Public humiliation is illegal, says the Anti-Hazing Law. But student organizations that do this ask how come this law, which defines this method of recruitment as hazing, does not provide penalties when an applicant is subjected to psychological suffering unless he or she becomes insane or imbecile.
Republic Act No. 8049, the Anti-Hazing Law, defines hazing as “an initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority, or organization by placing a recruit, neophyte, or applicant in some embarrassing or humiliating situation such as forcing him to do menial, silly, foolish, and similar tasks or activities or otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological suffering or injury.”
Section 4 says school authorities who consent to the hazing or failed to act against it shall also be punished under the law.
At the State University, the UP College of Mass Communication (UP CMC) administration recently suggested that its student organizations do away with application process that subjects recruits to public humiliation.
But the UP Samahan ng mga Mag-aaral sa Komunikasyon (Samaskom) and UP Broadcasting Association (Broad Ass) expressed disapproval of the suggestion, arguing that their application process is a tried-and-tested tradition that has helped build the character of their members and produce excellent public performances.
In a meeting last August 10, UP CMC college secretary Lourdes Portus asked Samaskom and BroadAss to find alternative ways to recruit members, as public humiliation is not reflective of the College’s mission-vision to have an “egalitarian, participative, and progressive society through the development of media that is socially responsible, critical, vigilant, transformative, and independent.”
This meeting was a result of an earlier faculty assembly where majority of the participants found the two organizations’ cursing, scolding, and ordering costumed applicants to buy something in the college canteen during their “fun weeks” degrading, said Portus.
“The college does not agree with this [public humiliation]. Ang sina-suggest ng college eh ibang methods, di ka maghuhumiliate ng tao, hindi ka magveverbal abuse. Kasi kung nagmumura ka, artificial lang ang pag-develop ng character kasi you’re just pressured o takot ka lang,” she said.
But UP Broad Ass Membership Committee head Lara Magtalas pointed out that public humiliation was never the intention of their organization. Their objective, she said, is to measure how an applicant could adapt in the world of mass communication. Such process, she explained, has helped a lot of their alumni in the industry.
She said that scolding the applicants when they had not exerted much effort on producing costumes would train them to “work under pressure,” as what most companies say in job advertisements.
“We also believe that hindi lahat nadadaan sa mura at sa pagsigaw. What we’re really after is the pressure. You can do these [requirements] in a certain amount of time na made-deliver mo in an excellent way. Because who wants trabahong trash, di ba?” Magtalas said.
While some members do speak in outburst and curse, those were never directed to the person himself, Magtalas said. For example, when they were not satisfied with the performance, members would say “tangina naman,” not “tangina mo,” she said
Meanwhile, there are performing student organizations in UP that do not believe that public humiliation is necessary for them to succeed.
Jonald Salcedo, assistant property head of Kontemporaryong Gamelang Pilipino (Kontra-Gapi), the official music and dance ensemble of UP College of Arts and Letters, said that for a student to become a member, he or she just have to undergo two to three months of training.
“We are not the kind of group that humiliates recruits in public. In Kontra-Gapi, as long as you know how to count from one to eight, that’s enough,” Salcedo said.
UP Theatre Council (UP TC) expressed the same view. “If you do your work and get serious with what you’re doing, you would gain respect through that,” UP TC costume mistress Cristina Agila said.
For his part, UP Streetdance Club (UP SC) Competing Team member Mark Joseph Ubalde said that although the Club is a performing organization, its members then did not put them through any humiliating situation when they were applicants.
“The Club does not believe in public humiliation. We did wear costumes but the members made sure we were not humiliated. In fact, I even enjoyed it,” Ubalde said.
Asked what is his reaction about humiliation-free performing student organizations, UP Samasakom president Marvin Tomandao said, “Wala akong pakialam.”
Meanwhile, Magtalas further defended their application process by saying they do it in public is for people to know what they are doing. “So if you would notice that there is something wrong, you are free to tell us. You are free to guide us and give opinions,” she said.
Consequently, UP Broad Ass and the CMC admin have agreed that “it should not be totally eradicated but somehow it must be lessened.”
Even as he agrees with UP Broad Ass’ arguments, Tomandao sees the college administration's act as a suppression of their freedom of expression. He said their application process is no different from Alpha Phi Omega’s Oblation Run and the activists’ rallies.
Tomandao said that during the meeting, the college secretary threatened to file a complaint to the CMC administration to revoke their org's recognition if UP Samaskom would continue tolerating this kind of initiation.
Knowing that this might happen, he explained to all of his members and even to their alumni that they were no longer allowed to curse and scold applicants within the college premises.
Portus, however, denied this. She said the UPCMC administration would not impose sanctions for they “treat students as adults.”
The UP Student Guide, which is published by the Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Student Affairs, includes the Anti-Hazing Law. But even this law, which is supposed to regulate initiation rites of organizations, is being questioned.
Magtalas said that the definition of hazing is vague and relative, for what is humiliating to one may not be that embarassing to another.
Tomandao, on the other hand, said the Anti-Hazing Law is “weird” as it only penalizes if the applicant was physically injured, died, raped, or became insane or imbecile as a result of the initiation rites.
Juan Paolo Amistoso of UP College of Law Office of Legal Aid (OLA) said that the Anti-Hazing Law should be amended. If we were to put penal provisions for psychological incapacity after hazing, he said, we should clearly define the term so that at least, everyone would understand it.
“Because even psychologists themselves disagree whether a condition is a [psychological] disability or injury, the scope of the definition should be limited so that it would be clear whether an activity is under these penal provisions,” Amistoso said.
Unless R.A. 9049 is revised, said Tomandao, they would not think what they are doing is wrong.
