CHAPTER V

The Right to Association

Man by nature, is a social being. As a gregarious lot, the ordinary impulse to interact and form cliques and groups cannot be denied. It is therefore expected that our Constitution guarantee and promote every citizen right to association. The Constitution has the following provisions on the Right to Association, to wit
Article III, Section 4 No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances. Article III, Section 8 The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged.

According to Justice Isagani Cruz,1 the right of association is deemed embraced in the right to expression. This is due to the fact that associations are oftentimes used by its members to express opinions. It must be noted though that the right to form associations has a built-in limitation that it must not be for purposes contrary to law. To illustrate the concept, it is best to discuss the case of Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope Workers Union.2 Benjamin Victoriano, a member of the religious sect known as the Iglesia ni Cristo, had been in the employ of the Elizalde Rope Factory, Inc., 1958. As such employee, he was a member of the
1 2

Constitutional Law, 2000 ed., page 240. 59 SCRA 54.

101

102

The Right to Association

Elizalde Rope Workers Union, which had with the Company a collective bargaining agreement containing a closed shop provision, which reads as follows:
Membership in the Union shall be required as a condition of employment for all permanent employees workers covered by this Agreement.

On June 18, 1961, however, Republic Act No. 3350 was enacted, introducing an amendment to Paragraph (4) subsection (a) of Section 4 of Republic Act No. 875, as follows: x x x but such agreement shall not cover members of any religious sects which prohibit affiliation of their members in any such labor organization. Being a member of a religious sect that prohibits the affiliation of its members with any labor organization, Victoriano presented his resignation to appellant Union in 1962. Thereupon, the Union wrote a formal letter to the Company asking the latter to separate Victoriano from the service in view of the fact that he was resigning from the Union as a member. The company terminated the employment of Victoriano. The issue in this case was whether or not, the law, which exempted INC members from being union members valid. The Supreme Court echoed this pronouncement:
Appellant Unions contention that Republic Act No. 8350 prohibits and bans the members of such religious sects that forbid affiliation of their members with labor union or from joining labor unions appears nowhere in the wording of Republic Act No. 3350; neither can the same be deduced by necessary implication there from. It is not surprising, therefore, that appellant, having thus misread the Act, committed the error of contending that said Act is obnoxious to the constitutional provision on freedom of association. Both the Constitution and Republic Act No. 875 recognize freedom of association. Section 1 (6) of Article III of the Constitution of 1935, as well as Section 7 of Article IV of the constitution of 1973, provide that the right to form associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged. Section 3 of Republic Act No. 875 provides that employees shall have the right to self-organization and to form, join or assist labor organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of collective bargaining and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining and other mutual aid or protection. What the Constitution and the Industrial Peace Act recognize and guarantee is the right to form or join associations. Notwithstanding the different theories propounded by the different schools of jurisprudence regarding the nature and contents of a right, it can be safely said that whatever theory one subscribes to, a right

The Right to Association

103

comprehends at least two broad notions, namely: first, liberty or freedom, i.e., the absence of legal restraint, whereby an employee may act for himself without being prevented by law; and second, power, whereby an employee may, as he pleases, join or refrain from joining an association. It is, therefore, the employee who should decide for himself whether he should join or not an association; and should he choose to join, he himself makes up his mind as to which association he would join; and even after he has joined, he still retains the liberty and the power to leave and cancel his membership with said organization at any time. It is clear, therefore, that the right to join a union includes the right to abstain from joining any union. Inasmuch as what both the Constitution and the Industrial Peace Act have recognized, and guaranteed to the employee, is the right to join associations of his choice, it would be absurd to say that the law also imposes, in the same breath, upon the employee the duty to join associations. The law does not enjoin an employee to sign up with any association. The right to refrain from joining labor organizations recognized by Section 3 of the Industrial Peace Act is, however, limited. The legal protection granted to such right to refrain from joining is withdrawn by operation of law, where a labor union and an employer have agreed on a closed shop, by virtue of which the employer may employ only members of the collective bargaining union, and the employees must continue to be members of the union for the duration of the contract in order to keep their jobs. Thus Section 4 (a) (4) of the Industrial Peace Act, before its amendment of Republic Act No. 3350, provides that although it would be an unfair labor practice for an employer to discriminate in regard to hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment to encourage or discourage membership in any labor organization: the employer is, however, not precluded from making an agreement with a labor organization to require as a condition of employment membership therein, if such labor organization is the representative of the employees. By virtue, therefore, of a closed shop agreement, before the enactment of Republic Act No. 3350, if any person, regardless of his religious beliefs, wishes to be employed or to keep his employment he must become a member of the collective bargaining union. Hence, the right of said employee not to join the labor union is curtailed and withdrawn. To that all-embracing coverage of the closed shop arrangement, Republic Act No. 3350 introduced an exception, when it added to Section 4 (a) (4) of the Industrial Peace Act the following proviso: but such agreement shall not cover members of any religious sects which prohibit affiliation of their members in any such labor organization. Republic Act No. 3350 merely excludes ipso jure from the application and coverage of the closed shop agreement the employees belonging to any religious sects, which prohibit affiliation of their members with any labor organization. What the exception provides, therefore, is that members of said religious sects cannot be compelled or coerced to join labor unions even when said unions have closed shop agreements with the

104

The Right to Association

employers; that in spite of any closed shop agreement, members of said religious sects cannot be refused employment or dismissed from their jobs on the sole ground that they are not members of the collective bargaining union. It is clear, therefore, that the assailed Act, far from infringing the constitutional provision on freedom of association, upholds and reinforces it. It does not prohibit the members of said religious sects from affiliating with labor unions. It still leaves to said members the liberty and the power to affiliate, or not to affiliate, with labor unions. If, notwithstanding their religious beliefs, the members of said religious sects prefer to sign up with the labor union, they can do so. If in deference and sect to their religious faith, they refuse to sign up, they can do so; the law does not coerce them to join; neither does the law prohibit them from joining, and neither may the employer or labor union compel them to join. Republic Act No. 3350, therefore, does not violate the constitutional provision on freedom of association.

In People vs. Ferrer,3 the issue was whether or not the AntiSubversion Law which criminalized membership in the Communist Party of the Philippines impaired the citizens right to association. The High Court in this case ruled:
In the Philippines the character of the Communist Party has been the object of continuing scrutiny by this Court. In 1932 we found the Communist Party of the Philippines to be an illegal association. In 1969 we again found that the objective of the Party was the overthrow of the Philippine Government by armed struggle and to establish in the Philippines a communist form of government similar to that of Soviet Russia and Red China. More recently, in Lansang vs. Garcia, we noted the growth of the Communist Party of the Philippines and the organization of Communist fronts among youth organizations such the Kabataang Makabayan (KM) and the emergence of the New Peoples Army. After meticulously reviewing the evidence, we said: We entertain, therefore, no doubts about the existence of a sizeable group of men who have publicly risen in arms to overthrow the government and have thus been and still are engaged in rebellion against the Government of the Philippines. As already stated, the legislative declaration in section 2 of the Act that the Communist Party of the Philippines is an organized conspiracy for the overthrow of the Government is intended not to provide the basis for a legislative finding of guilt of the members of the Party but rather to justify the proscription spelled out in section 4. Freedom of expression and freedom of association are so fundamental that they are thought by some to occupy a preferred position in the hierarchy of constitutional values. Accordingly, any limitation on their exercise must be justified by the existence of a

48 SCRA 382.

The Right to Association

105

substantive evil. This is the reason why before enacting the statute in question Congress conducted careful investigations and then stated its findings in the preamble, thus: xxx xxx xxx x x x [T]he Communist Party of the Philippines although purportedly a political party, is in fact an organized conspiracy to overthrow the Government of the Republic of the Philippines not only by force and violence but also by deceit, subversion and other illegal means, for the purpose of establishing in the Philippines a totalitarian regime subject to alien domination and control; x x x [T]he continued existence and activities of the Communist Party of the Philippines constitutes a clear, present and grave danger to the security of the Philippines; x x x [I]n the face of the organized, systematic and persistent subversion, national in scope but international in direction, posed by the Communist Party of the Philippines and its activities, there is urgent need for special legislation to cope with this continuing menace to the freedom and security of the country. In truth, the constitutionality of the Act would be open to question if, instead of making these findings in enacting the statute, Congress omitted to do so.

The case of In Re: Atty. Marcial Edillon,4 is interesting and must be discussed. Edillon was a lawyer who passed the Bar Examinations, by reason of which, he was admitted as a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. As a member of the IBP, dues were collected which Edillon refused to pay. Hence, his name was stricken off the Roll of Attorneys. Questioning the action as an impairment of his right to association more particularly the right not to join the IBP, the Supreme Court has this to say:
The first objection posed by the respondent is that the Court is without power to compel him to become a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, hence, Section 1 of the Court Rule is unconstitutional for it impinges on his constitutional right of freedom to associate (and not to associate). Our answer is: To compel a lawyer to be a member of the Integrated Bar is not violative of his constitutional freedom to associate. Integration does not make a lawyer a member of any group of which he is not already a member. He became a member of the Bar when he passed the Bar examinations. All that integration actually does is to provide an official national organization for the well-defined but unorganized and incohesive group of which every lawyer is already a member.
4

84 SCRA 554.

106

The Right to Association

Bar integration does not compel the lawyer to associate with anyone. He is free to attend or not attend the meetings of his Integrated Bar Chapter or vote or refuse to vote in its elections as he chooses. The only compulsion to which he is subjected is the payment of annual dues. The Supreme Court, in order to further the States legitimate interest in elevating the quality of professional legal services, may require that the cost of improving the profession in this fashion be shared by the subjects and beneficiaries of the regulatory program the lawyers. Assuming that the questioned provision does in a sense compel a lawyer to be a member of the Integrated Bar, such compulsion is justified as an exercise of the police power of the state.

In Batas Pambansa Blg. 232, Students Right to Form Associations/Organizations, are expressed in the following sections
Section 9. Rights of Students in School. In addition to other rights, and subject to the limitations prescribed by law and regulations, students and pupils in all schools shall enjoy the following rights: xxx xxx xxx

7. The right to free expression of opinions and suggestions, and to effective channels of communication with appropriate academic and administrative bodies of the school or institution. 8. The right to form, establish, join and participate in organizations and societies recognized by the school to foster their intellectual, cultural, spiritual and physical growth and development, or to form, establish, join and maintain organizations and societies for purposes not contrary to law.

A cursory reading of the provisions gives us the idea that no school can prohibit the formation of associations and societies not contrary to law. Moreover, neither can the school compel its students to join associations or in most cases not to join them. This right is particularly of greater significance if associational objectives and activities are the preferred rights of individuals such as freedom of expression, right of assembly and petition, right to join political parties of their choice, and the free exercise of religious profession and worship, as the association itself enjoys the highest protection accorded to individuals.5 This is because association is an extension
Bernas, Fr. Joaquin G., Schools and the Right of Association Speech delivered before the Philippine Bar Association, March 20, 1991.
5

The Right to Association

107

of individual freedom. It is a method of making more effective, or giving greater depth and scope to, the individuals needs, aspirations, and liberties. Hence, as a general principle, the right of individuals to associate or to refrain from association ought to be protected to the same extent, and for the same reasons, as individual liberty is protected.6 However, there are certain situations when the right to association in a school environment can be curtailed. First, school rules and regulations may curtail the associational rights of students on campus only if the exercise presents the clear and present danger of a substantive evil which the school authorities have the right to prevent. In order for the school to take any action which restricts protected associational activities, the school bears the burden of proving that the school action serves a compelling, legitimate school interest (in particular, prevention of substantial disruption of educational activity) and that there is no other way of serving that interest which is less restrictive of students associational activities, and in no event can the activity be restricted because of the contents of the groups message.7 Second, if the association is formed for the purpose of asserting an unpreferred right, it may be curtailed if the rule prohibiting it promotes the schools assertion of its own preferred right. Thus, labor unions, to the extent that they are associations formed for the protection of property, have been found inferior to the asserted religious right not to join a union. This ruling can be applied mutatis mutandis to the right of students to form associations contrary to the religious beliefs and teachings of the school. Hence, in a Catholic school, student cannot assert their freedom of association to justify the organization of a group that is contrary to the precepts, teachings and rules of the Catholic Church. Even if the student intends to form their own religious group or association, the same may not be allowed by the Catholic school. In this latter case, although the students are not only organizing in accordance with their freedom of association but also assertion of their right to religion, these freedoms cannot
Ibid. Weekstein, Paul; School Discipline and Student Right: An Advocate Manual, 1982 Revised Ed., page 82.
7 6

108

The Right to Association

justify the existence in the campus of their group for the students are deemed to have waived their rights to the same when they decided to enroll in a school fully aware of the Catholic character thereof and therefore impliedly agreed to be bound by the Catholic schools rules and regulations pertaining to its own Catholic beliefs. Third, the school may prohibit associations harmful to the legitimate interests of the school and its students from operating and penalize students who persist in such memberships. Fourth, when the purpose of the organization is contrary to law or to the mission-vision statement of the school. Furthermore, while it is correct to say that every student can compel the school to recognize his/her right to association, it is incorrect to say that the right to association includes the right to compel the school for recognition of a student organization. Thus, the concept of recognition of a student association must be taken up.

Recognized Student Associations

Attention is drawn again to Section 9(8) of BP 232
In addition to other rights x x x students and pupils in all schools shall enjoy: xxx xxx xxx

8. The right to form, establish, join and participate in organizations and societies RECOGNIZED by the school to foster their intellectual, cultural, spiritual and physical growth and development, or to form, establish, join and maintain organizations and societies for purposes not contrary to law.

Here the word organization is qualified by the word recognized. Recognition in this case implies the student organizations full compliance with school rules and regulations. Recognition carries the privileges of using the school name and the enjoyment of school facilities. As such, schools can, and often do, require that student organizations, register as a condition of obtaining benefits which are not otherwise available to students individually or collectively school funds, office space, and regular meeting space. Thus, by registering, a group would not only have the same rights as other students to

The Right to Association

109

meet at an available, non-disruptive time and place. It would also be assured of the availability of such place on a regular basis.8 Moreover, as a recognized student organization, its activities, programs and projects are legally considered as officially sanctioned by the school administration and hence, are official or recognized school functions and/or activities. In effect, the school administration shall have special parental authority and responsibility and loco parentis over the minor students and the students of majority age respectively, who shall be involved in the said extra-curricular occasions.9 Finally, CHED Memorandum Order No. 97 requires all heads of private Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to submit to the CHED a list of all fraternities/sororities and/or student organizations officially registered with their respective institutions and the corresponding members thereof. If the institutions have not extended official recognition to these organizations but the school heads do know of their illegal existence in their institutions, a similar list must also be submitted.

Fraternities and Sororities in Schools

The most frequently asked question on this topic is whether school administrators can prevent students from joining fraternities and sororities. In several cases, US courts have consistently ruled that a school may forbid fraternities because (1) they subvert the legitimate goals of the school and (2) students are constrained to submit to school regulations which promote discipline and school objectives. It cannot be argued that such a ban unconstitutionally interferes with the personal rights of students, their freedom of association, and their freedom of assembly. Fr. Bernas, commenting on this has said: (A student) cannot simply say, Keep me because I have the guaranteed right to form an association. He has the guaranteed right to associate with persons of like mind, but he cannot force himself on others who do not accept his values, especially if they are perverted ones.

Sarmiento, Ulpiano III, Education Law and the Private Schools 2002 ed., page 506. 9 Ibid.

110

The Right to Association

Fraternities and sororities may also be prohibited on the ground that their organizational purposes are contrary to law. Fr. Bernas expounds on which laws they subvert
x x x let me just single out provisions of the Constitutions because schools are expected to inculcate in students respect for the Constitution. I single them out to place them side by side with the popular and much publicized notion of brutal and sometimes academically disruptive fraternity activities. We could start with the Preamble which proclaims love. Make love, not war, in other words. This is incompatible with associations that foster animosity. The Preamble also proclaims the Filipino desire to build a just and humane society and not a society that brutalizes. The Declaration of Principles states that we must value the dignity of every human person and (guarantee) full respect for human rights. (Section 11), that the State must promote and protect (the) physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well being of the youth (Section 13), and in giving priority to education the State must promote total human liberation and development. (Section 17). The bill of Rights prohibits torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate free will (Section 12(2) and the employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment. Section 19 (2), Article XIII contains a whole litany of provisions on promoting respects for human rights. Article XIV contains commands for schools to foster love of humanity (and) respect for human rights. (Section 3(2). When you consider all these, the school has every right to exclude from its premises any student who supports by overt acts any organizations or society, whether open or secret, which requires or tolerates acts of violence or affronts to personal dignity in any form on any person as part of initiation rites or of other organization or society activities.

It must be noted that if the school authorities adopt a policy of total ban on campus fraternities and sororities because they are organized for purposes contrary to law, the school will have to prove that the organization in question undermines the schools legitimate goals and the welfare of its students. Again, Fr. Bernas says
The school must also show that the student joined the organization or remains a member of the organization fully knowing the harmful character of the organization, x x x If schools have not been able to act firmly and effectively in ridding themselves of harmful associations, it is for the most part

The Right to Association

111

because of the difficulty in procuring evidence that can stand judicial scrutiny. Once a student enrolls, you need evidence to disenroll him.

DECS/CHED Orders on Recognition of Student Associations/Organizations/Fraternities and/or Sororities

Since students not only constitute an essential sector of the Education Community, but at the same time are citizens at the threshold of professional and community leadership, it is desirable and necessary to recognize, confirm, provide for, and support the right of students to form and operate, for their civic development welfare and other purposes not contrary to law, student organizations in colleges and universities, and other tertiary (or post-secondary) educational institutions.10 Students in higher educational institutions desiring to establish, join, or participate in student organizations and publications on campus shall do so as a right, subject only to such reasonable regulations as exist in the various institutions or as they may promulgate, in return for recognition by affiliation with, and/or support from the respective institutions. It is understood that organizations that exist or operate outside of the system of school recognition shall continue to be governed by law.11 All colleges, universities, and other tertiary educational institutions are enjoined to promulgate and implement reasonable regulations to govern the establishment and operation of all student or campus organizations for their students enrolled in post-secondary courses. Such regulations shall require that the student or campus organizations shall be established and operated for lawful purposes, and shall, in the light of the circumstances prevailing in the various institutions, provide for. a. the procedure and standards for recognition or authorization of organizations, usually through the institutions approval of a constitution or charter;

10 11

MECS Order No. 57 s. 1981, November 4, 1981. Ibid.

112

The Right to Association

b. the mode of selection and qualifications of officers of the organizations; c. the funding of organizations and their operations, and the collection, disbursement, accounting and auditing of funds; d. the system of disciplinary proceedings governing violation of regulations, in order to ensure due process; and e. such other regulations pertinent hereto.12 The following are guidelines from the DepEd and the CHED that colleges and universities may adopt as their rules in the supervision and regulation of the establishment and operation of student associations. It must be pointed out here, that the DepEd strictly prohibits the organization of fraternities and sororities at the elementary and secondary levels, both public and private.

Student Interest Groups

To further discover and nurture the students talents and potentials for total integrated development, schools are encouraged to organize and support interest groups such as debating clubs, dramatic and theater art clubs, reading, science and math-clubs, music related clubs, dance troupes and others. Such organizations or groups constitute one way of implementing the constitutional provisions of promoting desirable cultural values and the inculcation among citizens of an appreciation for the finer things of life.

Student Councils/Governments
In regard to the organization or establishment of student councils in the college level, school administrators shall respect the right of student leaders to determine their policies and programs on student activities, in accordance with the provisions of their recognized constitutions or charters. Members of student councils must be elected in annual popular elections.

12

Ibid.

The Right to Association

113

The CHED encourages school administrators to allow their student councils active participation in the determination of school policies which directly affect students. Such participation, however, should not impair the authority vested by law and CHED regulations in any educational institution. Each institution shall make available to the student council, from fees collected for the purpose or from other appropriate funds, financing for the programs of activities of the council, in accordance with an income and expenditures budget for the semester or school year, as the case may be. Amendments to institution regulations governing student councils and student organizations shall be effected with the participation of a representative of the council, or of the organization concerned, subject to the same condition that it does not impair the rights and authority of the institution as provided by law, (CHED) rules and regulations.13 In secondary schools, the DepEd recognizes student governments as vehicle for developing leadership skills among the students and fosters student empowerment, promotes harmonious relationships between student bodies and school administration and safeguards students general welfare.14 In view thereof, DepEd finds it necessary to employ an organizational mechanism for student government that shall focus on the following objectives: a. To sustain student government programs enhancing organizational management; directed at

b. To implement a systematized transition or turning over of duties and responsibilities from one batch of officers to another; c. To conduct a strategic planning of student activities and leadership training for student officers; and d. To synchronize a national high school student government election period in order to provide a general trend of major student activities throughout the calendar year.

13 14

MEC Order No. 62, s. 1981. DECS Order No. 37, s.2001; 2 August 2001.

114

The Right to Association

The following shall guide the conduct of school elections: a. From February to May of every school year, outgoing and incoming officers shall work together to provide a transition phase of leadership; b. Only freshmen, sophomore and junior students of the present year can qualify to run as candidates for the February election; incoming freshmen shall elect in the last week of June their batch representative/s, the number of which shall depend on the enrollment as determined by the school head. Example: 200-300 enrollees 301-400 enrollees 401-500 enrollees 501-enrollees = = = = 1 representative 2 representatives 3 representatives 4 representatives

c. An adequate filing, screening and campaign period of two weeks must be provided to all candidates in order to ensure the observance of democratic processes; d. Campus-wide Presidential and vice Presidential Public Debates are encouraged to underscore the candidates platforms.15 Head teachers of Social Studies Department Coordinators are automatically designated as advisers for the Student Government in the high school level, with supervision from School Principals and Division/Regional Social Studies Supervisors.

Fraternities/Sororities16
The school head shall have the authority to regulate the establishment and operation of student organizations (i.e. fraternities and/or sororities), upon compliance of the requirements prescribed by
15 16

Ibid. DECS Order No. 63, s. 1976.

The Right to Association

115

DECS Order No. 63, s. 1976; subject, however, to the reasonable supervisory and regulatory authority of the CHED over educational institutions, and to revoke or cause the revocation of the authority to operate granted to a student organization for cause and upon the recommendation of the school head. It shall be the responsibility of the school head to supervise and regulate the operations as well as activities of all duly recognized student organizations, for the purpose of directing as well as maximizing the utilization of their resources and efforts toward the attainment of their avowed and approved objectives. However, the authority herein indicated may be delegated to the Dean of Students of the school. Furthermore, the school head must exercise utmost care in allowing the use of school facilities, particularly by outside groups for any purpose, especially the use of facilities that are portable; submit monthly reports on the actual security situation in his/her school to the CHED. The authority to operate, or recognition of the student organization, as provided for above, shall be a pre-condition for its operation in the school. A corresponding certificate of recognition shall be issued to each student organization upon full compliance with the requirement herein prescribed. However, such certificate shall be effective for one school year only and may be renewed each time for a similar period, and that the certificate may be revoked or cancelled for violations of school rules and regulations. Each student organization shall have a constitution and by-laws which shall be approved, upon recommendation of the Dean of Students, by the school head. No such student organization shall be allowed to function in a school without prior approval as required. Any group of fifteen (15) students of a school may apply to the Dean of Students to organize and operate fraternity and/or sorority or other similar student organizations. For the specific purpose of accreditation of such organizations, the total membership should not be less than fifty (50) students at the time of the issuance of its certificate of recognition, and that the membership of such organizations shall be limited to bona fide students of the school. The Dean of Students shall forward such application, with his comment and recommendation, to the school head for his/her admission.

116

The Right to Association

Each student organization shall be assigned a faculty adviser, within five (5) days after the approval of the constitution and by-laws. The faculty adviser shall be appointed by the school head, upon recommendation of the Dean of Students. The faculty adviser of every student organization shall be employed on full-time status with the school at the time of his/her appointment and shall be under the supervision of the Dean of Students. The officers of each student organization, as provided for in its approved by-laws, shall be elected by the members thereof. Every election of officers of the organization shall be under the supervision of, and subject to regulation by, the assigned faculty adviser. Any candidate for election, appointment or designation to any position of the organization shall submit to the faculty adviser a clearance issued by the school head. Every accredited or recognized student organization shall be registered with the Office of the Dean of Students of the school. For this purpose, the following shall be invariably required: a. A copy of the approved constitution and by-laws of the organization, signed by the initial set of officers and members of the organization; b. A list of the initial set of officers and members of the organization, including an indication of their respective positions, date of assumption to office, and their respective specimen signatures; and c. Such other documents as may be required under the school rules and regulations. The Dean of Students shall maintain or cause the maintenance of an up-to-date records of each student organization. Each accredited student organization shall renew its authority to operate within thirty (30) days after the start of the regular classes of each school year. The failure of the organization to secure a renewal of its authority to operate as provided herein shall be considered a sufficient cause for the cancellation of the name of the organization from the Registry Book of Student Organizations of the school.

The Right to Association

117

Preventive Measures Against Violence and Sanctions on Fraternities and Other School Organizations17
In order to have an atmosphere of brotherhood among fraternities and other student organizations, all educational institutions of higher learning are encouraged to promote programs and projects that will produce responsible students and will instill the value of human life for a productive future. The following preventive measures are therefore suggested: a. Monthly meetings of head so fraternities in a Council of Equals. b. Regular gatherings of fraternity members through sports, cultural events and joint community projects where there are cross memberships. c. Reporting of potential conflicts to the head of the fraternity as a standard procedure. The head in turn will patch it up with his/her counterpart. d. Internal policing by fraternities themselves. e. Long-term re-orientation of role of fraternity to move away from macho conflicts into a society of brotherhood that stresses studies, productivity, creativity, and sense of community and nationhood. f. More interaction between the School Administration and the fraternities.

g. Patents informed about the participation of their children in fraternities. h. Use of fraternity alumni members to counsel resident members. i. Fraternities be obliged to have an ethical code in their organizational vision and objectives which should include a commitment to solve problems in a peaceful and friendly way.

In order to deter violence among Fraternities the following sanctions shall be strictly carried out.

17

CHED Order No. 4, s. 1995.

118

The Right to Association

a. Automatic expulsion of any fraternity member for: i. starting or taking the offensive action that clearly provokes violence;

ii. carrying of knives, sticks, pipes, guns and other deadly weapons in schools; extortion. b. Sixty (60) days suspension of all officers of a fraternity found guilty of starting action that will provoke violence. c. Suspension of guilty fraternity for one year for the first offense and permanent ban for the next offense.

The Anti-Hazing Law

The topic on student organizations will not be complete without a thorough discussion of Republic Act No. 8049 or An Act Regulating Hazing and Other Forms of Initiation Rites in Fraternities, Sororities, and Other Organizations and Providing Penalties Therefore. This is popularly known as the Anti-Hazing Law of 1995. First of all, the concept of hazing must be laid out. Section 1 of RA No. 8049 gives us the definition of hazing as well as the coverage of the term organization.
Hazing, as used in this Act, is an initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority or organization by placing the recruit, neophyte or applicant in some embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing him to do menial, silly, foolish and other similar tasks or activities or otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological suffering or injury. The term organization shall include any club of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National Police, Philippine Military academy, or officer and cadet corps of the Citizens Military Training and Citizens Army Training. The physical, mental and psychological testing and training procedure and practices to determine and enhance the physical, mental and psychological fitness of prospective regular members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police as approved by the Secretary of National Defense and the National Police Commission duly recommended by the Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Director General of the Philippine National Police shall not be considered as hazing for the purposes of this Act.

The Right to Association

119

A perusal of the provision would lead to surmise that as a general rule, the concept of hazing as a practice and method of entry to any organization has long been held as an accepted fact. However, the law itself aims to minimize the ill effects of the practice by regulating the action. As held in Vedana vs. Valencia,18 the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the law, to wit:
In the community of nations, there was a time when discrimination was institutionalized through the legalization of now prohibited practices. Indeed, even within this century, persons were discriminated against merely because of gender, creed or the color of their skin, to the extent that the validity of human beings being treated as mere chattel was judicially upheld in other jurisdictions. But in humanitys march towards a more refined sense of civilization, the law has stepped in and seen it fit to condemn this type of conduct for, at bottom, history reveals that the moving force of civilization has been to realize and secure a more humane existence. Ultimately, this is what humanity as a whole seeks to attain as we strive for a better quality of life or higher standard of living. Thus, in our nations very recent history, the people have spoken, through Congress, to deem conduct constitutive of sexual harassment or hazing, acts previously considered harmless by custom, as criminal.

In the case of in Re: Al Argosino,19 the Supreme Court discussed the act of hazing and its detrimental effect on the moral trait of the actor. To wit:
Mr. Argosinos participation in the deplorable hazing activities certainly fell far short of the required standard of good moral character. The deliberate (rather than merely accidental or inadvertent) infliction of severe physical injuries which proximately led to the death of the unfortunate Raul Camaligan, certainly indicated serious character flaws on the part of those who inflicted such injuries. Mr. Argosino and his co-accused had failed to discharge their moral duty to protect the life and well-being of a neophyte who had, by seeking admission to the fraternity involved, reposed trust and confidence in all of them that, at the very least, he would not be beaten and kicked to death like a useless stray dog. Thus, participation in the prolonged and mindless physical beatings inflicted upon Raul Camaligan constituted evident rejection of that moral duty and was totally irresponsible behavior, which makes impossible a finding that the participant was then possessed of good moral character.
18 19

Administrative Matter No. RTJ-96-1351, September 3, 1998. Bar Matter No. 712, July 13, 1995.

120

The Right to Association

Hazing: When Lawful

It is essential to bear in mind that not all acts of hazing are to be considered criminal. The provisions of RA No. 8049 gives us certain conditions by which the act of hazing can be considered a legitimate exercise. The pertinent provisions are the following:
SEC. 2. No hazing or initiation rites in any form or manner by a fraternity, sorority or organization shall be allowed without prior written notice to the school authorities or head of organization seven (7) days before the conduct of such initiation. The written notice shall indicate the period of the initiation activities which shall not exceed three (3) days, shall include the names of those to be subjected to such activities, and shall further contain an undertaking that no physical violence be employed by anybody during such initiation rites. SEC. 3. The head of the school or organization or their representatives must assign at least two (2) representatives of the school or organization, as the case may be, to be present during the initiation. It is the duty of such representative to see to it that no physical harm of any kind shall be inflicted upon a recruit, neophyte or applicant.

The law is clear in providing that when a fraternity or sorority would undertake initiation rites, it must conform to certain guidelines. The first requirement is that written notice shall be given to the school authorities seven (7) days before the conduct of the initiation rites and must include the names of those subjected to the initiation and the period thereof, which shall not exceed three (3) days. The second requirement is that the school activities must send at least two (2) representatives to the initiation rites to see to it that no physical violence is inflicted. The last and most important requirement is that during the initiation rites, there must be no physical violence involved. Considering the mandate of the law, a legal issue is raised: Whether or not school administrators may be held liable for prohibited acts of hazing committed by the students, if they (the schools) refused or failed to assign representatives during the initiation as required by law. School authorities argue that even if a written notice from the student fraternity is sent to them, they would not attend to such activity, for fraternities in their schools are not extended recognition

The Right to Association

121

by administrations. As such, no fraternity activity shall be officially sanctioned. Schools reason that if they send representatives as required by the law, the same may be construed as an implied recognition of the association as a school organization and the activity officially sanctioned. The schools therefore contend that as long as they do not participate in the initiations, they cannot be held liable for the acts of the students. We do not agree. RA 8049 is clear. The obligation to send school representatives x x x to see to it that no physical harm of any kind x x x is inflicted upon a recruit, applies to all forms of student associations, recognized or unrecognized. For the law does not make the distinction for the purpose of applying the rule. Hence, as long as the fraternity has sent the written notice to the school authorities informing the latter of the intention to hold initiation rites, the institution must assign at least two (2) representatives to attend the ceremonies. If the school neglected to send the representatives as require, then the institution shall be held liable, if physical harm is used in the hazing. The absence of the representatives is a failure on the part of the school x x x to take any action to prevent x x x the physical harm from occurring.

Criminal Hazing
The crux of RA No. 8049 is the provision which enumerate the criminal acts covered by the law. To wit:
SEC. 4. If the person subjected to hazing or other forms of initiation rites suffers any physical injury or dies as a result thereof, the officers and members of the fraternity, sorority or organization who actually participated in the infliction of physical harm shall be liable as principals. The person or persons who participated in the hazing shall suffer: 1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment) if death, rape, sodomy or mutilation results there from. 2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period (17 years, 4 months and 1 day to 20 years) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall become insane, imbecile, impotent or blind. 3. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period (14 years, 8 months and one day to 17 years and 4 months) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to

122

The Right to Association

smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such member shall have become incapacitated for the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged. 4. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its minimum period (12 years and one day to 14 years and 8 months) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall become deformed or shall have lost any other part of his body, or shall have lost the use thereof, or shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance on the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged for a period of more than ninety (90) days. 5. The penalty of prison mayor in its maximum period (10 years and one day to 12 years) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance on the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged for a period of more than thirty (30) days. 6. The penalty of prison mayor in its medium period (8 years and one day to 10 years) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance on the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged for a period of ten (10) days or more, or that the injury sustained shall require medical assistance for the same period. 7. The penalty of prison mayor in its minimum period (6 years and one day to 8 years) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance on the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged from one (1) to nine (9) days, or that the injury sustained shall require medical assistance for the same period. 8. The penalty of prison correccional in its maximum period (4 years, 2 months and one day to 6 years) if in consequence of the hazing the victim sustained physical injuries which do not prevent him from engaging in his habitual activity or work nor require medical attendance. The responsible officials of the school or lf the police, military or citizens army training organization, may impose the appropriate administrative sanctions on the persons charged under this provision even before their conviction. The maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed in any of the following instances: (a) when the recruitment is accompanied by force, violence, threat, intimidation or deceit on the person of the recruit who refuses to join;

The Right to Association

123

(b) when the recruit, neophyte or applicant initially consents to join but upon learning that hazing will be committed on his person, is prevented from quitting; (c) when the recruit, neophyte or applicant having undergone hazing is prevented from reporting the unlawful act to his parents or guardians, to the proper school authorities, or to the police authorities, through force, violence, threat or intimidation; (d) when the hazing is committed outside of the school or institution; or (e) when the victim is below twelve (12) years of age at the time of the hazing. The owner of the place where hazing is conducted shall be liable as an accomplice, when he has actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers or members of the fraternity, group, or organization, the parents shall be held liable as principals when they have actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring. The school authorities including faculty members who consent to the hazing or who have actual knowledge thereof, but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring shall be punished as accomplices for the acts of hazing committed by the perpetrators. The officers, former officers, or alumni of the organization, group, fraternity or sorority who actually planned the hazing although not present when the acts constituting the hazing were committed shall be liable as principals. A fraternity or sororitys adviser who is present when the acts constituting the hazing were committed and failed to take action to prevent the same from occurring shall be liable as principal. The presence of any person during the hazing is prima facie evidence of participation therein as principal unless he prevented the commission of the acts punishable herein. Any person charged under this provision shall not be entitled to the mitigating circumstance that there was no intention to commit so grave a wrong. This section shall apply to the president, manager, director or other responsible officer of a corporation engaged in hazing as a requirement for employment in the manner provided herein.

In order to understand the provision, it is necessary to separate the individual liabilities of the persons involved. As a rule, the act of hazing is criminal when as a consequence the person being initiated suffers physical injury or dies. First of all, the officers and members

124

The Right to Association

who actually participated in the infliction of the physical harm shall be liable as principals. It is not material who inflicted the deadly blow. Every person who took part in the hazing no matter how minimal his or her participation maybe, is equally liable. They are punished according to the gravity of the injuries or to the fact of death. The gravest penalty is life imprisonment if death, rape, sodomy or mutilation results. Another person held liable as a principal are the parents whose home was used in the initiation where the hazing took place. In order to be liable, the parents must actually know that hazing was being conducted in their premises and failed to make any move to stop or prevent its occurrence. In the same breath, if the owner of the place is not a parent and he knows that hazing is taking place but fails to take any action to prevent it, he shall be liable as an accomplice. The officers, former officers, or alumni of the organization, group, fraternity or sorority who took part in the planning of the activity shall also be liable as principals even if they were not present in the initiation rites. Furthermore, the fraternity or sorority adviser shall also be liable as principal if he or she is present when the acts of hazing were committed and failed to take action to prevent it. It is also to stress that mere presence during the initiation rights creates a presumption that such person is liable as a principal unless he can prove that he prevented the hazing. Lastly, the school authorities including faculty members who consent to the hazing or knows of its happening, but failed to take any move to prevent it from occurring shall be punished as accomplices.

Regulations on Student Assemblies

A. Authorization for Student Assemblies
Prior written approval of school authorities in the form of a permit shall be necessary before any student assembly is held or announced. A student organization, defined as an organization of students formed and recognized pursuant to DECS Orders Nos. 57 and 62, s. 1981, may sponsor a student assembly and apply for a permit to hold the same. The application for a permit shall be submitted by the duly authorized officer of the sponsoring

The Right to Association

125

organization. The application shall be in writing and shall include the names of the leaders or organizers, the purposes of the student assembly, the date, the time and duration thereof, the place or area within the school where the activity shall be held, estimated number of participants, and the names of invited speakers, if any. The application for a permit shall be filed with the Office of Student Affairs or any other office designated for the purpose within a reasonable time prior to the proposed student activity which shall not be less than five (5) working days prior to the activity. The official of the school responsible for the processing of the permit must act within three (3) days upon receipt of the application and the applicant of the permit must be informed accordingly. In passing upon the application for a permit, the school official concerned shall consider all factors and circumstances which may affect the holding of a peaceful assembly to the prejudice of the normal academic activities. The school official concerned shall also consider whether the student activity would pose danger to life or property within school premises. If the application for a permit is denied, the school official shall inform the applicant of the reason/s for the denial thereof. An appeal from the decision may be taken to the president or head of the school, college or university or, in his absence, to the next ranking official of the school, college or university.

B. Conduct of Student Assemblies

It shall be the responsibility and the duty of the leaders or organizers of the student assembly to adopt all measures and to take all steps necessary to ensure a peaceful student assembly. These shall include but shall not be limited to the following: a. To police the ranks of the participants in order to ensure that the student assembly is conducted peacefully; b. To coordinate with the school officials in order to ensure that the student assembly is conducted peacefully; c. To ensure that no person in the student assembly molests, intimidates or threatens any other person or interferes in the exercise by others of their rights;

126

The Right to Association

d. To see to it that the student assembly shall end on the time stated in the permit. e. To see to it that the gates or any other entrance of the school is not blocked so as to permit the free entry and exit of students, faculty, non-academic personnel and the public; and f. To see to it that no educational functions of the school are in any way disturbed, distracted or interrupted. It is understood that all student assemblies and activities shall be conducted within the bounds of law, rules and regulations, including the laws on libel and sedition. ***