Carmencita G.

Dolina October 28, 2019

ENGL 11 – LL Dr. Elena Canilao

Sexual Harassment in the Classroom: The Revision of DepEd and CHED

Orders to Better Protect Victims

Sexual harassment in the school setting is not uncommon. Most recently, this
has been a pressing issue in Ateneo de Manila University as a whole. According to
ADMU’s Sanggunian Commission on Anti-Sexual Misconduct and Violence (CASMV),
there have been many cases filed properly regarding sexual misconduct and even
more cases that were not filed at all (2019). That said, there are protocols to be
followed in the event that cases like these are filed and they depend on both the
regulations of the institution and, more importantly, the governing bodies in relation to
this in our country.

The Department of Education (DepEd) is the central body that governs the
educational system in the Philippines from kindergarten to the 12th grade, while the
Commission on Higher Education (CHED) governs the tertiary level and above
(Udquim). While the distinction between the two is clear and important, they enact
many similar provisions and memorandums in regard to education and all its
prospects. One problem that both bodies have issued memorandums on is sexual
harassment in schools. CHED Memorandum Order No. 26 Series 2003 and DepEd
Order No. 40 Series 2012 both touch on sexual harassment, violence, and abuse in
all levels of education.

The way these governing bodies treat sexual harassment cases is similar, but
each memorandum has its distinct difference. On one hand, CHED’s memorandum
directly references the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995, and stresses some
guidelines for all higher education institutions (HEIs) to follow: the formation of
committees on decorum and investigation (CODI) and all its responsibilities as the
investigative team and the submission of a list of offenders directly to CHED (2003).
On the other hand, DepEd’s order touches on the protection of the children by
distinction between public and private schools (2007). The protocol to be followed after
the filing of a complaint in relation to violence against children, like sexual harassment,
is modelled after Resolution No. 01-0940 of the Civil Service Commission. For private
schools however, there is no strict model for protocol. Rather, the cases, including the
outcomes and consequences of these cases, are to be dealt with accordingly by the
institution itself and up to its own discretion.

While it is admirable that these memorandums exist, the problem lies in the lack
of specific consequence to be given to an abuser if found guilty or the
inappropriateness of the consequence in its entirety. To combat this, I propose the
revision of these memorandums by the revision of certain sections and the addition of
clauses that will do more to protect the victim rather than the oppressor. This proposal
calls for the: (1) revision of the third highlighted protocol to be followed as stated in
CHED Memorandum Order No. 26 Series 2003, (2) addition of a section regarding
penalties for cases in public schools in DepEd Order No. 40 Series 2012, (3) revision
of Section 20 of CHED Memorandum Order No. 26 Series 2003, and (4) addition of a
clause regarding preventive measures to be implemented by all schools.
 The proposal will not make any revisions to other sections or clauses of the
memorandums aside from those stated previously. That said, the only change to be
made will be the consequence given to the one charged. This revision will make the
consequence specific to all schools under DepEd and CHED instead of leaving the
decision up to the discretion of the institutions themselves. In ADMU’s Employee Code
of Discipline, for example, the punishment to be ruled by the institution could either be
suspension or complete termination of the accused’s employment. This is what would
be revised in the event this proposal is accepted. Since this proposal’s goal is to
prioritize the abused, the specific consequence if the accused is found guilty must only
be termination of employment. The revisions are as follows:

Revision 1
It is stated in the third highlighted protocol stressed by CHED that HEIs are to
submit a general list of members of the institution found guilty of sexual harassment
along with the “penalty meted on the offender, if any”. This line is problematic because
it implies that offenders may be given no penalties at all even after being found guilty.
The words “if any” should be omitted and there must be the addition of dismissal as
the only specific penalty.

Revision 2
It is stated in DepEd Order No. 40 Series 2012 that the investigative protocol to
be followed after the filing of a case regarding sexual harassment is modelled after
Resolution No. 01-0940 of the Civil Service Commission. However, it does not state
any specific penalty if the accused is found guilty. A specific penalty should be
appended to this clause, and it should be the dismissal of the accused if found guilty.

Revision 3
Section 20 of CHED Memorandum Order No. 26 Series 2003 states that, as
mentioned earlier, “The penalty shall be that which is provided by the rules of the
school.” This means that the charges held against an offender will be subject to the
decisions of the administration. In order to protect the victim, it is better to specify the
penalties even for cases in private schools, and preferably to name the dismissal of
the accused if found guilty as the penalty.

Revision 4
There does not exist a clause in either the aforementioned CHED Memorandum
or the DepEd Order regarding preventive measures to be taken to minimize the
number of sexual assault or harassment cases on campus. Some suggested
preventive measures can include seminars on sexual education, consent, and other
similar topics.

Having the option for suspension connotes that the disparity between each
sexual harassment case matters. While admittedly there are multiple levels of gravity
of sexual harassment, abuse, and violence, the outcomes of these must be treated
equally. When a member of the institution is found guilty of even the least grave of
cases, with all malicious intents and purposes behind that, it must be assumed that
the accused is capable of doing more. Moreover, the trauma inflicted on the victim
spans all levels of gravity. In Dr. Amy I. Cass’s study Routine Activities and Sexual
Assault: An Analysis of Individual- and School-Level Factors, she stresses that
violence, especially sexual violence, in school can hinder an individual from
participating normally and to the best of their ability (Cass, 2007). This can be
correlated to the trauma that victims of sexual harassment face, and if exposed to their
abusers who serve as their primary triggers, their conditions may worsen over time.

One may argue that this is unfair for some outlier cases, such as those of faulty
investigations leading to the misattribution or misrepresentation of an individual. It is
possible that the CODI falsely labels the accused as guilty but only finds out after the
investigative period that they were innocent. Cases like this may be treated as special
ones. It would be acceptable for the next action taken, such as the reinstitution of the
accused’s employment or otherwise, to be up to the discretion of the institution since
that problem lies within the CODI itself and not the revision of the memorandums. This
procedure, and all aforementioned suggested procedures, can be likened to the
specificness seen in DepEd Order No. 55 Series 2013 or the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013.
In relation to the outlier cases, it is also possible to frame a clause regarding false
accusations, much like that of the Anti-Bullying Act (Section 10, B., clause i.).

These consequences to be added, however, remain to be a band-aid solution

if preventive measures are not taken. In order for change to occur in the school setting,
everyone in the community must be educated properly in order to reduce the number
of offenders and, ultimately, the need to enforce such consequences on these
offenders. The call for seminars on consent and the overall strengthening of sex
education in schools will help both students and employees alike become more aware
of the boundaries set between each individual and the importance of staying vigilant
even in a space considered to be safe.

And schools should be safe. We can say that a school is safe if its members
are protected. That said, its primary focus should always fall back on the students it
serves. In the event of a case as morally wrong and grave as sexual harassment in all
its forms, this goal will only be met if we side with the victim. While DepEd’s and
CHED’s orders on the topic are admirable, they remain to be insufficient if the
oppressor has a chance to come back. In order to side with the victim, through the
removal of merely suspension as an option, that chance should cease to exist. As a
student of the Ateneo, I know my rights not only as a member of the community but
also as a person. That said, I will fight for those who do not.
References

CASMV Progress Report on Sexual Misconduct Cases from August 2017 to July
2019.pdf. (2019). Retrieved from
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IkWrNgWw3fpa2uFNxp0W47koVzDSrV2B/vie
w?fbclid=IwAR2P1ZgbITZrL9tnVTnoDL_wQ9LDX8Zbz8L05Nsl1DJ9TN0R4P
3utRIq7aA.

Cass, A. I. (2007). Routine Activities and Sexual Assault: An Analysis of Individual-

and School-Level Factors. Violence and Victims, 22(3), 350–366. doi:
10.1891/088667007780842810

Dec. 23, 2013 DO 55, s. 2013 – Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of
Republic Act (RA) No. 10627 Otherwise Known as the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013.
(n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.deped.gov.ph/2013/12/23/do-55-s-2013-
implementing-rules-and-regulations-irr-of-republic-act-ra-no-10627-otherwise-
known-as-the-anti-bullying-act-of-2013/

Erickson, P. I., & Rapkin, A. J. (1991). Unwanted sexual experiences among middle
and high school youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 12(4), 319–325. doi:
10.1016/0197-0070(91)90007-9

Enjoining the Creation in Every Higher Education Institution of a Committee on

Decorum and Investigation on Sexual Harassment Cases and Implementing
Measures to Avoid Commission of Sex-Related Offenses Against Students,
Faculty and Staff. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://ched.gov.ph/cmo-26-s-2003/.

Luna, F. (2019, October 15). Ateneo students protest 'inaction' on sexual harassment
by faculty. Retrieved from
https://www.philstar.com/nation/2019/10/15/1960416/ateneo-students-protest-
inaction-sexual-harassment-faculty.

May 14, 2012 DO 40, s. 2012 – DepEd Child Protection Policy. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.deped.gov.ph/2012/05/14/do-40-s-2012-deped-child-protection-
policy/.

Philippine Commission on Women. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://pcw.gov.ph/law/republic-act-7877.

Udquim, D. (n.d.). A Reflection Paper on DepEd, CHED and TESDA: A Summary of

Organizational Structures, Visions, Missions and Functions In partial fulfillment
of the Requirements in LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF EDUCATION. Retrieved
from
https://www.academia.edu/7136208/A_Reflection_Paper_on_DepEd_CHED_
and_TESDA_A_Summary_of_Organizational_Structures_Visions_Missions_a
nd_Functions_In_partial_fulfillment_of_the_Requirements_in_LEGAL_FOUN
DATIONS_OF_EDUCATION.