Mindanao State University - General Santos City (MSU-GSC) faces its next batch of Supreme Student Council (SSC) leaders as the elections draw near. However, with the decline of student leadership engagement within MSU-GSC, only a single party list steps forward to candidacy for the second year in a row - with a smooth road headed for victory. Though democracy exists in the SSC elections, it is reduced to a bare-bones democracy.
With the upcoming SSC elections scheduled to commence this Monday, April 29, the student body will find only one candidate party on their ballots: the Alliance of Students for Alternative Politics (ASAP) party. For the second consecutive year, ASAP faces no opposition, not even independent candidates. The SSC election stands as a crucial moment for the student body to exercise their rights as constituents, shaping the direction of the student council's operations. Democracy hinges on the power of the people; in governance, it reflects rule according to the will of the people. But how can this hold true when there is only one option? Why has only one path been paved in the first place? This situation necessitates the need for scrutiny by the Commission on Elections, which will serve as the conduit for the next SSC administration, as brought in an interview with Vice Chairperson Raymark Edradan.
In the revised S.Y. 2024-2025 Election Code of the Commission on Elections, adopted and ratified on April 13, 2024, there are no explicit and specific provisions addressing one-party elections – a revelation gleaned from an interview with Hon. Edradan. Consequently, for two consecutive SSC elections, only a single party, ASAP, has vied as the sole candidate party list. The absence of provisions in the election code renders these past two elections technically unconstitutional or, at the very least, unprecedented and inadequately anticipated. This discrepancy arises as all other provisions of the COMELEC election codes are tailored towards the presence of at least two distinct party lists.
Despite the latter fact, it is clarified in the aforementioned election code that both current and previous boards of the SSC COMELEC had the power and discretion to implement such rules regarding to one-party elections - or, at least adjust their calendar of activities for the election. It is in the election code for this academic school year that in Article 5 Section 2 Functions of the Commission, letters (a) and (e), which states the Comelec's ability to formulate, implement rules, regulations and procedures necessary to properly conduct SSC elections; while under 'First Week Schedule' from Section 3 Article 6 'Election Calendar' provided that Comelec has the discretion that the election calendar can be modified to conform with time availability.
As such, the situation of the one-party elections, as well as the last-minute rush of filings for candidacy which, according to Hon. Edradan, only poured in by the last day of the SSC COMELEC, would all have been preventable if not for the other factors that are well past SSC COMELEC’s jurisdiction. One of these, as Hon. Edradan confirmed in an interview, includes the lack of constituents’ participation in voting, as well as the number of students willingly running for positions that carry responsibility as heavy as the duty of the student council.
Notably, years ago, the predetermined win of the Alliance of Students for Alternative Politics (ASAP) party was menaced by their closest opposing parties—Student Alliance for the Advancement of Democratic Rights and Welfare (STAND) and Catalyst of Change (COC). Now, what is left are the memories emblazed in the once hyperactive scenes of elections at MSU. Evidently, it is the second year of ASAP as a lone party running for SSC, and what this entails is a working problem of a decline in student leadership participation at MSU in the present. As we get bigger in our institution with over 8,500 students, our problem with student participation becomes more massive, as mentioned by Mr. Edradan, who said that last year's election turned out to gain only 1000 student votes. This is not who we were at the outset, but we made it an ideal as we progressed.
As much freedom we enjoy by merely seeing a party running for positions, tantamount is to now degenerate democratic utility, as no one has ever tried to impede ASAP harnessing straight victory. It is true that having an established political party in an institution is a blessing for the student body, but what could it ever be if someone else or a few other students just tried to accept the challenge? By that, we may induce more proactive political movements in this institution, and establishing that is a means to answer to our dying interests in participating in student leadership in an institution that once housed incomparable political animals. Nevertheless, it is still in the hands of students if they continue to vanish when time calls them the most.
On the other hand, there are guidelines in violations that are stated in the election code, but they are only for the most important part, including violations by individual entities or entire slates of candidates. Thus, the true problem is neither with the running ASAP party nor this year’s SSC Comelec: the root problem has started sprouting since before, or specifically last year, since this year’s election is the early recurrence in what may be the beginning of a one-party election pattern. Hon. Edradan also confirmed how the next possible measures to prevent this ‘friendship dynasty’ or a web or network of connections that persuaded members to running for SSC positions, includes setting a minimum of 50% votes from the entire student body plus a single vote.
Furthermore, a possible solution to address the dwindling amount of participation in student leadership would be to ease the access and process for candidacy, or at least streamlining the process of running for a position in the SSC. It has been confirmed how this year’s election turnout was expected to only be at 30% of the total student body’s votes; add into the mix he necessity to sever affiliations and prior positions with other organizations or resignment from the memberships thereof, which would have been simple and easy enough, the result is a lackluster election season that was only held for formalities.
University-wide student leadership is long due for a reviva. To ensure that there truly is democracy, not just a convenient illusion of non-choice, students must first be empowered and answer the call to actively engage in their pursuits for leadership.
Democracy is being exercised at its barest minimum in the upcoming election, and even then it would only be ceremonial to barely comply with the provisions of the existing electoral code. To walk down the same beaten path would eventually make it into the only path to be ever known, just as how it is to allow a one-party election party to persist, not reflective of the democracy that MSU-GSC upholds. Settling for an election with only a single competing party list confirms how much democracy for the SSC elections is dwindling into a bare-bones democracy.
Comments