In this case, I am completely convinced that the doctoral degree should be

restored to Ms. Arokiaswamy William Margaret Celine due to some reasons. By reading and

analyzing the context of the case, there are some loop holes: First, it is questionable why the oral

defense was moved from January 6, 1993 to February 5, 1993. Dr. Serena Diokno did not give

any reason why she rescheduled private respondents oral defense, she must give any valid

reasons why she wanted to reschedule it. Another is that, Dr. Medina informed CSSP Dean

Consuelo Joaquin-Paz that there was a portion in Arokiaswamys dissertation that was copied

without acknowledging the sources, I wonder why the chairperson of the U.P. Department of

Anthropology, Dr. Realidad S. Rolda approved the dissertation and why is it that 4 out of the 5

panelists still gave the respondent a passing mark even though they already knew that there was

plagiarized part in the dissertation?

After Dean Paz already accepted private respondents dissertation in partial

fulfilment, April 17, 1993, Ms. Arokiaswamy sent a letter to him explaining why she no longer

showed her dissertation to Dr. Medina, expressing her disappointment to Dr. Diokno and Dr.

Medina and warned Dean Paz against treacherous acts against her. On a letter dated April 21,

1993, Vice Chancellor Milagros Ibe received a letter from Dean Paz containing:

Mahigpit ko pong hinihiling na hwag munang isama ang pangalan ni Ms. Arokiaswam[y]

William Margaret Celine sa listahan ng mga bibigyan ng degri na Ph.D. (Anthropology)

ngayon[g] semester, dahil sa mga malubhang bintang nya sa ilang myembro ng panel para sa oral

defense ng disertasyon nya at sa mga akusasyon ng ilan sa mga ito sa kanya. Stating the point of

Dean Paz to exclude Ms. Arokiaswamy in the list of candidates for graduation not because of the

plagiarism case but because of private respondents imputation to the panel members. (Di

magsusulat tong si Dean Paz kung di lang siya sinulatan ni Arokiaswamy)