The Story of Student Rights

By Atty. Ernesto B. Neri

Rights do not just fall from the heavens. They are forged by human struggle on the ground. Look
at history: the slaves’ right to freedom, the women’s right to vote, the workers’ right to a living
wage. These entitlements were never served on a silver platter by the powers that be. Across
time, it has always been argued and demanded—peacefully or otherwise—by courageous and
organized people.

Student rights are no different. It took five courageous students of Des Moines, Iowa, USA to plant
the case law that would later find its way to Philippine jurisprudence. Punished for wearing black
armbands in protest against the Vietnam War, these students braved harassment and sued the
school district. They won. Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) declares that "it can hardly be argued
that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression
at the schoolhouse gate."

In Manila, Philippines, Gregorio Araneta University Foundation attempted to merge with another
school. Fearing that this would result to a colossal increase in tuition fees, student leaders called
for mass action. They applied for and was granted a permit to organize a rally in the basketball
court. But, perhaps wanting to drive the point in the heart of the school, the student leaders moved
the rally to the second-floor lobby. For causing “material disruption” of classes, they were
suspended for one academic year. Aggrieved, they sued.

Malabanan v. Ramento (1984) brought Tinker to our shores. The Court ruled that the one year
suspension is not a commensurate penalty since the students were exercising a highly protected
form of speech. Even if the tenor of the speeches was objectionable, the Court understood that
this was part of the “exuberance of the youth.” The Court even took judicial notice of the attitude
of student leaders as not the “timid” type but the “assertive and dogmatic” who tend to
“exaggerate” their speeches to satisfy a roaring crowd. However, since the student leaders did
violate the permit, the Court imposed a more reasonable one-week suspension.

Another case on the fight for student rights takes us to Camarines Norte where Mabini Colleges
refused re-enrollment of several student leaders who organized a mass action. The school argued
that because their contract ended within the semester, the school was not obliged to enter into a
new one with the student leaders.

Non v. Danes II (1990) affirmed that the contract between the school and the student is not an
ordinary contract. It is imbued with public interest, considering the high priority given by the
Constitution to education. When students enroll, they expect to complete the course, not just the
semester. The school’s argument on academic freedom crumbled before the students’ right to
expression. As long as the action did not materially disrupt classwork, involve substantial disorder,
or invade the rights of others, the school was bound to enroll them.

Still, these victories in Court are pliable without a strong legislative backbone. But for years, a
Magna Carta for Student Rights and Welfare remain languishing in Congress. Amidst this bleak
backdrop, local governments are stepping up. Bacolod and other cities are passing ordinances
codifying student rights. In Cagayan de Oro City, student leaders are making steps in crafting a
local ordinance to set up a Student Rights Commission. This Commission, composed of
representatives from various schools, would help monitor, document, and report rights abuses to
proper national authorities and perhaps, in extreme cases, recommend revocation of business
permits.

In the long march for student rights, students should realize that they are not just in school to get
a diploma for economic viability. By mobilizing for some higher idea, students develop character,
and most importantly, immerse in the joy of citizenship – that is, the recognition of their collective
power to build a more just and humane society.