The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) expresses grave concern over the adoption by Assumption Iloilo of rules defining immorality, which include ‘homosexuality.’

As a National Human Rights Institution and as Gender Ombud under the Magna Carta of Women, CHR condemns all forms of discrimination, which includes discrimination on the basis of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Expression, and Sex Characteristics (SOGIESC). We advocate for the inherent dignity and rights of all without discrimination and have been consistently advocating for the passage of anti-discrimination legislations.

In 2019, the Situationer of LGBTQI children by CHR’s Child Rights Center and Center for Gender Equality and Women’s Human Rights has clearly shown the different forms of discrimination and violence that LGBTQI children experience in the family, in the community, and even in academic settings.

While schools were supposed to be safe havens for children to learn and grow, the results of the focus group discussions showed that many LGBTQI children felt unsafe and unsure in schools where they often experience bullying and where discriminatory policies and practices of institutions impact their mental health and wellbeing and their right to education. The mistreatment that these marginalised students face on a day-to-day basis were further exacerbated by discriminatory policies that are well-entrenched in certain educational institutions.

Assumption Iloilo, in adopting a definition of immorality that includes homosexuality, is complicit in discriminating children of diverse SOGIESC and runs counter to the notion that schools are safe spaces. As a Christ-centered educational community, it is their moral responsibility to provide a more equal and accepting safe space for all students, regardless of gender expression and sexual orientation.

In insisting on this discriminatory policy, and even in clarifying that they ‘pertain to acts’ and not the individuals, the institution remains complicit in the creation of threatening spaces for children of SOGIESC. This impact student’s right to education, and risks their mental health and well being by being stigmatised and discriminated against by the institution meant to protect them.

In including as well ‘trial marriage’ and ‘live in’ in the definition of immorality, and thus grounds for expulsion, the school also runs the risk of discriminating against women and young girls, including solo parents, or students who are born out of wedlock. This could run counter to the provisions of the Magna Carta of Women prohibiting discrimination in educational institutions and the prohibition of dismissal on the basis of pregnancy.

As it is in the best interest of the child to have education that is free from hate and discrimination, school policies and academic freedom should not come at the expense of the right to education and the child’s right to development.

We remind the school administration of the Iloilo City Resolution 2016-572 or the Anti-Discrimination Ordinance particularly of Section IV (2), which defines refusal and failing to accept as a student and subjecting a person to terms on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity as acts of discrimination and thus within the ambit of the said ordinance. According to Section V of the same ordinance, any person who commits any of the acts prohibited shall be criminally liable and penalised accordingly and in the case of a juridical person, whether public or private, the manager, head and the officers thereof shall also be criminally accountable and responsible without prejudice to other liabilities, if any.

As educators and duty-bearers, it is within the mandate of the school to respect, promote, and protect human rights of the students and ensure a healthy environment conducive for all. It is also their mandate to heed the voices of their students. Thus, we urge Assumption Iloilo to consider the statement of Assumption Batch of 2018, which unequivocally and bravely called out the institution for the discriminatory policy and recommending the adoption of a newer and progressive policy.

This unfortunate policy is again another call for the passage of the SOGIE Equality Bill. CHR emphasizes that the SOGIE Equality bill seeks to address the crucial issues, such as differential treatment in the workplace and denial of admission or expulsion from educational institutions. With this measure, we will be able to fully protect the rights of persons with diverse SOGIESC and create an enabling environment free from discrimination where our children are able to fully realize their potential.

For stigma thrives in institutionalized discriminatory policies, we urge Assumption Iloilo to retract and revisit their enrollment contract establishing homosexuality and other acts as grounds for expulsion. Discrimination does not have a place in educational institutions and moreso in our society. ###