The Assassination of Karl Satinitigan
Disclaimer: The title is an allusion to the Philippine Daily Inquirer editorial (February 6, 2008) entitled "The Assassination of De Venecia"
We are terribly disappointed at how the Sanggunian has handled the current chain of events. We are referring to the recent string of resignations in the student council, with great emphasis on the issue of Karl Satinitigan' s non-enrollment.
We have read the article in The Guidon entitled "Top Sanggu officers resign." We agree to the students' reactions when they say that the Sanggunian should have told the students about these resignations and vacancies. We agree when students talk about how Sanggunian should have been more transparent with the internal workings of the council.
We have also read the statement of the newly sworn Sanggunian President, Cabrei Cabrera, on the status of Karl Satinitigan. We are terribly disappointed at how the statement deflected the various issues raised by our group and other students by saying that "laudable efforts from our lower units were significantly negated by the absence of clear-cut leadership."
Why are they (the President speaking in behalf of the Sanggunian) putting blame on Karl Satinitigan? Is the President of the Sanggunian the only one liable for this "absence of clear-cut leadership?" Aren't the Vice President and the other officers also culpable? Why does it sound like the Karl Satinitigan issue is being used as a fire escape from the burning building known as the Sanggunian? Can't the Sanggunian take care of its own? If it can't, how does it expect to "take care" of the student body? Karl Satinitigan is first and foremost a student and part of the Sanggunian constituency.
If there was one thing that the new president said that was right, then it would be the importance of the coming Sanggunian elections. It would be the true measure of how students perceive this recent chain of events. We wouldn't be surprised if, like the on-going plebiscite regarding the number of course representatives, the quota would not be reached.
--
Gadfly Society
http://gadflysociety.blogspot.com
We are terribly disappointed at how the Sanggunian has handled the current chain of events. We are referring to the recent string of resignations in the student council, with great emphasis on the issue of Karl Satinitigan' s non-enrollment.
We have read the article in The Guidon entitled "Top Sanggu officers resign." We agree to the students' reactions when they say that the Sanggunian should have told the students about these resignations and vacancies. We agree when students talk about how Sanggunian should have been more transparent with the internal workings of the council.
We have also read the statement of the newly sworn Sanggunian President, Cabrei Cabrera, on the status of Karl Satinitigan. We are terribly disappointed at how the statement deflected the various issues raised by our group and other students by saying that "laudable efforts from our lower units were significantly negated by the absence of clear-cut leadership."
Why are they (the President speaking in behalf of the Sanggunian) putting blame on Karl Satinitigan? Is the President of the Sanggunian the only one liable for this "absence of clear-cut leadership?" Aren't the Vice President and the other officers also culpable? Why does it sound like the Karl Satinitigan issue is being used as a fire escape from the burning building known as the Sanggunian? Can't the Sanggunian take care of its own? If it can't, how does it expect to "take care" of the student body? Karl Satinitigan is first and foremost a student and part of the Sanggunian constituency.
If there was one thing that the new president said that was right, then it would be the importance of the coming Sanggunian elections. It would be the true measure of how students perceive this recent chain of events. We wouldn't be surprised if, like the on-going plebiscite regarding the number of course representatives, the quota would not be reached.
--
Gadfly Society
http://gadflysociety.blogspot.com
