No Other Substitute

The bar examinations, while it maintained its flamboyant style for almost a hundred years, is not immune from the demands of the changing need of time. The Supreme Court over the past two years instituted abrupt changes to the bar examination which may have referred to as one of the most difficult examinations in the world and probably, the greatest  and rigorous ordeal a man has to take. It is the view of Justice Abad to test the examinees of the basic knowledge in law that is required for an entry level lawyer. Thus, the 2011 bar examination catered a multiple choice questions in all major fields of the study of law and dealt with opinion-making and trial memorandum, a total departure from the essay type examination. To polish, perhaps, the success of the previous bar examination, the head of the 2012 bar committee initiated, as in fact it adapted, few changes when it added the essay type examination.

There is no mistake that an examinee will inevitably face four classes of test, viz: multiple choice question; essay type examination; opinion-making; and trial memorandum. In addition to the degree of difficulty in the bar, despite its syllabus, are the ever-changing doctrines of the Supreme Court and the multifarious statutes promulgated by the law-making authorities.  Nevertheless, a law student is not expected to do a miracle- memory of all laws. Regardless, however, of the development in passing the bar, there can never be any other substitute in preparing for the bar than reading. As it has been the mantra of law professors, since time immemorial, that law is a reading profession and that the preparation for the bar starts at the very first day of class.

Hence, membership in the legal profession is not a sweet walk over the gates of UST neither an effortless seat during the four Sundays of the bar. It is achieved on the merits of a long and laborious study taken together with faith and prayer. Ultimately, it is not luck but a product of hard work and splendid dedication. The bar examination is not only a formality whether one is fit to be in the roll of attorneys but, rather, it is a test of whether one can now do justice to every man.  

The Contract is Over

The Family Code defines marriage as a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with the law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. Likewise, the Constitution provides that the family is a social basic institution by which public policy cherishes and protects. In  all, marital union is a sacred and solemn occasion by which the parties are bound to observe mutual love, offer fidelity and give needed support until the color of death appears.

While no law prohibits marriage between a Filipino and an alien, the State, nevertheless, must guard all the evils that may germinate with the present trend of marital sacrament. Obviously, gone were the days when we only seldom witness a union between two couples of different races. In fact, the converse is true, where some Filipino women sell their souls to senile aliens in exchange for material wealth and fortunate disposition in life. Sadly, instead of rearing a happy family after having perfected the special contract, when love and lust begins to crumble like a sand fortress, each, particularly the non-Filipino spouse, with their own tales, causes to file divorce.

Absolute divorce may not find solace under our system of family affairs, as it is against public morals and customs. However, Article 26 of the family code provides for recognition of divorce validly obtained by the alien spouse outside of the Philippines. To succinctly put it, alien spouses are given the road to severe marriage in foreign land. Apparently, this has been the practice and the common resort of dissatisfied partners having lost the heat of mutual affection. While it may be true that no one is bound to live in hell, nonetheless, with this controversy of demeaning the sanctity of family life, the State must risks all it efforts to preserve the basic unit of the society.

Did the angels speak?

Unparalleled in any political history of a civilized nation, there has been no instance where right and reason have been defeated, than on the fateful day, when the Senate of the Republic of the Philippines, sitting as an impeachment court, rendered its verdict. An overwhelming majority placed a final nail on the coffin of the Chief Magistrate’s judicial career. Notwithstanding the clear and legal defences advanced by the defense panel during the trial, the court proceeded to convict the respondent. The grounds for conviction were repulsive to common sense and violative of fair play. Instead of taking the case on the merits, the self-proclaimed angels of the Senate took into consideration the expansion of their political occupation. Thus, the outcome was inevitable. It was more political than legal.

No concern was raised as to the effect of the independence of the third branch of government, nor was there any consideration on the consequence it will bring on our democratic institutions. The common standpoint is its implication on their hold of power. In the light of this perceive developments, integrity, together with wisdom, vanished in the same course when a tally was made on the guilty box. Even then, the guillotine was preset before the Chief justice enters trial. His innocence was never placed on the balance, as time is the only moving factor that delayed the final verdict. Everything was a script written down under a seal of finality without, however, the knowledge of the main actor – CJ Corona.

Obviously, to declare that the votes casted by the senators serve the unyielding interests of the Filipino people is a misbelief. The proposition to fight against corruption is, likewise, misplaced. Moreover, it is an erroneous exercise of mental faculty to deliver the idea that the voice of the people have won against an official which they deemed already unfit of being called the Chief Justice. The ticket for conviction is not about conscience but power in bare hands, influence in a naked eye and money in an open pocket. Hardly enough to accept, but, this is Philippine politics at its finest, where the actors know when to speak the truth, half-truth, or, even, no truth at all. In fact, if lying can kill, then the moment they move their lips, death would be instantaneous.

In the final analysis, this nation must veer out and leave behind bad politics. The same political life stands still since time immemorial, when, in a distant past, a country named Philippines was conceived. We might be treading on a straight path but on a wrong direction. It will be a direction where perversity, hypocrisy, insincerity, and idleness loom. Soon, when we shall open our eyes and succumb to realize that this nation is lost, then, we must accept that the high heavens will be weeping and will take care of our souls.

Error in Judgment

In the hope of a fair judgment, unbiased by any political color and free from any sight of influence, some members of the senate, acting as judges in the impeachment trial, has promulgated and rendered verdicts wanting of any legal basis and merit. They chose to make a popular decision, so that they may celebrate that the people have spoken, which accounts the hapless respondent guilty as charged. They may claim validity of action for the people, by the people and of the people, with no better understanding that democracy works not for the people alone but for the rule of law and justice. As they have left the fate of a man under the mercy of the gullible majority, they will be judged by history with the propriety and righteousness of their actions.

Regrettably, the judgment was to serve the Palace its wishes. It is not for the people to rejoice with, since, after this melodramatic scene, corruption of moral decency will still continue to pervade in our nation. Nothing has been proven, much less testified with, nor has there been a presumption that the Chief Justice amassed ill-gotten wealth. Not a scintilla of evidence was presented to show the he has squandered an ounce of the public treasury. While it may be true, as the court argues, that the non-disclosure of the magistrate of a sizeable amount of dollars in his SALN is an omission reprehensible under the SALN law, it must be made clear, that he relied in good faith of a law which its conception begins and its birth has been in the care of the Congress of the Philippines. Moreover, the admission of a quantifiable amount of money during the hearing, as has been made under oath, answers the very question the SALN law posed – the total net worth of the properties. Knowing already the total assets of the person charged, the court may have simply ordered to include the same in the SALN of the following year instead of dangerously rushing for conviction.

The fear that corrupt officials will conveniently avail the interpretation impressed upon by the Chief Justice is a farfetched idea, more illusory than apparent. The call for doubt as to the purpose of the law (Foreign Currency Deposit Act) should have left them with no other remedy but to amend, repeal or change it. The law was conceived by the law-making body. If they argue it correctly that such eventuality may happen, then it is the Congress which made this evil that is to blame and not the man convicted.

What appears in the decision of the Senate is a reflection of the public opinion and collective sentiments. Bases were given on the premise that it is for the good of all. Correct as it may seem that the senators are the representatives of the people, nevertheless, it does not follow that judgment be made in accordance by which they represent. When the people elected them as representatives of the sovereign, they have not just been selected to represent the people but, most importantly, they were chosen to intelligibly decide the fate of this country with independence, candor, and freedom. With all great regret to the men in robes, they failed to dispose the character that is demanded in their office.

With the lack of ability of the people to believe the truth, with the seeming incessant display of might and power, with the inherent weakness of our leaders to make true though unpopular decisions, with a media that can sway public opinion, with a rule of law so easily disregarded and disobeyed, and with injustice seen as justice, God save this country!

Persons and Family Relations Multiple Choice Questions

Civil Law

(Persons and Family Relations)

1.       The Civil Code of the Philippines is:

a.       Republic Act no. 386

b.      Republic Act no. 368

c.       Republic Act no. 366

d.      Republic Act no. 398

2.       The Civil Code of the Philippines took effect on:

a.       August 29, 1950

b.      August 30, 1950

c.       September 30, 1950

d.      September 25, 1950

3.       It is a collection of laws which regulates the private relations of the members of civil society, determining their respective rights and obligations, with reference to persons, things, and civil rights.

a.       Law

b.      Civil Code

c.       Civil Law

d.      Family Code

4.       The mass of precepts which determines and regulates those relations of assistance, authority and obedience existing among members of a family as well as among members of the society for the protection of private interests.

a.       Family Code

b.      Family relations

c.       Civil Code

d.      Civil Law

5.       Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the completion of their publication:

a.       In the official gazette

b.      In a news paper of general circulation

c.       Both a and b

d.      Either a or b

6.       After a storm causing destruction in four Central Luzon provinces, the legislative branch enacted a special law appropriating 1 billion for purposes of rehabilitation for the provinces. In view of the urgent nature of the legislative enactment, it is provided in its effectivity clause that it shall take effect upon approval and after completion of the publication in the official gazette and a newspaper of general circulation. The law was passed by Congress on July 1, 1990, signed into law by the President on July 3, 1990, and published in such newspaper on July 7, 1990 and in the official gazette on July 10, 1990.

As to the publication of the said legislative enactment, is there sufficient observance or compliance with the requirements for a valid publication?

a.       Yes, there is a sufficient compliance because the law itself prescribes the requisites for its effectivity

b.      Yes, there is sufficient compliance because the law is considered effective upon its approval

c.       No, there is no sufficient compliance because the date of publication in the official gazette and newspaper must be the same

d.      No, there is no sufficient compliance because it must undergo public hearing

7.       When did the law took effect?

a.       It was effective on July 1, 1990 upon promulgation by the congress

b.      It was effective on July 3, 1990 upon approval by the president

c.       It was effective on July 7, 1990 upon publication in the newspaper

d.      It was effective on July 10, 1990 upon publication in the official gazette

8.       Can the executive branch start releasing the funds appropriated by the said law the day following its approval?

a.       Yes, since the law was effective upon approval of the President

b.      Yes, since it is an urgent need for the rehabilitation of the provinces

c.       No, since the other requisites for its effectivity were not yet complete

d.      No, since the law was not certified as urgent

9.       The following are the exceptions to the rule that laws shall have no retroactive effect, except:

a.       When the law is penal insofar as it favors the accused who is not a habitual criminal

b.      When the law is procedural

c.       When the law does not create substantive rights

d.      When the law is interpretative of other laws

10.   It is the fitness subject of legal relations

a.       Juridical capacity

b.      Legal capacity

c.       Juridical personality

d.      Legal personality

11.    Personality is determined by

a.       Birth

b.      Death

c.        The time of conception

d.      Attainment of the age of majority

12.   What is the rule if the fetus has an intra-uterine life of less than seven months?

a.       It is considered born if it is alive at the time of its complete delivery

b.      It is deemed born if it dies within twenty-four hours after its complete delivery

c.       It is not deemed born if it dies within twenty-four hours after its complete delivery

d.      It is considered born for all purposes favourable to it

13.   Civil personality is extinguished by

a.       Insanity

b.      Civil interdiction

c.       Death

d.      All of the above

14.   The effect of death upon the rights and obligations of the deceased is determined by

a.       Law

b.      Contract

c.       Will

d.      All of the above

15.   The Family code of the Philippines is

a.       Executive Order no. 209

b.      Republic Act no. 290

c.       Executive Order no. 116

d.      Republic Act no. 161

16.   The absence of any of the essential and formal requisites of marriage shall render it

a.       Void with respect to the essential and voidable with respect to the formal

b.      Voidable with respect  to the essential and void with respect to the formal

c.       Both voidable

d.      Both void

17.   Except in marriages where no license is required, it shall be issued by the local civil register of the city or municipality,

a.       Where both parties habitually resides

b.      Where either parties resides

c.       Where the male resides

d.      Where the female resides

18.   Marriages between Filipino citizens abroad may be solemnized by

a.       Ambassador

b.      Charge de affairs

c.       Vice-consul

d.      None of the above

19.   No license shall be necessary for a marriage of a man and a woman who have lived together as husband and wife for

a.       Not more than five years

b.      At least five years

c.       Not more than eight years

d.      Al least eight years

20.   What marriage is void from the beginning, among the choices

a.       The consent of either party was obtained by force, intimidation or undue influence

b.      The consent of either party is obtained by fraud

c.       Mistake of one contracting party as to the identity of the other

d.      Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other than the husband

21.   What constitutes fraud as a ground for annulment of marriage?

a.       Concealment of previous marital status

b.      Non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of a crime involving moral turpitude

c.       Concealment of physical incapacity to consummate the marriage

d.      Misrepresentation or deceit as to character, fortune or chastity

22.   A petition for legal separation may be filed on the ground of

a.       Psychological incapacity

b.      Impotency

c.       Non-attainment of legal age at the time of marriage

d.      Sexual infidelity

23.   An action for legal separation shall be filed

a.       Within five years from marriage

b.      Within five years from the time of the occurrence of the cause

c.       Within five years after the cooling off period

d.      After five years from the time of marriage

24.   A decree of legal separation shall be based on

a.       Stipulation of facts

b.      Confession of judgment

c.       Presentation of evidence

d.      Allegations on the complaint

25.   The property relations between the husband and wife shall be governed by

a.       By marriage settlement

b.      By provisions of the Family code

c.       By the local customs

d.      All of the above

26.   What is the rule, if the future spouses agree upon a regime other than the absolute community regime ?

a.       They can donate to each other more than one-fifth of their present property

b.      They cannot donate to each other more than one-fifth of their present property

c.       They can donate each other in their marriage settlements more than one-fifth of their present property

d.      They cannot donate each other in their marriage settlements more than one-fifth of their present property

27.   The absolute community of property between the spouses shall commence

a.       One year from the celebration of marriage

b.      Two years from the celebration of marriage

c.       Three years from the celebration of marriage

d.      None of the above

28.   The following shall be excluded from the community property, except

a.       Property acquired during the marriage by gratuitous title

b.      Property for personal and exclusive use of either spouses

c.       Property acquired after the marriage, where such property is encumbered

d.      Property acquired by either spouse who has legitimate descendants

29.   When shall the absolute community terminate?

a.       Upon extrajudicial order

b.      Upon agreement of the parties after marriage

c.       Upon insolvency of either parties

d.      Upon the decree of legal separation

30.   W, during her marriage to H, transferred the administration of her paraphernal property to the latter. Can W alienate said paraphernal property?

a.       No, the alienation of the property must be with the consent of H

b.      No, the property cannot be alienated because it already belongs to the conjugal property

c.       Yes, the property may be alienated because the agreement was null and void

d.      Yes, the property may be alienated because W still retains ownership over the property

31.   A donation propter nuptias of a parcel of land was given by X to Y. They were subsequently married but the marriage was annulled on the complaint of Y upon her discovery that X has been previously married. X now files a suit for revocation. Will the suit prosper?

a.       The suit will prosper since the marriage is now annulled

b.      The suit will prosper one of the party is in bad faith

c.       The suit will not prosper because Y was in good faith

d.      The suit will not prosper because it is part of their conjugal property

32.   H and W are husband and wife. Without any justifiable cause, W abandoned the conjugal home. Can H ask a competent court to order W to return to the conjugal home?

a.       Yes, because it is the obligation of the husband and wife to live together

b.      Yes, because it is within the competence of the court to order W’s return

c.       No, because specific performance is not a remedy to personal obligation

d.      No, because W already abandoned their home.

33.   In a marriage in a remote place,

a.       Public solemnization is not needed

b.      It must be made in accordance with their customs

c.       There is no need for a solemnizing officer

d.      A marriage license is required

34.   Nemu cum alterius detriment protest means

a.       No man ought to be made rich out of another’s injury

b.      No person should unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another

c.       The indemnity cannot exceed the loss or enrichment, whichever is less

d.      In case of doubt,  the doubt must be in favour of the underdog

35.   Ignorance of foreign law is

a.       Ignorance of the  law but not ignorance of the fact

b.      Not ignorance of the fact but ignorance of the law

c.       Not ignorance of the law but ignorance of the fact

d.      Ignorance of the fact but and ignorance of the law

36.   The following are instances when the law grants an independent civil action, except:

a.       Breach of constitutional rights

b.      Defamation, fraud, or physical injuries

c.       Quasi-delict or culpa aquilana

d.      Breach of contract

37.   It is the condition of a person who does not have the mind, will, and heart for the performance of marriage obligations.

a.       Diriment impediments

b.      Psychological illness

c.       Sexual infidelity

d.      Psychological incapacity

38.   What is the correct rule in matters of absolute divorce

a.       If the action is brought here in the Philippines between Filipinos it will prosper

b.      If the action is brought here in the Philippines between a Filipino and a foreigner it will prosper

c.       If the action is brought here in the Philippines between foreigners it will not prosper

d.      If the action is brought in a foreign court between Filipinos it will be recognized in the Philippines.

39.   May the court issue a decree of legal separation based upon facts stipulated by the spouses?

a.       No, if the decree is based solely on the stipulation of facts

b.      Yes, if there be other evidence of the existence of a ground for legal separation

c.       All of the above

d.      None of the above

40.   If a person is under guardianship because of insanity

a.       He is presumed insane if he should enter into a contract

b.      He is insane if he should enter into contract

c.       He is barred to enter into contract

d.      The contract is binding

41.   How many provisions are there in the New Civil Code?

a.       2330

b.      2480

c.       2270

d.      2155

42.   A right is

a.       The interest in property that has become fixed that is no longer open to controversy

b.      The privilege given to one person and as a rule demandable of another

c.       All of the above

d.      None of the above

43.   In an action based on a breach of promise to marry, what is the right of the aggrieved party in case there has been carnal knowledge?

a.       The aggrieved party cannot demand for support

b.      Sue for moral damages, if it was due to mutual lust

c.       Sue for actual damages, should there be expenses incurred

d.      An action for actual and moral damages may be filed

44.   What kind of right is possessed by the husband or the wife over the conjugal property while the partnership remains?

a.       Vested right

b.      Inchoate right

c.       Equitable title

d.      None of the above

45.   The following are requisites for marriage settlement, except

a.       Must be in writing

b.      Must contain not contrary to the provisions of the law

c.       Must be made before the celebration of marriage

d.      Must be by  consent of the parents

The Lady With An Axe

                The double-edged sword of the Lady Justice symbolizes the power of reason and justice. It will break the chain of irrationality and cut the perpetuation of inequality. The sword will swing to protect a person of his right to life, liberty or property, but it can also be a tool to strike the heart of a man who disrespects the dictates of the law. Rather than being vindictive, its purpose is to preserve order and stability in social life, as anyone who wilfully crosses the border drawn by it is in danger of dealing the loss of his privileges and rights.

Now that the Senate is acting as a court in the impeachment case of the Chief justice, and that the senators have now become jurors by their own right, they must possess with no excuse the character of Justitia (the roman goddess of justice). As a political entity called upon by the Constitution to act on the merits of the case of an impeachable official, they must render justice, in accord with the moral force of observing the rule of law and the rule of reason. They must determine with all good fidelity whether or not the embattled official is fit to remain the office he holds. But unlike the lady justice, who decides without fear or favour, the senators are inclined in pursuing their political light to blend with the taste of the public, in order to secure victory when the kingdom of election comes.

The inconvenient truth would create the impression that the senators will be serving the whimsical desire and wishes of the public and in the abandonment of their sworn duty to do justice to the accused. In the light of this analysis, it is the people who are their master and not the majesty of the law. The fallen wings of justice and the death of truth is an imprint of an evil axe - public opinion.

Not Among Equals

The impeachment proceeding of the Chief Justice has marvelled every ordinary intellectual and the highly-legalistic observers. Since it is viewed by the many, the main actors –the senator-judges- must conduct themselves in a manner which partakes of cold neutrality, in order to avoid the evil suspicion of being bias to one party or another. Above all, they must speak with the resemblance of possessing wisdom and philosophy considering that they have been elected at large by the Filipino people. However, there was one senator-judge who bravely declared before the honourable impeachment court and before the entire nation to the effect that the senate sitting as an impeachment court is like no other, that being so, it can pass upon any matter and invoke its authority on it, regardless of any boundaries set forth under the constitution.

In other words, he gallantly aired his conviction that the impeachment court is supreme to that of the highest court of the land. Logic and reasoning will never subscribed to such proposition. As pointed by Fr Joaquin Bernas, in his article on the PDI 01/23/12, he states in part that “Incidentally, this is not a question of who, between the Senate jury and the Supreme Court, is superior. After all, the Senate jury is no other than the same upper house of Congress. The Senate jury is not a distinct body from the Senate but is the same Senate given non-legislative authority to be exercised occasionally. The three departments of government are coequal, working in coordination with each other. When faced with a situation in which they seem to appear to be an immovable force pushing against an immovable wall, what is constitutionally demanded of them is to look for ways of working together.” The rationale, therefore, would fall on the premise that the senate is a body given by the constitution the sole authority to try and decide impeachment cases and it is not licensed to venture in an expedition to any other branch of government without the sacrifice of the doctrine of separation of powers.

In an indirect democracy such as ours, we are supposedly ruled with statesmen who are equipped with reason and wisdom. While they may commit blunders in their acts, it must not be so gross as to view them unreasonable and ignorant. Having been reposed the responsibility of representing the people, they must act with the highest mode of intellectual propriety.