Talaingod” because STTICLC schools were allegedly teaching their children revolutionary tenets, to hate the government, and to join the rebel group. Dr. Fadul admitted her mistake of proposing the use of military personnel as para-teachers should the tribal leaders’ request be granted.45 38. Atty. Alberto Escobarte, Regional Director of DepEd Region XI, clarified that the DepEd did not order the closure of Salugpongan schools, but merely issued a “Notice of Non-Renewal” to all schools which failed to submit their applications therefor. She clarified that the DepEd immediately renewed the permits of the STTICLC schools on 21 June 2015 after receiving the schools’ application for renewal three days earlier.46 39. On 23 June 2015, CHR XI conducted its own investigation and held a dialogue with some IP leaders, their barangay captain, and some residents in Palma Gil, Talaingod.47 Datu Pogsing of Sitio Nasilaban, Barangay Palma Gil, Talaingod, stated that NGOs coordinated in the building of the community school. He was also promised that schooling there would be free and that the IPs would provide the teachers. However, when the school was built, he lamented that the NGOs not only occupied it, but the teachers also came from the NGOs. 40. The Datus alleged that, during the construction of the STTICLC school building, it was guarded by heavily armed groups belonging to the NPA. Classes were only conducted twice a week, and that in the remaining days, the children were brought to the forest and taught how to assemble and dismantle firearms.48 Such allegations were corroborated by Asinad Bago, a former student who studied at a STTICLC school in Talaingod for five years.49 He claimed that, after classes, at a post near the school, they learned how to dismantle and assemble M16 armalite rifles. 41. The allegations that the schools are directed by the CPP-NPA-NDF, if true, are alarming. The schools operate within the DepEd’s regulatory mechanism. If, indeed, they were established by and administered under the direction and control of the NPA and operated as training centers for future insurgents, the Department has legal grounds to close them. 42. The matter was brought by the AFP to the attention of the DepEd. As the agency with the legal mandate to regulate the operation of schools for basic education, the Department is presumed to have regularly performed its duty. That it temporarily closed the schools for technical, not insurgency, reasons, however, shows that the DepEd itself had not made a serious investigation as to the substance behind the allegations relating to insurgency. 45 Position Paper of DepEd Schools Division Superintendent Dr. Josephine Fadul. See also summary of Dr. Fadul’s testimony at paras. 105-108, pp. 33-34. 46 See summary of Dir. Escobarte’s testimony at para. 104, pp. 32-33. 47 Id., at 2, 48 Id. 49 Testimony of E. Bayani, Public Inquiry Conducted by the House Committee on Indigenous Cultural Communities and Tribal Filipinos and Indigenous Peoples headed by Cong Nancy Catamco, Nov. 5,2015 12