March 30, 2015

Kalibo, Aklan
DR. DANILO ABAYON
OIC, Office of the President
Aklan State University
DR. YASMIN H. PRIMAVERA-TIROL
Campus Director
College of Fisheries and Marine Sciences
Aklan State University

Dear Dr. Abayon and Dr. Tirol:

Greetings!
I am writing both as a counsel of CHEN HARLETTE Y.
MANUGUE and a member of the ASU New Washington Campus
faculty (Criminology Department). Ms. Manugue is a graduate in
Bachelor of Science in Customs Administration of the previously
mentioned ASU Campus. She sought legal assistance from our
firm regarding her concern on her impeded receipt of award as
Cum Laude during the last celebrated ASU graduation
ceremonies. Our office finds her cause meritorious and so I
decided to bring before your attention, once more, this issue. As
part of ASU myself, I believe that it would be best for us to
exhaust all remedies to fully settle the matter within our school
instead of bringing it somewhere else. With that, I raise before
you the following discussions:
Antecedent Facts
Ms. Manugues weighted average is 1.73 which is well within
the schools criteria for Cum Laude graduates. As early as March
9, 2015 or weeks before the graduation rites, she was given a hint
by the registrar personnel that she would be graduating cum
laude. On March 23, before many people in school, she was
announced to be with such honor by a member of the
Consultative Committee for Honors and one from the Office of
Student Affairs. She was likewise allowed to join the practice as
someone who will receive the award on stage.

It was only in the evening of March 24 when her sister

Cheska, a member of the Student Regents, received a call from
the ASU faculty that Ms. Manugue is disqualified from receiving
the honor. They were able to confirm the truth of the information
on the next day. And since it was already the day before their
graduation ceremonies, she was given no time to contest the
decision of the school. On May 26, graduation day, many of her
schoolmates questioned why her name was removed from the list
of cum laude graduates. It was also quite evident that the
removal of her name was an afterthought on the part of the
school since her name was originally printed on the program with
the list of cum laude graduates but was eventually erased.
Discussion on the Alleged Grounds for Refusal of
Grant of Honors
The school explained that the disqualification of Ms.
Manugue is in accordance with the ASU Student Handbook. But
upon perusal of the said handbook, we found nothing on it that
could be the basis for the disqualification. With all due respect,
the provisions on the said handbook that allegedly disentitled Ms.
Manugue from receiving honors do not at all provide the supposed
disqualification.
The provisions in page 19 of the ASU Student Handbook on
Leave of Absence do not say anything about the grant of honors
or awards. It merely provides for the requirement of securing a
written permission from the Dean or an official with equivalent
rank or a formal leave of absence, as the case may be. It does not
particularly provide for the disqualification of the student from
receiving deserved honors as a consequence of failure to comply
with the said requirement. The school cannot rightfully impose a
penalty which is inexistent. Moreover, the very same provision
even presented a remedy should a violation of the rule is
committed, that is, to reapply for admission. The fact that the
school readmitted Ms. Manugue to their curriculum should be
construed as a condonation of her past shortcomings.
Likewise, page 35 of the aforesaid handbook on the title
Graduation with Academic Honors cannot be correctly interpreted
to make Ms. Manugue ineligible to her hard-earned honor. Number

5 of the said title provides: A student who is a candidate for

graduation with honors must have taken during each semester
not less than 15 units of credit or the normal load prescribed in
the curriculum Ms. Manugue met this requirement. The latter
clause which says provided that he/she shall be able to finish
his/her course within the period prescribed for the same refers to
those students who took less than 15 units of credit in one
semester if the normal load is actually less than 15 units. But
even if the rule is interpreted to mean that Ms. Manugue is
required to finish her course within the prescribed periodin her
case, four (4) yearsshe was nevertheless able to comply with
the same. She took the course in four yearsthat is in 2010 to
2012 (2 years) and 2013 to 2015 (another two years). The period
when she was not attending school cannot be rightfully counted
since she was not enrolled during said period. The rule does not
require the students to finish their course in four straight years.
So long as she was able to take them in four years or in eight (8)
semesters, compliance has been made.
There is in fact ambiguity in Number 5 of the aforesaid title
but as a rule, ambiguities must be construed against the makers
of the instrument, in this case, the school, not the student.
If the reservations of the school in granting Ms. Manugues
humble claim are due to the fear that the incident might be taken
as a loophole to the schools rules, the proper remedy is not to
deny Ms. Manugue of her right to receive and enjoy her hardearned honors but to make the necessary revisions or
modifications in the student handbook. In fact, the exact same
problem might again reappear in the future should the
deficiencies in said rules be left unfixed.
It should be put in mind that although it is the schools
prerogative to create their own rules and set their own criteria
and qualifications in all aspects as they may see fit, once said
rules, criteria or qualifications have been met, it creates a
demandable right, which when violated can be remedied by our
justice system.

Legal Grounds for Probable Complaint for Damages

(1) Discrimination against Women Students

The reason why Ms. Manuque had to temporarily stop going
to school is pregnancy and giving birth.
When a female student gets pregnant, it would be inevitable
for her to be out of school at least for a semester. If the subjects
she misses to take during the semester she was out were
prerequisite subjects for the next semesters, it would be expected
that she will not be able to take the full 15units in each semester.
The schools rule is clear that one must complete at least 15units
per semester for her to qualify for honors. Thus, it would be more
advisable for her to withdraw from school for the entire year and
take her subjects regularly on the following school year. If the
school then would likewise disqualify a student who has been out
of school for a year even by virtue of maternity leave, then the
school poses discrimination against pregnant women. It is
equivalent to making a rule that once a student gets pregnant,
she loses her chance of getting academic honors. And since all
women are prone to getting pregnant, it is a discrimination
against women students.

(2) Breach of the Constitutional Protection in Favor of

the Youth
Section 13 of the 1987 Constitution provides: The State
recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and shall
promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual,
and social well-being
Undeniably, Ms. Manugue suffered great and irreparable
humiliation and anguish after the denial of her right to receive her
award despite prior announcements declaring her to be a Cum
Laude graduate. The school failed to appreciate the possible
damages this incident might have caused to this young woman.
Her embarrassment almost caused her to refrain from attending
the graduation ceremony. She also felt estranged from her
classmates who kept on asking why her name was stricken out of
the list of awardees. She also felt condemned by the school of her
pregnancy since it is the cause of her absence and denial of
honor. She spent days and nights, even after the graduation,
wailing over this matter. She also felt discouraged that the hard

work she exerted over the years was not even given any
appreciation by her alma mater.
All these are irrefutably opposed to the Constitutional
principle of protecting and promoting the youths moral,
intellectual and social well-being.

Damages incurred due to the refusal of the grant of

honors
After she learned that she might be awarded as cum laude,
Ms. Manugues father came home from Hongkong, and his mother
from Tarlac to celebrate her accomplishment. And as everyone in
their place would, Ms. Manugue and her family were open and
proud about her honor. People also extended their greetings in the
social media to the open view of everyone. But all these supposed
joyous moments crumbled when they learned that the school
withdrew her award.
Her parents incurred expenses in going to Kalibo in the belief
that they could accompany her to stage to receive her award. The
family also suffered humiliation from taunting lips that accused
them of lying about the honor.
Ms. Manugues faith that she was one of those who would
come up the stage and wear her medal of honor is not without
sufficient and reasonable basis. Other than the very fact that she
had been consistently a dean-lister, it was the acts of the school
through its personnel itself that created such belief. She was
informed as early as March 9 that her weighted average meets
the criteria for her to graduate cum laude. Then she was
proclaimed to be such an honor graduate during their graduation
practice and was asked to rehearse the reception of her award on
stage. More so, it is also quite evident that her name has already
been printed in the section of graduates with honors in the
graduation program. The word cum laude was also written after
her name in the same program. But these were eventually
deleted by superimposing a strip of paper on them.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, it is our humble request

thatat the leastthe honor of Cum Laude be made to reflect on
Ms. Manugues transcript of records. After all, between the school

and the child, I believe that the welfare of the latter is of greater
stake insofar as the issue is concerned. No harm could be suffered
by the school if the request be granted. On the other hand, the
grant would cause much relief on Ms. Manugues part. Not only
that she would somehow feel vindicated for the embarrassment
she suffered, she would also avail of the benefits granted to cum
laude graduates such as financial discounts on fee for review, etc.
We are looking forward to receiving a favorable response
from you soon. Thank you very much!

Respectfully Yours,
ROWENA MAE N. MENCIAS
Mencias Law Office
Refindor Bldg. Extn., Capitol
Site, Osmea Ave., Kalibo
Aklan;
Tel. No. 268-3718
Mobile: 0998-5457552
Email: wengmencias@gmail.com