A classic display of subservience to the US

(taken from Inquirer; inq7.net)
Last updated 01:15am (Mla time) 12/28/2006

WE THOUGHT that our Philippine Constitution classes were clear enough for the common tao. Article II, Sec. 7 states that "The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other states, the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination."

However, it looks like our government, represented by Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez and Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo, does not understand this very simple principle. They think that the Visiting Forces Agreement is over and above the Philippine Constitution.

Gonzalez had no right to scold Judge Benjamin Pozon over the media when the latter refused to turn over rape convict L/Cpl. Daniel Smith to US custody. We're sure that Gonzalez does not even understand the logic and principles on which Judge Pozon based his decision.

It is really a shame to have a government that cares more about its relationship with a foreign country than its relationship with its own people. Because of the Subic rape case custody issue, the Filipino people will all the more realize how they are being deprived of justice and law.

Again, we have no one else to blame but Secretary Gonzalez and the person he represents. His "lawyering" for an American rape convict is a classic act of subservience to foreign rule.

But if there is subservience from the puppet government, we thank that there is also strong resistance from the people. We thank Judge Pozon. We thank Nicole. We thank the multitude of Filipinos who continue to defy the US demand, in the name of sovereignty, independence and national dignity.

--MARCO M. DELOS REYES, national president, National Union of Students of the Philippines, via e-mail

Students Chide Malacañang over 2007 Budget Impasse

23 December 2006

“They’re like the Grinch hiding in Santa Claus’s clothes.”

This was the pronouncement of the National Union of Students of the Philippines over Malacañang’s persistence to pass the 4.7 billion peso-worth school feeding program in the 2007 budget. Senate wanted to realign the said budget to school buildings and hiring of teachers citing that the feeding program will only be used in the 2007 elections. However, the House counterpart wanted the budget passed without Senate alterations.

Congress recessed on Thursday without passing a 2007 national budget. This will be the fourth time in President Arroyo’s incumbency that the country will run on a reenacted budget.

“We, the students, will not be used by the hypocritical charity of Mrs. Arroyo for their campaign in the 2007 elections. We agree with the Senate that the root of corruption must be weeded out from the budget,” declared NUSP President Marco Delos Reyes.

He explained that malnutrition and hunger among the Filipino students “can only be addressed sincerely by bringing livelihood to the families, and not by giving temporary and paltry food.” Delos Reyes added metaphorically, “It is very ironic. Government removed income for food from the Filipino families when they increased VAT, but now they want their candidate’s names to be put on the plates to be served to the school children.”

“The Senate approached the problem properly as they wanted the fund realigned to school buildings and hiring of additional teachers. We see that as a better investment,” said Delos Reyes.

However, the student union also expressed their apprehension that the reenacted budget will still be used in the coming May elections. They explained, “In 2004 we also had a reenacted budget. That gave the incumbent much discretionary funds that they used for campaign like the fertilizer scam, Philhealth cards, etc.”

This early, NUSP called for vigilance over the coming 2007 elections from the youth. “These are the events foreboding. The youth must prepare to stand and protect the sanctity of the ballot.” ###

Eroded Integrity of the UP BOR and Administration

I was once a member of the UP Board of Regents. We were the group of people who voted to seat Dr. Emerlinda Roman as the UP President to replace the retiring Dr. Francisco Nemenzo. That was in 2004.

I criticized the structure of the BOR. Along with the UP community, we sought to democratize decision-making in the beleaguered University of the Philippines by advocating democratization through the passage of the unit assemblies in the UP Charter. We believed that the BOR is far less accountable to the University because of its skewed composition (with six Malacañang appointees, including the CHED chair) and representation (only one Regent for student and faculty).

The erroneous decision of the UP BOR on December 15, which approved the proposed 300 percent tuition increase, manifested the indifference of the Board of Regents to the constituency they were supposed to represent. It came as natural as raindrops because of the inherent structure of the board. But that is not my main argument and point of reflection here.

Let me still work inside the framework of the Board. The BOR I knew was cautious and careful so as to build a sense of legitimacy in its decisions. This is important in an academic community where legitimacy comes from the ability of board decisions, policies, and actions to withstand highly adversarial and intellectual public scrutiny and debate. I realized that principle more when we elected the next UP President (that is, Dr. Roman).

I remember President Dodong Nemenzo’s reminder to the members of the Board then: come the time that we are to decide on the UP Presidency, we should be in no less than a perfect attendance. Meaning: twelve members present and voting. That we did.

Unfortunately, this is not the case with the present BOR leadership. Leaving the Student Regent and Faculty Regent behind, seven (7) members of the BOR convened covertly at the UP College of Law, after an abrupt and unannounced change of venue, and approved without objection the 300 percent tuition increase proposal. 20 minutes were all they needed to discuss and approve the proposal. CHED Chair Puno and Pres. Roman made JDV’s con-ass effort an LRT compared to their Maglev. Dr. Roman has just given a new operational definition to the word railroad.

The BOR and UP administration cannot only withstand public scrutiny and debate; they refused and evaded public scrutiny and debate. In the past years, the BOR has been barricaded in its meetings at UPLB, UP PGH and even at Quezon Hall, UP Diliman, and they faced the community squarely. But recently, they hid behind a bush and even barred those that they thought do not belong to the clique. Certainly, there is no legitimacy in their shrouded act.

The fact is, they cannot look at the iskolars ng bayan in the eye because their actions disregarded social responsibility and universality of education – principles that UP kept in its last 98 years of existence. Education in our country has all the more become the right of the few.

Now, my enthusiasm to the Centennial of UP in 2008 has gone. I expect grand pomp and pageantry, but the meaning has lost. Despite of this, I still have hope for the students, and selfless faculty and employees who continue to spread their arms like Oblation. Indeed, they are the true carriers of what we know as “UP”.

Tuloy ang Laban!


UP Student Regent (2004)

NUSP National President

21 December 2006


Why do youth and student groups demand tuition refund?

In brief, the Commission on Higher Education implemented a new tuition regulation policy (CHED Memo Order 14, series of 2005) which allowed schools to increase tuition without consulting students, parents, faculty and other stakeholders of education if the increase is below the prevailing inflation rate.

According to the House Committee on Higher and Technical Education, in its meeting on 5 June 2006, the CHED Memo Order 14 is illegal since it violated Republic Act 6728 which states that, “In any proposed increase in the rate of tuition fee, there shall be appropriate consultations conducted by the school administration with the duly organized parents and teachers associations and faculty associations with respect to secondary schools, and with student governments or councils, alumni and faculty associations with respect to colleges.” (Section 10)

Because the Commission on Higher Education erred by issuing an illegal tuition guidelines procedure (which private schools followed for their tuition and other fee increases this academic year), students demanded for the full refund of tuition and other fee increases this school year as a rightful remedy.

What is CHED Memo Order 14?

CHED Memo Order 14 (CMO 14), entitled “Guidelines and Procedures to be observed by Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) intending to increase Tuition and Other School Fees and introduce New Fees” is the Commission on Higher Education’s (CHED) response to the growing resistance of Filipinos over increasing tuition and other fees, which render access to education more difficult during these times of economic hardship and crisis. It has the following features, according to CHED (non exhaustive):

> it covers not only tuition but “other school fee” increases including “new fees”;

> allowable increase in both tuition and other fees less than or equivalent to the prevailing year’s inflation rates, shall not be subjected to consultations; increase of tuition and other fees over the prevailing year’s average inflation rate shall require a consultation process with the concerned sectoral representatives;

CMO 14 is the revised guidelines of the previous CHED Memo Order 13 series of 1998 underlining the procedures for schools intending to increase tuition. However, CMO 13 proved to be ineffective in tuition increase as private schools evaded the memorandum through institution of new fees and circumvention of the consultation process.

The National Union of Students of the Philippines, along with other youth and student organizations and student councils, organized protest actions and pressed upon reforms in the regulation of school fees. Hence, on 9 May 2005, CHED adopted CMO 14. However, the struggle for accessible education in the country remains as the new memo order, in fact, aggravated the school fee increases and leaves much to be desired by the Filipino people.

What are the contentions of the students with regard to CMO 14?

Foremost of these, CMO 14 explicitly provided exemptions for consultations in Article 3, Sec 10, and they are as follows:

“Consultations shall not be required for the following:

> The rate of increases in tuition and other school fees is less than or equal to the rate of the prevailing year’s national inflation rate as determined by the National Economic Development Program.

> Tuition for incoming freshmen. However, any increase shall be based on prevailing national inflation rate.”

CHED employed a false sense of logic for using the prevailing inflation rate as an index to the rate of tuition and other fees. By allowing increases without student consultations, the CHED institutionalized annual increases in tuition, other fees and new fees as students are stricken off their role to confront these increases through student consultations. There must always be student consultations regardless of how small or big the rate of increases will be.

CHED, itself, stripped itself off its regulatory function (and responsibility) in CMO 14 because of the consultation exemption based on the National Inflation Rate. CHED Regional Offices (CHEDRO) would only need to check the documentary requirements (article 5, sec 13, except letter b) of schools proposing within the NIR. Hence, the schools shall only wait for ministerial confirmation of their fee proposals.

The basic point is that, at these times of increasing prices of consumer goods and utilities, an increase in school fees, even though within the inflation rate, is already an injustice to students and parents alike. Access to quality education, thus, becomes narrower to the Filipino people.

Secondly, CMO 14 did not regulate the kinds of “other fees” that may be collected by schools. In fact, it even legitimized those anomalous fees’ existence:

“Charges in addition to tuition that are collected for a specific purpose or service, as may be identified by the school authorities such as medical and dental, athletic, audio-visual, guidance, insurance, laboratory fee, laboratory deposit, library, student organization, internet, school publication, energy, developmental, related learning experience, study tours, miscellaneous, etc.” (Article 2, Section 6)

Thirdly, the consultation process stipulated in CMO 14 remains to be a “sermon at the mount” because a) the number of student participants were reduced to “at most three representatives”, and b) students’ ideas and dissension to fee increase proposals are not necessarily incorporated as they are only “noted” and needs only to be reflected in the minutes of the meeting.

Take note that consultations in CMO 14 are only required for those fee increases above the inflation rate.

How did the Congress Committee on Higher and Technical Education (CHTE) came up with the pronouncement of the illegality of CMO 14?

The National Union of Students of the Philippines, along with fellow national youth and student organizations College Editors Guild of the Philippines, Anakbayan, League of Filipino Students, Student Christian Movement, and Kabataan Party, continuously informed the studentry and the public about the faults of CMO 14. These organizations launched a campaign against CMO 14 and lobbied it at Congress.

At the June 5, 2006 meeting of the CHTE, students revealed to the committee that CMO 14 provided exemptions to fee consultations. With this revelation, the committee members responded that this should not be the case because the CHED should follow its mandate to regulate tuition. Cong. Abayon expounded on this:

“Rep. Harlin Abayon (1st District, Northern Samar), chairman of the Committee on Higher and Technical Education said CHED was not only negligent in its mandate to regulate tuition increase but it also violated Section 10 of RA 6728.

Abayon said a feature in CHED Memo Order 14 (CMO 14) allows increase in both tuition and other fees less than or equivalent to the prevailing year's inflation rates without consultation.

Abayon cited Section 10 of RA 6728 that states ‘In any proposed increase in the rate of tuition fee, there shall be appropriate consultations conducted by the school administration with the duly organized parents and teachers associations and faculty associations with respect to secondary schools, and with student governments or councils, alumni and faculty associations with respect to college.’

’This memo does not only violate RA 6728 but in fact amended the provision on consultation,’ Abayon said.” (
12 June 2006, Congress Public Relations and Information Department, http://www.congress.gov.ph/press/)

Because of this pronouncement, the Tuition Refund Campaign was launched as early as June and July in the first semester of academic year 2006-2007.

What were the activities of the Tuition Refund Campaign?

The convening student organizations of the tuition refund campaign launched a Student Manifesto of Unity and quickly conducted information campaign to students nationwide. A blog site (http://www.tuitionrefund.blogspot.com/) was also launched to be the carrier of all pertinent documents and updates of the campaign.

Likewise, protests were launched at the CHED’s offices to push it to adhere to the pronouncement of Congress that CMO 14 is illegal, and that a full refund of tuition and other fee increase should ensue. Student leaders from various schools also lodged their complaints to the CHED regional offices against several schools to add up to the pressure for refund, in general and a resolution to the complaints, in particular. Notable campaigns were launched in UE Manila and Caloocan, UST, DLS-AU, and the private schools in Davao City.

How did the CHED react to the call of Tuition Refund?

CHED did not answer squarely the call of the students for full refund of the fee increases. The Commission insinuated on July 2006 that they adopted a resolution en banc prohibiting tuition increase above 7.6 percent, or the declared national inflation rate for 2006. The said resolution is thus stated:


RESOLVE AS IT IS HEREBY RESOVED, that the Commission agreed that no private higher education institutions shall be allowed to increase tuition, miscellaneous, and other fees beyond the National Inflation Rate of 7.6% for School Year 2006-2007. (8 May 2006)

Take note that the resolution was dated 8 May 2006. However, CHED did implement this resolution in July 2006 only because of the clamor of the students for a full refund of fee increase. This action is, in fact, admittance on the part of CHED that it did erred in coming up with CMO 14. Aside from that, CHED also created a Technical Committee for the Review of CMO 14 in September 2006.

Because of the CHED resolution, around 140 schools nationwide has to refund their tuition and other fee increases until it reaches the limit of 7.6%. Students recognize this achievement as a small victory in the campaign. However, the campaign still remains to push for the full refund of tuition and other fee increases even in schools which have only increased fees by 7.6% because the fact still remains that they violated a law that necessitates consultations in any amount of increase.

How many schools should refund their tuition fees to students?

This school year, out of 1,428 private higher education institutions (PHEIs), 27.31 percent or 395 schools have increased their tuition. Of that total number of schools increasing tuition, 194 are increases above the inflation rate while 201 are below or equal to the inflation. This data was given by CHED in June 2, 2006. Hence, the number of schools that have increased their fees must have increased since that date.

Based on this number, there should be no less than 395 schools which must fully refund their fee increases to the students. According to CHED, in their adjusted number of schools that increased above 7.6%, there should be around 140 schools that will have to partially refund their fees to students in adherence to the CHED en banc resolution.

More or less, two million students nationwide would benefit in the refund of fee increases.

Is tuition refund possible when classes have already started in the second semester?

A quick answer: yes. Supposedly, schools should have refunded in the first semester. Some schools, for example, UE, DLS-AU, University of Batangas, have partially refunded their tuition collected in their adherence to CHED’s en banc resolution in the first semester. So, it is but proper for the other schools which have not done their refund in the first semester to conduct the refund now. And since it is already the second semester, the schools must roll back their tuition to reflect the refunded percentage in the first semester.

Student leaders take note: we have to reiterate that while it is proper for the schools to partially refund in accordance with the May 8 CHED resolution, schools must refund the fee increases in full because they violated the law for their non-consultation.

How can the schools refund the tuition and other fee increases?

Firstly, schools must organize a refund monitoring committee (multi-sectorally composed) to ensure the proper implementation of the refund. In most cases, student leaders have to assert for the creation of this committee. Take note that the refund also covers miscellaneous and other fee increases.

Secondly, schools can either give the refund in cash or it may be deducted to a student’s fee balance if he/she pays on installment. In both cases, the percent of refund should be reflected so that the students will know what they are getting.

Lastly, schools must practice transparency and accountability in the process of refund. Information must be disseminated to all students about the process to ensure that everyone will receive their just amount of refund.

How can schools be pushed to implement a tuition refund?

CHED must issue another memorandum requiring schools which implemented a tuition increase for the current schoolyear to refund the students. Public pressure on CHED to order a refund must continue. Students should file petition letters and complaints addressed to the leadership of CHED. Lawmakers can ask CHED to implement a tuition refund.

The key is for the continuance of the campaign to refund the illegal tuition and other fee increases. Students have gained some victories in the months that passed. The struggle continues for a true tuition regulation policy that will protect the rights of each citizen for quality education. ###

Culture of Impunity in the Philippines

19 December 2006

Assassins and criminals are now even more emboldened to attack because of the pervading culture of impunity. 802 recorded political killings during the time of President Arroyo. Latest in the addition is the killing of 19-year old Sangguniang Kabataan chair from Cagayan Valley Nelson Asocena. If we may, the number will be 803, including Abra Cong. Bersamin assassinated last Saturday after attending a wedding.

This culture of impunity means that heinous crimes go unpunished, and this encourages perpetrators and would-be perpetrators to do the same. What is even more ironic is that this happens in our country where the government harks of the rule of law, peace and order.

If assassins can do it to a member of Congress, what more to an ordinary citizen exercising his/her political rights? The recorded killings of activists and journalists share the same aspects with that of Cong. Bersamin – motorcycle riders, up-close gunman, and politically motivated. Though there is a difference – the police is up on its feet to solve the congressman’s case, while the slayings of the peasants, workers, youth, and church leaders go unresolved and even whitewashed.

The only conclusion that we can draw is that the systematic extra-judicial killings, which the Arroyo administration has been silent on, have laid the fertile ground for the crimes that will affect even the encased politicos. Arroyo’s policy of inaction to political killings has bore a rotten fruit.

Now, even politicians are crying for help. Fellow congressmen said that the assassinations mark the start of the election period, with the final shovel pushed against charter change. That comment comes as natural as the sun would set every day. And it is a cause for worry to us.

Be Part of the NUSP 3rd National Convention

The National Union of Students of the Philippines (NUSP), a nationwide alliance of student councils/ governments/ unions, together with the student councils of De La Salle University, College of St. Benilde, University of the East Manila, University of the Philippines Diliman and University of the Philippines Manila, is proud to present the 3rd National Student Convention 2007 to be held on 12-16 January 2007 at the San Juan City Gymnasium.

2007 marks the golden anniversary of the NUSP, and it is proud to be the sole student center in the Philippines, championing students’ rights and welfare. Thus, this year’s convention carries the theme:


Consolidate our victories and continue the campaign for a relevant and accessible education!

Celebrate the fifty years of the Union by renewing our commitment to defend the rights of the youth and the people!

The National Convention is a 5-day event composed of discussions, trainings, workshops, cultural presentations, and dialogues on pertinent student concerns. More than 300 student leaders from all over the country are expected to attend this momentous gathering.

Contact us at nusp_national@yahoo.com or 0928-6082344 for details.

Join the Second Gawad Edgar Jopson


Pagkilala sa Natatanging Konseho ng mga Mag-aaral

National Union of Students of the Philippines

Ipinangalan ang gawad na ito kay Edgar Jopson o Edjop, mahusay na lider-estudyante noong dekada 70 at naging tagapangulo ng National Union of Students of the Philippines (NUSP). Una siyang nakilala bilang tagapangulo ng Sanggunian ng Mag-aaral ng Ateneo de Manila University. Kalaunan, nakita si Edjop kasama ang malawak na bilang ng mga mag-aaral mula sa iba’t-ibang pamantasan sa magiting na paglaban sa mapanupil na Batas Militar. Hindi naging hadlang ang matinding pampulitikang paniniil upang manindigan si Edjop para sa pagbabagong panlipunan para sa malawak na mamamayan. Bagamat mula sa maalwang pamilya, mapangahas na hinarap ni Edjop ang hamon ng kanyang panahon – inialay niya ang kanyang talino, panahon at sigla ng kanyang kabataan para sa kapakanan ng nakararami. Siya ay binawian ng buhay na tangan ang tunay na kahulugan ng paglilingkod sa bayan.

Nananatili sa bawat lider-estudyante ang diwa at mga aral na iniwan ni Edjop. Sa kasalukuyan, ang mga sanggunian ng mga mag-aaral ang nagsisilbing tagapamandila ng mga demokratikong karapatan at interes di lang mga mag-aaral kundi ng mga aping sektor sa lipunan. Masasaksihan natin ngayon ang pagsusumikap ng mga sangguniang ito na maglaan ng serbisyo at pangangailangan ng kapwa nilang mag-aaral habang patuloy na nag-aambag sa mayamang kasaysayan ng kilusang kabataan. Tangan ang paninindigan at pagkilos – mula sa pagtutol sa di-makatarungang pagtaas ng matrikula at panunupil sa kampus, sa paggigiit ng karapatan sa edukasyon at kabuhayan ng kabataan at mamamayan, hanggang sa pagkakamit ng tunay na pagbabagong panlipunan – ang mga sanggunian ng mag-aaral ay isa sa mga natatanging halimbawa ng pamumuno at paglilingkod sa maningning na panahon ng kabataan.

Bilang pagkilala sa kanilang kolektibong pamumuno, binuo ang Gawad Edgar Jopson. Ito ay pagkilalang igagawad sa natatanging Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral na tapat na naglilingkod sa kapakanan ng estudyante at mamamayan. Ang mga katatangi-tanging sangguniang ito ay nagsisilbing mabuting halimbawa sa bawat estudyanteng Pilipino na manindigan para sa kanilang kolektibong interes at kagalingan.

Sino ang maaaring lumahok sa Gawad Edgar Jopson?

Ang Gawad Edgar Jopson ay bukas sa lahat ng mga sanggunian ng mga mag-aaral na:

  • nagsasabuhay ng diwang iniwan ni Edgar Jopson sa pagiging tunay na maka-estudyante at makabayan.
  • kolektibong namumuno sa pagkamit ng mga tagumpay para sa kagalingan ng mga mag-aaral
  • matagumpay na nakapaglunsad ng mga aktibidad na kapakipakinabang sa mga mag-aaral.


Masinsin na pagplano – 20%

Kolektibong pagpapatupad ng buong plano – 20%

Pakikipag-ugnayan sa mga sektor pangkampus – 20%

Pagkamalikhain – 20%

Masaklaw na pamumuno sa mga estudyante – 20%

Paano sumali?

Isumite sa inyong rehiyonal o probinsyal na tsapter o sa pambansang opisina ng NUSP ang inyong naratibong report kalakip ang mga larawan o mga pagpapatunay ng inyong ulat. Maaaring isumite ang inyong ulat sa nusp_national@yahoo.com o kaya’y ipadala sa sumusunod na address: National Union of Students of the Philippines, C/o Office of the Student Regent, Vinzon’s Building, UP Diliman, Quezon City. Para sa katanungan, mangyaring maki-ugnay lamang kay Alvin sa numerong 0906-2458411 o 0920-6209362.

Ang pagpili ng mananalo ay pagpupulungan ng Pambansang Konseho ng NUSP na binubuo ng mga lider mula sa iba’t-ibang tsapter sa buong bansa.

--Ang paggawad sa natatanging Sanggunian ng mga mag-aaral ay gaganapin sa Pambansang Kumbensyon ng Mag-aaral

(National Students Convention) ng NUSP

(Enero 12-16, 2007) sa San Juan City, Metro Manila.

Student leaders announce plans to mobilize fellow students for Luneta prayer rally

December 16, 2006

Guarantee intensified anti-chacha campaign

Student leaders from the University of the East-Manila, St. Scholasticas College, UP Diliman and Manila and the University of Sto. Tomas today promised a large student and youth contingent at the Luneta prayer rally against charter change to be held on Sunday.

In a press conference, the students read a “unity statement of the youth against charter change” as their counterpart to the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP’s) statement.

Alvin Peters, secretary-general of the National Union of Students of the Philippines said that along with the endorsement of CEAP (Catholic Educators Association of the Philippines) of student participation in the prayer rally, the students also pushed through with their own initiative of simultaneous protest centers across Metro Manila before proceeding to Luneta. “We got together to talk about a unified conduct that will demonstrate a strong and united student front that is firmly opposed to charter change,” Peters said.

Peters outlined several assembly points at various schools before traveling to the venue of the prayer rally. “For the schools located along Taft Avenue, the assembly point will be at De La Salle University, Katipunan Avenue is the assembly point for UP Diliman, Ateneo and Miriam College and España Avenue in front of UST will be the gathering place for schools in the University Belt.” Peters revealed.

UP Students angered over 300 percent tuition increase, compare tuition increase to Con-Ass

Meanwhile, UP Diliman University Student Council (USC) chairperson Juan Paolo Alfonso said that they would mobilize as many as a thousand students for Sunday’s rally. “After the unacceptable approval by our university’s Board of Regents (BOR) of the 300 percent tuition increase in UP, we are even more adamant that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s charter change be stopped in its tracks, cha-cha should be buried once and for all,” Alfonso said, referring to the recent UP BOR decision to hike UP tuition.

“While we are dismayed about the outcome of the BOR meeting yesterday and we are reminded of the recent proceedings in congress with regard to the conduct of the tuition increase approval, we are steadfast in our opposition to charter change just as we are determined to continue the fight against tuition and other fee increases,” added Terry Ridon, chairperson of the UP Manila student council.

Student demands

“What we students want is a credible government accountable to the people, not a government ruled and controlled by self-serving politicians and corrupt officials,” said Einstein Recedes of the UE-Manila student council. Recedes maintained that the actions of the majority congressmen during the deliberations that paved the way for Constituent Assembly (Con-Ass) were “proof-positive” that dirty politics is what currently holds sway in the country.

“Through charter change, the Arroyo’s administration hopes to suspend the May 2007 elections because it knows that the said elections will be an assessment by the Filipino people of her administration and it knows that in that assessment, her government will fail miserably. Arroyo and her cohorts are clearly desperate – the blatant attempts to rush Con-Ass through Congress and the persistent persecution of critics of the Arroyo regime are the concrete illustrations of this. The youth will not let this go without a fight,” Peters said. ###

The National Union of Students of the Philippines

THE NUSP is a national alliance of student councils/unions/governments. It was established in 1957, and it is a patriotic, democratic and progressive alliance of student leaders that upholds and defends the rights and welfare of the Filipino students. As the Philippines' prime student center, NUSP unites all students in the country through their mandated representative student councils, governments and unions in the struggle for the fundamental right to education.


  • Work for the restoration and preservation of student councils and organizations, which assert and uphold the interests of the students
  • Advocate for a nationalist, scientific and mass-oriented educational system in the country
  • Promote and protect the people’s rights and welfare and work for a united struggle for genuine freedom and democracy
  • Promote international solidarity with the students and peoples of other countries who share similar objectives with the NUSP



  • Leadership Training Seminar
The NUSP provides training for student leaders during its national conventions and biennial congresses. It includes input on leadership, workshops on public speaking, writing for advocacy, table battles and negotiations, etc. Upon request, the NUSP offers trainings to member
student councils.
  • Organizational discussions
Part of the NUSP organizing work is a systematic discussion on the organization’s orientation, history and line works.

  • Socio-political issues
The NUSP also holds fora and alternative classes tackling relevant socio-political issues which affect the Filipino youth.


  • The Filipino Student is the official publication of the NUSP.
  • The Unyon (Union) is NUSP’s political journal.
  • Primers and/or research papers on the Philippine educational system are also disseminated to NUSP chapters.
  • The Campus Watch is a summary of important and particular student concerns. Data are gathered through caucuses and consultations.
  • The NUSP maximizes the mainstream media to propagate its position on many student issues. NUSP officers are invited to television shows and radio programs. Letters to the editors from the organization are published in national and local papers.


  • Education
The NUSP leads the fight against unjustified tuition increases in private schools and cuts on subsidy to public education. It represents the Filipino students in various dialogues, hearings called forby the Department of Education, the Commission on Higher Education and the House of Representatives.

  • Students’ democratic rights
The NUSP stands against violations to academic rights and other democratic rights of the students. Campaigns have been launched for the recognition of student organizations in schools, abolition of the mandatory military course in college, repeal of other repressive policies (i.e. closure of student councils and publications, suspension/expulsion of student leaders, no permit no exam policy, etc.)

  • People’s issues
The NUSP also participates in various national issues affecting the Filipino youth. Among these include anti-U.S. military intervention actions, human rights violations, attacks on civil liberties, oil price hikes, unemployment, etc. The NUSP, like many student and youth groups in the country, was involved in the


  • The NUSP has convened many broad youth formations such as the Estrada Resign Youth Movement, Education for All, AbolishROTC! and Youth Action Network. At present it works as a convenor of Tuition Monitor, Youth Demanding Arroyo’s Removal (YouthDARE) and Tanggulan Network forCivil Liberties.
  • It has also joined multi-sectoral alliances such as the Plunder Watch, September 21 Committee and POWER.
  • It continues to relate with progressive legislators to push for pro-student laws.


The NUSP maintains relations with other youth organizations abroad.

  • It is a member of the Asian Student Association (ASA) and the International Union of Students (IUS).
  • It seeks to relate with other international youth formations for various forms of cooperation and solidarity.


The organizational structure of the NUSP is composed of the National Assembly, the National Council and the National Executive Board.

The National Assembly (NA) is the highest policy-making body composed of all the officers of the National Council including the national standing committees, all the officers of the NUSP chapters and a minimum of one delegate from each member council. The National Assembly is convened every two years (except for special sessions which can be called upon by the National Executive Board) when election of officers, adoption of policies, programs and projects and other organizational matters are forwarded by the national office or local chapters. It also acts as the constitutional body of the National Union should the need arises.

The National Convention refers to the assembly of student leaders once every two years in between the holding of the National Congress.

The National Council (NC) is the second highest policy-making body of the NUSP when the National Assembly is not in session. It is composed of the National Executive Board and all NUSP chapter representatives elected or appointed by their respective constituents. The National Council meets twice a year to assess the activities and performance of the organization and to adopt such policies and measures, as maybe necessary. In urgent cases, the National President may convene the National Council.

The National Executive Board (NEB) is the implementing and administrative body when the National Council and/or the National Assembly are not in session. It is composed of the National President, Executive Vice-President, Vice Presidents for Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao and the Secretary General. An expansion of the NEB includes the committee heads.

The NEB is tasked to formulate the rules that will govern the administration of the organization; draw up annual program of activities for the approval of the National Congress or the National Council; to act for and in behalf of the National Assembly and for the National Council on matters that require immediate actions; to prepare the agenda of and convene the session of the National Assembly subject to the concurrence of the National Council; and to define the positions of the NUSP on vital and urgent issues of the campus and national concern.