Tuesday, February 06, 2007


Don't forget to attend tomorrow's convocation at the Malcolm Theater (6pm).

Hear what the candidates have to say and cheer for your candidate(s) too.

See you there!

Tuesday, December 19, 2006


Last December 15, 2005, a group of UP students with strong anti-tuition fee increase sentiments, barged through the doors of Malcolm Hall, in search of members of the University of the Philippines Board of Regents. The group was headed by the Student Regent, and the University Student Council. Such students verbally assaulted members of the UP Law Student Government and the UP Law community who were at that time peacefully preparing for “Malcolm Madness”, the College’s Christmas program. In the attempt to find the regents, these students harassed practically everyone who was foreign to them including the UP Law Center staff, the UP Law Personnel and fellow UP students. They were hurling accusations such as, “Tinatago n’yo sila!” “Niloko n’yo kami!” “Bakit n’yo kami pinagtatagksilan?!” at the members UP Law community who were in sight. During the height of turmoil, a student of the College was pushed to the door of the Malcolm Theater in her attempt to ward off the rallyists from entering the Theater, wherein there were students preparing for the College program; a handful of other students were likewise emotionally traumatized. It was only after a five-minute, initially adversarial dialogue between the Student Regent and the Law Student Government President that the angry crowd was asked by their leaders to turn around and leave. Unfortunately, however, the injury had already been inflicted. Aside from emotional and physical injuries, the mob ultimately left the college with property damaged, specifically the door of Malcolm Hall and the Malcolm driveway was splashed with red paint. Furthermore, the “Malcolm Madness” was cancelled for the first time since its inception, causing losses for equipment rentals and decoration costs on the part of the UP Law students and the UP Law Student Government.

It is understandable that these students may have had strong sentiments against the Tuition Fee Increase issue. After all, they are entitled to express their vehement objections to the Board of Regents in accordance with their constitutional right to free speech and expression. However such forms of expression are never justifications to trample on others’ rights to safety of their persons and property.

Thus, it is with a heavy heart that we, the Law Student Government, condemn this chaotic incident initiated by our fellow UP students. We believe that their acts have crossed the borderline of freedom of expression as it tramples on propriety, ethics and any notion of reason. We have no choice but to respond accordingly – as of all institutions, the UP College of Law and the UP Law student Government will not tolerate exploits of such kind. In verbally and physically hurting other people and destroying property, these acts are no less than criminal.

We hold the Student Regent responsible for inciting this mob and leading it into our college with no sense of direction or restraint according to the purpose by which it was gathered. We implead him primarily for being the proximate cause of the incident, without regard for those who do not share his agenda.

We hold the members of the University Student Council responsible, most especially the USC Chair, according to the principle of command responsibility. The Chair was not present during the incident; the members of the USC who were in attendance did nothing to pacify the crowd during the height of chaos. We deem that they should have reasonably anticipated such consequences when a group of extremely emotionally charged individuals rally: chaos will definitely result from the mob rule - despite lack of premeditated ill intentions to inflict harm on others.

As veterans of mass action protests, the Student Regent and the University Student Council should have foreseen harmful results and consequently formulated and implemented proactive safeguards to avoid or minimize them. The damages caused by these acts of omission were not rectified by belated measures to make the crowd turn back. Such conduct of the USC betrays the very office that they occupy. Beyond advocacies, the primary accountability of the USC belongs to the UP populace, whose safety, welfare and well-being they ought to have upheld - whichever side of the fence the constituent-students sit in an issue.

We, too, in the UP Law Student Government, are scholars of the people. Like every UP Student, we are being educated to become productive members of society who are reflective of the ideals of the nation. We believe that the UP student has brilliant ideas and opinions, which have to be voiced out in a reasonable manner. Thus do we champion the spirit of activism, one of the forces for which our University is distinctly renowned. It is in this spirit that we, ourselves, participate in various rallies, fora and social action in the midst of various issues of public interest. Yet, we condemn riotous and anarchical modes of activism. No matter how noble the purpose or ends of a rally, mutinous styles of mass action will NEVER be justified, especially when they infringe on others’ safety of their persons and property. Though we, ourselves, are activists in our own right, we will never allow activism to cast a dark shadow on the conduct and character of the UP students.

We, in the UP College of Law, denounce the December 15, 2005 incident in Malcolm Hall. We deem that it is only just and equitable that those at its helm be held responsible for its outcome. We condemn all types and kinds of abuses of the spirit of activism, which has been enshrined in the history of our university. Relentlessly, we will cling to our bias for order, propriety and the rule of law.

Christina Faye M. Condez

Lorybeth R. Baldrias

Faustina Victoria E. Ochoa

Hardy B. Aquende

Elgene Lawrence C. Feliciano
Public Relations Officer

Leandro Angelo Y. Aguirre
College Representative

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Forum on Tuition Free Increase

The Law Student Government together with the University Student Council and the League of College Councils will be sponsoring a forum on tuition fee increase on November 29, Wednesday, 4:00-7:00pm at Bocobo Penthouse, UP Law Center. Speakers from both pro and anti TFI camps have been invited.

We are hoping to generate a large audience for this activity. The Board of Regents will be taking up the TFI proposal on their next meeting slated on December 15 (Friday). There is a great urgency for the students to be informed about this proposal to generate more support in our campaign to oppose the exorbitant tuition increase.

It is important to make an informed choice. This is a very good opportunity for students to learn more about the TFI proposal. We are looking forward to seeing you at the forum.

In service of the students,

- USC Vice Chairperson
- Convenor; League of College Councils 2006-2007

Sunday, November 05, 2006

2nd Semester Enrollment Schedule

November 6 (Monday)
Registration of Freshmen and Graduating Students

November 7 and 8 (Tuesday, Wednesday)
Registration of other students

November 9 (Thursday)
Start of Classes

November 16 (Thursday)
Last day for Late Registration

Monday, October 23, 2006

UP Moot Court Teams

Congratulations to those who qualified to represent the college in various moot court competitions.


Janice Lee
Aurafe Nayna Malayang
Jeffrey Michael Sison
Maricel Seno-Sison :)
Ces Sicangco
Norman Yap


Henry Aguda
Jackie Espinilla
Anna Ramos
Anya Palileo
Ethel Avisado
Jan Barcena

Goodluck, and do your damned best!

from Mon, the administrator.

Monday, September 25, 2006

Ask Scaebolah!

The 2006 Bar Edition

September is a very special time for lawyers and law students. As the days grow shorter, the kind of depression and loathing that our profession feeds upon is strengthened. And of course, there is The Bar [1]. Colleagues in the bench have asked me to share humorous anecdotes about The Bar, and I must admit that it was a difficult enterprise. The plain and simple explanation is that there is nothing funny or even mildly entertaining about The Bar [2]. It is a stain on the fabric of one’s existence, a pointless, soul-sucking hole in space and time [3]. God, how I hate The Bar.

Still, I must strive to serve the profession as best I can. I have heard your cries for help. Some of this year’s bar questions have been especially challenging, and I have been tapped by the Law Center to shed the law’s guiding light upon these curiosities. Of course, none of this would have been a problem had you enrolled in my review center [4].

Dear Scaebolah,

What are the four In’s of the judiciary?


Dear Incensed,

I am just shocked – shocked - that you don’t know about this. It just goes to show how standards of legal education have declined over the years. Weren’t you told in your Legal Method class that the cleverly-named, temporary, motherhood-statement programs of Chief Justices should be taken to heart? It is foundational in our system of adjudication! Why, during my time, we memorized the three Re’s of the litigation (Remand, Review, Recess) as well as the five tion’s of law (Assumption, Presumption, Redemption, Consumption, Desperation). The Bar exists to ensure that only those whose competence has been tested can practice law, and nothing spells competence better than knowing the latest and greatest rage in the judiciary. So without further ado, here are the four In’s:

Instant Decisions – A model achievement in efficiency, made possible by using a standard format for all decisions (The Case, The Facts, The Issues, The Decision/Resolution). We owe this to Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, The Court’s most prolific ponente [5], who structures his typical day in the same manner (The Bath, The Breakfast, The Drive to Work, The Daily Grind, The Coffee Break…).

In Demand – What judges are these days, considering the vacancies in many of our courts, and the clogging of the dockets. Those who can talk to dwarves need not apply [6].

Insecure – The judiciary is always on guard for possible encroachments to its power. Why should the judiciary be always on guard? Because the judiciary was neglected as a child, that’s why. Growing up, it was always called the “least dangerous branch” of government, which must have been disastrous to its ego. Thus, the judiciary today does not shirk from its power, nay – its duty - of judicial review.

Indirect Contempt – The possible punishment for those who mock the the four In’s, and question their relevance in this year’s bar.


Dear Scaebolah,

Who is the President of the ICJ?


Dear WTF!?!,

You should have seen this coming. Without the element of compulsion that is found in most systems of municipal law, nor a rigorous tradition of stare decisis, it is but natural that International Law come down to a simple matter of personalities. Throw all your naïve notions of long-standing principles like jus cogens or rebus sic stantibus, and start reading about the Who’s Who of the International Law scene. Not only should you know who the current president of the ICJ is [7], but also the name of her husband, her kids, and her favorite color [8].

Rosalyn Higgins, President of the ICJ – Not sexy, but relevant to The Bar

In fact, why stop at International Law? You kids have never bothered to know more about judges and justices, those few unelected old men and women who get to tell what the law actually is, and hence determine the extents of your rights. This question should have been a no-brainer if only you’d look for the latest developments in the ICJ in Wikipedia or Google, instead of just surfing for pictures of Paris Hilton. But then it’s too late now.

Paris Hilton – Sexy, relevant to a different kind of Bar


Dear Scaebolah,

What is a pyramiding scheme?


Dear ICanAlwaysRetake,

To help you learn how a pyramiding scheme works, I am offering you a wonderful opportunity where you can earn up to P50,000 a month from your home or while studying for your finals. Simply bring 10 friends to the Scaebolah Holistic Institute for Training in Law, UP Law Center Basement. I’m sure you can “learn and earn” at the same time.


Scaebolah (completely trustworthy and STD-free since August)


[1]The etymology of this annual examination can be traced from the ancient method of admitting new lawyers into the profession: administering a series of blows to the head with a bar (i.e. a crowbar) made of hard wood, and later of metal. Some barristers have expressed the opinion that this was far more humane.

[2]But then again the Bar is no stranger to funny business. See the hilarious People v. Mapa (G.R. No. 30725, July 31, 1929), the rib-tickling People v. Romualdez (G.R. No. 31012, September 10, 1932) and the side-splitting In Re: Cunanan (Resolution, March 18, 1954).

[3]Read Javellana v. Executive Secretary(G. R. No. L-36283, March 31, 1973) and and La Bugal B’laan Tribal Association v. Ramos (G.R. 127882, December 1, 2004) in the original for a first hand experience of “soul-sucking hole”.

[4]Scaebolah's Holistic Institute for Training in Law.

[5]Not to mention its leading three-point shooter, and all-time ping-pong champion.

[6]See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5261856.stm

[7]It’s Rosalyn Higgins, duh.


Friday, August 25, 2006

The LSG Openlaw Project

"None of us is as smart as all of us."
- Ken Blanchard

The shallow, practical version of the project: We want to build a wikipedia (or wiki-law)-like resource where law students can stash, revise, and retrieve stuff to make their lives easier: notes, reviewers, digests, that obscure municipal ordinance only their professor cares about.

The deep, philosophical version: We want to harness the power of smart people working together. To transform the way the law is learned and imagined: as a conversation rather than a lecture. To make sure that there is no space for fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the way we study and review the law. To trade in hierarchies for hyperlinks.

To do this, we need your help. Any contribution will be welcome: Materials, skills, your time and effort. We have no grade, year-level, or height requirement. We will teach you how to use the tools you need.

To join the Openlaw Project, simply write your name and contact info on one of the sign-up sheets on the LSG Board, or write: lsg_openlaw[that-ubiquitous-at-sign]yahoo.com

(Oh, and please help spread the word - through your blogs and egroups. We'll need all the help we can get)