by Lourdes
Ramos-Laguardia
How’s AUP’s Star?
Some years ago, an FB post read, “AUP, the School that
Refuses to Shine Forever!” Was that prophetic, co-incidental, or plainly a
baseless statement? Let’s see.
Corruption after corruption has been alleged – from bribing
to non-existent ledgers; from malversation of funds to overpricing of
materials, etc. (Members of a closed alumni FB group know what I am talking
about). The most recent fiasco is the “bringing down” of Narra Men’s dormitory
because of its flawed construction, a likely consequence of self-imposed
procedure and shady deals. No real bidding was done as usual and there was an
apparent cutting corner of materials despite its multi-million budget. This is
an allegation yes, but like the proverbial, “when there’s smoke, there’s fire”
– which is not true all the time all right, but it’s one thing to check the
smoke and prove there’s no fire and another, not to check the smoke at all. We
call it irresponsibility! Yes, to pursue the contractors behind this mess is
correct, but what about the AUP leaders who inked the deal and the other
members of the “pyramid?” Corruption is never right. What must a new leader do
about it? Lick it and he angers the builders; ignore it and he oppresses the
public. What about conspiring with the corrupt to appease a suspecting public?
Connivance to cheat a public is worse! Where is AUP going?
A new leader must do a balancing act between the past and
the current. He cannot be indifferent to a previous mess; neither can he get
stuck in it. Instead, he must continue to develop and advance the mission and
fulfill the goals of the organization. To do it, he needs to communicate- to
listen, to consult, and to speak –to friends or foes. Sometimes, the people
considered villains are the experts to be consulted. Experto Credite, says
Virgil (Trust one who has proved it). A new leader in his scheme of things
should be ready to be humbled – to admit the things he doesn’t understand and
is not capable of delivering. He must be ready to give to others the credit for
something he truly does not need to deserve. Sometimes, the people around or
below a leader see things more clearly and have better solutions to offer.
Unfortunately, in the Philippines
only the highly educated seem to have the right to speak and be heard. We call
this, oppression.
In the event of the men’s dorm blunder and the failed College
of Theology
Why is there a seemingly panicky atmosphere regarding the
COM project? Claims of preventing CHED’s moratorium have been quoted to justify
the haste in building the COM. But doesn’t it sound like there are too many,
non-performing COMs in the Philippines
thus, a moratorium? Do the AUP leaders then make it certain that their COM
shall not join the bandwagon of failed COMs? Yes, it’s true CHED issued a
moratorium (MO #32, series of 2010) on five undergraduate or graduate courses:
nursing, teacher education, business administration, information technology and
hotel and restaurant management effective SY 2011-2012. However, CHED has not
officially issued a moratorium on opening medical colleges by already existing
universities however; CHED improved its application procedure by focusing on
two important aspects: qualified faculty and deans, and teaching hospitals. If
AUP insists on pushing the COM project for 2013, we expect detailed plan of its
academic programs, line-up of qualified deans and faculty. Is there yet one
published? As to a building (structure), there was no mention of it as a
stringent criterion perhaps because a university can make use of some existing
buildings and laboratories (supposing they are available). This is not the case
in AUP- correct me, thus the birth of the COM complex project. There is nothing
strange in planning for advancement; it is expected of a university like AUP
that has been granted autonomy. It is likely of a university that has
registered top licensure examinees (though wanting in high over-all passing
rates). But what is not quite rational is to pursue another mammoth project
when some previous ones are laid waste and are stinking with anomalies. This is
so uncool – so unbusiness like. But if AUP leaders are so convinced and
determined to pursue it with or without alumni 100% support, go on if you must.
If they can only restore the trust….
Where is Dr. Francisco Gayoba, the AUP president going? Like
his predecessors, his mandate remains the same and that is, to make AUP a truly
Adventist model university. As a pastor and as an academician, he understands
this language. Unfortunately, he is inheriting the JVA bribery issue, the COT
riddled failure, the Narra men’s dormitory fiasco, and of course the once
initiated COM, and the questionable dispensation of initial donations. These
are evidences enough to think that all is not well in the university. People
feel betrayed, they are hurt, they are angry, and they are worried – where is
AUP going? However, some do not believe a thing about all these allegations -
they insist that someone is innocent until proven guilty. Some suggest to just
let God take care of the mess and punish the culprits in His time. Mr. Gayoba
must be brave and must plead for wisdom – with all these alleged anomalies and
divided response, his calling is to once and for all find out the truth and If
there is indeed corruption, he must call it by its right name and clean AUP of
it. He cannot allow himself to be intimidated by the “old cowboys” in the camp;
his loyalty is to God and to the institution, not to a powerful few. Lick them
and you have given God, his glory! AUP’s public is in need of a hero, Mr.
Gayoba – heed their call.
Finally, a brief note to AUP alumni: supporting this
university that trains for service is a noble task. Sharing your hard-earned
money is genuine generosity. May God bless you all! But supporting it blindly
is amiss. Protecting its leaders from due investigations is idolatry. To ignore
glaring evidences of questionable decisions inside the university is outright
callousness. A public trust is being broken, - what are we doing?
“The king is the chair….,” not the person that sits on the
chair. Leaders come and go. The benefit of the institution is paramount. We
work hard for the institution, not for the self-important few. And besides,
“the chair” is custom built for men and women who “cannot be bought and sold….”
Where are these men and women?
May our leaders say, “Here we are, at your service. Shine,
AUP, Shine!
No comments:
Post a Comment