Politicized governance in public universities

(First of two parts)

The Higher Education Modernization Act (RA 8292) was passed in 1997 to provide an improved governance framework for state universities and colleges (SUCs) in the country.

This law established a uniform composition and powers for the governing boards of SUCs in the Philippines. The governing board (Board of Trustees/Regents) includes the regional directors of the DA, DOST and NEDA; sector representatives (faculty, students, alumni); private-sector representatives and the chairs of the Senate and House committees on higher education. The CHED chairman serves as the BOT/BOR chairman, with the SUC president as vice chairperson.

The law also granted the Board broad powers, including the authority to select the SUC president.

Before RA 8292, the Philippine president appointed all SUC presidents. I experienced this during the Ramos administration, when my boss, senator Leticia Ramos Shahani, served as chair of the Senate committee on education and I helped vet candidates for SUC president to be recommended to Malacañang.

We recommended highly qualified candidates, and many were appointed and served with distinction. I suppose this was because Senator Shahani had a solid academic background, having taught at the University of the Philippines and earned a PhD at the University of Paris (Sorbonne).

At the time, she was the only senator with a PhD, and no one challenged her sterling academic credentials.

But this system of appointment drew criticism. Critics called for democratizing university governance by ensuring representation from the academic community, regional executive agencies and both houses of Congress. The idea was to depoliticize the process not only through the Governing Board’s decision-making but also through the detailed academic and managerial requirements established by law.

More than 30 years later, has the selection process been depoliticized, and are we getting more qualified and better-performing SUC presidents?

Recently, the House of Representatives approved House Bill 4799 (Acidre, Romualdez) and House Bill 5042 (Adiong), which enhance the structure and powers of SUC governing boards and establish a system of differentiated autonomy based on each institution’s capacity and performance.

These bills add a staff regent to the governing board, require governance certification and training for board members and establish a Philippine Higher Education Academy to support leadership development and succession planning.

These bills also grant differentiated autonomy status to SUCs by providing increasing levels of self-governance to those meeting national standards for quality, accountability and relevance.

I laud these legislators’ efforts to address governance issues in SUCs.

But the bills do not address two very important questions for SUC governance reform: have the representatives of the House and Senate improved governance in SUCs and has the selection of SUC presidents become democratized since the appointment power was transferred to the governing board?

The rationale for including the House and Senate committee chairs on all governing boards is to ensure that Congress’ perspective is represented in board deliberations.

In addition to the requirements for efficiency, transparency and accountability in SUC operations, the House and Senate chairs are expected to ensure that SUC programs (and budgets) align with national education priorities, require compliance with mandates in newly passed laws and bring SUC issues to the attention of the legislative committee on higher education.

Unfortunately, the chairpersons of the committees on higher education often appoint politicians (such as congressmen and governors) and their political allies to serve on the Board of Regents.

How have their representatives performed?

Yes, some contribute significantly to SUC policymaking.

Rep. Janet Garin, drawing on her background as a former DOH secretary, actively participates in West Visayas State University board meetings, particularly because WVSU operates a medical school and training hospital.

Rep. Mayo Almario understands the operations and regularly seeks CHED assistance in the programs of Davao Oriental State University.

Rep. Claro Lobregat has been guiding the development of Western Mindanao State University, Zamboanga Peninsula Polytechnic State University and Zamboanga State College of Marine Sciences and Technology.

Rep. Joey Salceda championed Free Higher Education in the House and supported the development of Bicol University and other SUCs in Region V.

Rep. Rufus Rodriguez was instrumental in advancing equity in the admissions policy at the University of Science and Technology of the Philippines.

But for every Garin, Almario, Lobregat, Salceda and Rodriguez, there are numerous other representatives who frequently miss meetings, seldom join discussions or leave early to carry out their legislative duties.

Many do not understand SUC processes, including curriculum development, research, student services, land-use planning and procurement. They should request briefings from SUC officials or the CHED regional director to participate more effectively in discussions, yet they often fail to do so.

And then, there are the horror stories.

A member of Congress who refused to help implement an ombudsman’s decision suspending his SUC president-prodigy.

Representatives who badgered (even threatened) board members to prevent a sitting president from receiving a second term, despite an evaluation committee’s outstanding rating.

A member of Congress who takes positions contrary to the chairman of the committee, asserting that he is the representative of Congress.

Members of Congress who talk and pressure an incumbent president not to seek a second term because they have a candidate-in-waiting.

Many education stakeholders believe that politicians view their membership on the governing board as a means to recommend students for admission (regardless of their qualifications), secure infrastructure projects for their preferred contractors or influence (even dictate) the appointment of deans and faculty.