What can they do for us? This must be frankly queued to the Student Supreme Government (SSG) candidates who have proclaimed to serve the student community. They must prove the lengths that they are willing to reach for the purpose of their leadership because the student community does not need another loud affirmation and promises that cannot be transformed into reality. Remember, a can sounds loudest when content is absent. So, unless they plan to remain a nuisance, they must justify their means.
In the coming SSG election, two parties are headed to a two-way race between two presidential candidates. Antimony Partylist is headed by a presidential candidate who is an appointed member of the office, while the Alliance Partylist is taken by the lead of a challenger aiming to fit in a position in the said office. Just because these two are being endorsed as official candidates, does it mean that they fit for the position?
Since they have pledged their intent to sit for presidency, they must undergo a serious form of scrutiny of their convictions and therefore, it is only just right to buzz around their qualifications, advocacies, and admit it or not, we look for their intellectual qualities and leadership capabilities. Unshackling their leadership legitimacy, few shortcomings have transpired to unreservedly justify their validity.
Based on a faculty member, the Antimony Party presidential candidate is currently an irregular student due to a record of shifting back-and-forth to the said program. It was also found out that he has incurred numerous incomplete grades and missing grades reflected in the records of his academic performances. Although he does carry a load of personal achievements and leadership experiences, his intellectual qualities remain under the blur for the fact that his academic performance reflects the shortcomings of his responsibilities, much of a duty of official function in the office. He is also the former Executive Secretary of the cabinet which is yet to accomplish all the advocacies they have promised in the previous election.
It is from his words that he said “Dire po harumamay na ada ka na position, dre man harumamay ito na position la. We are not just a student. We are the stakeholders of the university.” yet he took the audacity to run despite failing to realize the promises of their cabinet.
Meanwhile, the presidential candidate of Alliance Partylist has been reprimanded of holding presidency in an organization despite filing his intent to run for president in this year’s SSG election. Though he has immediately dropped the presidential position in this organization, this still reflect his insentient cluelessness and negligence on the Article V, Section 3b of the Constitution and By-Laws (CBL) of the SSG.
This flawed candidacy of aspiring chieftains of the student community evokes a calling for a critical examination of the potentials of these candidates to serve its constituents. Buzzing over their qualifications will help measure whether it would potentially riffle their cause for the betterment of the student community, or shoot blanks in the tenure of their term. Otherwise, this election will turn out to be a hypocrisy.
Aspiring leaders’ accolades and awards may manifest their qualities, skills, and experiences which attributes to being a good leader, but feigning negligence of the core aspect of leadership could debunk the quest to achieve better governance.
Leadership is intertwined with responsibility. One way or another, one of them will have the chance to sit in the Federation of Student Supreme Government presidency, and will be a potential student regent representing the student community. Thus, this election must be a yardstick of the candidates’ leadership legitimacy which measures the lengths of what they could offer to the students and the community where the lines dividing between their official function and their personal responsibility are drawn and accentuated.
Article by Meraflor O. Pecore