position paper: state of philippine maritime education

Page ii of 40

Page i of 40

Contents

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1

PRESENT STATE OF MARITIME EDUCATION ..................................................... 2

The Context of Maritime Education in the Perspective of Stakeholders ............... 2

The Regulatory Requirements of Maritime Education ........................................ 10

DESIRED STATE OF MARITIME EDUCATION .................................................... 14

CURRENT JURISPRUDENCE ............................................................................. 15

PROGRAM OF ACTION ....................................................................................... 23

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................... 29

Page ii of 40

of 40

INTRODUCTION By experience, the perspective of the maritime higher education institutions or MHEIs was never a factor in the initiatives. They were not consulted much in the process of correcting the "deficiencies" of the system as declared by the European Maritime Safety Agency or EMSA. Most of the "consultation" meetings with both the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) were perfunctory and was more like a "talk down" more than anything else. The many issues confronting maritime education is really rooted in the absence of standards, a predicament that all stakeholders have a hand in making. The content of this paper will untangle these issues and once unlocked, it will be clear that no Philippine standard for the administration, development and delivery of educational objectives has ever been put into one document and provided to stakeholders since the signing of the STCW Convention as amended in 2010. The Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) will be insisting that the issuances of appropriate circulars and memorandum s have already established these standards and this paper will prove it otherwise by using the same logic and framework that both MARINA and CHED use to evaluate maritime higher education institutions (MHEIs). This position paper puts forward a perspective of the issues and the proposed program of action that stakeholders must take to sustain compliance to IMO and STCW Convention and Code in as far as maritime education is concerned. The paper will walk you through the issues in the eyes of the CHED culled from memoranda and official communications issued by the Chairperson of the CHED herself. It will present the specific laws, memoranda, and circulars driving the issues and affecting stakeholders. It will show what should be the most desirable state supportive of the stakeholders and accomplishing the educational objectives prescribed by the STCW Convention and Code. And, lastly, the more feasible course of action that will zero in on the root cause of the MHEIs woes.

of 40

PRESENT STATE OF MARITIME EDUCATION

The Context of Maritime Education in the Perspective of Stakeholders There are a lot of sources from where one can draw information about the state of maritime education in the Philippines but none have synthesize them more clearly and concisely as the series of memoranda and letters issued by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED). The Chairperson of no less than Commission on Higher Education (CHED), Dr. Patricia B. Licuanan, has many memoranda issued from her office that can sufficiently introduce anyone to the issues facing maritime education today.

Memorandum from the Chairperson dated July 15, 2014 The Memorandum from the Chairperson sent to maritime higher education institutions dated July 15, 2014, reiterated that:

1. The Maritime Education Unit (MEU) of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) emphasized in the following fora, that 21 July 2014 is the ultimate deadline for the submission to the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) of documentary evidence of the corrective actions of various agencies including CHED and Maritime Higher Education Institutions (MHEIs):

a. the sub-regional cluster workshops on Learning Competency

Based Education and Outcomes-based Evaluation held from April to June 2014;

b. the Public Hearing on the draft document about the Enhanced Support Level Program conducted on 19 June 2014; and

c. the Annual Meeting and Workshop of the Philippine Association of Maritime Institutions (PAMI)

2. "…the Philippines is a major supplier of certified seafarers in the

international seaborne trade, providing more than 25% of the crew that manages, operates and supports the labor requirements of international marine vessels. In turn, the country benefits tremendously from about $4B dollars of annual remittances from sea-based overseas Filipino workers-that constituted about 22% of total OFW remittances in 2012. This situation accounts for the interest of the Philippines as well as the world's maritime industry in sustaining a steady supply of qualified Filipino seafarers who have acquired a competency-based education and training anchored to "scientific and academic rigor, the development of a clear linkage between practical skills and management techniques; and an unerring focus on quality"."

3. "The high Filipino share of the world's seafaring population has

inevitably focused international attention on the capacity of the Philippines to continuously supply competent seafarers who meet the STCW regulations as amended in 2010. The EMSA audit in 2006, 2010, 2012 and 2013 ought to be viewed in this context. Had

of 40

the Philippines been supplying less than 10% of the world's seafarers, international attention on the compliance of its education and training systems might not have been as focused. On the other hand, had our share been much lower than 25%, we might not have been visited by EMSA as many times as we were, before deciding on our country's retention in the White List. The EU might have more easily removed the Philippines from the List without resorting to as many inspections.

4. "The findings of the EMSA audits since 2006 have cast doubt on the

capacity of the Philippines to produce competent officers despite the palpable preference of international shipping companies for Filipino seafarers vis-a-vis those from other port states. Until the most recent meeting of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) held in June 2014, our avid supporters in the international shipping industry and international organizations who are rooting for the country's retention in the EU's White List, have cited the high number of MHEIs offering the BS programs in Marine Transportation and Marine Engineering and the non-compliance of many of these programs with the STCW as amended in 2010 as contributory factors to the negative perception among our international stakeholders of the quality of the country's maritime higher education and training."

5. "In 2010, the EMSA inspectors revealed serious deficiencies in

Philippine Maritime Education and Training (MET). Many of these issues continued to be raised in subsequent EMSA inspections, quite apart from critical concerns over the compliance of the maritime higher education programs with the 2010 Manila Amendments to the STCW Convention and Code. In 2011, for instance, uncorrected deficiencies of particular MHEI programs since the EMSA inspection in 2006 persisted, compelling CHED to issue closure orders on the programs of three MHEIs as part of the corrective actions of the Philippines. Thus by April 2013, the tireless repetition of the same issues had raised the possibility of the removal of the Philippines from the White List if the technical evaluation by the EMSA team in October 2013 revealed significant shortcomings vis-a-vis the amended STCW regulations-that would undermine confidence in the capacity of the system to produce competent officers."

6. "About 65,000 young Filipinos enroll yearly as cadets but only 20%

of new enrollees complete 3 years of academic schooling. Moreover, only 4000 to 5000 (8%) will manage to secure the required 12 months shipboard training to qualify for the Professional Regulatory Commission's licensure examinations."

7. "Given an oversupply of maritime students with some college

education, the manning agencies have preferred to recruit students with academic collegiate courses as support level seafarers. The result: 90% of the deck and engine support staff have come from either the BS Marine Transportation and BS Marine Engineering programs of MHEIs that are expected to produce officers-in-charge at the operational level and NOT support level staff. In effect, the higher education system that has produced world-preferred

of 40

seafarers at the support level-with the value added of a general education background and the competence to communicate, compute and exude humanist values such as respect for the rights of others-is also the same system that continues to "shoot the country in the foot", i.e. that undermines the level of the country's Bachelor of Science (BS) maritime programs vis-a-vis Baccalaureate programs in other countries. This erodes the confidence of the international public in the ability of MHEls to produce competent officers-in-charge."

8. "Our attention has been called time and again to the significant

number of MHEIs with very high enrolments (in the thousands) and extremely low graduation rates that do not arrange the shipboard training of their students in clear violation of Article III Section 4 of CHED Memorandum Order No. 2 Series of 2012. Moreover, these MHEIs do not provide adequate equipment to allow students the minimum number of hours needed to learn how to use them properly and hire instructors without the proper training, among other findings."

9. "Our attention has also been called to the existence of highly

reputable MHEIs with double standards-one for the alpha class/classes that is/are selected to ultimately board international ships and another for the regular students who are also enrolled in a BS maritime program but do not enjoy the same learning opportunities as their counterparts in the alpha class/classes. While these MHEIs provide excellent education to the alpha students, the fact that their BS students who are not in the alpha classes eventually end up in support level positions are enrolled, effectively watering down the BS degree, rendering the institution vulnerable to shortcomings vis-a-vis the STCW-aligned requirements (e.g. equipment at the revised ratios) for the BS program because of the sheer number of students enrolled in the maritime bachelor degrees."

10. "The above practices of a number of MHEIs offering the BS maritime

programs have contributed to the perception that the level of the Baccalaureate maritime programs of Philippine is not at par with those of countries in the White List. In general, Baccalaureate programs in national qualifications frameworks including the Philippine Qualifications Framework are expected to provide their graduates with knowledge and skills that are specialized, technical and theoretical within a specific field and that involves analytical and critical thinking. In addition, students are expected to train for the application of such knowledge and skills to changing and complex situations requiring initiative, adaptability and strategies to improve activities and to solve complex and abstract issues."

11. The operationalization of these dimensions of qualifications in the

maritime field is best embodied and illustrated in the appropriate competency tables for the deck and engine at the operational level in the 2010 STCW Code. MHEIs eligible to offer programs at the level of the BS Marine Transportation and BS Marine Engineering programs are thus expected to meet the STCW requirements as reflected in the following features:

of 40

a. Full compliance with minimum requirements per PSG, STCW

and other applicable laws and regulations (learner centered/competency based education with a system of outcomes-based assessments and evaluation);

b. Developed physical facilities, laboratory facilities, library facilities and other instructional support facilities (A/V facilities, gym, housing, dormitories, etc.). Please note that CHED has very recently revised the ratio of students to equipment since the ratio stipulated in CHED Memorandum Order Nos .31 and 32 Series of 2013 is not yet aligned with the STCW requirements. This issuance will be released shortly for the information and guidance of all.

Take for instance the case of the Radar ARPA. Based on the IMO model course 1.07 for RADAR-ARPA, students must have a minimum of 48 simulation hours. For effective learning outcomes the number of students per session on a simulator should be a maximum of 3 students. The CHED Memorandum Order No. stipulates a ratio of 500 students to equipment.

To meet the 48 hour requirement, consider the following cases:

• 48 hours covered in 1semester results in 3 hours per

week. In a 40 hour working week MHEIs can accommodate 40/3=13.3 groups of 3 students for 1 unit (assuming 1 unit=l hour) or 40 students. With 2 units or 2 hours, 80 students can be accommodated in one semester.

Should the schools schedule the simulator in 2 semesters they can accommodate 160 students. This is still far below the maximum number of 500 as simulator.

• Suppose the number of students per session is increased

to 5 (which has an effect on the learning outcome). MHEIs can accommodate 13.3 x 5 = 67 students per unit per semester; with 2 units 134 students and if 2 semesters, 268 students. This is still far below the number of 500.

• Competent faculty line-up with the requisite training;

continuing faculty development/training programs

• Selectivity in admissions

• Updated/upgraded instructional materials;

• Presence of Ship board training (SBT) opportunities and/or easy access to ships for all students admitted; MHEI-arranged shipboard training for 70% of the students who are supposed to go for shipboard training; and

of 40

supervision and close monitoring of students during shipboard training [A transitional period will be provided for existing MHEIs eligible to offer the BS program, but for which less than 70% of the deserving students obtain shipboard training];

• Commitment to quality assurance (QA) and

institutionalization of QA mechanisms including accreditation; updated, certified and continuously improving Quality Standards System (QSS);

• Presence of industry partnerships/ tie-ups, local and/or

international support from industry;

• Employment track record of graduates;

• Stable financial position; viability and sustainability of operations; and

• Reputation of integrity.

12. The challenge we confront at this point in time relates to the

corrective actions for maritime higher education that MARINA and CHED have to take to keep the Philippines in the EU White List. One of these actions is documentary evidence that programs that do not comply with STCW regulations at the Baccalaureate or operational level have been phased out or would have been phased out by June 2015.

13. The phase out of BS maritime programs that are not STCW

compliant must be understood against the following goals that will make the Philippines a major source of support level seafarers as well as excellent officers for both the domestic and international maritime industry:

• To ensure that the MHEI programs at the Baccalaureate level are

aligned with the STCW education regulations (operational level) and actually produce competent officers-in-charge; and

• To enable MHEIs to continue producing seafarers with some

college education as one of two pathways to becoming a rating or support level seafarer, the other being the regular ratings program.

14. Towards this end, CHED, upon instructions from MARINA, has

initiated the development of the Enhanced Support Level Program (ESLP).

15. This was the subject of one session of the April to June 2014 sub-regional cluster workshops on Learning Competency-based Education and Outcomes-based Evaluation and the conduct of a public hearing on 19 June 2014 involving MHEIs and other stakeholders.

of 40

16. The rationale for the development of the ESLP program, which will be instituted through a MARINA circular and implemented transitionally by CHED and eventually by MARINA, is to align the current BS maritime programs of MHEIs with their corresponding level in the Philippine Qualifications Framework. The Program is intended to open a third option for seafarers and MHEIs apart from the two existing options-i.e. to take/offer the Ratings programs for deck and engine support, or the BS program. It was not conceived to replace the existing Ratings programs but to include a third choice that provides the added value of having completed certain college general education subjects.

17. As mentioned repeatedly in the various fora since April 2014, the

ESLP has been partly instituted to achieve the following outcomes:

• MHEIs with maritime BS programs that are not compliant with STCW as amended and that do not meet the qualifications requirements at the Baccalaureate levels would have shifted to the ESLP or the existing ratings programs by June 2015 if they still choose to continue offering maritime programs. The shift can begin in the second semester of SY 2014-2015 (or November 2014) when the ESLP is in place.

• MHEIs with existing BS programs that are compliant with STCW

as amended and meet the qualifications requirements at the Baccalaureate level for a subset of students (e.g. the alpha class/classes) but whose regular BS students do not have the same learning opportunities and end up working at the support level would have rationalized their offerings, i.e., would have offered BS program for the alpha class/classes and the ESLP for the regular students but with a system of admission to the BS programs for eligible students. This will be in addition to the regular ratings program that they are currently offering or planning to offer. (The possibility of common admission requirements for BS maritime programs in the country is currently under discussion).

18. Existing BS programs that have been phased out and have admitted

students in anticipation of the expected establishment of the ESLP in the first semester of SY2014-2015 can offer the first year, first semester courses in the ESLP curriculum with clear notice to the students that their enrolment in the MHEI will lead to qualifications at the support level once the ESLP is fully established in August 2014 and their application to offer the program has been approved before the end of the semester.

19. Since MHEIs involved in the production of 90% of seafarers at the

support (and not the operational level) are under the jurisdiction of CHED, the Commission will assist MHEIs in making the transition as part of its developmental function until MARINA takes over the supervision of the program.

20. Against this backdrop, CHED Team reiterated its call for the:

of 40

• Voluntary phase out in good faith by June 2015 of the BS programs of MHEIs that do not meet STCW regulations;

• Voluntary delineation starting June 2015 by MHEIs that meet

STCW regulations at the operational level but only for a subset of Students the alpha class/classes-of the BS program for these classes and the ESLP and/or the regular ratings program for the other students who are otherwise enrolled in the BS programs with the caveat that a system of admission from the ESLP must be instituted for students who are eligible to proceed to the BS programs. As noted previously, the possibility of common admission requirements is currently under discussion.

21. MHEIs that opt to voluntarily phase out or delineate their programs

will have first priority in the processing of their applications and in any development assistance that CHED will provide in the future.

22. Letters and show cause orders were issued individually to notify the

candidates for phase out on or before 15 August 2014. Unless they are able to show cause by 31 August 2014 as to why they should not be phased out given the above criteria of eligibility to offer BS maritime programs, their programs will not be included in the provisional White List of the MHEIs and BS programs that MARINA will publish on 30 September 2014. If they are still unable to meet the criteria by 31 December 2014, they will no longer be in the final White List that MARINA will publish by January 2015. Following MORPHE, formal phase out orders for their respective BS maritime programs starting June 2015 will be issued by the end of SY 2014-2015 and approval of their shift to the ESLP will be processed accordingly as soon as the Commission receives their application to offer the ESLP.

23. "...after careful deliberation and serious evaluation of the situation of

maritime higher education programs, MARINA and CHED are contemplating the possibility of lifting the moratorium on the BS Marine Transportation and BS Marine Engineering program for the following reasons: 1) to help meet the future demand for competent officers; 2) to enable MHEIs with the wherewithal to institute high quality maritime BS programs that strictly adhere to STCW, CHED policies and other relevant regulations and the potential to further enrich the curriculum to offer such programs; and 3) to allow phased out MHEIs that may eventually meet the more stringently implemented criteria in the future to re-apply for the permit to offer programs at the Baccalaureate level.

Memorandum from the Chairperson dated June 9, 2015 The CHED Chairperson issued another Memorandum dated June 9, 2015, which reinforced the memorandum quoted above, declaring as follows:

1. the "20 February 2015 Omnibus Memorandum provided a background for the use of shipboard training--a condition sine qua non of maritime education--as a key indicator of compliance with the 1978 International Convention on the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) as amended. The

of 40

Memorandum specifically cited the country's persistent breach of global maritime standards as the reason for the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA)'s assessment in April 2013 that major shortcomings have not been addressed since 2006 although there have been significant changes since then."

2. "The Memorandum also disclosed that the "critical findings of [the

EMSA] Report further threatened the country's position in the IMO [International Maritime Organization of the United Nations] White List. A final audit of the government agencies involved and of selected MHEIs was scheduled in October [2013] as basis for the European Union's vote on whether the Philippines would remain in the White List or not".

3. "The October 2013 MESA inspection report still "revealed

shortcomings, many of which were tireless repetitions of earlier findings. Nevertheless, the European Union deferred its vote on the status of the Philippines by virtue of the recommendation of the IMO Committee on Safe Seas (COSS) for another EMSA visit sometime in October 2014 to validate the corrective actions taken thus far".

4. According to the COSS recommendations the country showed

progress since April 2013 more particularly in the "issuance of CHED Memorandum Order No. 2 Series of 2012 entitled Implementing Guidelines on the Shipboard Training Requirement for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation and the Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering. Accordingly, the implementation of this CHED Memorandum Order No. is what the EMSA inspectors should validate."

5. "The fact that a significant number of MHEIs have not provided

adequate opportunities for their cadet students to obtain shipboard training due to a number of factors and have not kept track of their progress in obtaining such training explains our use of the PRC examines and Special Orders in the proxy variables. However, during the review of programs issued show cause orders or letters of non-compliance, some MHEIs sowed proof that the number of cadets from different batches with completed shipboard training (SBT)--whether the denominator be first year students, third year students or those who completed their academic requirements--exceeded the stipulated 30% cut-off."

6. "With the institutionalization of "carrying capacity" as the basis for the

admission of first year students to the BS maritime programs of MHEIs eligible to offer such program/s, it is also presumed that an MHEI would have a more accurate tracking of each student it admits to the BS maritime program/s."

7. "The increasing operational cut-off percentage targets of the ration of

completed SBT to CAR for each year--which was stipulated in Section 25 Article 8 of CHED Memorandum Order No. 20 Series of 2015 entitled Consolidated Policies, Standards and Guidelines for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation and the BS in Maritime Engineering Programs--shall be further integrated into the

of 40

joint MARINA-CHED Guidelines for the Recognition of Officer Programs."

Letter from the Chairperson Dated June 30, 2015 A letter from the Chairperson of CHED dated June 30, 2015, sent to MHEIs with phased out maritime programs, declared the following:

1. "While the subsequent EMSA inspection still yielded some adverse findings, the following specific and feasible corrective actions to address the problem of too many MHEIs with very high BS enrolments but with extremely low graduation rates were duly acknowledged in favor of the CHED: (1) establishment of the Enhanced Support Level Program for the deck and engine in collaboration with MARINA; and (2) the voluntary delineation by reputable MHEls in the country with links to European shipping companies of their BS maritime programs from the ESLP, subject to their carrying capacity for an STCW-compliant BS program. This prevailing situation has accounted not only for the fact that the officer track BS programs of the MHEls has produced 90% of the ratings from among those who drop out of these programs but more importantly, for the inability of our MHEIs to strictly comply with STCW as amended."

2. "…shipboard training is a sine qua non condition that our MHEIs

have found very difficult to comply with. Upon the recommendation of the Technical Panel for Maritime Education chaired by the MARINA Administrator, CHED approved the very high weight given to shipboard training in determining the compliance of MHEI programs to STCW for purposes of determining their eligibility to offer the BS programs. This would not have been the case had the evaluation findings on other key areas of maritime education in the outcomes based monitoring been calibrated, but EMSA had previously registered the lack of calibration and wide divergence in the findings of evaluators as one of the country’s shortcomings."

Note that CHED Memorandum Order No. 2 Series of 2012 have since been superseded by CHED Memorandum Order No. 20 Series of 2014.

The Regulatory Requirements of Maritime Education Although the statutory requirements provide a general policy for implementing compliance to the 1978 STCW Convention, it is actually a set of MARINA STCW Circulars and CHED Memorandum Orders that embodies the policy, standards and guidelines for the setting and implementation of standards for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT), Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE), the Enhanced Support Level Program for Marine Deck (ESLPMD), and the Enhanced Support Level Program for Marine Engineering (ESLPME).

1. CHED Memorandum Order No. 07, series of 2009, entitled, "Rules and Regulations Governing the Setting and Approval of Policies, Standards and Guidelines for Programs and Higher Education Institutions Pursuant to Section 8(d) of RA 7722".

of 40

2. CHED Memorandum Order No. 02, series of 2012, entitled, "Implementing Guidelines on the Shipboard Training Requirement for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) Programs". (OBSOLETE. Repealed by CMO 20, s2014.)

3. CHED Memorandum Order No. 46, series of 2012, entitled, "Policy-Standard to Enhance Quality Assurance (QA) in Philippine Higher Education Through An Outcomes-Based and Typology-Based QA".

4. CHED Memorandum Order No. 09, series of 2013, entitled, "Enhanced Policies and Guidelines on Student Affairs and Services".

5. CHED Memorandum Order No. 13, series of 2013, entitled, "Policies, Standards and Guidelines (PSG) for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation Program". (Amended by CMO 31, s2013)

6. CHED Memorandum Order No. 14, series of 2013, entitled, "Policies, Standards and Guidelines (PSG) for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering Program". (Amended by CMO 32, s2013)

7. CHED Memorandum Order No. 27, series of 2013, entitled, "Rules and Procedures Implementing the CHED and MARINA Joint Monitoring of Maritime Education Programs Offered by Maritime Higher Education Insitutions".

8. CHED Memorandum Order No. 31, series of 2013, entitled, "Amendments and Supplemental Policies, Standards and Guidelines to CMO 13 Series of 2013". (OBSOLETE. Repealed by CMO 20, s2015.)

9. CHED Memorandum Order No. 32, series of 2013, entitled, "Amendments and Supplemental Policies, Standards and Guidelines to CMO 14 Series of 2013". (OBSOLETE. Repealed by CMO 20, s2015.)

10. CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2014, entitled, "Revised Implementing Guidelines on the Seagoing Service Requirement for the Conferment of the Degree in Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) Programs".

11. CHED Commission en banc Resolution No. 209-2015 dated 12 May 2015.

12. CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2015 entitled, "Consolidated Policies, Standards and Guidelines for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) Programs".

13. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2014-01, entitled, "Rules on the Preparation and Approval of STCW Circulars"

14. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2014-02, entitled, "Daily Journal of Bridge Watchkeeping Duties and Daily Journal of Engine-Room Watchkeeping Duties"

of 40

15. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2014-07, entitled, "Implementation of the Enchanced Support Level Program for STCW Certification as Ratings Forming Part of a Watch and Ratings as Able Seafarer"

16. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2014-08, entitled, "Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination Assessment, Licensing and Certification of Officers-in-Charge of a Navigational Watch on Ships of 500 Gross Tonnage or More"

17. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2015-01, entitled, "Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination Assessment, Licensing and Certification of Masters on Ships of Less Than 500 Gross Tonnage Not Engaged on Near-Coastal Voyages"

18. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2015-03, entitled, "Rules and Requirements for the Implementation of Updating Training for Officers in Charge of Navigational Watch on Seagoing Ships of 500 Gross Tonnage or More and for Officers in Charge of an Engineering Watch on Seagoing Ships Powered by Main Propulsion Machinery of 750 KW Propulsion Power or More"

19. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2015-04, entitled, "Rules on the Monitoring of Maritime Education Programs (MEPs), Approved Training Programs (ATPs) and Assessment of Seafarer's Competence Carried Out By MHEIs, MTIs, PACs and MACs"

20. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2015-06, entitled, "Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Education, Trainings, Examination, Assessment and Certification of Ratings Forming Part of a Navigational Watch on a Seagoing Ship of 500 Gross Tonnage or More"

21. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2015-08, entitled, "Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Education, Training, Examination, Assessment and Certification of Ratings Forming Part of a Watch in a Manned Engine-Room or Designated to Perform Duties ina Periodically Unmanned Engine-Room on a Seagoing Ship Powered by Main Propulsion of 750 kW Propulsion Power or More"

22. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2015-11, entitled, "Rules on Procedure in Administrative Investigation of Cases for Violations Committed by Filipino Seafarers Holding Management and Operational Level Related Functions"

23. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-06, entitled, "Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination, Assessment and Certification of Ratings Forming Part of a Watch in a Manned Engine-Room or Designated to Perform Duties in a Periodically Unmanned Engine-Room on a Seagoing Ship Powered by Main Propulsion of 750kW Propulsion Power or More".

24. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-07, entitled, "Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination, Assessment and Certification of Rating as Able Seafarer Deck on a Seagoing Ship of 500 Gross Tonnage or More".

25. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-08, entitled, "Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination, Assessment and Certification of Rating as Able Seafarer Engine in a Manned Engine-Room or Designated to Perform Duties in a Periodically Unmanned Engine-Room Serving on a Seagoing

of 40

Ship Powered by Main Propulsion Machinery of 750 kW Propulsion Power or More".

26. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-10, entitled, "Revised Guidelines on the Implementation of the Enhanced Support Level Program for STCW Certification as Ratings Forming Part of a Watch and Ratings as Able Seafarer".

All the above regulations are supposed to be the basis for the standards of developing, managing and delivering the results or educational objectives of maritime education in the Philippines.

of 40

DESIRED STATE OF MARITIME EDUCATION A Management System for MHEIs based on a Single Document that Embodies the Philippine Standard for Maritime Education The most desirable state for maritime education is for all stakeholders to have a single document all stakeholders will refer to as the standard to be use as basis for improving the delivery of maritime education and the monitoring of compliance and performance by MHEIs. Harmonized standard that incorporates the STCW code, planning approach, key area of evaluation and the quality standard systems (clauses of ISO 9001). By harmonizing the standards set by the STCW Convention and Code with the planning approach, the key area of evaluation and the clauses of ISO 9001, the only document that will be audited by the ISO registrar, MARINA and CHED will be the quality management system (QMS) document. A MHEI audited based on its own QMS document should therefore yield no “Non-conformance” whether MHEI is audited by CHED, MARINA, EMSA or its own ISO registrar.

of 40

CURRENT JURISPRUDENCE The Memorandum from the Chairperson of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) sent to maritime higher education institutions (MHEIs) dated July 15, 2014, summarized the findings of the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) as follows:

“The findings of the EMSA audits since 2006 have cast doubt on the capacity of the Philippines to produce competent officers despite the palpable preference of international shipping companies for Filipino seafarers vis-a-vis those from other port states".

A great number of MHEIs became a subject of these audits in 2010, 2012, and 2013 of which findings led to MHEIs being subjected to deeper and frequent monitoring. Objective evidence from CHED of these audits eventually led to the conclusion that these institutions will not be able to comply, leading to a recommendation for phase-out in early 2014, a recommendation that many affected MHEIs contested through a temporary restraining order (TRO). This phase-out was implemented under the provision of Section 61 of the Manual of Regulations for Private Higher Education (MORPHE). The use of TRO may have been an exercise of futility since existing jurisprudence indicate that CHED does have the power to adjudicate and to impose sanctions against erring higher education institutions (see G.R. No. 112844 June 2, 1995 and G.R. No. 88259 August 10. 1989). Section 8 paragraph (d) and (e) of Republic Act No. 7722 of 1994, entitled, "An Act Creating the Commission on Higher Education, Appropriating Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes" also known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994”, defining the "Powers and Functions of the Commission" and subsequently reiterated by Section 16 paragraph (4) and (5) of the Manual of Regulations for Private Higher Education (MORPHE) states that the Commission shall have the following powers and functions which among others is to:

"set minimum standards for programs and institutions of higher learning recommended by panels of experts in the field and subject to public hearing, and enforce the same;" “monitor and evaluate the performance of programs and institutions of higher learning for appropriate incentives as well as the imposition of sanctions such as, but not limited to, diminution or withdrawal of subsidy, recommendation on the downgrading or withdrawal of accreditation, program termination or school closure;”

The Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) have given cognizance of these findings eventually leading to the publication of a list of institutions that were “compliant”, “for further monitoring”, “for phase-out”, and “closed”. Eventually, some of the “erring” MHEIs sent their respective letters of intent to apply for the Enhanced Support Level Program (ESLP) one of the options given to institutions under “for phase-out”.

of 40

In a letter from the CHED sent to MHEIs dated June 30, 2015, the Chairperson articulated that:

"This would not have been the case (referring to the results of EMSA audits) had the evaluation findings on other key areas of maritime education in the outcomes based monitoring been calibrated, but EMSA had previously registered the lack of calibration and wide divergence in the findings of evaluators as one of the country’s shortcomings."

It is important to note that not even CHED and MARINA are in synch as to what constitute sufficient evidence of compliance, a fact demonstrated by the use of proxy data in the past to approximate the measurement of educational objectives. This lack of calibration and wide divergence in the findings amongst evaluators themselves are attributed for the most part, more than any of the primary stakeholders care to admit, to the absence of standards. This is the key component for any audit on compliance to make sense. Standards: Do We Have It or We Don’t! Both CHED and MARINA insist that there are standards and refer to the “International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) of 1978 as amended” as the standard. STCW referred to above as it is stated, is an international convention. The Philippines being a member of the United Nations (UN) in consequence becomes also a member of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) hence a signatory to the international convention. We have reiterated our commitment to this standard by hosting the amendment of this international convention in 2010. The renewal of the Philippine commitment to the international convention was embodied in a document that became part of the laws of the Philippines as provided for in the 1987 Constitution. This was made possible by transformation through the enactment of Republic Act No. 10635 of 2014, entitled, "An Act Establishing the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) as the Single Maritime Administration Responsible for the Implementation and Enforcement of the 1978 International Convention on Standards of "Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, as Amended, and International Agreements or Covenants Related Thereto" also known as the "Maritime Industry Authority. STCW Administration Act of 2014"." The question is: “Did Republic Act No. 10635 set the standards?” The answer is NO. The republic act merely established that standards should be set and that MARINA established those standards through administrative law. Has the Administrative Law such as Circulars and Memorandum Orders Sufficiently and Fairly Established the Standard?

of 40

It is the duty of both MARINA and CHED to set the standards because it is embedded in the law that gave them existence and consequently their powers and functions. Section 8 paragraph (d) and (e) of Republic Act No. 7722 of 1994, entitled, "An Act Creating the Commission on Higher Education, Appropriating Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes" also known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994”, defining the "Powers and Functions of the Commission" and subsequently reiterated by Section 16 paragraph (4) and (5) of the Manual of Regulations for Private Higher Education (MORPHE) which states that the Commission shall have the following powers and functions which among others is to:

"set minimum standards for programs and institutions of higher learning recommended by panels of experts in the field and subject to public hearing, and enforce the same;"

“monitor and evaluate the performance of programs and institutions of higher learning for appropriate incentives as well as the imposition of sanctions such as, but not limited to, diminution or withdrawal of subsidy, recommendation on the downgrading or withdrawal of accreditation, program termination or school closure;”

Section 4 of Republic Act No. 10635 of 2014, entitled, "An Act Establishing the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) as the Single Maritime Administration Responsible for the Implementation and Enforcement of the 1978 International Convention on Standards of "Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, as Amended, and International Agreements or Covenants Related Thereto" also known as the "MARINA STCW Administration Act of 2014", defining the "Powers and Function of the MARINA" which among others states:

The MARINA shall ensure that all maritime education, including the curricula and training programs, are structured and delivered in accordance with the written programs, methods and media of delivery, procedures, and course materials compliant with international standards as prescribed under the STCW Convention. For this purpose, the MARINA shall:

i. Chair the Technical Panel on Maritime Education (TPME) of the CHED; the TPME shall among others, formulate, review and recommend to the CHED en banc all policies, standards, and guidelines for maritime education, including curricula, facilities and guidelines;

ii. Monitor and verify, in coordination with the CHIED, compliance

with the policies, standards, and guidelines of maritime education in the conduct of maritime education and training programs;

iii. Review and harmonize the procedures for periodic evaluation,

assessment and monitoring of all maritime education and training institutions in accordance with the standards of the CHED and other recognized international organizations;

iv. Develop, formulate and recommend for implementation, strict

quality assurance mechanisms and relevant typology for maritime education programs and institutions;

of 40

v. Recommend to the CHED en banc the closure/phase-out of substandard maritime education institutions, in accordance with the rules and regulations, as well as recommend alternative schemes or options for the affected maritime educational institution;

vi. Maintain an updated list of compliant and phased-out maritime

education and training programs, publish such lists in appropriate media, and provide the public with a clear understanding of the consequences of enrolling in a phased-out program;

What the law is saying is that MARINA still needs to set the standards in collaboration with CHED. Both CHED and MARINA will respond that standards have already been set through relevant memorandum orders and circulars. A lot of stakeholders will disagree. There seem to be a "culture" and "belief" within both CHED and MARINA in preparing circulars and memoranda that a clause with a heading "Policies", "Guidelines", and "Standards" is actually a standard. If CHED and MARINA are to be believed, the standards for the achievement of educational objectives or outcomes are supposedly discerned in the following statutory and regulatory references:

1. Republic Act No. 7722 of 1994, entitled, "An Act Creating the Commission on Higher Education, Appropriating Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes" also known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994”.

2. Republic Act No. 10635 of 2014, entitled, "An Act Establishing the Maritime

Industry Authority (MARINA) as the Single Maritime Administration Responsible for the Implementation and Enforcement of the 1978 International Convention on Standards of "Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, as Amended, and International Agreements or Covenants Related Thereto" also known as the "MARINA STCW Administration Act of 2014"."

3. Executive Order No. 83, series of 2012, entitled, "Institutionalization of the

Philippine Qualifications Framework".

4. CHED Memorandum Order No. 46, series of 2012, entitled, "Policy-Standard to Enhance Quality Assurance (QA) in Philippine Higher Education Through An Outcomes-Based and Typology-Based QA".

5. CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2014, entitled, "Revised

Implementing Guidelines on the Seagoing Service Requirement for the Conferment of the Degree in Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) Programs".

6. CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2015 entitled, "Consolidated

Policies, Standards and Guidelines for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) Programs".

of 40

7. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-10, entitled, "Revised Guidelines on the

Implementation of the Enhanced Support Level Program for STCW Certification as Ratings Forming Part of a Watch and Ratings as Able Seafarer".

The keyword here is "discerned" because out of the above seven (7) regulatory and statutory references, only one (1) actually mentions and attempts to define the word "standard" in its provisions: MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-10. MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-10 under Item 4 entitled "General Provisions" mentions two (2) sets of standards. Even in its effort and its context, MARINA does not do justice to the word "standard". MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-10 defines "Minimum Standards" in Item 4.1 and "Curricular Standards" in Item 4.2 of the circular.

Minimum Standards. Minimum standards are expressed as a minimum set of desired program outcomes and are found in Item 5.1.2 of this Circular. The minimum circular requirements are shown in Item 5.2.2 hereof. The Course Specifications for these special programs are similar to the specification of the first year courses in BSMT and BSMarE programs with the addition of Machine Shop 3 and Engineering Materials for ESLPME and English 3 for both special programs. Course specifications for specific courses at the support level are defined under Item 5.2.4 of this Circular. The physical resource requirements for the library, laboratories and other facilities and the human resource requirements in terms of administration and faculty are in Item 5.3 hereof.

Curricular Standard. The MHEIs are allowed to design curricula suited to their own contexts and missions in the spirit of academic freedom provided that they can demonstrate the attainment of the required minimum set of outcomes at the support level, fully compliant with the Minimum Standard, albeit by a different route. In the same vein, they have latitude in terms of curriculum delivery and the specification and deployment of human and physical resources as long as they can show that the attainment of the program outcomes and satisfaction of program educational objectives can be assured by the alternative means they may propose.

Note that Item 5.1.2 of MARINA STCW Circular No. 2016-10 refers to "Program Outcomes"; Item 5.2.2 refers to "Curriculum Outline"; Item 5.2.4 refers to "Course Specification"; and Item 5.3 refers to "Required Resources". These clauses refers to areas requiring standards but by themselves are not standards. Anyone reading the definition of “Minimum Standards” and “Curricular Standards” will not extract a definition in the text. It is a paragraph that tells you nothing about any standard. Clearly the text of the circular do not point to any standard. In jurisprudence, CHED and MARINA are relying on the logic that administrative law has already established the standards and therefore enforceable. When pushed for answers why the the Evaluator’s Guide used by both MARINA and CHED to audit MHEIs do not specify anything specific, both MARINA and CHED agree that they are allowing MHEIs some degree of “academic freedom”.

of 40

Standards and Academic Freedom The position of CHED and MARINA regarding academic freedom can be taken in another perspective, CHED and MARINA are not ready with any standard. Section 19 of Article IV of the Manual of Regulations for Private Higher Education (MORPHE) contextualized the concept of academic freedom:

Guarantee of Academic Freedom. Nothing in this Manual shall be construed as limiting the academic freedom of higher education institutions. In particular, no abridgment of curricular freedom of the individual institution shall be made by the Commission except for: (a) minimum unit requirement for specific academic programs; (b) general education distribution requirements as may be determined by the Commission; and (c) specific professional subjects as may be stipulated by the various licensing entities.

Higher education institutions shall have the freedom to innovate, introduce and operate new programs in spite of the absence of the particular policies and standards for such programs. Provided, that the minimum standards or requirements as provided for in this manual are complied with. Provided further, that proper authority will be secured from the Commission before operating such programs.

Finally, no academic or curricular restriction shall be made upon private higher education institutions, which are not required for chartered state colleges and universities, including local colleges and universities (LCUs).

This provision of the MORPHE specifically indicates that academic freedom can be invoke only when the following conditions already exists and complied with:

a) minimum unit requirement for specific academic programs;

b) general education distribution requirements as may be determined by the Commission; and

c) specific professional subjects as may be stipulated by the various licensing entities

Clearly, this provision specify that academic freedom does not mean absence of minimum standards. CHED and MARINA however have not established this and in a way created an environment where evaluators were making assessments of MHEIs without even the minimum standards in its Evaluator’s Guide. Stakeholders Don’t Agree on the Definition of Standards It should be common sense therefore for all stakeholders to understand the definition of the word “standard”. According to Dictionary.com, standard is defined as:

1. something considered by an authority or by general consent as a basis of comparison; an approved model.

2. an object that is regarded as the usual or most common size or form of its

kind:

of 40

a. “We stock the deluxe models as well as the standards.”

3. a rule or principle that is used as a basis for judgment: a. “They tried to establish standards for a new philosophical approach.”

4. an average or normal requirement, quality, quantity, level, grade, etc.:

a. “His work this week hasn't been up to his usual standard.” Since one of the Key Area of Evaluation (KAE) is the implementation and institutionalization of quality standard system and subsequently the use of ISO 9001, it is just appropriate and logical therefore, to use the definition of quality in the context of ISO. According to International Organization for Standardization (ISO.org):

“A standard is a document that provides requirements, specifications, guidelines or characteristics that can be used consistently to ensure that materials, products, processes and services are fit for their purpose.”

Based on this definition the question therefore that we need to ask, is what document from MARINA and CHED provides requirements, specifications, guidelines or characteristics that can be used consistently to ensure that materials, products, processes and services are fit for maritime education? Since the evaluator’s guide always ask for objective evidence, it is just sensible to ask the same question to both CHED and MARINA: What verifiable and objective evidence do CHED and MARINA have that such a document (standard) even exist? And why is it, that a cluster of regulations meant to set standards don’t even have a definition of the word “standard” in its provisions and clauses. Both CHED and MARINA share a tool they call the Evaluator’s Guide that appears as a table containing the eleven (11) key areas of evaluation. The evaluator’s guide however is not a checklist culled from a standard. It is a collection of guide questions or statements to give the evaluator a semblance of a guide to audit key areas of maritime programs. Even evaluators can’t seem to agree what to look for in a program. One evaluator when they get to the key area “Faculty” will say that your General Education teachers should have a certificate from IMO Training No. 6.09 and another evaluator from the same audit team will disagree that is not compulsory for General Education teachers. One evaluator will say that the syntax of the ILO is wrong while another auditor will say “No Comment” invoking academic freedom. If indeed there was a standard hidden in each of the key area, the evaluator can simply answer a set of simple questions:

1. What is the key result expected from this key area being evaluated? 2. What is the process that will ensure the achievement of the key result? 3. What is the success indicator that will validate that the process was

executed correctly? 4. What is the objective evidence that shows the key result was achieved? 5. What information should be retained? 6. What are the resources or assets that should be provided to successfully

execute the key process and achieve the key results?

of 40

Once we put the answer to each of the questions above for each key area of evaluation, a standard can emerge. Unfortunately, CHED and MARINA have not answered these questions. They have used an Evaluator’s Guide that is too prone to subjective judgement of evaluators or auditors. Two or three different auditors will have different interpretations of the guide questions in the Evaluator’s Guide. How do we guarantee then that two or three auditors and evaluators will make the same assessment from the same set of criteria? A considerable number of MHEIs were sanctioned through the provisions of administrative law that were flawed in the first place. The guide used to audit MHEIs were open to interpretation that were capricious and arbitrary. This is a fact that stakeholders more particularly MHEIs must challenge through the judicial process. Harmonizing Standards Prior to Ratification The next responsibility of CHED and MARINA is to harmonize the matrix of the key area of evaluation with the clauses of ISO 9001 so we are more confident that once an MHEI complies with their quality management system, the key area of evaluation is also complied with. Harmonizing standards is also part of the powers and functions of MARINA as provided for in Section 4 of Republic Act No. 10635 of 2014, entitled, "An Act Establishing the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) as the Single Maritime Administration Responsible for the Implementation and Enforcement of the 1978 International Convention on Standards of "Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, as Amended, and International Agreements or Covenants Related Thereto" also known as the "MARINA STCW Administration Act of 2014", defining the "Powers and Function of the MARINA" which among others states:


(vii) Review and harmonize the procedures for periodic evaluation, assessment and monitoring of all maritime education and training institutions in accordance with the standards of the CHED and other recognized international organizations;

of 40

PROGRAM OF ACTION Obviously, jurisprudence and experience by higher education institutions indicate the usual strategy of using Temporary Restraining Order or TRO have proven ineffective as shield against execution of CHED resolution of closure cases. The higher courts have consistently decided in favor of CHED when the basis for closure is non-compliance to regulations. What then is the course of action available to MHEIs? Petition the Court of Proper Jurisdiction for a Writ of Mandamus Since the root cause of the capricious and arbitrary assessment of MHEIs lies in the absence of standards, it is quite apparent that standards should be set. The most feasible course of action therefore is to petition for a writ of mandamus compelling CHED and MARINA to perform their functions of establishing standards for the management of maritime education programs Under Rule 65, Section 3 of the Rules of Court, mandamus lies under any of the following cases:

1. against any tribunal which unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty;

2. in case any corporation, board or person unlawfully neglects the

performance of an act which the law enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station; and

3. in case any tribunal, corporation, board or person unlawfully excludes

another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is legally entitled; and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.

[Reyes v. Zamora, et al., G.R. No. 46732, May 5, 1979, 90 SCRA 92; Province of Pangasinan v. Reparations Commission, G.R. No. L27448, November 29, 1977, 80 SCRA 376.]

The Writ of Mandamus must pray for the performance of the respective duties of both MARINA and CHED as provided for in the provisions of the following statutes:

a) Section 8 paragraph (d) and (e) of Republic Act No. 7722 of 1994, entitled, "An Act Creating the Commission on Higher Education, Appropriating Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes" also known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994”, defining the "Powers and Functions of the Commission" and subsequently reiterated by Section 16 paragraph (4) and (5) of the Manual of Regulations for Private Higher Education (MORPHE) which states that the Commission shall have the following powers and functions which among others is to:

"set minimum standards for programs and institutions of higher learning recommended by panels of experts in the field and subject to public hearing, and enforce the same;"

“monitor and evaluate the performance of programs and institutions of higher learning for appropriate incentives as well as the imposition of

of 40

sanctions such as, but not limited to, diminution or withdrawal of subsidy, recommendation on the downgrading or withdrawal of accreditation, program termination or school closure;”

b) Section 4 of Republic Act No. 10635 of 2014, entitled, "An Act Establishing the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) as the Single Maritime Administration Responsible for the Implementation and Enforcement of the 1978 International Convention on Standards of "Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, as Amended, and International Agreements or Covenants Related Thereto" also known as the "MARINA STCW Administration Act of 2014", defining the "Powers and Function of the MARINA" which among others states:


(i) Chair the Technical Panel on Maritime Education (TPME) of

the CHED; the TPME shall among others, formulate, review and recommend to the CHED en banc all policies, standards, and guidelines for maritime education, including curricula, facilities and guidelines;

(ii) Monitor and verify, in coordination with the CHIED,

compliance with the policies, standards, and guidelines of maritime education in the conduct of maritime education and training programs;

(iii) Review and harmonize the procedures for periodic

evaluation, assessment and monitoring of all maritime education and training institutions in accordance with the standards of the CHED and other recognized international organizations;

(iv) Develop, formulate and recommend for implementation, strict quality assurance mechanisms and relevant typology for maritime education programs and institutions;

The nature of mandamus has been the subject of discussions in several cases. It is settled that mandamus is employed to compel the performance, when refused, of a ministerial duty, this being its main objective. It does not lie to require anyone to fulfill contractual obligations or to compel a course of conduct, nor to control or review the exercise of discretion. [Tabique v. Duvall, 16 Phil., 324.] [Avenue Arrastre and Stevedoring Corp., Inc. v. Commissioner of Customs, et al., G.R. No. L44674, February 28, 1983, 120 SCRA 878.] On the part of the petitioner, it is essential to the issuance of a writ of mandamus that he should have a clear legal right to the thing demanded and it must be the imperative duty of the respondent to perform the act required. It never issues in doubtful cases. While it may not be necessary that the duty be absolutely expressed, it must however, be clear.

of 40

[Canonizado v. Benitez, etc., et al., G.R. Nos. L49315 and 60966, February 20, 1984, 127 SCRA 610; Lozada, et al., v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 59068, January 27, 1983, 120 SCRA 337; Taboy, et al., v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. L47472, July 24, 1981, 105 SCRA 758; Ocampo v. Subido; etc., et al., G.R. No. L28344, August 27, 1976, 72 SCRA 443.] The writ will not issue to compel an official to do anything which is not his duty to do or which is his duty not to do, or give to the applicant anything to which he is not entitled by law. The writ neither confers powers nor imposes duties. It is simply a command to exercise a power already possessed and to perform a duty already imposed. [Province of Pangasinan v. Reparations Commission, G.R. No. L27448, November 29, 1977, 80 SCRA 376.] Withdrawal or Amendment of Relevant Administrative Law Petition the Withdrawal or Amendment of the following administrative law for creating a monitoring and auditing process that is capricious and arbitrary: There are two administrative laws that mandate CHED and MARINA to audit or evaluate MHEIs and imply that a set of criteria actually exists:

Commission on Higher Education Memorandum Order No. 27, series of 2013, entitled, "Rules and Procedures Implementing the CHED and MARINA Joint Monitoring of Maritime Education Programs Offered by Maritime Higher Education Institutions".

Maritime Industry Authority STCW Circular No. 2015-04, entitled, "Rules on the Monitoring of Maritime Education Programs (MEPs), Approved Training Programs (ATPs) and Assessment of Seafarer's Competence Carried Out By MHEIs, MTIs, PACs and MACs".

These sets of administrative laws have proven to be and have shown to the stakeholders an environment of unfairness driven mostly by the conduct of evaluators that are often times capricious and arbitrary. These administrative laws should be either withdrawn or amended because it is not a based on any standard. If amended should be done so in collaboration with stakeholders who will be subjected to the provisions of such administrative laws. "It is an axiom in administrative law that administrative authorities should not act arbitrarily and capriciously in the issuance of rules and regulations. To be valid, such rules and regulations must be reasonable and fairly adapted to the end in view. If shown to bear no reasonable relation to the purposes for which they are authorized to be issued, then they must be held to be invalid." [Gonzales, Administrative Law, Law on Public and Election Law, 1966, page 52.] [G.R. No. 77372 April 29, 1988, [Lupo L. Lupangco, Raymond S. Mangkal, Norman A. Mesina, Alexander R. Reguyal, Jocelyn P. Catapang, Enrico V. Regalado, Jerome O. Arcega, Ernestoc. Blas, Jr., Elpedio M. Almazan, Karl Caesar R. Rimando, (petitioner), -vs.- Court of Appeals and Professional Regulation Commission, (respondent).] Amend the Administrative Law Governing the Issuances of Policies, Standards and Guidelines in Collaboration with Stakeholders There must be a proposal from any stakeholder as to how the process of setting the standards will take place to ensure that a real standard is delivered and stakeholders have a major role in setting these standards.

of 40

Emphasis should be given to the review and amendment of CMOs such as the Commission on Higher Education’s Memorandum Order No. 07, series of 2009, entitled, "Rules and Regulations Governing the Setting and Approval of Policies, Standards and Guidelines for Programs and Higher Education Institutions Pursuant to Section 8(d) of RA 7722". Any stakeholder can use this case to petition for the imposition of a moratorium on monitoring pending the approval or ratification of the standards by stakeholders. Gathering attendance of stakeholders should not be use as compliance for completing “consultation meetings” when drafting PSGs. Embody the Philippine Standard for Maritime Education in a Single Document The initiatives to accomplish all of the above should be collaborative and shall involve all stakeholders including the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA). The participation of EMSA should ensure there is validation that the Philippine standard is ratified by stakeholders and recognized by EMSA. The following activities should be completed:

1) A focus group discussion of the coverage of the Philippine Standards 2) A planning conference to organize a summit and how to manage the

sessions in the summit. 3) A summit for the compilation and ratification of standards with the goal of

coming up with a single document as reference for all stakeholders.

There must be a proposal from the stakeholders as to how the process of setting the standards will take place to ensure that a real standard is delivered and stakeholders have a major role in setting these standards. This document shall cover at least the following: 1. The process of drafting, approving and revising policies, standards and

guidelines for maritime education defining:

i. The key processes such as drafting, collaboration, editing, revision, ratification, and publication.

ii. The objective evidence that each key process has been implemented correctly.

iii. The objective evidence that the output for each key process was reviewed and approved by the duly authorized representative of each stakeholder. Note: Attendance should not be considered an output. It should be categorized as evidence of execution.

2. The specifications and standards for each key area of evaluation shall

define:

i. The key result for each key area of evaluation. ii. The minimum and basic steps in each process to ensure the key

result can be delivered. iii. The objective evidence that the procedure is executed correctly and

consistently. iv. The success indicator that the key result is achieved. v. The objective evidence that the key result is achieved.

of 40

vi. The specific information about the procedure and the result that should be retained in a document.

3. The conduct of monitoring, inspection, audit and verification of MARINA-

CHED defining: i. The key area to be evaluated and the standards to be use. ii. The composition of the audit team. iii. The notice of inspection/audit iv. The specific authority of the audit team. v. The rights of the MHEIs during the audit/inspection (including

conditions under which MHEIs can refuse audit/inspection).

4. The selection, qualification and publication of the members of the monitoring or quality audit team defining:

i. Specific credentials. ii. Area of specialization relevant to the key areas of evaluation. iii. Specific page in the MARINA-CHED website where the identification,

qualification and specialization of the members of the monitoring or quality audit team are published.

iv. Template of the authority of each individual member to conduct monitoring, inspection or audit specifying the key area they are to inspect or to audit and the specific date and inclusive time it is to be conducted.

v. Template of the notice of inspection specifying the names of the members of the audit team, specialization and key area of evaluation.

Harmonize Planning Objectives, STCW Convention and Code, Key Areas of Evaluation and ISO 9001 Clauses If the MHEI is already doing planning, it is presumed that they have defined their goals based on the minimum set by CHED. For example, if the MHEI is already using Logical Framework Approach (LFA) in planning, their plan will be in a matrix having a goal, purpose, outputs and key activities.

The ultimate goal for MHEIs is to get their graduates to be employed in the maritime industry based on their qualifications. The defined purpose is supposed to lead to the goal and the outputs should support the achievement of the purpose. Key activities should be supporting each output.

If CHED and MARINA are actually doing their jobs, they should be able to define the desired minimum output for each of the eleven (11) key areas of evaluation.

If they are able to define the minimum outputs, they should be able to prescribe the basic steps in each key process that can lead to the desired output and prescribed the objective evidence they need to validate compliance to the process.

The steps in each of the process constitute the procedures that will be part of the QMS. By identifying each of the key processes that are complying with each of the clauses in ISO 9001, we can then harmonize the goals, purpose and outputs of the plan, with the key processes in the key areas of evaluation and the clauses of ISO 9001.

of 40

If the proposal is done right, MARINA and CHED will ask for at least six (6) months to a year to complete the task of establishing the standards in collaboration with stakeholders.

of 40

BIBLIOGRAPHY Commission on Higher Education. (2008). Manual of Regulations for Private Higher

Education. Quezon City, Philippines: Commission on Higher Education. Commission on Higher Education. (2009). Memorandum Order No. 07, series of

2009, entitled, "Rules and Regulations Governing the Setting and Approval of Policies, Standards and Guidelines for Programs and Higher Education Institutions Pursuant to Section 8(d) of RA 7722".

Commission on Higher Education. (2012). Memorandum Order No. 02, series of

2012, entitled, "Implementing Guidelines on the Shipboard Training Requirement for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) Programs". (OBSOLETE. Repealed by CMO 20, s2014.)


2012, entitled, "Policy-Standard to Enhance Quality Assurance (QA) in Philippine Higher Education Through An Outcomes-Based and Typology-Based QA".


2013, entitled, "Enhanced Policies and Guidelines on Student Affairs and Services".


2013, entitled, "Policies, Standards and Guidelines (PSG) for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation Program". (Amended by CMO 31, s2013)


2013, entitled, "Policies, Standards and Guidelines (PSG) for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering Program". (Amended by CMO 32, s2013)


2013, entitled, "Rules and Procedures Implementing the CHED and MARINA Joint Monitoring of Maritime Education Programs Offered by Maritime Higher Education Institutions".


2013, entitled, "Amendments and Supplemental Policies, Standards and Guidelines to CMO 13 Series of 2013". (OBSOLETE. Repealed by CMO 20, s2015.)


2013, entitled, "Amendments and Supplemental Policies, Standards and Guidelines to CMO 14 Series of 2013". (OBSOLETE. Repealed by CMO 20, s2015.)


2014, entitled, "CHED Priority Courses for AY 2014-2015 to AY 2017-2018".

of 40

Commission on Higher Education. (2014). Memorandum Order No. 18, series of 2014, entitled, "Installation of a Labor Market Information (LMI) Corner in All Higher Education Institutions (HEIs)".


2014, entitled, "Revised Implementing Guidelines on the Seagoing Service Requirement for the Conferment of the Degree in Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) Programs".

Commission on Higher Education. (2014). Commission en banc Resolution No.

209-2015 dated 12 May 2015. Commission on Higher Education. (2015). Manual of Procedures. Quezon City,

Philippines: Commission on Higher Education. Commission on Higher Education. (2015). Memorandum Order No. 20, series of

2015 entitled, "Consolidated Policies, Standards and Guidelines for the Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) Programs".

Executive Order No. 83, series of 2012, entitled, "Institutionalization of the

Philippine Qualifications Framework". Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No. 10635, series of 2014,

entitled, "Implementing Rules and Regulations of the MARINA STCW Administration Act of 2014 (Republic Act No. 10635)"

International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping

for Seafarers (STCW) of 1978 as amended. Licuanan, Patricia B. (2014). Memorandum from the Chairperson of the

Commission on Higher Education dated July 15, 2014 Licuanan, Patricia B. (2015). Memorandum from the Chairperson of the

Commission on Higher Education dated June 9, 2015. Licuanan, Patricia B. (2015). Letter from the Commission on Higher Education

dated 30 June 2015 addressed to Concord Technical Institute. Maritime Industry Authority. (2014). STCW Circular No. 2014-01, entitled, "Rules on

the Preparation and Approval of STCW Circulars" Maritime Industry Authority. (2014). STCW Circular No. 2014-02, entitled, "Daily

Journal of Bridge Watchkeeping Duties and Daily Journal of Engine-Room Watchkeeping Duties"

Maritime Industry Authority. (2014). STCW Circular No. 2014-07, entitled,

"Implementation of the Enchanced Support Level Program for STCW Certification as Ratings Forming Part of a Watch and Ratings as Able Seafarer"


"Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination Assessment, Licensing

of 40

and Certification of Officers-in-Charge of a Navigational Watch on Ships of 500 Gross Tonnage or More"


"Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination Assessment, Licensing and Certification of Masters on Ships of Less Than 500 Gross Tonnage Not Engaged on Near-Coastal Voyages"

Maritime Industry Authority. (2015). STCW Circular No. 2015-03, entitled, "Rules

and Requirements for the Implementation of Updating Training for Officers in Charge of Navigational Watch on Seagoing Ships of 500 Gross Tonnage or More and for Officers in Charge of an Engineering Watch on Seagoing Ships Powered by Main Propulsion Machinery of 750 KW Propulsion Power or More"

Maritime Industry Authority. (2015). STCW Circular No. 2015-04, entitled, "Rules on

the Monitoring of Maritime Education Programs (MEPs), Approved Training Programs (ATPs) and Assessment of Seafarer's Competence Carried Out By MHEIs, MTIs, PACs and MACs"


"Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Education, Trainings, Examination, Assessment and Certification of Ratings Forming Part of a Navigational Watch on a Seagoing Ship of 500 Gross Tonnage or More"


"Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Education, Training, Examination, Assessment and Certification of Ratings Forming Part of a Watch in a Manned Engine-Room or Designated to Perform Duties in a Periodically Unmanned Engine-Room on a Seagoing Ship Powered by Main Propulsion of 750 kW Propulsion Power or More"

Maritime Industry Authority. (2015). STCW Circular No. 2015-11, entitled, "Rules on

Procedure in Administrative Investigation of Cases for Violations Committed by Filipino Seafarers Holding Management and Operational Level Related Functions"


"Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination, Assessment and Certification of Ratings Forming Part of a Watch in a Manned Engine-Room or Designated to Perform Duties in a Periodically Unmanned Engine-Room on a Seagoing Ship Powered by Main Propulsion of 750kW Propulsion Power or More".


"Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination, Assessment and Certification of Rating as Able Seafarer Deck on a Seagoing Ship of 500 Gross Tonnage or More".


"Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Examination, Assessment and Certification of Rating as Able Seafarer Engine in a Manned Engine-Room or Designated to Perform Duties in a Periodically Unmanned Engine-Room Serving on a Seagoing Ship Powered by Main Propulsion Machinery of 750 kW Propulsion Power or More".

of 40

Maritime Industry Authority. (2016). STCW Circular No. 2016-10, entitled, "Revised

Guidelines on the Implementation of the Enhanced Support Level Program for STCW Certification as Ratings Forming Part of a Watch and Ratings as Able Seafarer".

Republic Act No. 7722 of 1994, entitled, "An Act Creating the Commission on

Higher Education, Appropriating Funds Therefor and For Other Purposes" also known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994”.

Republic Act No. 10635 of 2014, entitled, "An Act Establishing the Maritime Industry

Authority (MARINA) as the Single Maritime Administration Responsible for the Implementation and Enforcement of the 1978 International Convention on Standards of "Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, as Amended, and International Agreements or Covenants Related Thereto" also known as the "Maritime Industry Authority. STCW Administration Act of 2014"."

Relevant Jurisprudence: G.R. No. L40779 November 28, 1975

EPICHARIS T. GARCIA, (petitioner), -vs- THE FACULTY ADMISSION COMMITTEE, LOYOLA SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY, herein represented by FR. ANTONIO B. LAMBINO, (respondent).

G.R. No. 88259 August 10, 1989

THE BOARD OF MEDICAL EDUCATION and the HON. LOURDES R. QUISUMBING, in her capacity as Secretary of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports and Chairman, Board of Medical Education, (petitioners), -vs.- HON. DANIEL P. ALFONSO, Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 74, Fourth Judicial Region, Antipolo, Rizal, and the PHILIPPINE MUSLIM-CHRISTIAN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE FOUNDATION, INC., (respondents).

G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993

JUAN ANTONIO, ANNA ROSARIO and JOSE ALFONSO, all surnamed OPOSA, minors, and represented by their parents ANTONIO and RIZALINA OPOSA, ROBERTA NICOLE SADIUA, minor, represented by her parents CALVIN and ROBERTA SADIUA, CARLO, AMANDA SALUD and PATRISHA, all surnamed FLORES, minors and represented by their parents ENRICO and NIDA FLORES, GIANINA DITA R. FORTUN, minor, represented by her parents SIGRID and DOLORES FORTUN, GEORGE II and MA. CONCEPCION, all surnamed MISA, minors and represented by their parents GEORGE and MYRA MISA, BENJAMIN ALAN V. PESIGAN, minor, represented by his parents ANTONIO and ALICE PESIGAN, JOVIE MARIE ALFARO, minor, represented by her parents JOSE and MARIA VIOLETA ALFARO, MARIA CONCEPCION T. CASTRO, minor, represented by her parents FREDENIL and JANE CASTRO, JOHANNA DESAMPARADO, minor, represented by her parents JOSE and ANGELA DESAMPRADO, CARLO JOAQUIN T. NARVASA, minor, represented by his parents GREGORIO II and CRISTINE CHARITY NARVASA, MA. MARGARITA, JESUS IGNACIO, MA. ANGELA and MARIE GABRIELLE, all surnamed SAENZ, minors, represented by their parents ROBERTO and AURORA SAENZ, KRISTINE, MARY ELLEN, MAY, GOLDA MARTHE and

of 40

DAVID IAN, all surnamed KING, minors, represented by their parents MARIO and HAYDEE KING, DAVID, FRANCISCO and THERESE VICTORIA, all surnamed ENDRIGA, minors, represented by their parents BALTAZAR and TERESITA ENDRIGA, JOSE MA. and REGINA MA., all surnamed ABAYA, minors, represented by their parents ANTONIO and MARICA ABAYA, MARILIN, MARIO, JR. and MARIETTE, all surnamed CARDAMA, minors, represented by their parents MARIO and LINA CARDAMA, CLARISSA, ANN MARIE, NAGEL, and IMEE LYN, all surnamed OPOSA, minors and represented by their parents RICARDO and MARISSA OPOSA, PHILIP JOSEPH, STEPHEN JOHN and ISAIAH JAMES, all surnamed QUIPIT, minors, represented by their parents JOSE MAX and VILMI QUIPIT, BUGHAW CIELO, CRISANTO, ANNA, DANIEL and FRANCISCO, all surnamed BIBAL, minors, represented by their parents FRANCISCO, JR. and MILAGROS BIBAL, and THE PHILIPPINE ECOLOGICAL NETWORK, INC., (petitioners), -vs- THE HONORABLE FULGENCIO S. FACTORAN, JR., in his capacity as the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and THE HONORABLE ERIBERTO U. ROSARIO, Presiding Judge of the RTC, Makati, Branch 66, (respondents).

G.R. No. 100588 March 7, 1994

UNIVERSITY OF SAN AGUSTIN, INC., SISTER CONCEPCION CAJILIG, NENALYN ABIODA, MARY ESPINO, RHODORA AZUCENA, MA. DULCE SOCORRO POSA and COSETTE MONTEBLANCO, (petitioners), -vs- COURT OF APPEALS, ANTONIO H. LARA, EDUARDO MAGANTE, JOSE SANCHO, REYNALDA F. SO and WINNEFRIDA C. VALENZUELA, as parents/guardians of Antonio Marco Ho, Ma. Elanie Magante, Roy D. Sancho, Michael Kim So and Bernardina Cainoy, (respondents).

G.R. No. 112844 June 2, 1995

PHILIPPINE MERCHANT MARINE SCHOOL, INC., represented by JUAN O. NOLASCO III, (petitioner), -vs- COURT OF APPEALS, THE OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, EDELMIRO AMANTE, RENATO CORONA, and the DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, (respondents).

G.R. No. 139465 January 18, 2000

SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, (petitioner), -vs- HON. RALPH C. LANTION, Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 25, and MARK B. JIMENEZ, (respondents).

G.R. No. 17194748 December 18, 2008

METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Present: DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, PUNO, C.J., DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, QUISUMBING, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, YNARES SANTIAGO, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC CARPIO, WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, AUSTRIA MARTINEZ, DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND CORONA, MANAGEMENT, PHILIPPINE CARPIO MORALES, COAST GUARD, PHILIPPINE AZCUNA, NATIONAL POLICE MARITIME TINGA, GROUP, and DEPARTMENT OF CHICONAZARIO, THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL VELASCO, JR., GOVERNMENT, NACHURA, (Petitioners) , REYES, LEONARDO DE CASTRO, -versus- BRION, JJ. CONCERNED RESIDENTS OF MANILA BAY, represented and joined by DIVINA V. ILAS, SABINIANO

of 40

ALBARRACIN, MANUEL SANTOS, JR., DINAH DELA PEA, PAUL DENNIS QUINTERO, MA. VICTORIA LLENOS, DONNA CALOZA, FATIMA QUITAIN, VENICE SEGARRA, FRITZIE TANGKIA, SARAH JOELLE LINTAG, HANNIBAL AUGUSTUS BOBIS, FELIMON SANTIAGUEL, and Promulgated: JAIME AGUSTIN R. OPOSA, (Respondents).

G.R. No. 159618 February 1, 2011

BAYAN MUNA, as represented by Rep. SATUR OCAMPO, Rep. CRISPIN BELTRAN, and Rep. LIZA L. MAZA, (Petitioner), -vs- ALBERTO ROMULO, in his capacity as Executive Secretary, and BLAS F. OPLE, in his capacity as Secretary of Foreign Affairs, (Respondents).

G.R. No. 159618 February 1, 2011

BAYAN MUNA, as represented by Rep. SATUR OCAMPO, Rep. CRISPIN BELTRAN, and Rep. LIZA L. MAZA, (Petitioner), -vs- ALBERTO ROMULO, in his capacity as Executive Secretary, and BLAS F. OPLE, in his capacity as Secretary of Foreign Affairs, (Respondents).

Online References: Alquitran, Non. (2015). Seafarers stage protest vs Maritime Industry Authority. The

Philippine Star. Updated October 18, 2015 - 12:00am. http://www.philstar.com/metro/2015/10/18/1511932/seafarers-stage-protest-vs-Maritime Industry Authority. (Browsed November 12, 2016, 1:59 PM Philippine Time.)

Bordadora, Norman. (2014). 80,000 seamen may lose jobs, warns Drilon. Philippine

Daily Inquirer / 07:45 AM February 03, 2014. http://globalnation.inquirer.net/98248/80000-seamen-may-lose-jobs-warns-drilon (Browsed November 12, 2016, 2:03 PM Philippine Time.)

Esplanada, Jerry E. (2014). 2 Marine officials, bids members accused of rigging

P59M printing deal. Philippine Daily Inquirer / 11:40 PM May 20, 2014 http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/603853/2-marine-officials-bids-members-accused-of-rigging-p59m-printing-deal (Browsed November 12, 2016, 1:52 PM Philippine Time.)

United Filipino Seafarers. (2015). UFS to conduct a massive rally against Maritime

Industry Authority. Posted by: Agent Tinig on Sep 22, 2015 http://unitedfilipinoseafarers.com.ph/a-rage-against-corruption-ufs-to-conduct-a-massive-rally-against-Maritime Industry Authority./ (Browsed November 12, 2016, 1:56 PM Philippine Time.)

United Filipino Seafarers. (2015). A rage against corruption: UFS to conduct a

massive rally against Maritime Industry Authority. Posted by: Agent Tinig on October 02, 2015 http://unitedfilipinoseafarers.com.ph/a-rage-against-corruption-ufs-to-conduct-a-massive-rally-against-Maritime Industry Authority.-2/ (Browsed November 12, 2016, 1:57 PM Philippine Time.)

United Filipino Seafarers. (2014). Tinig Marino. May-June 2014. Volume XIX, No. 6.

http://www.unitedfilipinoseafarers.com.ph/downloadable-docs/tinig-issue/2014/2014-May-Jun.pdf

of 40

(Browsed November 12, 2016, 4:27 PM Philippine Time.) Ronda, Rainier Allan. (2011). MARINA probes whistle-blower. Updated October 21,

2011 - 12:00am. http://www.philstar.com:8080/metro/739315/Maritime Industry Authority.-probes-whistle-blower (Browsed November 12, 2016, 1:50 PM Philippine Time.)

of 40

This paper is published with the

understanding that the author is not

rendering or offering legal,

accounting, or other professional

service. If legal, accounting,

engineering advice or other expert

assistance is required the services

of a competent professional person

should be sought. Contents in this

paper are culled from a business

case in support of a consulting

engagement.