Educators challenge language policy in SC
Educators, writers and students trooped to the Supreme Court on Friday to challenge the Arroyo administration’s language policy.
They petitioned the Court to stop the Department of Education from continuing to carry out Executive Order 210 strengthening the use of English in the school system at the expense of Filipino and the other Philippine languages.
The petitioners described the policy as both “unconstitutional and mistaken.”
The petitioners are asking the Court to issue a writ of preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order—telling the administration to desist from carrying out EO 210 and any of its implementing regulations.
They are also asking the Supreme Court to declare EO 210 and DepEd Order No. 36, S 2006 null and void, saying these are in violation of the Constitution.
The educators seeking a repeal of EO 210 include Dr. Patricia Licuanan, president of Miriam College; National Artists Bienvenido Lumbera and Virgilio Almario; University of the Philippines sociologist Randolf David; Isagani R. Cruz, president of WIKA Inc.; and Efren Abueg, writer in residence at De La Salle University.
They are represented by Pacifico A. Agabin, former dean of the UP College of Law.
The petitioners claim that EO 210 and Department of Education Order No. 36 (which operationalizes EO 210) patently violate Article XIV of the 1987 Constitution.
The Constitution declares Filipino as the national language and mandates the government “to initiate and sustain [its] use . . .as a medium of official communication and as language of instruction in the educational system.”
The educators claimed that the implementation of EO 210 would emaciate the constitutional policy of propagating the use of Filipino. They cited a 1991 congressional study to refute both EO 210 and a House bill with a similar intent, written by Cebu First District Rep. Eduardo Gullas.
HB 4701 on “Strengthening and Enhancing the Use of English as the Medium of Instruction in Philippine Schools,” certified as urgent by President Arroyo, passed the House but was not acted on by the Senate in the Thirteenth Congress.
The Gullas bill goes against the findings of a Congressional Commission on Education (Edcom) in 1991.
The commission—made up of 10 senators and congressmen, and chaired by Sen. Edgardo J. Angara—recommended specifically that Congress make the vernacular and Filipino the medium of instruction for basic education.
The Edcom report, written after an 11-month study, became the basis for reform laws that restructured the Department of Education and created a separate commission to supervise higher education.
Edcom also ordered the DepEd to develop instructional materials in Filipino. It envisioned that all subjects in elementary and high-school education—except English and other languages—would be taught in Filipino by the year 2000.
how come this move is unconstitutional? there is no provision in the constitution which prohibits the use of English as a medium of Instruction. let’s just say, WE ARE NOT TO ABOLISH FILIPINO AS A SUBJECT IN THE CURRICULUM, therefore, IT IS NOT A QUESTION THAT THE FILIPINO LANGUAGE WILL STILL BE INITIATED AND SUSTAINED. All we have to consider is that, we have lots of supporters from the government. Therefore, it is not wrong to say that we haev English as a medium of Instruction. we are not to erase Filipino Language, i repeat again. Also, if people will argue that the Filipino Language will be forgotten and covered, that is not the case. we still have other alternatives to use inorder to preserve Filipino as well. Being a medium of Instruction in our educational system is not the only means to sustain the use of Filipino Language.
Loving our own doesn’t necessarily mean we have to GO FOR IT ALL THE TIME. If you want Philippines to become more competent globally, well then, WE HAVE TO SACRIFICE A BIT OF OUR OWN.
This is just my opinion people.
Anyways, I’m Kay Conales, a 15 yr old, 4th yr High School Student from the University of Cebu.
Thank you! God bless.
Kay,
Alam mo what is unconstitutional… Tanging Supreme Court lamang ang makapagsasabi nun kaya nga humihingi ang ilang educator ng TRO para maihinto ang EO 210 at mareview ng SC kung na-over move ng executive department ang function niya at kung may violation nga sa constitution. lets wait. pero we can still become competitive kahit hindi naman english ang medium ng instruction db?…
maybe then..well, its really the supreme court who can well judge it.