SENATOR JOEL VILLANUEVA (JV): Mr. President, I moved that we recognized the sponsor of the measure, Senator Chiz Escudero will interpelate our Senate Majority Leader Koko Pimentel.
SENATOR KOKO PIMENTEL (KP): With the permission of our hardworking sponsors, Mr. President, yes. we lined up I think five of his committee reports for today’s session. Does this measure, Mr. President, impose a new policy? Is this still no policy and measures as of the moment?
SENATOR CHIZ ESCUDERO (CHIZ): There is a policy by CHED but it is merely persuasive and not mandatory, Mr. President, your Honor. It becomes mandatory when you impose penal sanctions or provisions by a law.
KP: So, how does CHED maintain such a, what it is, this discretionary policy, Mr. President.
CHIZ: I have not been able to do so, Mr. President. That is why in the program of Senator Raffy Tulfo, we see many cases wherein students were not allowed to take an exam because they failed to pay the corresponding tuition fees. Again, CHED nearly tries to exercise its persuasive powers, but it is not mandatory.
KP: So, ang kahalagahan po ng pinag-uusapan natin ngayon ay napakahalaga at napaka-relevant sa panahon ngayon kasi mahirap ang buhay at marami ang hindi nakakabayad. Ang gusto lamang po nating mangyari is pagbawalan sa parehong pribado at saka sa pampublikong paaralan. Pag-aralan ang polisiyang pagbayarin muna ang mga estudyante bago sila maka-exam?
CHIZ: Tama po ang kinatawan mula sa Cagayan De Oro, Ginoong Pangulo. Ang layunin po ng panukalang batas na ito ay ipagbawal na pigilan ang isang estudyanteng kumuha ng exam dahil lamang sa hindi siya nakapagbayad ng sapat at tama o kaukulang tuition fee sa paaralang pinag-aaralan niya—pampubliko man o pampribado. Kinausap namin noong nagpulong kami ang mga kinatawan ng pribado at mga pampublikong paaralan.
Simple ang sinabi kong argumento sa kanila. Bakit ninyo pinayagang mag-enroll uli kung hindi naman pala nagbayad noong nagdaang taon at nagdaang semester. Tapos hindi ninyo papayagang mag-exam na parang tinututukan ninyo ng baril at hinohostage ninyo ang mga estudyante para pilitin silang magbayad.
Masasayang ang ilan nilang pag-aaral kung hindi naman sila papahintulutang kunin iyong final exams sa dulo ng semester ng taong iyon. Ang sabi ko sa kanila, hindi naman namin tinatanggal ang karapatan at kapangyarihan ninyo na pagbawalan silang mag-enroll sa susunod na semester o sa susunod na taon kung hindi naman talaga nakabayad. Pero, kapag pinayagan na nilang mag-enrol, hindi nila puwedeng pigilan mag-eksamin ang bata dahil hindi lamang nakapagbayad ng kabuuang tuition fee.
KP: So, klaro iyon at ang magbebenepisyo rito ay ang ating mga mag-aaral. Anong level po ba ito kung sakaling maging batas po itong law na ito, ‘no permit, no exam’ policy? Saan po ito ma-iimpose?
CHIZ: Applicable po sa lahat ng antas. Pero sa pampublikong paaralan, wala naman pong tuition fee na binabayaran. Sa pampublikong paaralan din walang binabayarang tuition fee sa tertiary level.
KP: So, ito po ay talagang limitado lamang sa kakulangan ng kakayahang magbayad ng tuition fee. So, kung sakali iyong estudyante ay may ibang pananagutan na pera rin or materyales o libro or equipment na hindi naman related sa tuition, siya po ba ay puwedeng mapigilang mag-exam?
CHIZ: Hindi pa rin po ginoong pangulo pero iyong pananagutang bayaran iyong bayaring iyon — sa libro man, sa computer, sa laboratory fee, mananatili pa rin naman po. At gaya ng sinabi ko, kung gagamitin nilang dahilan iyan para hindi pahintulutan magmatrikula ang estudyante sa susunod na taon ay hindi na po naming pigilan iyon. Karapatan ng paaralan iyon. Pero, ang pinayagan nilang pumasok ay hindi puwedeng gamiting dahilan ay ang kakulangan ng pambayad para hindi pakuhanin ng exam.
KP: So, ito pong ating panukalang batas sa present form niya, sa pagkasulat niya- covered na po iyong second senaryo ng sinasabi ko na meron nang pagkakautang pero hindi related sa tuition fee?
CHIZ: Tama po kayo basta bayad din po sa paaralang pinag-aaralan niya.
KP: Ngayon, ginawa po nating mas istrikto ang sabi natin ay persuasive lamang iyong CHED ngayon gawin nating mandatory with a penal provision. Pero, tiningnan ko po iyong ating penal provision, Section 7, Page 3 penalties- ang atin pong paparusahan ay ang ating education institutions. Ito po ba ay kaya nang gawin ngayon?
CHIZ: Opo, dahil kung may guro man na magbawal ng isang estudyanteng kumukuha ng exam dahil hindi nakapagbayad, obligasyon po ng paaralan na pagsabihan ang isang guro na inimpleyo niya na sumunod sa itinatalaga ng batas. Pangalawa, ang tingin po namin wala naman sa interes ng guro na huwag pakunin ng exam ang isang estudyante dahil hindi naman po sa kanya may utang. Iyong estudyante kung hindi sa institusyon at sa paaralan. So malamang mag-i-impose o magpataw ng kautusan na huwag payagan ang estudyante ay ang paaralan mismo.
KP: So ginawa po natin ito to penal law ano po ang bakit mape-pressure ang educational institution na sumunod na ang ating penalty po ay fine nasa Section 7 po, it’s a fine not less than Php20,000 pesos but not more than Php50,000 for each case and we know ito bang fine it is not paid does this entail as a consequence subsidiary imprisonment, Mr. President?
CHIZ: I just passed a bar, Mr. President, your honor I am not a topnotcher but I believe that subsidiary imprisonment only applies to crimes punishable by the revised penal code unless I am mistaken Mr. President, your honor. So, my answer would be if the gentleman agrees with, no. It does not carry the subsidiary penalty of imprisonment in case of non-payment of fines. But Mr. President, if the honorable minority leader would suggest a more severe penal provision, this representation is open to amending the same at the proper time.
KP: Well, my point Mr. President, is if the educational institution fails to pay or refuses to pay the fine then how will the penalty be felt, Mr. President?
CHIZ: Well, the presumption, Mr. President, is that a fine should be paid only after conviction. And therefore, the usual remedies that the sheriff would do in executing a judgment would apply which includes attachment if at all non-payments still persists sale of assets of the constitution at public auction in order to satisfy the fine that was imposed upon the institution.
KP: So, the fine will be, the amount of the fine, will be executed against the properties of the educational institution?
CHIZ: As the ordinary course in civil judgments, Mr. President, or penal judgments Mr. President, your Honor.
KP: Well, the educational institution, Mr. President is a juridical entity and will have to act through individuals. So, is the sponsor not amenable to pinpointing a specific official of the educational institution which we can make liable for the penalty? Mr. President, to really give teeth to the mandatory nature of the law, Mr. President.
CHIZ: We thought about adopting the principle of command responsibility, Mr. President, and simply impose it of the president of the institution however, there may be cases wherein the prohibition was imposed by someone without the knowledge of the president of the institution but definitely someone did it. But again, if the gentleman would like to impose the principle or adopt the principle of command responsibility to this particular situation and make the president of the institution liable to makes his business to know and that if he does not well to the principle of command responsibilities applies and he would be the one be made liable. It will be amenable, Mr. President.
KP: Thank you for that Mr. President. We will in the proper time and capture the exact words. And maybe also that person specifically responsible for violating the policy. Because if there’s a policy then there should be well-disseminated also in the educational institution, Mr. President.
CHIZ: Again, following the principle of command responsibility it’s his job Mr. President your honor. I would just like to cite a situation where in the case of the state colleges and universities it is the CHED chairman who sits as the chair of the board, co-chair lang po ‘yung presidente and their policy-making body and if they omit or fail to act on such complaints then it might also include if at all the CHED chairman as the chairman policy-making body of the state university and college.
KP: Yes, but then again of course the president is the one in charge of executing or implementing the policies and monitoring the day-to-day activities of the educational institutions.
CHIZ: We are amenable, Mr. President, to amending Section 7 to specifically state that as follows for example. The president of the educational institution was found guilty of committing. We would be amenable to that, Mr. President.
KP: Thank you, Mr. President. And then the mechanism for allowing this policy to be observed, Mr. President, is that instead of preventing the student from taking the exam when he or she has unpaid tuition and other school fees the student and/or the parents or legal guardians shall execute a promissory note.
CHIZ: If that is required by the school, Mr. President.
KP: Yes, OK if that is waivable by the school. In cases where the school will not waive this and will require this, that note should include a date when the obligation shall be settled and then we will allow interest not exceeding 6% the interest is also waivable, but in case it is not waived up to 6%. So, is the sponsor open to the idea of prohibiting the imposition of interest, Mr. President? Kasi nga we still allow the promissory note, we still allow the date when the note shall be discharged. But let’s prohibit the imposition of interest kasi nahirapan na nga magbayad ‘yung estudyante.
CHIZ: I see where the gentleman is coming from, Mr. President your honor, especially given the fact that educational institutions are tax-exempt. They do not actually pay any taxes. Again, at the proper time, we would be open to an amendment to that effect.
KP: Thank you, Mr. President. And they also maybe a wording to capture these sponsors understanding that even the promissory note is waivable because as Section 4 is currently written it is only in my understanding, it is the interest which is waivable, Mr. President.
CHIZ: Agreed, Mr. President, your Honor. We can help the good gentleman craft wording to that effect.
KP: And then Mr. President section 5 paragraph D about the possible court action. My concern here is the connection of the interest in the pro indicated in the promissory note in the court action. So, it’s connected with my initial proposal that we do away with the – if possible, with the interest Mr. President.
CHIZ: Once we delete that in section 4 Mr. President it will correspondingly mean that we should also delete that in the succeeding section, Section 5.
KP: And then Mr. President let us go to Section 6 on the prohibited acts and paragraph B and it will be read this way. The following acts committed by any educational institution shall be prohibited; letter B, requiring a student to secure a permit to take an examination or any form of education assessment from the school authorities prior to the administration of such examination or assessment. So, does this establish a new general rule that in the taking of an exam no more permit will actually be required, Mr. President?
CHIZ: Well Mr. President, your Honor, if you’re enrolled as a grade 5, grade 6, second year, third year, high school or college then in the ordinary course of events you should go through this semester as planned in the curriculum which includes the taking of certain exams whether midterm or finals. And it begs the question why each time you have to take an exam you have to secure a separate permit. So, the question is what would be a requirement for securing such a permit before you take the exam? The mere fact of enrollment in an institution should suffice to qualify you to take the exam whether the outcome is that you pass or fail that exam it should reflect in your final grade but it should not reflect whether you will have the right to take the exam.
KP: Current practice, Mr. President, do educational institutions require permits fair exam?
CHIZ: Some do, Mr. President, because they try to avoid the persuasive circular of CHED not to require the payment of tuition fees prior to taking of an exam. So, some private educational institutions have been creative. In so far as circumventing that requirement and latching the right to take an exam on something else other than the payment of school in tuition fees.
KP: So, kaya nga, Mr. President, if we now take it into consideration section 6 paragraph B this will now be a new rule, no more permit, because it’s going to be prohibited,
CHIZ: As long as he is enrolled.
KP: Yes, no more. That will now be the new rule in all educational institutions at all levels according to our sponsor.
CHIZ: Mr. President, kahit noong nag-aaral tayo matanda ka lang ng kaunti sa akin Ginoong Minority Leader, wala namang mga permit sa exam. ‘Di ba ‘pag grade 1 ka kukunin mo lahat ng exam na binibigay ng teacher quiz man ‘yan, midterm o finals. Ganoon din noong high school. Ganoon din naman noong college. Makabagong pamamaraan lang naman ‘yung mga permit-permit na ‘yan bago ka payagan kumuha ng exam at ‘yan ay konektado madalas sa pagbabayad o hindi pagbabayad ng tuition fee.
KP: So, kaya nga po. Generally, hindi naman talaga nire-require ng karamihang educational institutions ang permit pero mayroon pala na nag-imbento na kada exam kukuha ka ng permit. Ngayon itong panukala natin pagbabawalan na po ‘yon?
CHIZ: Opo dahil ginagamit ‘yon parang checkpoint kumbaga para matiyak na magbayad ‘yung estudyante o para ma-pressure o mapilit yung estudyante magbayad.
KP: Tama po ‘yon, klaro po ‘yon. And then ito pong prohibited acts natin Section 6, ‘yong letter D: imposing fines, penalties or interest on an outstanding financial or property obligations in excess of the maximum interest rate provided on the Section 4 of this act. Babalikan ko na lang po ‘yong aking proposal ulit.
CHIZ: Mawawala na rin po ‘yan.
KP: Pagbawalan po natin kasi mayroon nan gang principal na utang ‘wag na natin payagan ng educational institution kahit pasok man doon sa 6 percent na magpataw pa ng additional na pampahirap po sa estudyante.
CHIZ: Mawawala na rin po ‘yan, Ginoong Pangulo, dahil sa babaguhin nating probisyon sa Section 4 at Section 5. Kaakibat po ‘yan.
KP: Salamat po. Salamat po. So mga ilan pong kung ito po’y maging batas mga ilan pong educational institutions kaya ang medyo kailangang baguhin nila ‘yong kanilang practices dahil dito sa ating panukala.
CHIZ: Well, Ginoong Pangulo, noong tinanong namin ang mga pribado at pampublikong educational institution, wala naman pong nagsabi na sila’y tutol dito. Sa katunayan, basta’t nandoon ang karapatan nila na magsampa ng kaso para habulin ‘yong bayarin sa kanila. Pangalawa, basta may karapatan sila na ‘wag pahintulutan mag-enroll sa susunod na taon o semestre, tanggap po nila ito dahil inamin din naman po nila pinayagan nilang pumasok maski hindi nakapagbayad. ‘Di dapat patapusin nila ‘yong semester man lang.
KP: Opo, sang-ayon po ako doon. Noong tinggap na siyempre may reasonable expectation na talaga ‘yong mag-aaral na makatapos siya. And then hindi naman siya mape-penalize because of poverty or financial difficulties, Mr. President.
CHIZ: Naniniwala ako, Ginoong Pangulo, na wala namang budol budol na estudyante o kung mayroon man kokonti lang at wala namang balasubas na magulang na pipilitin lang mag-aral ‘yong anak niya na walang intensyong magbayad. Talagang kapos lamang siguro at hindi pinalad na magkaroon ng sapat na pera para magbayad ng tuition fee.
KP: Wala po tayo sa committee hearing po natin wala po tayong educational institution na nag-report na posible silang bumagsak kung maging batas ito dahil mas marami silang estudyante na natanggap nila pero tapos ay hindi natuloy, hindi magbabayad o hindi makabayad at mapipiligro pa ang kanilang financial situation.
CHIZ: Ito’y aplikable po sa mga pampribadong institusyon at wala po silang binanggit na ganoon sa aming pagdinig. Sa katunayan sinabi nila na suportado nila ang intensyon ng panukalang batas subalit ayaw nilang tanggalan sila ng karapatang habulin labas sa hindi pagpahintulot o hindi pagbabawal na mag-exam ang estudyante kung ano mang bayarin na kailangang bayaran sa kanila.
KP: Pero nasabi po ba nila, Mr. President, sa hearing na talaga bang interesado silang pagkakitaan pa ng interes ‘yong mga halagang hindi nababayaran.
CHIZ: Hindi po napag-usapan subalit pumayag sila sa 6 na porsyento na nakasaad sa bersyon ng bill, Ginoong Pangulo, Ginoong Minority Leader.
KP: Opo. Kasi ang aking plano is ‘yong 6 magiging 0 na po ‘yon, 0 percent kasi I mean I’m sure maiintindihan naman siguro po nila hindi naman sila siguro na ang habol nila ay pagkakitaan pa ng interes ‘yong hindi pa nababayaran.
CHIZ: This representation has no objection, Mr. President. In the spirit of fair play and helping the needer segments of our society in this country perhaps the only objections would be in a sense by way of unjust enrichment but clearly, the parents of the students are poor who cannot pay the tuition fee and they will not in any stretch of their imagination be enriched by the non-payment interest.
KP: So, thank you, Mr President. I think this measure deserves our full support kasi ang dami na rin naman nating ‘di ba ang dami naman nating meron tayong educational assistance sa DSWD meron tayong mga CHED financial assistance ang dami so ito’y isang paraan lang din na tulungan ‘yong talagang mahirap or nahirapan ng panandalian. So, this measure, Mr. President, deserve our full support and it applies just to public or private educational institutions at all levels.
CHIZ: That is correct, Mr. President.
KP: Klaro po ‘yon and at least no more permit or a permit-like system where the intention is to force the student to pay some unpaid obligation whether tuition related or not before he or she can take the exam.
CHIZ: That is correct, Mr. President, your Honor, whatever nomenclature the educational institution would like to use whether it’s called a permit or what have you this will be deemed prohibited shall the law be passed.
KP: So, thank you, Mr. President. Thank you to our sponsor for his patience he has a lot the pending measure and it’s importance Mister President. Thank you.
JV: Mr. President, at this juncture I moved to suspend these considerations, Mr. President. Sorry, I moved and suspended consideration of Senate Bill No 1359 under Committee Report No. 6. So moved, Mr. President.
SENATOR JUAN MIGUEL ZUBIRI (JMZ): The Senate Bill of our colleagues Senate Bill No. 1359 is suspended.
JV: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, with the consent of the body I moved that we resumed consideration of House Bill No. 4635 under Committee Report No. 18. This is the Bill on extending the term of the office of the president of the Adiong Memorial State College. I so moved, Mr. President.
JMZ: If there’s no objection, motions are approved.
JV: Mr. President, the parliamentary study of the measure is that we have sponsored the measure. I now moved to open the period of interpellation debate and recognize the sponsor, Senator Chiz Escudero and to interpolate our minority leader. So moved, Mr. President.
JMZ: Distinguished sponsor Senator Escudero recognized and Minority Floor Leader Senator Koko Pimentel is recognized.
KP: Thank you, Mr. President. With the permission of our esteemed colleague, our chairman and sponsor, I would like to ask just a few clarificatory questions on this very curious bill, Mr. President.
CHIZ: It would be an honor, Mr. President.
KP: I used the word “curious,” Mr. President because there is already a law. There is a law, RA 8651 passed in 1998 is later than RA 8292 passed in 1997. And yet, we still have this problem that RA 8651, a later law is not compliant with the earlier law? So, how did this happen, Mr. President?
CHIZ: I asked that question, Mr. President, your Honor. In fact, during the committee hearing, I said if there is a need to amend or can they simply comply with the earlier law but according to them, it is a source of misunderstanding, conflict, and confusion in this state university and colleges therefore the need to clarify the term of the president. Clearly Mr. President, this was done because of an omission of that time by the Committee on Education. Hindi pa siya yata nahahati sa basic education at that time. Both part of the House and the part of the Senate Mr. President, your Honor.
KP: So, among all these state colleges Mr. President it would be the only Adiong Memorial State College whose president is at the term of three years all the rest four years na?
CHIZ: Yes Mr. President, your Honor. Except for those only term clarifications, and extensions that we usually do whenever a state college is converted into a university. If the current term of the incumbent president of the state college will be counted as such or it will be considered as a totally new term again subject to re-election one time?
KP: But we still use the number four.
CHIZ: That is correct, your Honor. Except for UP.
KP: UP is exempted from the general law. And the term is six years, Mr. President.
CHIZ: Six years, Mr. President.
KP: How about MSU? I think they are also exempted.
CHIZ: Not familiar, Mr. President, because I don’t sit MSU Board personally.
KP: So, thank you for that, Mr. President. And then so, on the substance of the bill. The bill mentions that the president shall render full-time service. Isn’t full-time already a requirement under RA8082 Mr. President?
CHIZ: Yes, Mr. President. They just copied it. Again, to provide clarity, Mr. President, apparently according to the officials of the university that attended the hearing virtually, it has been a source of confusion, misunderstanding, and conflict within the said state university.
KP: And then the bill deletes the preselection process Mr. President which is also mentioned in the existing law. So, will this not possibly lead to another or a new misunderstanding, Mr. President?
CHIZ: Well at least, Mr. President, now it’s clear that whatever selection process or guidelines as they may call it now would be established by the board.
KP: So, what was the confusion before Mr. President?
CHIZ: They were using tradition apparently Mr. President your honor. “Noon ganito, noon ganyan” refers to the selection process used in previous years when they chose the president of the university.
KP: This time there would be a search committee, Mr. President?
CHIZ: And the board will set the guidelines for the creation, guidelines, and procedures of such a search committee similar to what is done in the University of the Philippines Mr. President your honor it’s the board that says it.
KP: During our committee hearing, Mr. President, on this measure is there any other matter which could lead to a misunderstanding or which is a source of misunderstanding as of the moment? So that we will comprehensively address all these concerns, Mr. President.
CHIZ: Well, Mr. President, ika nga nila “aabangan natin ang susunod na kabanata.” But I will not be as entertaining anymore because I ask them that very same question during the hearing. Mayroon pa ba dahil baka mamaya, bukas makalawa babalik na naman kayo para sa hindi na naman pagkakaunawaan na kakailanganin na naman ng pagpasa namin ng bagong panukalang batas para amyendahan ang inyong charter. The answer given to me off the record Mr. President was at this time with the emphasis of at this time wala daw po.
KP: OK na po Mister President I think that’s been clarified siguro although we passed a later law sometimes these things happen ‘no. We were probably, we forgot with the principle contained in an earlier laws nakalusot anyways this is just an exception lang naman to this does not happen most of the time. Sometime this happens.
CHIZ: Mr. President, Myrna Feliciano would be proud, our teacher in statutory construction. The said law was a general law and this is a specific law applied to a particular university although It’s a later law. Nakalimutan ko ‘yong tamang sagot na tinuro sa atin ni Prof. Myrna Feliciano at that time but there is always exceptions to the rule. That’s why I tried to convince them that this is not necessary. That the earlier law or the earlier it may be should be followed but they requested that this bill be passed nevertheless and I see to it.
KP: Yes, because it destroys the overall plan or design for state colleges, Mr. President.
CHIZ: Exactly, Mr. President.
KP: Nakasulat na doon: presidente has obligation, duties and then the term is four years, Mr. President. So, thank you again for the patience of our sponsor, Mr. President. At least we have been clarified and siguro notice to us all legislators to be conscious of the existing law as well as of a general of a law giving the general plan or design or overall pattern or skill for a certain sector of our society like state universities and colleges. So meron ng, parang meron ng, general rules diyan sa kanila so all should follow otherwise masisira-sira na naman, Mr. President.
CHIZ: I agree, Mr. President, your Honor. we will be circumspect when it comes to dealing with similar pieces of legislation. Thank you, your Honor, thank you Minority Leader.
JV: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I moved that be resumed consideration of Senate Bill No. 1864 under Committee Report No. 26. This a bill on Student Loan Payment Moratorium during Disasters and Emergencies Act, so moved, Mr. President.
JMZ: Any objections? Motions approved.
JV: Mr. President, the parliamentary status of the measure is that we have sponsored the measure and I now moved that we open the period of interpellations and debate. Mr. President. I also moved that we recognize our sponsor, Senator Chiz Escudero, and interpellate our Minority Leader.
JMZ: Any objections? Motions approved. We recognized the Minority Floor Leader to interpellate the distinguished sponsor, Senator Francis Escudero.
KP: Again, with the permission of our sponsor, Mr. President.
CHIZ: Mr. President, let me just preface, this is just one of the many in the pro-poor bill of our distinguished colleague, Senator Lito Lapid.
KP: Yes, Mr. President. Siguro pag-usapan na lamang natin iyong general intent to what does this measures seek to achieve, Mr. President?
CHIZ: I want to clarify, Mr. President. To begin with this only applies to higher educational institutions covered by both CHED and TESDA, including local universities and colleges. It does not apply, or at least that is the wording of the bill filed by Senator Lapid, primary and secondary private educational institutions. It seeks to suspend, Mr. President or declare a moratorium in so far as student loan payment is concerned whenever there is a natural disaster during the period in which the locality is under a state of calamity.
KP: It must be formally declared the state of calamity, Mr. President?
CHIZ: Yes, Mr. President, your Honor. Either by the national government or by the local Sanggunian of the Municipality City or province is concerned via a resolution passed by the Sanggunian or LGU.
KP: And the subject matter would be the student loans? Ito na po iyong pinag-uusapan dito, tama po ba iyon?
CHIZ: That is correct, Mr. President, your Honor. Kung meron man sila at kung iyon po ay student loan sa pamahalaan- nasyonal man o lokal o sa pribadong paaralan- covered po iyan.
KP: OK po Mr. President, naklaro na ang benepisyo ay sa mga mag-aaral. Estudyante sa mga college level, institution of higher learning and then in case mayroong kalamidad sa lugar na formally declared mayroon po tayong moratorium or ligal sa pagtitigil sa pagbabayad sa kanilang mga utang na sino po ang creditor sa utang na iyon?
CHIZ: Pamahalaan man kung mayroon silang study now pay later program tulad sa nakita natin sa nagdaang panahon o yung pribadong institusyon po kung hindi man pumasok sa financing scheme para po sa pagpapautang sa pagbabayad ng tuition fee ng estudyante sa pampribado o pampublikong paaralan saklaw po ito ng panukalang batas.
KP: Sa United States po malaki po itong student loans kasi talagang umuutang ‘yung mga nag-aaral sa institution of higher learning para makatapos. Dito po bas a Pilipinas mga ilan po ang rehistradong students in higher education institutions public, private and local who have existing student loans, Mr. President.
CHIZ: Unfortunately, Mr. President, your Honor. CHED does not and did not have any data comprehensive enough to cover the entire country. I guess they must go through an institution-by-institution basis which they have not done thus far.
KP: So, they have no idea the number of potential beneficiaries under this measure as well as the amount involve kasi nagbabago rin naman ‘yung amount na—
CHIZ: I have no idea, Mr. President. I am sure it’s not as large even on a pro-rata basis as that which they have in the United States. Given it’s not that easily accessible and not too many institutions both public and private offer loans to poor but deserving students in order to pay their corresponding tuition fees.
KP: Thank you, Mr. President. I just have a problem, Mr. President, on the phrasing of found in Section 5, but actually the part in Section 5 found in page 4 lines 1-6. There is this phrase, prohibiting students from voluntarily waiving the benefit of the moratorium on student loan payments or availing assistance or subsidies on the government as provided by law, rules, and regulations.
CHIZ: Can I inquire about section 5 line?
KP: Section 5 let us go to section 4 which would be the final provision beginning on line 1. Yes, 1-6. That provided finally that nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent public or private HEIs or TVIs from implementing more favorable forms of payment, relief, or assistance to the students, klaro po ‘yon. But itong second part, prohibiting students from voluntarily waiving the benefit of the moratorium on student loan payments or availing assistance or subsidies from the government as provided by law, rules, and regulations.
CHIZ: We are amenable to deleting that particular provision, Mr. President, but the intention was just for the record. To prevent any HEI from cajoling, convincing, or pressuring the student to agree to waive his rights under this act. That was the intention, Mr. President. But then again we are amenable to deleting the phrase after the word, beginning with the word prohibiting until the word before the comma payments.
KP: Mr. President, I don’t think we need to delete siguro. We can capture the original intent and nahirapan lang po tayo because a double negative was used, Mr. President. So, I think we can still capture the intent of the author.
CHIZ: Then we can just amend it, Mr. President, to provide a provision meaning after if the gentleman is available after students, on line 4 provided that students cannot waive the benefit of the moratorium on student loan payments or availing assistance or subsidy blah, blah, blah.
KP: Yes. What is important is that the sponsor, Mr. President, is amenable to rephrasing but still capturing the original content of our author, Mr. President. I think that’s my last point, Mr. President because who can be against this bill. Ang ganda naman ng intent nito na tsaka very narrow, very anong tawag mo doon, very specific instances formally declared states of calamity and then what would be the benefits sa moratorium on the payment of student loans. For students in higher educational institutions. So it’s a very specific benefit for which is available in very specific instances, Mr. President. So siguro last point na lang, Mr. President, on the styling, page 3, section 5 which starts with there shall be a moratorium on the enforcement of payment of all fees so maybe if we can be more direct it could a moratorium in the payment.
CHIZ: Page ano, Mr. President, Section 3?
KP: Page 3, section 5, lines 21 to 22. There shall be a moratorium on the enforcement of payment of all fees etc. So payment if the moratorium would be on the payment not the enforcement.
CHIZ: Agreed, Mr. President. We will propose corresponding amendments during the period of individual amendments.
KP: So that would be all, Mr. President. So, thank you again for the patience of our sponsor.
CHIZ: Thank you.