You are on page 1of 99

Operation REFOCUS

University Student Government De La Salle University AY 2013-2014

Content Overview
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Overview of Operation REFOCUS Main Thrusts of Operation REFOCUS History of the USG Operation Revamp USG in Perspective Rationale of Operation REFOCUS Structures of the USG Proposed Amendments in the USG Constitution Comparison of Current and Proposed Structures in the Executive Branch 10. Summary of Operation REFOCUS

Part 1 Overview of Operation REFOCUS

PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
• Operation REFOCUS is a program of the USG, initiated by the USG-Office of the President which is in line with the President's vision of REFOCUS. The objectives of the program are as follows:
1. To assess the system and processes in the USG 2. To draft and propose amendments in the USG Constitution 3. To raise awareness and encourage involvement among members of the Lasallian community on the history, system and processes of the USG 4. To ensure proper and guided transition in the USG

PROGRAM DETAILS
• Research efforts were conducted to determine the history of the USG and to identify areas for improvement in the USG. • Consultations were made with elected and appointed officers of the USG particularly from the Legislative branch, Executive branch, Judiciary branch, and Constitutional Commissions. • A group with representatives from all branches and Constitutional Commissions in the USG was formed to analyze the USG Constitution and its supporting documents.

PROGRAM DETAILS
• Meetings were held towards the latter part of the first term until latter part of second term. • A set of amendments for the Constitution was drafted and proposed through a resolution for the LA to discuss and decide on. • While on the floor, further research and consultations may still be made through the initiatives and invitations by the LA. • Once the amendments are passed by the LA, the USG shall endeavor itself to ratify these through a plebiscite which is to be conducted before the end of January 2014.

PROGRAM DETAILS
• Prior to the plebiscite, all students shall be informed and educated about the USG through an awareness campaign initiated by all branches in the USG including the Constitutional Commissions. • Upon the success of the plebiscite, the General Elections 2014 shall adopt the format as stipulated in the ratified Constitution. • A transition process shall be made and a transitory commission shall be formed to ensure proper and guided turn-over of the USG from the outgoing officers to the incoming officers.

Part 2 Main Thrusts of Operation REFOCUS

University’s Vision-Mission

“De La Salle University is a leading learnercentered research University, bridging faith and scholarship, in the service of society, especially the poor.”

USG Vision

“De La Salle University Student Government is the supreme autonomous representative body of the students, guided by the Lasallian principles of Faith, Service and Communion, that develops empowered Lasallians engaged in nation-building.”

USG Mission

1. 2. 3. 4.

Advance and defend students’ rights Promote students’ holistic growth Strengthen the identity of the Lasallian community Engage in societal development

The Vision of REFOCUS

The USG serves its members and promotes positive development in our University by recognizing, appreciating, and supporting everyone’s roles and creating a context where empathy, involvement, and collaboration can thrive.

The Vision of REFOCUS
Representing You

The USG connects and engages with its members on a more personal and grounded level. Establishing partnerships can pave ways for greater communication and accountability and help the USG step beyond creating activity-based projects, and move towards goals-based and issues-based programs to address real concerns and promote progress and development in the University.

The Vision of REFOCUS
Spotlighting Others

The USG optimizes its potential to recognize, empower, and support efforts and initiatives of fellow students. The USG creates venues where opportunities for participation and involvement will be made more visible and more accessible for students and the Lasallian community.

The Vision of REFOCUS
Bridging All

The USG is a catalyst in connecting and unifying all the sectors inside the University. The USG facilitates opportunities for volunteerism to help those in need, beginning with our fellow DLSU community members, in the spirit of inclusiveness.

PRIMARY FUNCTION OF THE USG (based on the vision of REFOCUS)
ADMIN
USG
REPRESENT

other sectors
*USG must be able to relate with the students on a PERSONAL and GROUNDED level.

Students’ issues and concerns

*
• • • • • • • •

STUDENTS
160 ++ student groups: CSO CAO LSPO SMO OCCS COSCA LOVE OSD (Varsity Teams and Sports Clubs) Other Student Groups

SPOTLIGHT
efforts and initiatives of fellow student groups, administration, and other sectors

BRIDGE
students to all sectors (primary: studentadministration)

Part 3 History of the USG

Overview of the History of USG
• 1960’s - Foundations of the Student Council  LASSO: La Salle Student Services Organization  LASSACO: La Salle Student Services Coordinating Organization • 1970’s - Martial Law Period • 1980’s - Rebirth of the Student Council • 1990’s - Improving the Student Council • 2000’s - Revisiting the Student Council • 2010 and Beyond - Birth of the USG

The 1960’s Foundations of the Student Council
• 1960: LASSO (La Salle Student Service Organization) has been the “central ruling body” of the students. • 1964: LASSO became LASSACO (La Salle Student Service Coordinating Organization) to emphasize its role as a “coordinating body”. However, LASSACO felt the apathy of students due to inability to feel the need of such participation for the school. • 1967: LASSACO became a Student Council for the purpose of having a “representation” of student interest in the administration and coordination with the students. • 1968-1971: The Student Council encountered a crisis due to the different ideologies of those who were seated. Policies and decisions were still made solely by the administration.

The 1970’s The Marital Period
• 1972: All Student Councils and Student Governments in the Philippines were abolished because of the proclamation of Martial Law. • 1974: CSO (Council of Student Organizations) was established to have a decent coordinating body among students. CSO serves as the representative body for students but does not have any legislative function in order to protect students’ rights and welfare in the community. • 1976: Some members of the CSO fought for the creation of a legislative body to defend the rights and welfare of the students in the community and called it CORE (Council of Representatives).

The 1980’s The Rebirth of the Student Council
• 1981: The CORE made a unanimous resolution on putting the Student Council back in the University and assisted a Constitutional Convention (CONCON). • 1982: CON-CON introduced the drafted constitution. The Academic Council ratified the existence of the Student Council and the first SC Elections was held. • 1983-1987: Crises happened during these years. The first secretary was impeached, and another EXECOM officer resigned due to the President’s behavior towards tuition fee hike. The first president that was impeached due to the Fees-on-Protest campaign wherein the VP for Academics took over.

The 1990’s Improving the Student Council
• 1991-1992: Prepared the SC Constitution for revision. • 1993-1994:  A student charter was proposed and then eventually passed.  The Student Council Assistance Fund was also established.  SC Constitution was revised. • 1995-1996: Student Charter and SC Constitution were ratified.

The 2000’s Revisiting the Student Council
• 2003: Operation Revamp was made in order to fix the problems of the Student Council by reforming their structures and directing revisions for the SC constitution. • 2008: The Activities Assembly (AA) was ratified in attempting to make the Student Council better. It consisted of Batch Representatives from the six colleges and other appointed officers of the VP Academics. • 2009: This year was the transition phase of SC into USG by smoothing the manuals for the respective positions and offices for the USG.

The Year 2010 and Beyond Birth of the USG
• 2010-2011: Student-driven Student Government (Lorenz de Castro) • 2011-2012: ONE USG (Cabe Aquino) • 2012-2013: Lasallian Citizenship in the USG (Jana Cabuhat) • 2013-2014: REFOCUS in the USG (Migi Moreno)

Summary of the History of USG
LASSO (La Salle Student Service Organization) (1960) LASSACO (La Salle Student Service Coordinating Organization) (1964) (1974) CORE (Council of Representatives) (1976) (present)

(1967) 1960’s

(1972) 1970’s

(1982) 1980’s 1990’s

(2010 - present) 2000’s

Part 4 Operation Revamp
(Student Council AY 2003-2004)

OPERATION: REVAMP

PERSPECTIVE:
It all started last April 29, 2003 during the second day of the SC Formation Seminar when the EB had a closed door meeting with Ms.Bonnet. The EB identified various problems that existed in the SC, namely: • Endless supply of activities to students • Repetitive activities every year • Lack of quality and long term plans • Results of activities were not plotted against the set objectives • Activities were created for the sake of having done such • “Quantity over quality” mentality • SC doesn’t focus on leadership formation • Lack of good governance within the SC • Students can’t distinguish SC and CSO because both provide the same things • SC and CSO rival • Logistics problem • SC is not performing the way a student government should act • SC’s tendency to hold and mandate organizations on what to do

OPERATION: REVAMP

INITIAL PROPOSAL:
Saint suggested a possible solution to all these problems.

MAIN THRUSTS
Create Establish Implement

How we, as student leaders, and the students view the Student Council is really important. Simply because the vision of what we want to do with the institution emanate from that perception. There are a number of ways of looking at the institution for a Student Council can pursue different directions. Needless to say, each direction is in pursuit of a set of goals and vision.

OPERATION: REVAMP

INITIAL PROPOSAL:
From the standpoint of history and experience, the Student Council’s nature and orientation could be summed up into three characteristic roles.

Campaign Center

Service Center

Activity Center

OPERATION: REVAMP

INITIAL PROPOSAL:

CAMPAIGN CENTER
As a center of leadership, the Student Council must continue to affirm its relevance by addressing the issues confronting the students, the community and the nation. In doing so, the Student Council is assuming its role as a campaign center. There are structural problems and concerns affecting the student sector that the institution must engage. Anchored on the principle of advancing the rights and welfare of students, the Student Council is expected to take on the task of addressing issues that directly affect its constituents. This is a birth-right assumed by student leaders because other domains of society cannot be expected to fully take on the tasks of defending the welfare of the sector. Also, there are emergent issues affecting the nation that would require the sector to take a stand and be in solidarity with the progressive forces advocating meaningful changes.

In pursuing this direction, the Student Council should first educate its constituents in order to motivate and mobilize the student body to take part in collective actions and be involves in concerted efforts.

OPERATION: REVAMP

INITIAL PROPOSAL:

SERVICE CENTER
Service and leadership cannot be divorced. It is in this spirit that the Student Council is viewed as a center that provides services to its constituents.
The material reality in campuses shows that much is desired when it comes to providing auxiliary services and academic support to ease the burden of students. Where the government and the University administration fall short is the gap where the Student Council comes in. For it is truly the institution’s concern to make the lives of students easier and make learning more convenient. The Student Council must therefore institutionalize programs that would help provide for the much needed services of its constituency. A concrete example of this service component is the creation of a Student Cooperative that could offer affordable school supplies, meals and even computer rentals. This practice is already established in schools abroad. In Australia, every university has a Student Union operated by the Student Council. On a smaller scale, a Text Book Rental and Exchange Program could be put in place. The Student Council can request graduating classes to donate their old textbooks to the Program so that students need not buy books that they would only use for one trimester.

OPERATION: REVAMP

INITIAL PROPOSAL:

ACTIVITY CENTER
The more traditional function of the Student Council is to spearhead various campus activities that are geared toward the holistic development of the student body. Taking into consideration the many interests of the students, the Student Council creates opportunities for expressing and actualizing potentials of students that would not normally be tapped or harnessed in the confines of the classroom. In addressing the extra-curricular development of the students, the Council provides venues for interaction and consolidation. Activities such as competitions, athletic meets, parties, fairs and cultural programs not only provide the necessary breather in the hectic life of students but also foster the feeling of belonging to a community. Thus, making life in campus richer and more meaningful. The Student Council must be able to carefully identify strategic programs and activities that would appeal to its constituency and involve the broadest participation. Bearing in mind the traditional and annual activities in campus, the leadership must also innovate and create new forms so as to continuously be in tune and responsive to the dynamic culture of the young.

OPERATION: REVAMP

INITIAL PROPOSAL:

Campaign Center

Service Center

Activity Center

OPERATION: REVAMP

SECOND PROPOSAL:
The EB met last September 9, 2003 to assess the state of the SC after its first term operations as well as its officers.

REVAMP
An Executive Order was released that day and approved by the LA last September 24, 2003.

• Assess the Student Council’s role for the next 10 years • Determine the vision and its workable agenda for the next 10 years • Create policies, programs and action plans to actualize and heighten such role and vision • Assess the current structure and policies of the SC • Draft a working constitution • Draft an implementing rules and regulation upon the ratification of the constitution

OPERATION: REVAMP

SECOND PROPOSAL:
Fruits of the Second Proposal: • Report on the SC History by the EB • Forum (c/o OVP-Activities) • Ad hocs • Activity Streamlining • Grievance Reform • Judiciary Conceptualization

• Internal and External Affairs
• Rules and Policies • Electoral Procedures

OPERATION: REVAMP

SECOND PROPOSAL:
SC FRAMEWORK

? Roles
? Functions ? Plans

Student Body

University

Country

OPERATION: REVAMP

SECOND PROPOSAL:

STUDENTS

autonomous and genuine student government

UNIVERSITY

COUNTRY
embody the libertarian ideals, nationalist aspirations and noble vision of a humane and sovereign society

co-equal and co-determinant sector treated with utmost regard

OPERATION: REVAMP

CONSTITUTION IN PERSPECTIVE:

Prepared 1991-1992 Revised 1993-1994 Approved 1994-1995 Ratified 1995-1996
Task Force on Constitutional Amendments 1999-2000 Proposed Amendments 2000-2001

Ratification 2000-2001, 2002-2003 (Failed)

OPERATION: REVAMP

PROPOSED UNIVERSITY STUDENT GOVERNMENT CONSTITUTION:

• Role of the SC for the next 10 years

• Vision of the SC for the next 10 years
• Principles, Purposes and Policies to actualize the SC’s role • Three co-equal and co-determinant branches of student government

• A clear ideology that the SC can adhere to
• Includes the students as the source of power of the student government • Heightens the accountability of the officers • Clear division of tasks • Clear and organize structure of governance • Defines the identity of the SC in various settings (i.e. 3rd world country)

Part 5 USG in Perspective

Is this the USG? An interview with Saint Anthony Tiu
March 19, 2013 (General Elections 2013 Special Issue) By Juan Batalla and Miguel Luis Gayares

Back in 2003, Student Council President Saint Anthony Tiu drafted a then revolutionary idea: a University Student Government, with three functional branches patterned after the Philippine government. “The vision of the USG back then was really to create the right identity for a student government. Back then, we were an activity generation body. Every now and then, Student Council (SC) officers would think of short-term projects versus long-term sustainable programs.”

“And back then, the issue was [the SC’s] overlapping primarily with the Council of Student Organizations (CSO): the two could not distinguish who and what they were anymore, whether they were a government or just some student organization.”

“What we were trying to address back then was [our] need for an identity…So the vision was that the student council should [stand] as a student government, to the point that instead of creating activities, it should create policies, advocacies, and services for the student body…”
Legislation

Coordination

Representation

“That was the rule agreed upon by the CSO and other organizations. The entire student government would focus mainly on policy creation, creating resolutions and stands on issues at hand, whether University wide or national or international. The [USG] would not create any activities or short-term projects.”
Campaign Center Campaign Center

Service Center

Activity Center

Service Center

Activity Center

“There will still be some executive power, but the problem with the executive is that we think its always about execution and activities, when it’s all about creating programs and execution in the form of creating policies. Lobbying a policy is executive power, right? You lobby this to the University President or to the Senate. The USG really calls for some paradigm shift in terms of how we ground the government.”

ADMIN

Lobby policies and programs

USG

“A good example is the batch government. Instead of creating batch level activities, it should instead utilize manpower in terms of lobbying [and] enforcing University wide advocacies. So let’s say, for example, the Legislative Assembly (LA) will create a policy or a stand on something. Batch Representatives should ask themselves: how can I translate this to my batch? What kind of program will enable me to deliver the stand to the rest of my batch? The Executive Board will be responsible for large-scale representation, in terms of being active in committees inside the University, as well as becoming front liners in advocating stances on national issues.”
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
LA Resolution (policy, advocacy or stand)

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

“The other thing is the fact that there is a lack of understanding on what the USG really is for the people who actually led the USG, such as the USG presidents. Superficially, they call it a government, but they’re actually operating like a student council.”

?

“It takes time. When we envisioned the USG, we knew it wouldn’t just happen overnight; it came along with a five year sustainability program, where the first year focused on internal reforms…the USG for that year would focus on what is needed in terms of internal reforms. If necessary, we stop some external ties so we could focus internally. After that one year, when you build up the internal capability, the second year will be the year where you build the external ties, thinking, ‘now that we’re strong internally, we need to go out’. Then, these organizations can be linked up, creating a stronger alliance with each other, USG included.”

“I think it is very important that the USG institutionalizes principles in terms of running the USG, such that even though the president may have a different view, for as long as the principles are clear and tackles that, this is how the USG should operate, then all parties could always come back to the agreed principles. There might be some difference in policy creation and execution here and there, but it should be minor to the overall principles and strategy.”

“The current limitation with our student leaders back then was this mentality: ‘This is my year, I will do whatever I can for my batch.’ There was a lack of long term sustainable envisioning of plans, so there was no thought of: ‘This is what I want in the future; that is why I am doing this today. Even though I neglect some of my current duties as a president, [creating a system] will still help me get there’.”

My | I | Me

< ...

Our | We | Us

...

The USG in its first 3 years: In retrospect
March 19, 2013 (General Elections 2013 Special Issue) By Nina dela Cruz and Martha Elisse Teves

According to The LaSallian’s General Elections Special (2010), SC President Saint Anthony Tiu initially conceptualized the USG in 2004 then further revived by 2008 SC President Nicole Villarojo to achieve a more efficient means of leadership and a more established check and balance system. It was meant to stand for competence, transparency and accountability in governance.

USG
(2004) (2008)

Since the USG is a relatively new system, ambiguities and loopholes in clauses are not uncommon. There have been additional clarifications and amendments incorporated from the time of ratification. One of the problems encountered concerned information dissemination among students about the transition from SC to USG.

STUDENTS

The USG had concretized three branches similar to the country’s political structure—the executive, legislative and the judiciary…In comparison with the country’s political map, the question of transparency and accountability still remain as the need towards an adequate delivery of services to the students and to the society in a bigger picture.

LEGISLATIVE

EXECUTIVE

JUDICIARY

TRANSPARENCY

ACCOUNTABILITY

STUDENTS

In 2010, De Castro’s administration took on the USG’s first run, after the transition from the Student Council. De Castro believes that the change was necessary, emphasizing that the Judiciary branch was a key attribute to the new structure. As with anything, however, problems abounded the first year of the USG.

LEGISLATIVE

EXECUTIVE

JUDICIARY

For Jana Cabuhat’s administration, she shares that the main problem was having everyone land the same idea about the USG. Cabuhat asserts that the constitution has yet to be fully interpreted by the Judiciary, and every year, a new interpretation of it crops up. Thus, she notes that in the three years of USG’s official functions, it would be hard to gauge its efficiency yet as she believes that in order for the University to yield the results, a certain degree of consistency must transpire.

Direction? The problems of an aimless Presidency
March 19, 2013 (General Elections 2013 Special Issue) By Juan Batalla

Cabuhat furthers that nothing can be done because the constitution does not give the president direct jurisdiction over anything. She adds that it is all about representation, giving directions without any real first steps as opposed to the Vice President of Internal Affairs or External Affairs or Office of the Secretary or Office of the Treasurer that have specific tasks. She concludes, “The President really just oversees everything, especially if everyone has their own independent vision.”

The problem of coordination is the prevalent obstacle that hampers a USG’s overall effectiveness in that certain redundancies occur in terms of activity coordination. For instance, an October 2010 article from The LaSallian cites that during de Castro’s term, a lot of fundraising activities focused on shirt sales without diversifying the kinds of student activities available. Conversely, during Aquino’s time, a December 2011 article from The LaSallian examined that sometimes, the advocacy-based activities, due to their volume, were unable to secure large audiences for VIP guests who conducted lectures and delivered talks.

Cabuhat shares, “There are times during the year when I just feel exasperated on setting the direction for the whole USG,” citing that particular bodies in the USG were stubborn in following the strategic vision that she set at the start of the year.

Moreno’s main vision is refocusing the USG to remember its priorities and re-examine the functionality of the system, and ensure closer coordination between the USG and all of its stakeholders.

From the past USGs, [Moreno] noticed a lack of a real grasp of what it means to have a student government. He explains, “From the start, we focused too much on activities, and failed to see our greater role as representatives and policy-makers. It was as if the [Student Council] before simply changed its name to USG. Though there have been efforts last year and even this year to try to assume USG’s true nature, I believe that the efforts allotted for this goal have not been enough.”
First 3 Years of USG AY 2013-2014 GOAL

Original Nature of USG USG Transition Meter

Challenges for the USG
1. Is the USG living up to its founding identity and purpose? 2. Is the USG one and united? 3. Is the USG able to represent and serve all the students?

Part 6 Rationale of Operation REFOCUS

DIRECTION

There is a need to define and establish that much needed direction for the USG to be more efficient and effective in the services it provides all the students: service in representing them in multi-sectoral gatherings inside and outside the University, in spotlighting their efforts and initiatives, and in bridging them with the services and opportunities of other sectors inside the Lasallian community.

CONTINUITY

There is a need for the USG to build a culture of relevant continuity. USG officers should learn to embrace a proper, coordinated, and guided transition of plans and not just put aside and reject previous ideas, efforts, and initiatives (even current ones) simply because they were not plans of one's own preference or those of the political party.

INCLUSIVENESS

There is a need for the USG to be inclusive and collaborative by being unified and coordinated in its efforts and initiatives for all the students. Transcending the notion of being an exclusive group of student leaders in the service of the students, USG officers must embrace their identity and purpose and be one in the genuine representation and service for all students.

Part 7 Structures of the USG

Student Council Constitution
Prepared, Revised & Approved: AY 1991-1992 to AY 1994-1995 Ratified: AY 1995-1996 Last Year of Implementation: AY 2009-2010 (SC President: Aimee Chua)
NOTE: Structure was created and developed since there is no available structure from the said Constitution.

Student Council Structure Overview
President Vice President for Activities Legislative Assembly Representative Legislative Assembly Representative Vice President for Academics Executive Secretary Treasurer College Assembly Presidents Batch President Batch Vice President Vice President for Operations [and Communications] Executive Board Executive Committee Representatives from Professional Organizations Advisory Body

Students’ Rights and Welfare (STRAW) Rules and Policies (RnP) National Affairs (NatAff) Commission on Election

College Assembly Batch Assembly

NOTE: Task Force on Constitutional Amendments failed to ratify proposed amendments from AY 2000-2003.

2004 USG Constitution
Original Proposal By: Saint Anthony Tiu, SC President (AY2003-2004)
NOTE: Structure was taken from the said Constitution.

2004 USG Structure Overview
LEGISLATIVE Chief Legislator EXECUTIVE President Convention of Leaders Majority Floor Leader Minority Floor Leader Executive Secretary Vice President for Internal Affairs Executive Treasurer Vice President for External Affairs Commission on Elections Officers Monitoring Board JUDICIARY Chief Magistrate Magistrates

College Presidents Legislative Assembly Representatives Batch Presidents Student Population

College Student Government College Presidents Batch Presidents Legislative Assembly Representatives

Batch Student Government Batch Presidents

Legislative Assembly Representative

Course Representative

Student Organization Representatives

2009 USG Constitution
Ratified: AY 2008-2009 (SC President: Nicole Villarojo) First Year of Implementation: AY 2010-2011 (USG President: Lorenz de Castro)
NOTE: Structure was created and developed since there is no available structure from the said Constitution.

2009 USG Structure Overview
LEGISLATIVE Chief Legislator Majority Floor Minority Floor Executive Secretary Executive Treasurer College Legislative Board Batch Student Government Vice President for Internal Affairs EXECUTIVE President JUDICIARY Chief Magistrate Magistrates Activities Assembly College Student Government CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS Commission on Election Commission on Audit

Legislative Assembly Representatives Students’ Rights and Welfare (STRAW) Rules and Policies (RnP)

Vice President for External Affairs
College Presidents Batch Presidents Batch Vice Presidents

National Affairs (NatAff)

2013 USG Constitution
Unratified with DLSU-STC Government

(USG President AY 2012-2013: Jana Cabuhat)
NOTE: Structure was taken from the said Constitution.

2014 USG Constitution
Operation REFOCUS Proposal (USG President AY 2013-2014: Migi Moreno)

USG Structure Overview
LEGISLATIVE Chief Legislator Majority Floor Minority Floor EXECUTIVE President JUDICIARY Chief Magistrate Magistrates Executive Treasurer CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS

Legislators Students’ Rights and Welfare (STRAW) Rules and Policies (RnP) National Affairs (NatAff)

Executive Vice President

College (Campus) Presidents

Commission on Election
Commission on Audit Office of the Ombudsman Commission on Activity Processing

Batch (College) Representatives

Legislative Branch
Chief Legislator LA Secretariat Majority Floor Minority Floor Legislative Assembly Inner Circle Rules and Policies (RnP)

National Affairs (NatAff)

Students’ Rights and Welfare (STRAW)

College Legislative Board Legislators STC Campus Legislative Board

Executive Branch
President Executive Board (EB) Executive Vice President Executive Treasurer

Executive Assembly

Convention of Leaders (COLE)

Cabinet

Executive Committee (EXECOM)

Representatives from student organizations College Presidents

ALL Student Leaders

College Student Government Executive Board (CSG-EB) Batch Representatives Management Committee

Cabinet
President Executive Vice President Chief of Staff Executive Treasurer FINANCIAL Student Services Head Community Development Head

Advocacy Head

Finance Head

OPERATIONAL Marketing and Communications Head Documentations Head External Relations Head Special Projects Head

ADMINISTRATIVE

Judiciary Branch
Chief Magistrate Supreme Court College Magistrates Collegiate Courts STC -Campus Magistrate STC-Campus Court

Counsel Officers Committee

Judicial Administrative Affairs Office

Student Advisers Committee

Constitutional Commissions
Commission on Election (COMELEC) Office of the Ombudsman Ombudsman Deputy Ombudsman for STC Deputy Ombudsman Commission on Audit (COA)

Chairperson
Vice Chairperson for STC Vice Chairperson

Chairperson
Commissioner

Commissioner for STC Auditors

Commissioners Volunteers

USG Monitoring Board Commission on Activity Processing Chairperson

Commissioner for STC Approvals Team

Commissioner Monitoring Team

College Student Government
LEGISLATIVE College (Campus) Legislators College (Campus) Legislative Board

EXECUTIVE
College (Campus) President Batch (College) Representatives Chief of Staff Ad-hoc Positions

JUDICIARY College (Campus) Magistrate Collegiate (STCCampus) Court

CSG-EB

Batch (College) Councils

Academic Affairs Head

Activities Head

Marketing and Communications Head

Documentations Head

External Relations Head

Finance Head

Management Committee

USG Assembly
LEGISLATIVE Chief Legislator Legislative Assembly Inner Circle EXECUTIVE President Executive Committee JUDICIARY Chief Magistrate Supreme Court

CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS

Commission on Election Chairperson

Ombudsman

Commission on Audit Chairperson

Commission on Activity Processing Chairperson

Part 8 Proposed Amendments in the USG Constitution

OVERVIEW
• Modification of the 30-article 2013 Unratified Version of the Constitution into the 17-article 2014 Proposed Constitution • Shorter version of the Preamble of the Constitution • Full integration of STC in the USG Constitution • Clearer definition of terms, roles and responsibilities in the branches and personalities in the USG • Reinforcement of principles, purposes and policies of the USG • Merging of the Articles on the Bill of Rights and on the Duties and Responsibilities of Students into the Article on Declaration of Rights, Duties and Responsibilities

OVERVIEW
• Accountability of USG appointed officers • Creation of USG Assembly • More detailed provisions for Article on General Provisions • Creation of Constitutional Convention as means for proposing amendments in the Constitution • Modification of current three-year period to five-year period of non-amendment of the Constitution • Creation of a Transitory Commission

BRANCH SPECIFIC
LEGISLATIVE • Creation of an LA Secretariat not dependent on the Executive Branch • Renaming of LA representatives into Legislators • Clearer functions of the College Legislative Board

BRANCH SPECIFIC
EXECUTIVE • Removal of elected position of VP-External Affairs and reinforcing its roles with the President and to External Relations Head • Removal of elected position of Executive Secretary and reinforcing its roles with the Chief of Staff, Documentations Head, and Marketing & Communications Head • Renaming of VP-Internal Affairs into Executive Vice President and clarifying its roles • Creation of the Cabinet as shared office of the EB

BRANCH SPECIFIC
EXECUTIVE • Modification of Executive Departments (EXEDEP) as the former departments in the Activities Assembly (AA) • Creation of Executive Assembly • Restructuring and modification of College Student Government – Creation of College (Campus) Student Government Management Committee (MANCOM) – Renaming of Batch President into Batch Representative – Modification of the Batch Student Government into the Batch (College) Council

BRANCH SPECIFIC
JUDICIARY and CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS • Renaming of group of magistrates as Supreme Court • Provisions for Judicial Review • Clearer functions of the Collegiate (Campus) Courts • Creation of Constitutional Commissions: – Office of the Ombudsman – Commission on Activity Processing (from the former Department of Activity Approval and Monitoring)

Part 9 Comparison of Current and Proposed Structures in the Executive Branch
(Executive Board, College and Batch Levels)

43 units in the Executive Branch with their own structures (organizational charts): EB Offices, College (Campus) Governments, and Batch Governments

Given the proposed changes in the Executive Branch…

9 unified and coordinated units in the Executive Branch: EB Cabinet and College (Campus) Governments with Batch (College) Councils

Part 10 Summary of Operation REFOCUS

Going back to the Challenges for the USG…
1. Is the USG living up to its founding identity and purpose?

Reinforcement of the functions, roles and responsibilities of the three branches, the Constitutional Commissions and the personalities involved Modifications in the Executive Branch and College Student Government Creation of USG Assembly

2.

Is the USG one and united?

– –
3.

Is the USG able to represent and serve all the students?


– –

Reinforcement of principles, purposes and policies of the USG Creation of Executive Assembly Modifications in the Convention of Leaders