It’s a defining feature of most virtual engagements and interactions—the way we take to social media a spectrum of our sentiments, whether pleasant or not, about particular issues that light a fire under our interests.
Such was the case when El Consejo Atenista (ECA), the supreme student government of Ateneo de Zamboanga University, received varied remarks and comments from the student body after they released respective resolutions declining the appointments of two certain candidates last June 16.
Varying from criticisms to displays of online tar-and-featherings, the student body pointed out that the reasons for coming up with the decision were not explicitly written in ECA’s first published resolution about the matter. It then whisked a blend of vagueness and confusion that further heightened the flak towards ECA, especially because it’s expected of them to cultivate a culture of transparency among those that they’re governing.
Tremendous thought and planning always hold the underpinnings of every resolve being made, and few determinations are crafted on a whim. While there’s always a purpose, a value, or a goal behind every major decision, there’s also a “why” behind each of it, and imparting that in a manner that puts many traces of ambiguity on view can cause more trouble than any communication oversight. Thus three days after posting the initial resolutions on the decline of appointments, ECA released another resolution now clarifying the whys and wherefores of the issue.
In their statement, they explicated their purpose of publishing the resolutions, stating that they were only mandated to do so, and took upon themselves their failure to elaborate the grounds that made them give the two candidates’ appointments a brush-off.
“The Board of College Governors would like to inform the student body that the sole purpose of publishing the resolutions on our Facebook page is for transparency. Hence, there is no way that the Board wants to taint anyone’s reputation nor make baseless decisions as we are called upon to be the voices and decision-making body of our constituents,” they wrote. “We acknowledge the different perspectives and sentiments of everyone who might have felt wronged by the resolutions.”
Catering to the appeal beckoned by the student body in a way that ECA deemed to be befitting might have taken the ire off their edge. In our introspective ponders though, we ask, would’ve ECA crafted better resolutions if they weren’t called out?
In an exclusive rundown interview with Joaquin Gonzales, ECA Vice-President, he expressed that “the Board of College Governors are [sic] composed of Neophyte members. We are not perfect nor do we pretend to be, we believe that leadership is a continuous process and that we should always have a growth mindset whilst being a student-leader.” He also reiterated that the BOCG plans in careful detail every decision they make, and that they’re not, in any way, riling against the candidates.
“ECA is always committed to improving itself and its services for the student body. Whether the resolution was called out or not, our commitment to further the improvement of our services remains a priority,” he added.
ECA’s full statement can be accessed and read here.
