Heated debates on being vocal versus being silent on certain issues is a common sight—especially on social media. You may have come across at least one post that fits this description; you may have scrolled past it or engaged on it. One thing’s for sure, these don’t usually end on a good note—a ‘yes’ for awareness but a ‘no’ for coming to terms.
With this in mind, The BEACON Publications received an email from John Doe that included a concern on the unprofessional actions of ECA. To put it into context, the email pointed out a twitter thread from an ECA officer that discussed the silence of AdZU student leaders on social issues further suggesting that they should step down if they don’t plan to speak up. Note that this was from a personal twitter account of the said ECA officer. Calling out sTudEnt leAdeRs and organization moderators who chose not to actively participate on a stance against the Anti-Terrorism Law or any social issues. This was dubbed as “unprofessional” by John Doe, considering how the whole disagreement was dealt with by a twitter thread.
In the shoes of some student leaders, they have restrictions when it comes to making statements on issues that go against the government, restrictions that come with the nature of the organization itself. Also, an organization is made up of diverse individuals, as differences cannot be avoided, so are disagreements on social issues. This concern was relayed to the ECA President but no explicit action was made—no update, nada. In an interview with Ms. President, she stated that they had a ‘dialogue’ with the ECA officer involved, and that’s pretty much it. As vague as that may be, we don’t know the details from that talk, it is somehow deemed settled—a one-sided settlement that is. She shared that there is nothing wrong with expressing one’s opinion, and that “this is the best time to encourage students to take a stand—to spread awareness and take part in national issues.” In addition, she conveyed that since this was posted using a personal account then this does not speak for ECA.
Now that the ECA Elections is just around the corner, will John Doe’s concern give rise to a reform that would handle these sorts of issues accordingly? How does ECA define the thin line between the personal matters of an officer and the council itself, given that it does discuss the “politics” involved in a student government and the other organizations. You see, as introduced by ECA themselves, they are like a ‘microcosm’ of the government; and as important as the citizens hold the government accountable for their actions, it’s the same for students toward ECA. Conflict can’t be evaded as it is, realistically, part of the basic nature of a government, and how it will be resolved is what truly matters at the end of the day.
All things considered, as much as the tweet had a point, Ateneans should uphold the Ignatian values and be vocal when it is due. But it could have been handled with a different and a more appropriate approach. As mentioned, it may not reflect ECA but in the eyes of the student body, it does. It was a sneer to the faces of the student leaders and organization moderators who had their respective reasons for not being able to be vocal. Yes, people are free to express their opinions but they are also free not to do so; it’s simply a frustrating paradox. Cracking the code to be socially vocal without dragging or belittling other student leaders who choose to remain silent for whatever reason may be tricky, but such is one of the challenges of a student council. Taking all of these into account, what’s the final verdict of the blue bird on trial?
