One of the advantages of setting a target of just one blog entry a week is that I am able to allow myself the time to process my thoughts for at least a handful of days before publishing them. A week’s contemplation over certain feelings over daily events makes for better-worded recollections. This is not to say that there is no value in honest spontaneity, but those are better suited for Twitter or Facebook (if those thoughts get published at all). I wouldn’t say that more ruminated expressions are less genuine, but rather they are more circumspect and, well, a little more–polished. Most of all, I also get to avoid any prospective regrets should I want to take back whatever I might have initially wanted to say. Thoughts and feelings undergo processes, and they change over time–in this case, days, at least. I don’t usually harbor my initial reaction to most of life’s circumstances.
This week I informed the partners at the law firm of my acceptance offer from the Université Paris II, and that in pursuit of said offer, I would be leaving the office in the next month or two. The next day I was offered a generous alternative in consideration of any possibility that I might delay my prospective studies to next year. The firm’s upcoming projects and incoming cases were discussed including the role I might play in facilitating various transactions should I stay a little longer. It was flattering and it made me grateful, more than I have always been since I started with the firm. It made me reflect on the value of the work that I do as a lawyer, specifically in the cases and the projects that we handle. It also made me recall how fortunate I have been to be accommodated by my bosses at a stage in my legal career where I had little to no experience in civil, commercial, labor and tax cases–having come from purely administrative work in a government agency. I wouldn’t have had it any other way. The professional and legal experiences I have earned and learned the past year gave me enough confidence in what I do.
I am honestly undecided as of today, but I am taking all circumstances into serious consideration.
Anyway, this week saw me going to court twice, in Manila and in Quezon City. I rarely do court work, so I take note whenever I do.
One legal challenge that excites me at this point is having a judgment of acquittal of an opponent overturned. You see, a primordial rule in criminal and constitutional law is that a judgment of acquittal is immediately final and executory and that it cannot be appealed, in compliance with the prohibition on double jeopardy. In other words, once a person is acquitted of an offense, that judgment of innocence (or presumption thereof) cannot be disturbed anymore. That’s it, that’s the challenge. What is the remedy if one maintains the belief that the person is truly guilty of the offense?
Gusto ko iparating ang taos-puso kong pasasalamat sa lahat ng bumati. Hindi ko man kayo mapasalamatan isa-isa, nabasa ko lahat ng mga messages ninyo at masaya ako na bahagi kayo ng kaganapang ‘to.
Congratulations to all the parents who made this happen for all us new lawyers. This achievement is yours. Congratulations and thank you!
‘Di ko alam kung sa Pilipinas lang ganito natin idina-dakila ang pagiging abogado. I have a theory that more than the fact na napakahirap maging abogado sa Pilipinas, malaki ang pagtingin natin sa mga abogado at ganoon na lang kung ipagdiwang ang pagkakapasa sa bar exam dahil sa pangangailangan ng indibidwal, pamilya, at mga grupo na pangalagaan at ipaglaban ang kani-kanilang interes. Perhaps a manifestation of the many contradictions in society, or of its weak institutions that families celebrate having the advantage of having a lawyer to protect their interests. But that is for social scientists to discuss adequately. Othwerise, what are lawyers for, really?