Imposing monetary fines is nothing new to the student body of Visayas State University (VSU). It's often framed as a call to responsibility—a push to engage in mandatory activities among students. But what’s happening now feels nothing like governance, instead it shows how a student organization resorts to strong-arming students just to get its way. These excessive penalties don’t just undermine the Student Election Board’s (SEB) integrity—they cheapen the very idea of student democracy.
SEB is the sole authorized body responsible for overseeing all student elections, plebiscites, referendums, recalls, and other matters that require the approval of the studentry. As the University Supreme Student Council (USSC) and Faculty Supreme Student Council (FSSC) elections tipped off, the Board Resolution No. 5 series of 2025 issued by the SEB increased the monetary fine by threefolds from 50 pesos to 150 pesos if the required majority or quorum is not met.
This increase was labeled as an agreed initiative and advised by the SSC Presidents to improve overall voting turnout and students’ participation. However, the imposition of a 150-peso fine for non-participation in a university-wide election seems unreasonable and casts doubt on whether these student leaders are genuinely acting in the best interest of those they represent.
Given our recurring reliance on the same strategies for student engagement, why do we continue to default to ineffective methods rather than exploring student-centered approaches?
This board resolution will increase the voting turnout compared to the previous elections, but this will never equate to an increase to the political participation and engagement of students in the university. Other than that, this anti-poor policy slapped right in front of us is punitive and undemocratic, and ruins the sanctity of elections in general.
Penalizing students by not exercising their right to suffrage is not democracy, its coercion. Varied preferences may affect their way of choosing candidates because their ideal candidates may be neither of the choices, and that’s valid. Democracy is having a choice, and that includes the right to say ‘no’.
The same tactic goes on: Article 15 Section 2 of the SEB code was disregarded through punching in a last-minute board resolution—somehow amending an article about monetary fines. This has happened before, during a general assembly for the plebiscite for the University Supreme Student Council Federation (USSCF) constitutional amendments, which stands as a testament that the very essence and face of democracy is getting murdered right in front of our faces through forced students’ engagement.
This is an outright betrayal of the public trust vested upon our officers who ought to serve as amplifiers of the student body’s numerous but disconcerted voices. It is clear that the SEB’s motives are misaligned with their duty to hold free and fair elections, hence, we call the studentry to stand against this flagrant violation of our rights, not just as students but as citizens of a democratic country.
We call on the attention of SEB to take accountability and to call for a failure of election as well as submit themselves to an intensive investigation into these clearly undemocratic practices. For if we let these punitive actions fester within the walls of our university, what more within the walls of our national offices.