04/04/2026
๐๐
๐
๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) of Father Saturnino Urios University hereby informs the student body of the final ruling rendered by the Honorable Supreme Student Court on the consolidated petitions assailing COMELEC Resolution Nos. 2526-007 and 2526-008.
The Honorable Court has AFFIRMED Resolution No. 2526-007, declaring that the extension of the elections until March 31, 2026 at 12:00 noon is VALID and CONSTITUTIONAL.
However, the Court has REJECTED Resolution No. 2526-008, which stated that COMELEC will not conduct a re-election.
This ruling affirms that the extension of the elections was grounded on real threats to our democracy, anchored on the mandate vested to us by the Constitution and the powers given to us by the Electoral System Reform Act, and necessitated by circumstances that directly affected the integrity of the electoral process.
COMELEC acted on factsโnot assumptions.
Prior to Election Day, formal complaint was received on March 27, 2026, raising concerns regarding possible undue influence and internal interference involving those in the spaces of power in our Supreme Student Government. While this raised initial alarm, benefit of the doubt was given, presumption in favor of the alleged was afforded, and the complaint was treated as mere circumstantial. Unbeknownst to us that the full extent of the situation will evident only during the actual conduct of the elections.
On March 28, 2026โElection Dayโthe situation escalated significantly.
During the voting period, COMELEC received grievance forms, sworn affidavits, and direct verbal reports describing specific actions that took place and among the student body.
Central to these reports were the involvement high-level officers of the student government who, based on sworn statements, actively encouraged students not to vote. These were not isolated remarks. They were deliberate, repeated, and communicated in ways that influenced others - discouraging participation and eroding confidence in the electoral process. Coming from positions of authority, such conduct did not merely carry weight - it altered voter behavior.
At the same time, reports revealed that high-level officers are actively propagating misinformation: that the elections would fail, that the results would not stand, and that a re-election would inevitably follow. Students were led to believe that voting was futile - that their participation had no value, and that a more favorable opportunity would arise later.
This was not neutral discourse. This was targeted influence. It shaped perception, distorted judgment, and suppressed participation on a scale that cannot be precisely quantified, but whose consequences were unmistakable.
Even more troubling, reports reveal discussions and statements were being made linking the anticipated failure of the elections to future political positioning, including the possibility of these high-level officers fielding or supporting a preferred candidate under different circumstances. The implication is clear: the failure of the elections was not merely expected; it was strategically advantageous to certain parties.
While we recognize that to not vote and to convince others not to vote form part of the studentsโ right to suffrage, freedom of speech and expression, as pointed out in the join concurring and dissenting opinion, this was not that case. Taken together, these accounts establish a clear and consistent pattern: actions were undertaken on Election Day to suppress turnout, weaken participation, and create conditions to force the failure of elections.
This was not coincidence. This was not protected expression exercised in good faith. This was a calculated effort to undermine the electoral process itself in order to influence the outcome. The question, then, is unavoidable: should those entrusted with authority be allowed to weaponize misinformation and discourage participation simply to preserve power - for themselves or for their allies - at the expense of the student bodyโs right to suffrage?
More alarming still were the verbal statements and implicit affirmations that, should the elections produce results contrary to their expectations, these same high-level officers would resign and abandon their posts. Such declarations betray a fundamental misunderstanding of student government office, not as a duty owed to the students, but as a position contingent on personal preference and political convenience.
Faced with these realities, COMELEC had no lawful or moral option but to act.
To remain passive would have been a dereliction of duty - a surrender of its constitutional mandate to โensure just, fair, free, accessible, orderly, honest, credible, and peaceful electionsโ (Article IX, Section 5(3), 2024 Constitution). To proceed under such compromised conditions would have been to legitimize an outcome shaped not by the will of the electorate, but by manipulation, suppression, and calculated non-participation.
COMELEC acted, as it was duty-bound to do.
It undertook immediate measures: encouraging voter participation, directly countering misinformation, and intensifying public information efforts. However, as the situation persisted and its impact became evident, COMELEC escalated its response - extending voting hours from 5:00 PM to 7:00 PM, and ultimately until 12:00 noon of March 30. This was not an accommodation. It was an intervention - necessary, proportionate, and compelled by the circumstances.
The extension of the elections was not an advantage to any candidate or group. It was a safeguard against those who sought to subvert the democratic process and entrench themselves in power. It was a corrective measure to ensure that the true will of the student body could still be expressed.
The Honorable Court has now affirmed what was already evident: that COMELECโs actions were lawful, justified, and firmly grounded in its constitutional mandate.
This matter was further aggravated by COMELECโs initial position, formalized in Resolution No. 2526-008, that a re-election would be unlawful - creating the real possibility of a student government without elected officers. On this point, the Court has now decisively ruled otherwise. COMELEC, bound by this ruling, will act in full compliance with the directives that follow.
To every Urian, this is the truth that must be confronted:
The elections were not placed at risk because students were indifferent.
They were placed at risk because participation was deliberately suppressed, and because certain interests stood to benefit from that suppression.
They were placed at risk because those already in power acted as though that power was theirs to keep, regardless of the will of the electorate.
Democracy does not fail on its own.
It fails when participation is weakened, influenced, and intentionally suppressed.
Your vote is your voice.
Your participation is your power.
If you do not vote, others will decide for you. If you allow yourself to be discouraged, your voice is silenced before it is even heard.
Do not let that happen.
Be aware.
Be critical.
Be involved.
Care about what is happening in your student governmentโbecause it directly affects you.
Care about electionsโbecause that is where your voice matters most. Care about leadershipโbecause that is who represents you.
The Commission on Elections remains firm.
We will continue to uphold free, orderly, honest, and credible elections, and we will act whenever the integrity of the electoral process is threatened.
This is not just about one election.
This is about protecting the voice of every Urian.
And that voiceโ
must be heard.
09/04/2026
07/04/2026
04/04/2026
04/04/2026
31/03/2026
30/03/2026
30/03/2026
28/03/2026
28/03/2026
28/03/2026
28/03/2026