THESE two words are probably the most abused words these days, preferred by “wokes” who just woke up and the usual suspects desperately trying to be trendy without really knowing what academic and press freedom mean. All they have are a perverted and biased sense of these two words feed by perverted and biased people who twist these words to suite their ulterior motives.
The world is now full of these so-called wokes while in the Philippines we have these “wokes” who never woke up from their more than 30-year stupor. They still shout the same obsolete slogans, espouse an equally obsolete ideology and blame Ferdinand Marcos for almost everything when the man has been dead and buried for 30 years.
Let’s start with press freedom. In the Philippine setting, “assault on press freedom” and “death of democracy” are the favorite words uttered, probably shouted, by Maria Ressa and her Rappletes while holding a press conference covered just about by all the media outlets national and international. Of course at the end of the press conference they all go back to their offices and print or broadcast the story without anybody arrested.
The government does not control or censor media and curtail press freedom. What it does is provide enough democratic space for all to express themselves subject to the existing libel laws. We are, after all, a government of laws.
There is no absolute press freedom. What you hear, see and read on the news is what the owners/publishers of these media outlets i.e. newspapers, radio and television want to come out and not what the reporters and journalists want to express. Censorship begins and ends in the newsroom, not in Malacañang.
That is the reality in actual media practice long accepted by the journalists as part and parcel of their profession. Meanwhile, the “wokes” and trendy social climbers keep on screaming “assault on press freedom” till they’re parched and just go back to Starbucks for their Frappuccino fix.
And we segue to academic freedom, also an abused word, always name-dropped by pseudo intellectuals and pseudo communists without even knowing what it really means.
For those lost in translation: Academic freedom, — the freedom of teachers and students to teach, study, and pursue knowledge and research without unreasonable interference or restriction from law, institutional regulations, or public pressure. Its basic elements include the freedom of teachers to inquire into any subject that evokes their intellectual concern; to present their findings to their students, colleagues, and others; to publish their data and conclusions without control or censorship; and to teach in the manner they consider professionally appropriate. For students, the basic elements include the freedom to study subjects that concern them and to form conclusions for themselves and express their opinions.
One of the hottest topics now on mainstream and social media is this (excerpts from the press statement of the Office of the Solicitor General):
On Jan. 15, 2021, Secretary Delfin N. Lorenzana sent a letter to UP President Danilo L. Concepcion terminating/abrogating the June 30, 1989 Agreement between the University of the Philippines and the Department of National Defense.
The 1989 Agreement requires that prior notice be given by the AFP, Philippine Constabulary, or the CAFGU intending to conduct military or police operations in any of the UP campuses, to the University President, the Chancellor of the constituent university, or the Dean of the regional unit concerned, or their respective officers-in-charge in the event of their absence, when the situation so warrants.
With that, the usual suspects, “wokes” and “snowflakes”, including the pseudo intellectuals and pseudo communists, started their whining and childish tantrums, all screaming “assault on academic freedom”.
Excerpts from statement of the Office of the Solicitor General:
Given the nature of what academic freedom entails, it is clear that the termination/abrogation of the 1989 agreement will, in no way, curtail such freedom as UP will still be able to execute these rights even in the absence of such agreement – UP is still free to choose who may teach, what is taught, how such lessons are taught in class, as well as who may be admitted to such a prestigious institution.
Such prior notice unnecessarily hinders law enforcement officers by requiring them to send notice before serving any warrant – not to mention that any delay in the service of such warrants may spell the escape of the subject.
Furthermore, requiring prior notice as the agreement dictates violates the rules of court since the rules do not require that prior notice be given to the UP President, Chancellor, or Dean of the unit concerned before a warrant may validly be implemented.
The additional step as embodied in the agreement also violates the Equal Protection Clause since it requires law enforcement officers’ special steps to comply with before they can validly implement a warrant.
Further still, the agreement also requires an additional step for law enforcement to comply with before a custodial investigation may be conducted against any UP student, faculty, or employee – a clear hindrance to law enforcement.
The freedom to peaceably assemble and protest also remains intact even if the agreement has been terminated/abrogated as such right to peaceably assemble and protest stems from the Constitution, not the agreement. Peaceful protests and assemblies can still be held even in the absence of such agreement.
So if UP is not a haven for the wannabe and pseudo communists, what is it then? A haven for the alugbate?
Finally, taxpayers should be given a choice when paying taxes if they will allow part of their taxes be used to fund UP or not./PN
