ATENEO STUDENT JUDICIAL COURT

MVP 221, Ateneo de Manila University Loyola Schools

Katipunan Ave., Loyola Heights, Quezon City

MARIA ALEXANDRA D. TANJANGCO, John Gokongwei School of Management Chairperson, Petitioner

Case No. 14-2 Present: PEPITO, C.M., GAITE, PINEDA, SEGISMUNDO, STA. ISABEL, and VILLARUEL, MM. Promulgated: July 6, 2014

x-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

DECLARATORY RELIEF

STA. ISABEL, M.:

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court through the Petition for Declaratory Relief filed by the Petitioner on June 29, 2014. Petitioner Maria Alexandra D. Tanjangco prays for a clarification of Article XV, Section 4, subparagraph (a) of the 2005 Undergraduate Constitution of the Loyola Schools (“Constitution”) which states:

Vacancies that occur in the Central Board and School Boards before the election of the Freshman Officers, with the exception of the positions of the Sanggunian President and School Board Chairpersons, shall be filled via special elections to be held simultaneously with the Freshman Year Officer Elections.

The petitioner offers three possible interpretations of the said provision, that the positions of President of the Sanggunian (“president”) and the Chairpersons of the School Boards (“chairperson”):

(1) are not allowed to run in the special elections; (2) are not required to be included in the special elections, however are allowed to be

included; (3) are not allowed to take part in the special elections, however are allowed to take

part in a separate election held on the same dates.

Student Judicial Court 2 Declaratory Relief (July 6, 2014)

I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The recent general elections conducted last February 12-19, 2014 failed to garner the constitutionally required number of total votes to elect, among others, the president, vice president, secretary-general, and finance officer of the Central Board, as well as most of the chairpersons of the School Boards. Art. XV, Sec. 4(a) of the Constitution provides that vacancies in the Central Board and School Boards, with the exception of the positions of president and chairperson, shall be filled during a special election to be held simultaneous with the freshman elections.

Due to the unprecedented circumstance of having the positions of president and most of the chairpersons still vacant after the general elections last February 2014, the Sanggunian is now faced with the said constitutional provision that excludes the positions of president and chairperson from running in the upcoming special elections to be held simultaneously with the freshman elections. Thus, the issue before the Court is the legality of allowing the said positions of president and chairperson to be elected during the special elections held simultaneously with the freshman election.

II. DISCUSSION

The power of the Sanggunian being derived from the student body is most visibly manifested in the mandate of the same body in the election of Sanggunian officers. Such electoral mandate can be exercised by the act of either voting or not voting. The Constitution guarantees the right to abstain in any electoral exercise.1 Just as the act of voting is an exercise of the right to suffrage, the same goes for the act of not voting which, in itself, is an exercise of the student-voter’s electoral mandate.

Unless there were extenuating circumstances in the February 2014 general elections that caused the vacancy of the positions of president and most of the chairpersons, it is the opinion of this Court that the results of the said elections must be respected. In regards to this, the Court invokes its previous decision promulgated on February 21, 2014 on Case No. 14-1 which ruled, among others,

(1) that the Commission on Elections (“Comelec”) has given enough time for the casting of votes during the February 2014 general elections;

(2) that the Comelec, although not being able to sufficiently rectify its errors in the technical anomalies that transpired during general elections, was correct in deciding not to extend the election period; and

(3) that the Comelec, in its use of the hard ballots, had tried to legitimately rectify the errors in the electoral system.

1 Art. XV, Sec. 2 of the Constitution

Student Judicial Court 3 Declaratory Relief (July 6, 2014)

On the matter of the different interpretations of Art. XV, Sec. 4(a) of the Constitution offered by the petitioner as recounted supra, for the first interpretation, it is the view of this Court that said provision does indeed mean that the positions of president and chairperson cannot really be elected during a special election simultaneous with the freshman elections. For the second interpretation, if arguendo the positions of president and chairperson are not really required to but can be elected in a special election simultaneous with the freshman elections, then the Court sees this interpretation as lacking merit as the Court sees no reason why said positions will not be required to be part of a special election simultaneous with the freshman elections if said positions were left vacant after an immediately prior general election. For the third interpretation, the Court partially agrees with the petitioner that the president and chairperson, although prohibited from being elected during a special election simultaneous with the freshman elections, may be elected at another election set at a different date.

The Constitution does not explicitly institute special elections as always simultaneous with freshman elections. What the Constitution explicitly provides is that, with the exception of president and chairperson, positions left vacant in the Central Board and School Boards after a general election must be elected during a special election that had to be held simultaneously with the freshman elections. Furthermore, since Art. XIV, Sec. 3(h) of the Constitution also categorically gives the Commission on Elections the power to call for special elections, the Court sees this as meaning that the positions of president and chairperson can be elected in a special election held on a different date from the freshman elections and ahead of the general elections where these positions would normally be elected, should the Commission so decide.

III. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT

It is the view of this Court that the silence of the Constitution about what course of action to take if ever the positions of president and chairperson are ever left vacant intends to respect the electoral mandate of the student body. However, the Court believes that such mandate would not be breached if ever the positions of president and chairperson are again brought up for election at an earlier time than they usually would be elected since the same positions would similarly be subject to the same electoral mandate of the student body. Furthermore, the Court also recognizes the dilemma imposed upon the Sanggunian by this silence of the Constitution, the different context from the time the Constitution was framed, and the unprecedented circumstances that arose from the recent general elections.

WHEREFORE, the Court hereby conditionally allows the election of the president and chairperson ahead of the general elections. The Commission on Elections is ordered to proceed with the immediately upcoming special elections simultaneous with the freshman elections without the positions of president and chairperson. However, the Commission is granted the discretion of holding special elections set at a different date from the immediately upcoming freshman elections

Student Judicial Court 4 Declaratory Relief (July 6, 2014)

and ahead of the immediately upcoming general elections for the positions of president and chairperson so long as said special elections still comply with the constitutionally prescribed timeframe for the election of Sanggunian officials.

SO ORDERED.

PAOLO JAMES STA. ISABEL Magistrate

WE CONCUR:

LORENZO PEPITO

Chief Magistrate

DANIELLE JOANNA GAITE

Magistrate

MAGDALENA MARIE PINEDA

Magistrate

ALDWIN SEGISMUNDO

Magistrate

CRISTINE MARIE VILLARUEL

Magistrate

CERTIFICATON Pursuant to Section 30 of the Rules of Court, I hereby certify that the conclusions

in this decision have been reached in consultation with the rest of the magistrates before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of this Court.

LORENZO PEPITO Chief Magistrate