Instructor I to Instructor effective February 1, 1975 The President approved the increases in salary of the following instructors:
Atanacio Abadingo, from Instructor I to .Instruc~or III University of the Philippines College III Manila, eff~ctive February 1, 1975 until May 31, 1975.
Ma. Consolacion Enriquez, from Instr~ctorI to. Instruc- tor III, College of Home Economics, effective Feb- ruary 1, 1975.
Rogelio J. Libarnes, from IV, College of Medicine, until May 31, 1975.
Juanita Magbanua, Jr., from Instructor I to Instruc- tor IV, College of Medicine, effective February 1, 1075 until May 31, 1975.
Lourdes Santos, from Instructor I to Instructor II, College of Home Economics, effective February 1, 1975 until May 31, 1975.
Ofelia Tablan, from Instructor I to Instructor IV, Co~
lege of Medicine, effective February 1, 19'75 until May 31, 1975.
Alfonso Tioleco, from Instructor IV to Instr?ctor V, College of Business Administr~:ion, effectIve Feb- ruary 1, 1975 until :May 31, 191b.
FEBRUARY
213, 1915 D.P.
CAZETTE33
a. Agre6mcnt with the Bw"eau of Vocational Bdvea- tion (EVE)
The Agreement provides for the establishment of the UPLB·BVE Advanced Agriculture Training Pro- gram beginning June 1975. Under the program, the BVE shall send 25 outstanding agricultural teachers to UPLB to take courses leading to a master's degree in agriculture and see to it that these grantees are paid by their respective schools their monthly salaries and other attendant expenses for the duration of their training. The UPLB shall provide the grantees free
tuition, laboratory fees and miscellaneous and other fees.
The agreement shall be in force for 10 years.
b. Memorandum of Aynement ioith: the Philippin.e [Ok" Chemical Compalcy (PKCC)
The agreement pertains to a research project whose primary objective is to ascertain the effect of "Kiku"
soil conditioner on the growth and yield of rice and tobacco, for which PKCC is providing the amount of P28,552.00 for a period of one year beginning 1 De- cember 1974.
HISTORICAL PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS
COMMENDATION FOR HONESTY AND EFFICIENCY
•
Mr. Fidel Ancheta 12 February 1975Security Guard Security Division
University of the Philippines Dillman, Quezon City
(Through: The Acting Chief Security Division) Dear Mr. Ancheta:
I have just been informed by Mr. Albert R. Capacillo of 33-B lIlarilag St., U.P. Village, Quezon City of your role together with three other members of the Security Division, in the immediate recovery of his attache case
which was stolen from his car while he was eating at the Jacy's Restaurant, University Campus.
I wish to commend you for your honesty and effi- ciency in the performance of your duties. Your good deed is 'Worthy of emulation by others and it will be en- tered in your record of service in the University.
My congratulations for a job well done.
Sincerely yours, (Sgd.) ONOFRE D. CORPUZ
President:
:!:Similar letters were addressed to the other three security guards, namely, Wilfredo Desierto, Isagani Lac- samana, and Eduardo Manzano.
GUIDELINES GOVERNING DISCUSSIONS OF REFERENDUM ISSUES
•
Office of the President
14 February 1975 The [Students] Steering Committee for Information
on the Referendum University of the Philippines Dlliman, Quezon City
(Through: The Dean of Student Affairs Vinzons Hall)
Gentlemen:
'Thank you for the Position Paper from you on the guidelines issued by this Office relative to the conduct of discussion on the Referendum issues.
1. You state your disagreement therein with the guide- lines. I am certain that you cannot mean what you say.
I am in fact confident that you agree with the finit three guidelines (Nos. 1-3 in Memo Circular. No. 3, da.ted G February 1975). You will also agree WIth the first part of the fourth guideline, which say~ th~t: llther.~
shall be free public discussions by the U~lversltyconsti- t encv in the campuses of the Univeraity System,. the
U , t d " It I difficult
h 11 be encouraged and promo e .... IS
same s a f the
to imagine that you will hold to the contrary a
foregoing view(5). .
What you disagree with, therefore, IS the last part of the fourth guideline: "no outsid~ di~;ussants shall be invited in any such public discusslOns.. . . . .
I had anticipated disagreement to this ~nhlbltIOn from t' of proponent and opponent VIews.
par tsans
2. You might be interested in the background and surrounding developments pertinent to my decision. A government agency had requested a University convoca- tion in which the agency proposed to assist in "the en- lightcnment of the studentry" on the Referendum issues.
Of course I immediately declined the request.
Subseauentlv Commissioners of the COMELEC made informal
quel:i~s
as to whether they were included in the prohibition on outside discussants. These queries I answered through the same informal channels, to the effect that the COMELEC Commissioners are not to be invited to discuss the Referendum issues. They would be welcome to explain the mechanics, the procedures of the Referendum, but it would be improper for them to engage in substantive discussion of the issues.Meanwhile, the Ang Wika came to me to appeal from a decision of the Dean of Student Affairs disapproving their applicatiicn to sponsor campus discussions by, among others, outside speakers. Their proposed speakers from the outside were "name" speakers, or came fro~
well-known organizations. I likewise disapproved this
application. . . , .
3. Let me now answer YOUl' specific pomt~s.of dl.sagree.
t F' t you say in effect that the Universtty can
men. ITS, . ld k
be independent in its thinking, even If cutst e ~pea ers . rit d and the Univeraitjr should not be Indepen-
were mVI e , f PhT
dent "to the extent of isolation from the rest a IIp-
pine society." t
You miss the point completely. If outside discussan s
34 V.P.
GAZETTEVOL. VI, No.2
.come to the University to express or advocate already n:ell-known t>iew8, whether for or against relative to the Referendum issues, you seem to believe that this suffices to achieve the objective of University indepen- dence. This is wrong. Such a situation, where already well-known positions, whether /01" or aguinst, are given national prominence by making the University available as the forum of presentation, and where the University takes a stand by adopting one or the other of such positions, merely means that the University is taking an independent stand 'in [over of orthodoxy, he it the' orthodox position in favor, or the orthodox position against. This is not the independence fitting for the University. The University must, wherever it can, seek to generate unorthodox views, which the rest of the national community will not or does not seek, promote and protect. I will show later that the University can do this in the present situation.
Moreover, you say that a prohibition on your outside speakers isolates us from the rest of the community. I will also show shortly, that your choice of speakers iso- lates us from the reality of the mass of our society.
4. Your second point is that you disagree that U.P.
speakers have "insights more relevant to the interests of the University community than those of outsiders." And then you say that the Referendum involves national questions, and therefore it is proper to invite outside speakers "who arc knowledgeable on the questions in- volved."
If the rest of the U .P. constituency think like you do, I am almost tempted to conclude that this University is beyond salvation. Your views and your choice of speakers, reflect the most un-mitigated elitism which I personally commit myself to destroy.
The overt issues of the Referendum are the instru- mental issues. The real and fundamental issues are those of justice, liber-ty, dignity and well-being for the masses of our countrymen. When you vote in the coming referendum, think of these issues. The trouble with our political thinking is that most of us believe that these issues are beyond the comprehension of the com- mon man. We think that only learned people can dis- cuss the great and enduring issues of human well-being.
You want "knowledgeable" speakers. Apparently what you mean by knowledgeable is having occupied a high position in government or having wielded political power, or having participated in the enactment of laws (of dubious wisdom), or being in positions of "opinion leader- ship." And you expect that these personages will guide our thinking on the Referendum issues so that our votes will be votes for justice, dignity, liberty and well-being for the people. Of course we can learn from their well- researched, elegant and eloquent dissertations, and theo- ries on the misery, deprivation, injustice and the socio- economic constraints that afflict the common man, that constrain his liberty, which is his capability to develop to the fullness of his potential as a human being.
Eutno matter how you view this path to learning, all it means is that we will learn about improving the quality of life of the masses of our national community from the wisdom of the old-fashioned elite, although some of them happen to be out of power.
Should we not rather choose the other path to learn-
iug? Do we have nothing to learn about what it means to be poor and depressed and deprived from those who are in fact poor and depressed and deprived? We have been over-educated by the urban elite, the powerful.
Let us now learn from the wisdom of the common citizen, of whom we have so many in the University.
5. You say that the Guidelines I promulgated are
"a hindrance to the proper dissemination of information."
.I agree. They are a hindrance to the dissemination of eli- tist wisdom. But I will retain them and implement them fully. 'Ve have at present a system for dissemina- tion of views 'exclusively for the elite. You want me to cooperate in maintaining this system. It is an unjust and un-free system. Before we can have a free system for dissemination, let us first ensure that the views to be disseminated are not a monopoly of one class or cate- gory of interests. Your disagreement, if accommodated by the University, only serves to perpetuate the domi- nance of information by the elite, to make the University an accomplice to this dominance and to isolate the Uni- versity from the people you and all of us say we must serve.
6. Nevertheless, I am prepared to rescind the inhi- bition on outside speakers under the following condi- tions. You invite a fisherman, whose home is not lighted by electricity and who goes into the cold wind and waters of dawn to feed his family and eke out a live-- lihood; a jeepney driver; a farmer who was once a tenant and is now a leasehold operator in a Samaha-ni/
Nsnton, Let us open the University to them and to common Filipinos like them and learn from them about dignity and the issues of welfare.
They are the forgotten, the nameless citizens of om- nation, who will forever remain anonymous if the Uni- versity remains elitist in its social perspectives.
If you want "graduates" from detention as a conse- quence of martial law, we have honorable members of theU.P. community, whom we are urged under the Presidential amnesty to receive into our community and our friendship, because of expressions and actions on the basis of honest conviction. Let us invite them, and I personally shall guarantee that all the resources of the University shall be enlisted to protect every lawful exercise of the right of expression and discussion on the same basis as any other citizen shall deserve or need such protection.
7. You will see, I trust, that the guidelines were pro- mulgated not from disguised partisanship, but from a rag- ing dissatisfaction on my part at the insensitivity of the University to many of the real issues in our national life, at the mental conditioning that grips our minds at a time when we must review old habits, orthodox pro- positions and traditional institutions.
At the same time, I see in your disagreement a con- cern with public issues. I have been in Office but a short time for you to know my views and convictions;
I express my convictions in the strongest way I can, as I expect you to express yours. I wish to preserve this exchange, and I am prepared to learn from you, for I cannot be right all the time.
Yours truly,
(Sgd.) ONOFRE D. CORPUZ President
•
•
FEBRUARY