Student representation requires more than political activism

Meme from /reddit

The disqualification of the entire SAMASA PUP slate from the 2026 Student Council Elections has prompted the organization to question the Polytechnic University of the Philippines Commission on Elections' decision, describing it as arbitrary and calling for its reversal. But beyond the dispute over the ruling lies a more fundamental question: What does it mean to genuinely represent students, and what accountability should be expected from those who claim to speak on their behalf?

In Decision No. 2026-011 issued on Nov. 5, the PUP COMELEC disqualified the entire slate after finding that a non-PUPian had physically campaigned for its candidates during the Oct. 22 Miting de Avance of the College of Science Student Council. The commission cited violations of the university's election regulations and said the party failed to submit a formal explanation and supporting evidence within the prescribed period.

SAMASA PUP has challenged the decision, calling it arbitrary and demanding its repeal. While the organization is entitled to question the commission's findings and pursue available remedies, its objections should also be examined alongside its own record of accountability in student representation.

Representation begins with accountability

The controversy surrounding former PUP Student Regent John Paul Azusano raises particularly important questions. Azusano admitted during an ANAK-PUP meeting on Oct. 25 that he was not enrolled for the first semester of Academic Year 2026-2027. He had been elected Student Regent in July and had continued performing the responsibilities of the position for more than three months before his enrollment status became public.

He was subsequently placed under preventive suspension while his eligibility was investigated. Reports also indicated that he later stepped down from the position.

The issue is not simply whether a student leader can participate in activism while temporarily outside the university's enrollment system. The more important question is whether students were adequately informed about the eligibility of the person entrusted to represent them in the university's highest policymaking body.

A Student Regent is expected to represent the interests of the student population, making transparency about eligibility an essential requirement. Students have the right to know whether their elected representatives meet the qualifications for the positions they occupy.

The controversy also brings back memories of the 2017 dispute involving former Student Regent Karl Paulie Anareta, whose eligibility was questioned after the university administration said he had failed to enroll for two consecutive semesters. Although student organizations challenged the administration's actions at the time, the similarities raise questions about the importance of consistently enforcing eligibility requirements in student government.

These incidents should not automatically be treated as proof that every SAMASA PUP member is not a legitimate student. However, they demonstrate why enrollment verification, disclosure and compliance with student government rules cannot be dismissed as insignificant administrative matters.

There is a contradiction when organizations that campaign for genuine student representation face questions about whether their own representatives satisfy the basic requirements for holding student positions. Demands for transparency and accountability should apply equally to university administrators, elected student leaders and political organizations.

SAMASA PUP does not have monopoly on activism

SAMASA PUP also needs to recognize that it does not have a monopoly on student activism or the defense of democratic rights within the university.

Across PUP's colleges and local campuses, student councils, academic organizations and independent formations have their own capacity to advocate for affordable education, student welfare, academic freedom and other legitimate concerns. These organizations do not need to belong to one political alliance to demonstrate their commitment to the student population.

Activism should be measured by the substance of its work, the credibility of its representatives and its willingness to remain accountable to the people it claims to serve. No political organization should be considered the exclusive voice of the student body simply because it has an established organizational presence or a long history of campus mobilization.

Campus access and security

There is also a legitimate question concerning campus access. The reported participation of a non-PUPian in physical campaigning raises the need for clear and consistently enforced rules governing the activities of outsiders within university premises.

Universities are open spaces for intellectual exchange, public discussion and legitimate engagement with broader social issues. Non-students may have valid reasons to enter campuses, including attending public events, conducting academic activities or participating in authorized engagements. However, access should be governed by transparent institutional policies, particularly during elections and other activities where outsiders may influence the process.

The university has a responsibility to protect its students, personnel and facilities. It should therefore establish clear procedures for identifying visitors, regulating campaign activities and addressing unauthorized participation. These safeguards should be applied consistently and should never become an excuse to suppress legitimate student activism or peaceful dissent.

Ultimately, the dispute between SAMASA PUP and the university's election commission should not be reduced to a contest between political organizations and the administration. It should be an opportunity to reaffirm the standards expected of everyone participating in student governance.

The right to organize, criticize university policies and advocate for social change must be protected. But these rights do not remove the responsibility to follow election rules, disclose relevant qualifications and respect the democratic processes that give student representation its legitimacy.

Genuine student representation cannot rest on political slogans alone. It requires leaders who are qualified to serve, organizations willing to be accountable and an electoral process in which the same rules apply to everyone.