Article XIV, Section 5 by Lorna V. Wy, MA (July, 2006)

Education is a vital possession that nobody can take this away from an individual. It is a powerful weapon and passport that leads to victory and triumph.

The state recognizes the role of education in its citizenry. The Constitution states in Article XIV, Section 1: The State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all. However, Right to Education is not absolute, as held in Art. XIV Section 4 (1) of 1987 Philippine Constitution: The State recognizes the complimentary roles of public and private institutions in the educational system and shall exercise reasonable supervision and regulation of all educational institutions. Further, Section 5 (2), Academic Freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.

As may be gleaned from the above provisions, such power to regulate is subject to the requirement of reasonableness. Moreover, the Constitution allows merely the regulation and supervision of educational institutions, not deprivation of their rights.

Freedom of educational institutions has been defined as the right of the school or college to decide for itself, its aims and objectives and how best to attain the. Free from outside coercion or interference save possibly when the overriding public welfare calls for some restraint. It has a wide sphere of autonomy certainly extending to the choice of students.

While it is true that an institution of learning has contractual obligation to afford its students a fair opportunity to complete the course they seek to pursue, since a contract creates a reciprocal rights and obligations, the obligation of the school to educate a student would imply a corresponding obligation on the part of the student to study and obey rules and regulation of the school. When a student commits a serious breach of discipline or failed to maintain the required academic standards, he forfeits his contractual right. In this connection, Supreme Court as held in University of San Agustin, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 230 SCRA 761, educational institutions are afforded ample discretion to formulate reasonable rules and regulations in the admission of students, including setting of Academic Standards. Within the parameters thereof, they are competent to determine who are entitled to admission and re-admission.

What are the essentials freedoms subsumed in the term "Academic Freedom"?

Who may teach;
What may be taught;
How it shall be taught, and
Who may be admitted to study?
The right of the school to discipline its students is at once apparent in the freedom, "how it shall be taught" A school certainly cannot function in an atmosphere of anarchy. Thus, there can be no doubt that the establishment of an educational institution requires rules and regulation necessary for the maintenance of an orderly program and the creation of an educational environment conducive to learning. Such rules and regulation are equally necessary for the protection of students and faculty.

Moreover, the school has an interest in teaching the student's discipline, a necessary if not indispensable value in any field of learning. By instilling discipline, the school teaches discipline. It is the responsibility of the school to help its students grow and develop into mature, responsible, effective and worthy citizens of the community.

Even assuming a contract has been created from the moment the school admits the student the contract as a general rule has a period up to the extent of the duration of the course, which the student enrolled. However, the school has the right to terminate such contract if there is a breach violation of contractual obligation. As held in Ateneo de Manila v. Capulong, 222 SCRA 643, the higher court upheld the expulsion of students found guilty of hazing.

Academic freedom does not end when a student graduated or ceased its contract with the school.

May a university validly revoke a degree or honor it has conferred to a student after the graduation of the latter after finding that such degree or honor was obtained through fraud?

Supreme Court held in the case of UP Board of Regents v. CA and Arokiaswamy William Margaret Celine, G.R. No. 134625, Where it shown that the conferment of an honor or distinction was obtained through fraud, a university has the right to revoke or withdraw the honor or distinction it has thus conferred. This freedom of a university does not terminate upon the graduation of student, for it is precisely the graduation of such student that is in question.

Finally, the law provides equal protection and due process in the exercise of Academic Freedom; such freedom cannot be exercise whimsically, arbitrarily, and capriciously by both parties.