27/07/2026
To the SSC: Win the Carolinians Back
The most dangerous thing a student government can lose is not its funding or its office. It’s the trust of the students who elected it.
The USC Supreme Student Council's (SSC) recent decision to register under the Office of Student Formation and Activities (OSFA) marks one of the most significant developments in student governance since the 2022 SSC administration. For much of that time, the Council remained unregistered, driven by its principled refusal to compromise its autonomy to administrative oversight. With the Council’s transitory status and pending negotiations with the Vice President for Administration, Atty. Joan Largo, the process remains subject to compliance with OSFA's registration requirements. This decision has the potential to reshape the direction of student governance moving forward.
But one decision does not erase the months of silence and uncertainty.
For as long as the issue persisted, nearly every conversation surrounding the SSC inevitably returned to OSFA. Every delay was traced to institutional recognition, every criticism redirected toward the university administration. Those conversations remain valid. The University's policies have undeniably complicated student governance and deserve continued scrutiny. Yet somewhere along the way, OSFA became the answer to almost every question. It became increasingly difficult to ask another question on what responsibilities remained entirely within the Council's control. One issue, in particular, is still left unanswered.
A new academic year for the University of San Carlos is just around the corner, yet there is still no definitive timeline for this year’s SSC elections. There has been no comprehensive public explanation of the progress made, the obstacles that remain, or what students should expect in the coming months. The Council has now decided to register under OSFA, but the greater challenge begins after registration. Restoring trust and confidence of its constituents and renewing interest in student elections will depend on what the Council does next.
The 2025 SSC elections recorded a disappointing voter turnout of just 31.70%, a decline from 33.62% in 2024. If anything, those numbers should have prompted greater urgency, not only from the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), but also from the SSC itself. Perhaps the greatest consequence of prolonged silence is not frustration, but apathy. When students repeatedly feel left out of conversations that directly affect them, they begin expecting less from the institutions meant to represent them.
COMELEC Chairperson Yamanni Pabillore expressed that they have spent the past months drafting a new omnibus election code, with a tentative election period projected between August and September, but problems persist as administrative hurdles remain unresolved. COMELEC also explained that a statement on the operational delays had been drafted but was withheld in anticipation of a joint release with the SSC. The commission also admitted that communication with the council has been difficult, given the single point of contact, which is the SSC President, Maui Cruz. Pabillore openly apologized for the delayed silence, acknowledging that all frustrations from the student community are valid and that the commission shares those frustrations as well.
It is also worth noting that formal letters were sent to the SSC demanding action but were met with silence. On May 6, the Conglomeration of Student Organizations (CSO) sent a letter demanding governance reforms and transparency, including council participation, accountability mechanisms, and institutional developments. The Carolinian Political Science Society (CPSS) has also sent a letter on June 3 which raised concerns over continued delay of the SSC elections and a call for greater transparency.
CSO Vice President for Talamban Campus, Tyler Calderon, described an All Leaders Meeting where student organizations actively participated by offering recommendations for possible directions for the planned SSC elections, but were met with silence and uncertainty as months passed by. Despite the presence of official communication channels with the SSC, student organizations remain without a concrete timeline or definitive direction. As per Calderon’s standpoint, “Students can understand delays. What becomes difficult to understand is the absence of consistent communication”.
Let this be clear: the average Carolinian does not attend council sessions, nor are they present in consultations between the SSC, COMELEC, and student organizations. They should not have to understand what omnibus election codes are, nor what current developments are happening inside their own student government. Their understanding of the SSC comes from what reaches them.
The SSC may very well have legitimate reasons for the delay. Internal challenges, administrative constraints, and coordination with COMELEC is still ongoing. None of these, however, absolves the SSC of its obligation to keep the student body informed. Somewhere along the way, Carolinians have been presented with a choice: either sympathize with the SSC’s struggle against the administration or criticize its shortcomings. As though the two cannot exist at the same time.
A council can be oppressed and still be poorly governed. A council can be underfunded and still fail to communicate. A council can be fighting for autonomy and still fall short on accountability. One truth should never require ignoring the other. The SSC risks losing its integrity not because it has failed to act, but because it has failed to communicate that it is acting at all.
Criticisms surrounding the SSC are also often reduced as if the council were a single entity with a single voice, when in reality it is composed of 19 elected councilors entrusted with representing the student body. The Council originally had 21 members, but two councilors resigned, one before the previous academic year began and another during the last semester. Yet during its Ninth Special Session, which mainly tackled the institution’s registration, only 11 of the 19 councilors were present, barely enough to make a quorum. Councilors who remain absent, inactive, or silent during crucial moments should also bear the weight of public scrutiny.
A council struggling through one of the most challenging periods in its history cannot afford to have half of its elected officers missing in action. Not only is it a disservice to the presiding officers, but a huge dishonor to the Carolinians who had genuine hope for reform after casting your name on the ballot.
The burden of accountability does not rest solely on the SSC. The University administration must also answer for systemic obstacles that continue to complicate student governance, particularly those surrounding organizational recognition and institutional support. Likewise, COMELEC must continue asserting its constitutional mandate with the urgency expected of an independent electoral body.
Carolinians should reject an administration that unnecessarily complicates student governance. But we should also reject the idea that difficult circumstances excuse every failure of leadership. The SSC cannot expect Carolinians to defend the institution that struggles to keep them informed. The SSC deserves autonomy. The student body deserves transparency. Neither should come at the expense of the other.
Winning Carolinians back will not begin with another campaign season. It will not begin with punchlines, slogans, posters, or flashy campaign promises. It begins with something much simpler. Answering the students. A council cannot claim that it speaks for the students when it struggles to speak to us in the first place. More than elections, more than campaigns, this is what the SSC must win back: the trust of the students it is meant to serve.
—
Opinion by K
Visual by Jyreneah Angel
Visit Today’s Carolinian’s official social media channels: https://bit.ly/todaysusc
Today's Carolinian has been operating independently since 2019, without funding from the university. To support the publication, please make a donation through our finance officer:
M*****a M.
09668273480 - GCash