Lawyers and education

The subject, for me, is inevitable. As I write I am, with hundreds of local lawyers and others from neighboring provinces, who are bound to sit and listen to lectures in the halls of the L'Fisher hotel, for four days from early morning to late afternoon. The course (not curse) is termed MCLE which means Mandatory Continuing Legal Education. It is mandatory because if a lawyer does not enroll and gets no credit, an ornery “compañero” at the opposite side during a trial may tell the judge that he lacks the necessary credit to be allowed to open his mouth and explain his case.

But I believe the keyword in MCLE is “continuing”. The honest-to-goodness member of the bar must continue to keep abreast with the latest developments in law - the new laws for instance on criminal matters, new Supreme Court decisions on elections and procedures in court. The list goes on.

This is because, as one wise man said, while the law must be stable, it can not keep still. As sociologists will tell you (but you probably knows this) there is a constant change in society, the way people think, the way they behave, so the rules (laws) must also be changed to meet new needs.

In any, event that's supposed to be the rationale for new rules. As far as the lectures go, this ongoing one is up to par. The speakers are knowledgeable masters of the subject matter, their style honed sharp by long experience of talking to an audience of lawyers. Talking of talking styles, I was startled to hear a combative female voice from the podium. I thought senator Miriam Defensor had come to town and had been had been invited to say her piece (Defensor is an expert on constitutional law). The lecture was verging on a style usually describe as a “harangue”. But then there are a lot of speaking styles. And if a speaker is sincere and feeds deeply on a subject, there is a tendency to produce heat, to talk rapidly and loudly.

Of course, some lectures were peppered with so-called green jokes which in-variably perks the audience and draws general laughter and amusement. As with talks that take so long, the audience has a tendency to feel sleepy; many yawn. There is a need for a break in the subject --- is there a better one that a joke involving sex?

Incidentally, more awareness is focused on our troubled relationship with China over certain islets so we have Prof. H. Harry L. Roque, who will lecture on the Scope and Breath of Philippine National territory. I hope this will clarify certain legalities of concepts. However I doubt whether the newly awakened giant China will heed the legalities of International Law. Bigness, size has a tendency to make one over-reach, over zealous, heedless of consequence and a lack of concern for public opinion.

As I write, we have already attended two days of “Mandatory Continuing Legal Education” so that's about 50 percent of the hurdle. The last is on October 18.

The one thing I can say about the M.C.L.E. is that the audience is briefed on new pronouncements on various matters. (The Supreme Court is known to make turn-abouts in its decisions. It sometimes changes its mind. But then one must remember that these guys and dolls are human like the rest). It is therefore important to know what are the latest pronouncements.

And so, because I must dress up, wash my face, have an early breakfast to attend today's lecture. I will have to stop here.

“Non sum qualis, eram bonnae sub regno Cynara”.*

back to top