THIS WAS supposed to be historic. For the first time since 2018—when Aklas Magkaisa and Partido Silakbo faced each other across a contested election season—two accredited political parties were set to compete for seats in the Liderato kan Nueva Atenista. Partido SIGWA and the newly accredited KAUPOD Party entered the 2026 general election carrying the promise of renewed student engagement and a genuine contest for power within AdNU's student government.
What unfolded instead was a surprise. When the filing period closed, only three candidates had filed, both from the same party, and both running for executive positions. Every seat in the Student Congress—all 18 of them across six colleges—sat empty. Four Student Central Board positions produced no candidates. On 13 May 2026, COMELEC Chairperson Luise Luna formally declared a Failure of Elections for 22 out of 24 elective positions in the Liderato kan Nueva Atenista.
This is not a matter of bad luck or simple student apathy. It is a traceable chain of institutional decisions, beginning with a calendar that neither implementing body fully understood, and ending with a student body stripped of any meaningful electoral say in the overwhelming majority of its governing body.
THE NUMBERS
Of the 24 elective positions in the Lideratos, only the President and the Internal Vice-President have candidates—both unopposed standard-bearers of Partido SIGWA. Through Memorandum 2025-2026-033, COMELEC formally declared a Failure of Elections for every remaining post.
The scale of the failure is evident across the entire leadership structure, leaving the Student Central Board entirely hollow as the positions of External Vice-President, Secretary, Treasurer, and Public Information Officer drew zero candidates. This legislative vacuum extended into the Student Congress, where the College of Business and Accountancy saw all three of its seats remain empty following the formal withdrawal of its sole applicant, Ms. Alyssa Nebres—an exit officially acknowledged by COMELEC through Memorandum 2025-2026-034. The pattern of absence was total across the remaining five colleges; fifteen seats spanning Computer Studies, Humanities & Social Sciences, Education, Nursing, and Sciences, Engineering & Architecture were left without a single filing, effectively ensuring the Lideratos would begin its term without a functioning legislature.
The sheer scale of this vacancy must be absorbed before any deeper analysis begins. Even if the President and Internal Vice-President are proclaimed winners, the Lideratos will begin its term fundamentally handicapped: operating without an elected legislature, treasurer, secretary, or external representative. The executive and legislative branches of the student government will be built on entirely different democratic foundations from day one.
THE PROMISE THAT DIDN'T DELIVER
When COMELEC accredited both Partido SIGWA and KAUPOD Party, it marked the first time since 2018 that two parties would simultaneously compete for Lideratos seats. The early signal was genuine: multiparty competition typically drives voter turnout, broadens the candidate pool, and forces platforms to evolve beyond internal documents. For a student government still finding its footing under the 2024 Lideratos Constitution, a competitive election season carried real stakes.
What the subsequent calendar made possible—and what it rendered structurally impossible—is the core of this failure.
THE CALENDAR QUESTION
COMELEC drafted the election calendar in early March 2026, according to its written statement submitted to ThePILLARS. Formal transmission to the Student Congress was held back while scheduling concerns were deliberated, specifically the exclusion of Thursdays from the proposed timeline. In the same period, COMELEC proposed reducing the recruitment period from twenty-five days to twenty days, citing efficiency. The code requires a minimum of twenty-five. COMELEC's proposed reduction would have placed the recruitment window below the statutory floor before SCon had even seen the calendar.
On 30 March 2026, a Sunday, during the Holy Week break, COMELEC submitted what it described as a Concept Paper to the Student Congress. The first move, which the electoral code assigned to SCon, had come instead from COMELEC. SCon, by its own admission during a dialogue with ThePILLARS on May 12, had not yet issued any resolution. It had not yet set any date. It had been waiting, as Speaker of the House Zeah L. Villamonte confirmed, under the impression that the calendar was COMELEC's to prepare.
"The first move should be from the SCon," Villamonte acknowledged. "The dates should be mandated by the SCon, not by COMELEC."
By March 30, the fifty-day window had already effectively closed. The election was eventually scheduled for May 15 and 16—forty-six days from the date of COMELEC's submission, four days short of the statutory minimum, and before SCon had issued a single resolution.
Neither body flagged it. "SCon did not receive any letter from COMELEC regarding the fifty-day period," Villamonte said, adding that this gave the impression COMELEC was equally unaware. COMELEC's written statement, for its part, does not address the fifty-day requirement at all.
WHERE THE TIME WENT
The Student Congress did not simply sit on the calendar; what followed was a weeks-long back-and-forth that demonstrated institutional engagement but ultimately produced the exact outcome it sought to avoid. Based on SCon's account, COMELEC’s initial 30 March email was informally deliberated during Holy Week and formally acknowledged on 7 April.
When SCon held its first reading on 9 April, members immediately flagged the rushed timeline and its collision with the one-week activity ban preceding final exams. Consequently, the first calendar was formally rejected during the 19th regular house session on 10 April. COMELEC submitted a second proposal on 14 April, which SCon rejected during an emergency session because it cut recruitment days even further. Finally, on the evening of 20 April, after two rapid-fire revisions from COMELEC, SCon held a late-night emergency meeting and approved the third version. The resolution was released the following morning.
COMELEC says it then conducted an internal review to assess the feasibility of the finalized timeline, ultimately determining the elections were still viable — but only, in their words, if executed "strictly in accordance with the finalized schedule, precluding any further deviations."
The critical detail here is not the delay itself, but the contradiction of what SCon ultimately approved. The initial calendar was rejected for being too rushed for candidates, yet the finalized third version slashed the recruitment window even further. The recruitment period that actually ran lasted a mere nine days—a drastic reduction from the electoral code's mandated minimum of twenty-five.
WHAT THE CODE REQUIRED, AND WHAT CANDIDATES GOT
Mapped against the 2024 Omnibus Election Code, the finalized calendar structurally failed candidates at nearly every phase. The structural erosion of the electoral process is most visible in the sheer disparity between statutory requirements and reality: the recruitment window was slashed from the mandated 25 consecutive days to a mere nine. This compression intensified during the Certificate of Candidacy (COC) filing phase, which was halved from the required eight-to-ten-day period to just four days—an impossibly narrow window for students to navigate the bureaucratic hurdle of securing College Registrar certifications, OSA Director clearances, grade summaries, and parental permits. The final blow to participation came during the campaign period, which was truncated to only three school days—11 to 13 May—failing the legal minimum of ten days.
These violations were structural, not incidental, embedded into the process before a single candidate could even file. When asked whether the filing window gave students sufficient and realistic time, COMELEC's statement describes its accommodations as having "successfully facilitated the process," adding that "the natural plateau in subsequent submissions indicates that all ready and willing candidates had already been effectively captured." The five prospective candidates who expressed interest but did not file, mediated, COMELEC notes, through their respective party presidents, received no official explanation from COMELEC on why they chose not to proceed.
During the 12 May dialogue, Villamonte confirmed that SCon only became aware of the fifty-day requirement after the deadlines had passed. Ex-Officio Member Juliana Eunice F. Fuentes pointed out that the immediate implementation of the 2024 Electoral Code—enacted by the previous Congress—bypassed standard legislative transition periods. The 44th Congress approved a complex calendar framework without having comprehensively reviewed the very code they were enforcing.
COMELEC's written statement does not address the requirement at all, describing the delay in calendar approval instead as a product of "institutional congestion — namely, the overlap of consecutive university events and the immediate, mitigating adjustments required in response to the current national crisis." The fifty-day rule, which would have required both bodies to begin the election process in late March at the latest, goes unmentioned.
"The current state of the elections is an institutional problem itself," Fuentes stated, while Villamonte added that the next SCon must thoroughly review the electoral code at the start of the second semester.
COMELEC, for its part, said the situation is "honestly disheartening" and acknowledged it is not new. "These concerns continue to surface every election cycle," the statement read, "especially when the intention has always been to ensure fair representation and continuity in student leadership." The admission that this recurs implies the structural failure predates this cycle. COMELEC has announced plans to draft a proposal after the elections to formally integrate the electoral process into the academic calendar.
KAUPOD'S SILENCE AND SIGWA'S SOLITUDE
For KAUPOD Party, formally established just four days before COC filing began, this compressed timeline proved fatal. In a statement to ThePILLARS, party president Czarina Sambajon explicitly named the timeline as a structural barrier. "Organizing and properly preparing a complete slate within such a short period became structurally difficult," she wrote, noting that students were simultaneously balancing pre-final requirements. Around seven prospective candidates backed down because the party refused to pressure them into running before they felt adequately prepared.
COMELEC confirms it reached out to KAUPOD through Google Chat, email, and Messenger during the filing period regarding their intent to field candidates. An extension was granted on May 9 to both parties to provide additional time. COMELEC registered KAUPOD's continued silence as their "definitive operational stance" for the cycle.
KAUPOD's participation in the Special Elections remains uncertain; while one candidate is willing to proceed, the majority of members refuse to participate if elections remain scheduled during the stressful finals window. COMELEC's Special Elections calendar sets voting for 27-28 May, after most final examination periods. Whether that schedule is sufficient to bring KAUPOD back to the table remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, in a written statement submitted to ThePILLARS, Partido SIGWA acknowledged that the compressed timeline affected its own operations. "Yes. The compressed timeline affected SIGWA's preparations as a party, particularly in terms of recruitment, internal deliberations, candidate formation, and campaign planning," the statement read. "Despite these challenges, the party continued to comply with electoral requirements and work within the available timeframe."
On the question of legitimacy — whether winning under these circumstances changes the mandate the party carries into office — SIGWA was measured: "Legitimacy is not determined solely by the presence or absence of electoral opposition, but by the ability to serve responsibly, remain accountable, and genuinely represent student interests."
SIGWA expressed openness to advocating for calendar review, improved information dissemination, and closer coordination among concerned student bodies going forward.
SPECIAL ELECTIONS: ANOTHER ROUND OF VIOLATIONS
COMELEC's attempt to salvage the process via Special Elections (Memorandum 2025-2026-033) only perpetuates the cycle of procedural breaches. While the revised COC Filing period from 13 to 22 May (10 days) is finally compliant with the code, and the Voting dates of 27 to 28 May successfully avoid the friction of finals week, the Campaign Period remains a glaring violation. By allotting only four days (23 to 26 May) instead of the seven days mandated by Article X, Section 3 of the electoral code, the commission has ensured that even the "remedy" for the failed election carries the same strain of procedural illegality that doomed the first round.
COMELEC acknowledged in its statement that completing Special Elections before or during final examinations "may not be entirely feasible, given the strict minimum timelines mandated by the Election Code," and cited Article X's prescribed procedures specifically. Yet the campaign period in its own Special Elections calendar falls short of those same procedures. The statement offers no explanation for the discrepancy.
While the filing and voting windows have been adjusted to meet legal and academic realities, the campaign period remains a blatant violation. Article X, Section 3 of the electoral code requires seven days of campaigning for Special Elections; COMELEC has allotted four. The structural compression that derailed the general election remains deeply embedded in the remedy.
If this secondary process fails to draw candidates or meet turnout thresholds, Article IX, Section 3 directs that vacancies be filled through the Commission on Appointments. At that point, the vast majority of the Lideratos will be determined behind closed doors, by an internal body, drawing from a pool of candidates who circumvented the general election process entirely. Additionally, if Special Elections yield no candidates and the Commission on Appointments is called to fill every vacant seat in the Student Congress—who sits on that Commission? The same Student Congress that has yet to be elected.
THE STRUCTURAL QUESTION
Three failures compounded to produce this outcome: a calendar built on statutory violations, a legislative body that approved it without full knowledge of the law it was executing, and a second political party that could not organize in the time available. Together, they expose a deep flaw in the current electoral architecture. Does the Lideratos system realistically invite broad participation, or does it structurally favor those already entrenched in campus politics who possess the institutional knowledge to survive compressed deadlines?
KAUPOD named it plainly: "Structural factors such as the delays in the compressed timeline significantly affected the ability of newly forming groups... to organize effectively." If even SIGWA found the timeline difficult, the impossible burden placed on a newly formed party answers itself. SCon has acknowledged its institutional responsibility for this failure, confirming the crisis is deeply systemic.
COMELEC, meanwhile, describes its preferred solution as integrating elections into the academic calendar permanently—a fixed, recurring electoral period involving university stakeholders, operating with "allowances strictly limited to necessary minimal extensions." It is a substantive proposal. It is also an implicit acknowledgment that the current system, without such integration, does not work.
"It is honestly disheartening that these concerns continue to surface every election cycle," the COMELEC statement reads.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
Voting for the two remaining candidates proceeds on 15–16 May via Google Forms. Special Elections campaigning is set for 23–26 May, with voting on 27–28 May. ThePILLARS continues to await formal records of the calendar deliberation from SCon and will fiercely monitor compliance with campaign period requirements, Special Elections participation, and the potential implementation of appointment procedures.
A student government that begins its term with 22 of its 24 positions filled by circumstance rather than electoral choice starts from a position of fundamentally diminished legitimacy. The students who will be governed had no real choice in who governs them, stripped of their voice by a calendar drafted by the wrong body and endorsed by a Congress unaware of its own laws.
This election demands a rigorous application of unflinching scrutiny and enduring mark of accountability. Every institutional misstep in this cycle left a distinct trace—a calendar drafted out of turn, a legislature rubber-stamping timelines it didn't understand, and mandatory recruitment windows squeezed shut on potential leaders. These decisions pressed themselves onto the democratic process like a heavy fingerprint, suffocating student participation before anyone ever reached the ballot.
It is a lasting mark on the Lideratos' legitimacy, and one that cannot simply be explained away as bad luck.
This report draws on the following sources: the 2024 Omnibus Election Code of the Liderato kan Nueva Atenista; COMELEC Memoranda 2025-2026-033 and 2025-2026-034, both dated 13 May 2026; a written statement from COMELEC Chairperson Luise B. Luna submitted to ThePILLARS; a written statement from KAUPOD Party President Czarina Mae Fatima Sambajon submitted to ThePILLARS on 13 May 2026; a written statement from Partido SIGWA submitted to ThePILLARS; and a 12 May 2026 dialogue between ThePILLARS and the 44th Student Congress, attended by Speaker of the House Zeah L. Villamonte, Ex-Officio Member Juliana Eunice F. Fuentes, and Lideratos President Ma. Sheryn Louiella B. Bayrante, with minutes taken by ThePILLARS Research and Development staff.
The reconstruction of the calendar deliberation sequence is based on SCon's verbal account during the 12 May dialogue and COMELEC's written statement, not on documentary records. ThePILLARS has requested formal records and attachments from the Student Congress, expected within forty-eight hours of the dialogue's adjournment. Any material discrepancies between the verbal account and the documentary record will be reported upon receipt.
