There but for the grace

There but for the grace of God go I. I am Raymund L. Fernandez, more than 20 years a member of the faculty of the University of the Philippines Cebu. Last year my three-year term as chairman of the Humanities Division ended. I did not nor am I now seeking another term. By now, I cannot even tell if I still want to continue teaching in this institution. It is not a mere case of burning out. Rather, mine is a feeling of offense resulting from witnessing a clear case of injustice. It is also a feeling of helplessness such as one would feel when he looks at good people all around him and they remain silent in the face of all these. It is a feeling of shame.

I served under Dean Enrique Avila. The case of his dismissal is not specific only for the University of the Philippines Cebu community, nor for the University of the Philippines system. It is a case of concern for the whole community. State education is perennially asking for greater government subsidy. This case is all about whether or not it deserves it. If the UP system can victimize its own officers this way, what can it offer its youngest members, its youngest faculty? What can it offer the community?

What is Dean Avila guilty of? He is guilty of doing his job in accordance with the advice and approval of his superiors. The reader will do well to go through the text of this sordid affair. If you wish to read it yourself, contact me through my e-mail: [email protected] and I will gladly forward to you pertinent  documents, including the charges against him, his defense and the final decision of his dismissal. See for yourself if you come to the same conclusions I did.

The documents coming from the Administrative Disciplinary Tribunal are particularly telling. Compare the charge sheet with the document of ADT’s final decision and you will find the documents contain practically the same details. Both documents detail the dean’s alleged offenses, namely, that he committed gross neglect of duty for allowing filling materials to be temporarily placed at the school’s football field without charging Green Peaks Development Inc. anything, that he committed grave misconduct for appointing his co-accused Ernesto Pineda as chairman of the Resource Development Bids and Awards Committee (RDBAC) and that he committed gross neglect of duty for approving the centennial bonus for the college.

Neither of the documents contain any refutation of the dean’s defense. They do not cite, for example, that Green Peaks was the winning bidder for future infrastructure development for the college. Nor do they refute the fact that refilling the sunken football field would have cost the college P5 million, which amount was actually saved by the college with the agreement.

Those familiar with government operations would have faulted the dean for appointing Pineda as chairman of the Bid and Awards Committee (BAC). What the ADT decision does not affirm is that Pineda was, in fact, appointed to the RDBAC, which is not the same as BAC. The latter is mandated by law. RDBAC is a committee only of the university system and there have been precedents to similar appointments.

The case of the dean’s release of the centennial bonus was done with the full knowledge and approval of his superiors. Neither does the ADT’s final decision reflect that nor does it explain how a mere dean can “illegally” release P3 million in bonuses to his constituency without prior approval by his chancellor. After reading everything, one cannot help but wonder if there is a larger picture hiding behind all these. One cannot help but wonder what became of the students’ rallying points raised against the dean, which began all these. To recall, some members of the faculty made speeches rousing up the students protesting the issue with the security guards and the dean’s exclusion of student council representatives from the executive committee of the college. The students took to the streets. Yet there is no mention of this  in the ADT documents. While all these point to an apparent case of betrayal, it is betrayal occurring at least below the dean’s position.

There is a bigger picture of betrayal here. Indeed, for the last three years while the college had been working for its autonomy it had served practically under direct advisement of the advisory committee established by former UP president Emerlinda Roman just for UP Cebu. The committee included two former UP presidents, Jose Abueva and Francisco Nemenzo. As division chairman serving under them, I know for a fact that Dean Avila was their loyal lieutenant. We did everything they advised. They would know everything that went on beyond even our own knowledge. They know the difference between BAC and RDBAC, a committee of their own creation.  Why have they remained silent so far? Is Dean Avila only collateral damage here? Is he a necessary sacrifice in the normal course of a change of presidency, fodder for UP politics?

Surely, three former UP presidents could give us the true picture of what really occurred here. How can they allow this travesty to continue? If we penalize a dean for doing his job, who else will want to be dean or even chairman? And what of the future of this university? Who will want to have anything to do with us? Shame!