Raising the Bar (Part II)

The Bar examination questions asked in Political Law and Labor Law were generally assessed as “reasonable” (albeit a tad long) by the law deans present during the traditional first Sunday breakfast with the Chief Justice and the Bar chairman. This is probably due to the fact that this year’s chairman, Justice Ed Nachura, who is a former professor, bar reviewer and law dean, intimately knows the subject matter covered in law school and the pre-bar review. Fingers crossed that he will continue to be kind in tomorrow’s examinations in Civil Law and Taxation Law and the subjects to be taken in subsequent Sundays. But more importantly, I hope that the checking of the booklets by the examiners will be as, if not more, reasonable as the questions.

I mentioned last week the innovation introduced this year of having two examiners per subject. This should not only improve the quality of the checking but hasten the release of the results as well. Justice Nachura is targeting a release by end-February (as opposed to the previous years’ mid-April release). This would give the unfortunate ones more time to grieve, regroup and prepare for the next examinations. Speaking of the latter, the 2010 bar chairperson is Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales. The 2000 examiner in Legal Ethics (where the passing rate was 11%), Justice Morales has a reputation of being fair yet tough. My unsolicited advice to those taking the Bar next year is to study extra hard and not leave anything to chance.

* * *

Shortening Law School: In last week’s column, I had raised the idea that for the purpose of admission to the Philippine Bar, we should veer away from the US focus of passing an examination and move towards the English emphasis for a rigorous clerkship/on the job training.

Let me propose another idea which may sound counterintuitive. Currently a prospective lawyer needs to complete a four-year bachelor of laws or juris doctor degree on top of a four-year bachelor of arts or science degree. Add another year for studying, taking and waiting for the results of the bar exam and this brings the total to nine years.

You will note that this system is patterned again after the US model although the latter is 1 and _ years shorter. In contradistinction, a law student in a common law jurisdiction like the United Kingdom only needs to complete a four-year bachelor of laws to take a masters in law or even qualify for a bar exam. I remember taking my LLM in the US at the age of 28 while my classmates from Hong Kong and Singapore were between the ages of 22 to 24. It may be too radical to propose a shift to the common law practice but perhaps the Legal Education Board (if and when they are constituted) can study the possibility of returning to the old system of just requiring a two-year Associate in Arts degree for those who are seriously looking to pursue law. Coupled with the focus on “on the job” as opposed to “classroom” training, these students would have more time to take further studies, pursue other interests or work earlier to recoup their educational expenses.

* * *

Diversifying Law Practice: Another issue that the Supreme Court should revisit is the prohibition on Filipinos who obtained their law degrees abroad from sitting for the Philippine bar exam. If I am not mistaken the last one allowed was in the mid-90’s — Adrian Hernandez, a Columbia JD graduate, now a Romulo law partner. The only requirement then was for such foreign degree holder to take a one year review course in a Philippine law school. Indeed, if the Court truly believes in the Bar examinations’ ability to separate the truly chosen, then it should not really care where the law degree is obtained. In fact, I can see the practice of law in the country being diversified and enriched by allowing Filipinos trained by law schools from different jurisdictions.

Let me tackle in another column the issue on whether we should allow foreign professionals to practice their craft in our country.

* * *

Informing Texters: One centavo goes to Senator Richard Gordon for recommending to the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) that it put up a consumer help desk accessible thru a toll-free hotline or zero tariff short code to enable mobile phone subscribers to report problems they encounter. He also proposed the creation of an opt-in system that will require telecom companies to inform subscribers of the amount they will have to pay and the frequency of the services they are about to subscribe to. He also suggested that these companies undertake a massive tri-media information campaign clearly explaining to the public how to opt-out from services and promoting therein the free short code and telephone hotline. Given the increasing importance of technology in our daily lives, it is apparent that all these suggestions are timely as they seek to empower the consumer to make informed decisions regarding their mobile phone use.

* * *

Decentralizing Education: One centavo goes to the Department of Education led by Secretary Jesli Lapus for pursuing its Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (“BESRA”). The essence of BESRA is to decentralize authority and empower the local schools and the community to work together to deliver quality education leading to improved learners’ performance. This strategy is in line with the trend towards devolution of power and coincides with the reality that the persons on the ground are in the best position to understand the problems in their community and propose solutions to address them.

Another two centavos are donated to Secretary Jesli to help defray his 60th birthday celebration today.

* * *

“Life is like a snowball.

The important thing

is finding wet snow

and a really long hill.” — Warren Buffett

E-mail: [email protected]