16/08/2026
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
(๐๐๐๐๐๐๐: 12-15 ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐)
๐๐ก๐ฒ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐๐ง๐๐ ๐จ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐ฆ๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ฒ ๐๐ง๐ ๐ฉ๐จ๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ ๐ฌ๐ก๐จ๐ฎ๐ฅ๐ ๐ง๐จ๐ญ ๐๐ฎ๐ญ๐จ๐ฆ๐๐ญ๐ข๐๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฒ ๐๐ ๐๐ช๐ฎ๐๐ญ๐๐ ๐ฐ๐ข๐ญ๐ก ๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐ข๐ฆ๐ข๐๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง
The recent student consultation at Kalinga State University involving Kabataan Party-list Representative Renee Louise M. Co has generated a debate that deserves more than political accusations and social-media reactions.
At the center of the controversy is a seemingly simple question: What should happen when an elected political representative conducts a consultation with students inside a state university where the military and police also have an established presence in youth engagement, peace and security activities?
My answer is simple: they should be allowed to be there, provided that their presence is lawful, appropriate, non-coercive, and does not prevent students from speaking freely.
In fact, I believe that the presence of both sides can potentially make a student consultation more democratic, not less.
A consultation is supposed to be a place where concerns are raised, perspectives are exchanged, questions are answered, and institutions listen to the people they serve. If students raise concerns about security, peace, recruitment, human rights, education, governance or government policy, why should only one side be allowed to hear and respond to those concerns?
If a student raises an issue involving the military, it is reasonable that military representatives be present to provide their perspective. If a student raises an issue involving government policy, the political representative can explain her position. If students disagree with either side, they should be free to say so.
That is dialogue. And dialogue becomes meaningful precisely because people with different perspectives are willing to sit in the same space.
๐๐ก๐ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐๐ง๐๐ ๐จ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐ฆ๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ญ๐๐ซ๐ฒ ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ง๐จ๐ญ, ๐๐ฒ ๐ข๐ญ๐ฌ๐๐ฅ๐, ๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐ข๐ฆ๐ข๐๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง
The controversy surrounding the August 14 consultation appears to have intensified after military and police personnel were present during the activity.
Rep. Co criticized their presence and argued that the alleged "overkill" in police and military presence could stifle discussion, undermine academic freedom and university autonomy, and create fear within the university community.
Those concerns are legitimate subjects for discussion. No one should dismiss the importance of academic freedom. Students should never be threatened, harassed or prevented from expressing legitimate opinions.
But there is an important distinction that must be maintained: The presence of soldiers or police officers does not, by itself, prove intimidation.
To establish that a military presence "stifled" discussion, one would need evidence that students were actually prevented from speaking, threatened, monitored, questioned, harassed, red-tagged, or otherwise coerced. Without such evidence, saying that the presence caused those effects moves from an observable fact into an interpretation.
This distinction is particularly important in a university setting. Universities are supposed to teach students to distinguish evidence from assertion, fact from interpretation, and disagreement from oppression.
The military's presence may make some students uncomfortable. That feeling should not be dismissed. But discomfort and intimidation are not necessarily the same thing.
A democratic society must also be careful not to create a standard whereby the mere presence of an institution that one politically disagrees with is automatically considered an attack on free expression.
๐๐๐ซ๐ก๐๐ฉ๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ญ๐ญ๐๐ซ ๐ช๐ฎ๐๐ฌ๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐ข๐ฌ: ๐๐ก๐ฒ ๐ง๐จ๐ญ ๐ฅ๐๐ญ ๐๐ฏ๐๐ซ๐ฒ๐จ๐ง๐ ๐ญ๐๐ฅ๐ค?
There is something potentially positive about the Philippine Army's apparent call for unity with Kabataan Party-list.
Rather than seeing the military and a youth-oriented political organization as permanent adversaries, perhaps we should ask whether they can actually sit together and listen to one another.
That is particularly relevant in Kalinga.
The province has experienced decades of armed conflict and the consequences that come with it. For generations, soldiers, police officers, indigenous communities, local officials, teachers, religious leaders, civil society organizations and ordinary families have all lived with the consequences of insecurity.
Kalinga's current peace is therefore not something that should be taken for granted.
In May 2026, Kalinga was formally declared under a State of Stable Internal Peace and Security (SSIPS). The declaration recognized years of work involving local government, security forces, communities and other stakeholders. Importantly, the province's internal security role was formally transitioned from the Philippine Army to the Philippine National Police, a development that itself demonstrates that peace and security are institutional responsibilities shared across government and society.
The Philippine News Agency likewise reported that Kalinga's "insurgency-free" status was expected to help create conditions for economic development, investment and tourism. That achievement should cause everyone, including political parties, universities, students, police and soldiers to ask: How do we preserve this peace?
And Not: How do we keep talking to only those who already agree with us?
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐'๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐
It is easy to talk about peace as an abstract political concept.
For soldiers and police officers assigned to conflict-affected areas, however, peace has often meant leaving their families behind, entering dangerous communities, responding to armed encounters, rescuing civilians, and sometimes giving their lives.
For many of us who grew up in Kalinga, this is not an abstract idea. When we were in high school, many boys dreamed of becoming soldiers. For some, the dream was to enter the Philippine Military Academy (PMA). We looked at the men in uniform not simply as government employees, but as people who represented courage, discipline, service and the possibility of becoming someone who would defend the country. For many Kalinga-raised boys, becoming a soldier was a dream long before it became a profession.
That aspiration did not come from nowhere. Kalinga has a long history of producing men and women who have chosen military and police service, and some have paid the ultimate price for that choice.
Kalinga has produced soldiers whose service illustrates this reality.
Consider Colonel Herbert D. Dilag, a Kalinga-born Philippine Army officer and recipient of the Medal of Valor, the country's highest military award for courage. His award stemmed from the 2000 Battle of Hill 898 in Basilan, where his Scout Ranger unit undertook an extraordinarily dangerous assault against Abu Sayyaf positions holding civilian hostages. His story has subsequently been documented nationally and even portrayed in the film In Thy Name.
Another is Romualdo "Lolong" Rubi, who was born in the former Kalinga-Apayao province and received the Medal of Valor after fighting a numerically superior NPA force in Surigao del Norte. His story has become part of the country's documented record of military gallantry.
There are others whose stories deserve to be remembered whenever we talk about the military presence in Kalinga.
Private Jerry N. Wassig of Tinglayan was awarded the Distinguished Conduct Star, one of the Philippine Army's highest awards for combat, for his actions during the Marawi campaign. His recognition reminds us that the young men who leave Kalinga for military service are sometimes placed in the country's most dangerous battlefields.
Corporal Lolibel Guloy was awarded the Bronze Cross Medal for his significant role in rescue and retrieval operations following Typhoon Lando in Pinukpuk, Kalinga. His unit helped rescue 18 civilians trapped on an island in the Chico River. This is a useful reminder that a soldier's service is not confined to combat. Soldiers are also called upon to rescue communities during disasters and emergencies.
Then there are the fallen.
Corporal John Mangawit of Tanudan died in the 2019 Jolo Cathedral bombing while serving the country. Corporal Jordan Malnawa, another Kalinga soldier, was killed during an encounter in Sagada. Major Marvin Indammog of Tanudan was among the soldiers killed in the 2020 Jolo incident. Their stories are painful precisely because they remind us that military service is not merely about wearing a uniform or attending ceremonies. For some families, it means accepting the possibility that the son who left home to serve may never return.
And the sacrifice has continued into the present.
In March 2026, Captain Dean Buen Oyando, a Kalinga-linked Army officer, was killed in action in Occidental Mindoro while leading operations against communist fighters. In July 2026, Private First Class Drexler Gumayat of San Pablo, Bulo, Tabuk City, was killed during an encounter in Tineg, Abra. The Philippine Army gave Gumayat military honors, and 503rd Infantry Brigade commander Brig. Gen. Rhenante Salvador described him unequivocally as a hero who sacrificed his life for peace.
The police have their own Kalinga heroes.
In the 2017 Lubuagan firefight, PO3 Cruzaldo Lawagan, PO2 Juvenal Aguinaldo, PO1 Charles Ryan Compas, and PO1 Vincent Paul Tay-od were killed while serving in a dangerous law-enforcement operation. Their families later received the Medalya ng Kadakilaan, the PNP's Heroism Medal. Other Kalinga police officers, including Mitchell Fojslee Caldengon and Leon Galamto, were recognized with the Medalyang Sugatang Magiting after being wounded while pursuing a wanted criminal.
PSSg Richard Gumarang of Rizal, Kalinga was another policeman who died in the line of duty. His fellow officers publicly called him a hero after he was killed in a gun battle with armed robbers in Isabela.
And perhaps one of the most nationally remembered Kalinga-linked police heroes is Senior Police Inspector Cyrus Paleyan Anniban of Balbalan, one of the SAF 44 killed in Mamasapano in 2015. National reporting on Anniban recalled that he had been a Boy Scout troop leader and a high school CAT officer before becoming a police officer. His story is especially poignant because it connects the boy who once wore a school uniform and served in his school's CAT to the man who ultimately wore the uniform of the Philippine National Police Special Action Force.
These are not stories that should be used to silence criticism of the military or police. They should be used to provide context. A student should be able to criticize a military policy and still recognize the sacrifice of an individual soldier. A political representative can question the conduct of a security agency without denying the humanity or patriotism of the people serving in it. And a soldier can defend his institution while still listening respectfully to a student's criticism.
These are not merely stories about military institutions. They are stories about individual Filipinos who placed themselves in danger while performing their duties.
That is an important part of the conversation that should not be forgotten. A soldier can be committed to peace while carrying a weapon.
And perhaps that is why the presence of military personnel in a Kalinga university should not automatically be interpreted through the lens of fear. The uniform may represent an institution, but inside that uniform is often someone who grew up in a community very much like ours. Someone who once sat in a classroom, dreamed of a future, and decided to serve.
The military's presence in Kalinga is not merely theoretical
The argument that soldiers should not be present in discussions involving Kalinga youth also needs to be considered against the province's actual history.
In November 2025, the Philippine Army reported an armed encounter involving its 103rd Infantry Battalion in Pinukpuk. A soldier was wounded during the clash.
Kalinga's transition to stable internal peace and security did not happen overnight. It followed years of security operations, community engagement, governance, and peace-building efforts. The continuing security operations reported in 2025 were followed by the province's declaration of a State of Stable Internal Peace and Security in May 2026 which is a significant transition that reflects the collective efforts of government institutions, security forces, local communities, and other stakeholders.
These developments demonstrate something important:
The military's presence in Kalinga is connected to a real history of conflict and peace-building.
It is therefore too simplistic to interpret every appearance of military personnel in a Kalinga community as an attempt to intimidate people.
There may be occasions when military presence is inappropriate. There may also be occasions when military personnel behave improperly and should be held accountable.
But those conclusions should be based on what they actually did, not simply on the uniform they wore.
"๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐-๐๐๐๐๐"?
This is where I find the rhetoric surrounding the controversy particularly unfortunate.
If Rep. Co indeed stated, as reported, "NEVER magkaka-unity ang Kabataan Partylist sa AFP-PNP," that declaration deserves reflection.
Political parties do not have to agree with the military and the military does not have to agree with a political party. Students do not have to agree with either.
But unity does not mean uniformity. Unity does not require Kabataan Party-list to abandon its principles. It does not require soldiers to abandon their institutional responsibilities. It does not require students to agree with the government.
Unity can simply mean the willingness to remain in the same democratic space despite disagreement.
Indeed, saying that opposing institutions can never achieve unity risks contradicting the very democratic principle that political dialogue is supposed to protect.
If a military representative and a youth representative can sit in the same room, listen to the same student, hear the same question and provide different answers, that is not necessarily a failure of democracy. That is democracy at work.
"๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐"?
The accusation that the military "made a mockery of democratic dialogue" is a serious one.
But serious accusations require serious evidence.
If military personnel prevented students from speaking, interrupted the consultation, threatened participants, monitored individual students, intimidated organizers, or otherwise interfered with the proceedings, those actions should absolutely be documented and investigated.
But if military and police personnel simply attended, listened, interacted with students and remained available to answer questions, then describing their presence as inherently destructive to democratic dialogue is difficult to substantiate.
In fact, there is an alternative interpretation.
Perhaps the consultation demonstrated that democratic dialogue becomes stronger when people who disagree are physically present to hear one another.
A student who hears only one side receives advocacy. And a student who hears competing perspectives receives an opportunity for judgment. That distinction matters enormously in higher education.
๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐๐๐ง๐ญ๐ฌ ๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ฅ๐ ๐จ๐ ๐๐๐๐ข๐๐ข๐ง๐ ๐๐จ๐ซ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ฆ๐ฌ๐๐ฅ๐ฏ๐๐ฌ
There is also a danger in assuming that students are so vulnerable that the mere presence of uniformed personnel automatically prevents them from thinking or speaking independently.
Kalinga's students are not incapable of critical thought. They are university student and they should be trusted to listen to a representative of Kabataan Party-list, listen to representatives of the AFP or PNP, listen to their professors, listen to their community leaders, examine the evidence, challenge assertions and form their own conclusions.
If a soldier says one thing and a political representative says another, let the students hear both. If they disagree with the soldier, let them say so. If they disagree with the politician, let them say so. And If they agree with both on one issue and neither on another, that should also be acceptable. That is what education is supposed to produce: people capable of thinking for themselves.
๐๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐'๐ฌ ๐ฌ๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ข๐๐ซ๐ฌ ๐๐๐ฌ๐๐ซ๐ฏ๐ ๐ญ๐จ ๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ซ๐ญ ๐จ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐จ๐ง๐ฏ๐๐ซ๐ฌ๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐๐จ๐ฎ๐ญ ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐
There is another dimension that should not be overlooked. If Kalinga is now enjoying a relatively stable peace, the people who helped create that environment should not suddenly become invisible.
The province's transition to a State of Stable Internal Peace and Security was explicitly described as the product of effective law enforcement, community participation, governance and sustained peace-building efforts. Security officials, local leaders, indigenous leaders, youth and other sectors signed a commitment to preserve that peace. That means the peace belongs to everyone. It belongs to the students, teachers, indigenous communities, local government, civil society and the police. And also belongs to the soldiers who spent years fighting to keep communities secure.
To recognize their contribution and listen to them does not mean endorsing every military action or surrendering academic freedom. Both sides can coexist in a democratic society.
๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ซ๐๐ช๐ฎ๐ข๐ซ๐๐ฌ ๐ฆ๐จ๐ซ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐๐ง ๐ฌ๐ข๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐
Kalinga's peace and security should remind everyone that peace is fragile and collective.
The province has known armed conflict. It has lost soldiers. It has lost police officers. Families have buried sons and daughters who served the public. Communities have experienced fear and disruption. Yet the province has also reached a point where the government can declare a significant peace milestone. That progress should encourage reconciliation, not deepen division.
The Philippine Army's invitation to unity with Kabataan Party-list, therefore, should not automatically be dismissed as political maneuvering. It can be viewed as an opportunity to begin a conversation between institutions that have historically viewed one another with suspicion.
Kalinga has already paid a heavy price for peace.
Its soldiers and police officers have fought, suffered and died in the service of that peace. Its communities have endured conflict. Its people have worked toward reconciliation. Its government has now declared that the province has reached a stable peace. The challenge now is not simply to maintain that peace with guns, checkpoints and security operations.
The greater challenge is to maintain it through dialogue.
And perhaps the best way to honor Kalinga's heroes is not to keep different sectors apart, but to finally allow them to sit together, listen to one another, disagree honestly, and still walk away committed to the same thing: ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐
๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐
๐๐๐๐๐ ๐
๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐.
References:
https://pia.gov.ph/news/kalinga-now-under-state-of-stable-internal-peace-and-security/
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1275757
https://pia.gov.ph/news/phil-army-renews-call-for-remaining-npas-to-surrender-honors-fallen-kalinga-soldier/
https://pia.gov.ph/news/5id-ph-army-reaffirms-commitment-to-maintain-peace-and-security-in-kalinga/
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/in-depth/191932-valor-medal-filipinos-military/
https://www.gurupress-cordillera.com/post/heroic-story-of-an-ikalinga-army-officer-awarded-with-medal-of-valor-made-into-movie
https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/605852/duterte-confers-distinguished-conduct-star-on-2-junior-army-officers/story/
https://www.wowcordillera.com/2019/03/kalinga-soldier-receives-second-highest.html
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/886705/duterte-pins-second-highest-award-for-combat-to-2-junior-officers
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1081623
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1060297
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1301510/body-of-slain-army-major-flown-home-honored-in-kalinga
https://mb.com.ph/2026/03/30/soldier-killed-rebel-captured-as-troops-disrupt-npa-anniversary-in-occidental-mindoro
https://mb.com.ph/2026/03/31/army-chief-honors-slain-soldier-in-mindoro
https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/600692/bato-dela-rosa-skips-senate-hearing-on-jee-s-kidnap-slay-to-visit-wake-of-4-cops-in-kalinga/story/
https://www.philstar.com/nation/2014/02/19/1292233/2-kalinga-cops-wounded-pursuing-suspect-feted
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1081173
https://www.inquirer.net/147596/the-faces-of-the-saf44/
https://mirror.pia.gov.ph/news/2023/02/02/gallantry-of-saf-heroes-remembered-in-benguet-towns
https://tribune.net.ph/amp/story/2025/11/25/kalinga-still-not-insurgency-free
https://dahas.upd.edu.ph/sandatahang-dahas-2025-sources/
(Photo: 5th Infantry Division)
