UP Visayas policy of disqualifying anyone who had a grade of “4” or “5” in their NSTP and PE classes from graduating with Latin honors.
The UP community’s trust and confidence in the regents is paramount to the board’s functioning. The board does not implement and execute its orders because it is neither capable nor competent to do so. Its fiats made above Quezon Hall are interpreted, concretized and perfected by the faculty, administrators and students across the 17 campuses of the UP System.
With the questionable appointment of high-ranking university officials, the board has shattered that confidence. It has done so simply because it can. By its own doing, the BOR has proven that it is no longer a forum where the university community should expect even the most tokenistic victories.
Underneath the regents’ exquisite robes and academic regalia are partisan hacks only interested in entrenching their power backers and personal affiliations. Nevermind any semblance of reason, democratic governance, and collegiality. The board has already gone rogue.
And unfortunately, there may be no clean-cut resolution in the board’s crisis in confidence, which does not involve the politically risky move of opening up the UP Charter for amendments in Congress and approval by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Structural reforms to the board–altering its composition, limiting its powers, or both–may be the only way to stop its undemocratic spiral.
There will be three more chancellor selections this year. If the board has botched the Diliman selection–the constituents of which are just downstairs Quezon Hall–there is no stopping the regents from doing it in UP Visayas, UP Los Baños and UP Manila, too. And with a new UP administration in place, the next board meetings will be critical in dictating what UP should be under and beyond a Jimenez administration.
It has always been outside the boardroom where the real struggle is. Apart from our constant presence at the steps of Quezon Hall every board meeting, it is imperative to show the regents where true power lies. That means tirelessly engaging across all sectors, and consolidating, broadening and multiplying our ranks. It is, after all, in the interest of the community to maintain UP as an institution where democratic norms are respected and followed.
The realpolitik is that the board has stopped listening to its constituents. It is no longer enough to engage and exercise vigilance over a rogue board. As the regents escalate their charge, so should we. ●
