@FiscalEJ's first recorded interview after his unanimous, 3-0 win over Atty. Ranny Libayan. 0:00 - How much of the Law is subject to interpretation? 3:07 - Checks and balances in the Justice System 4:11 - Reasons why people break the law 6:31 - Cases that affected him personally 9:04 - Defending guilty people in court 15:32 - Innocent until proven guilty 19:50 - How Laws are created 24:35 - Lawmakers don't necessarily need to be lawyers 27:19 - Dealing with the high expectations from lawyers 32:29 - Q&A about the Bar Exams 36:44 - What is the Integrated Bar of the Philippines? 38:08 - What is a lawyer? 39:03 - What's it like to be a law student? 45:06 - Code of Ethics for Filipino Lawyers 48:51 - Reaction to other lawyers in social media that spread misinformation 53:49 - What is a good lawyer for you? 58:24 - Atty. Libayan whining about his loss ➡️Link in bio. #komiksman #komiksmanpodcast #tpkp #pinoypodcaster #batas #philippinelaw Make a donation to support the podcast: www.komiksman.com SUPPOR

Video Transcript / Subtitles:( AI generated. About AI subtitles » )

* AI ("Artificial Intelligence") subtitles on Tagalog.com are generated using "Whisper" by OpenAI (the same company that created ChatGPT and DallE2). Results and accuracy may vary.
* The subtitles do include errors occasionally and should only be used as a tool to help with your listening practice.
* You can request this website to create a transcript for a video if one doesn't already exist by clicking the "Request AI Subtitles" button below a video. Transcribing usually takes 30-40% of the length of a video to complete if there are no other videos in the queue. For example, a 21 minute video will take 7-8 minutes to transcribe.
* Running a super fast cloud GPU server to do these transcriptions does cost money. If you have the desire and financial ability, consider becoming a patron to support these video transcriptions, and the other tools and apps built by Tagalog.com

Hindi ko alam kung misconception to about laws. Pero may mga naririnig kasi ako na sa internet at saka minsan aling asgas lang kong kanilang kanino is

yung mga batas daw could still be subject for interpretation. Parang flexible ba ang mga batas na pwede mong i-interpret?

Kasi parang sa isang kaso, dalawang abogado maglalaban dyan, parang they would have different interpretations of the law. So how does that work?

Ang mag-i-interpret lang talaga ng batas is yung Supreme Court. Kaya nga may jurisprudence. So kung ano yung nakalagay sa jurisprudence, yun yung dapat sundin.

Ang problema pag nagkaharap yung dalawang abogado, bibigyan nila ng kanilang sariling interpretation to suit their case. So it could be na isang kaso lang yung pinanghawakan, isang jurisprudence lang yung pinanghawakan nila but they have different interpretations each to suit their respective positions.

But ultimately a judge will decide kung ano yung tamang interpretation talaga ayon sa jurisprudence.

I see. So kaya nagkakaroon ng mga appeals. Kasi unfortunately sobrang haba. Kasi ibig sabihin hindi talaga ganun ka perfect.

And do you think it is a problem that yung human, what would you call it, na parang misad preference and understanding din siguro na it can vastly affect a decision or how a case would be tried?

Hindi ko masyadong nakuha yung tanong mo.

Would you consider it a flaw in conducting justice? Yung mga laws, even though it's set in black and white, could be subject for interpretation?

Hindi naman dahil ultimately you will submit your case to a judge. Tapos yung judge ang magdedecide. Now kung if you are agreed with the decision of the judge, you can appeal your case to the next higher court.

So yun yung hierarchy of courts. We cannot do away with it. Ganyan talaga ang proseso. So I cannot say if it is beneficial or detrimental but yun talaga ang sistema ng justice system.

There will always be two interpretations or two positions that need to be resolved by a judge.

I suppose kaya nagkaroon ng hierarchy of courts because the system recognizes, the law recognizes it. Kasi pwede nga namang magkamali until makarating ka sa Supreme Court. Ilang levels din yun. Kaya sasalain talaga.

The Supreme Court is the court of last resort. So kung ano yung magiging decision ng Supreme Court, yun na yun. Hindi na pwedeng i-appeal mo pa sa ibang wala na.

Okay.

Dapat may katapusan din lahat. Hindi pwedeng never ending resolution of disputes. May hangganan talaga sa Supreme Court lang.

Pag feeling mo agree na hindi ka pa rin nakuha, then sa afterlife ka namin ng justisya.

Aakyat ka na ng bundok. Mag-rebelde ka na lang.

Well, ganun talaga. Kasi nandito tayo sa mundo. Anyway, let's go to lawyering.

May isa akong tanong pala dito. Ano yung tingin nyo, based on your experience, ano yung mga most common reasons why people break the law?

Ang daming reason, Sir Commissman. May economic. Tapos yung, depende kasi yung human factor involved, yung human emotion.

Yan. Jealousy, anger, ano pa. Basta marami. I cannot enumerate them all.

Is there a statistic on the types of crimes that are most committed in the Philippines? Do you think there is a need for that or maybe we can learn things from it?

Siguro we can learn more of that from social scientists kasi sila yung nagkakonduct ng mga surveys na ganyan, ng mga studies na ganyan.

Sa amin kasi sa mga lawyers, we have not been taught to explore on that aspect of human activity.

So sa amin lang pag may kasong dumating, then we resolve it. We try to help or give assistance to clients.

But in my experience as a prosecutor for 13 years, yung crime na medyo prevalent talaga is yung mga drug cases.

Yung estafa cases, mostly crimes involving property, theft, qualified theft, carnapping. So mostly crimes against property.

Yung drugs hindi naman crime against property yun but isa yun sa mga common crimes na pinaprosecute namin.

Of course meron din homicide, murder, rape. The usual crimes. We call it common crimes.

Are there particular cases that affected you dun sa career mo that put a mark?

Yes. There was one case that affected me. I was prosecuting two policemen whom I accused of being accomplices in the murder of an old woman.

So it became so personal to me in the sense na parang I got so affected when the court acquitted the two policemen.

But hindi ko na i-discuss yung merits ng case. So yun yung isa sa mga medyo na na-involve talaga ako personally because I felt for the victim and the family of the victim.

How did you deal with that?

It took a week for me to move on. After a short while, I just realized na you cannot dwell on those things.

You don't have control of everything. What is important is you do your best.

Ako kasi sir Comixman, I am a very passionate person in court. Yung tingin mo lang sa akin ngayon is parang malumanay.

But what you saw during the debate is my personality in court.

Sabi ko nga, ganyan-ganyan lang yan sa video.

You were asking me during the Ampalaya Collab na fiskal, ano bang magiging approach mo sa debate.

You remember asking me that. Will you be savage? Tapos sabi ko sa'yo, I'll keep my cards close to my chest.

So yun yung ibig sabihin that time.

Well, na-startle ang ating abutihin sa yung pinakita.

Ako kasi, siguro magkukwento ako ng konti.

Siyempre nung bata ka, when you're a kid, isa sa mga pangarap ng mga tao sa isang bata ay maging abogado.

Ikaw, mag-abogado ka kaya.

So naisip ko parang never kong kakayanin maging abogado.

Kasi you will have to defend people you don't like, maybe ganun.

Especially, I don't know about you fiskal kasi dalawang ikaw sa government ka.

I don't know how much choice you have in choosing your clients.

You will have to defend either way.

How do you deal with that?

Parang ako kasi, I don't even want to subject myself to that kind of decision.

Kaya sabi ko hindi ako pwede maging abogado.

Yung abogado kasi, Sir Comicsman, is simple lang.

Pinoproblemay mo yung problema ng ibang tao.

Meron ka ng sariling problema tapos pinoproblemay mo pa yung problema ng ibang tao.

But wala kaming choice.

We cannot say na hindi ko i-prosecute yan dahil ayaw ko sa pagmumuka niya or ayaw ko siya.

Walang fear, neither fear nor favor.

So, regardless of the person involved, then you have no choice but to prosecute.

Well, at least you are a prosecutor.

Paano kung ikaw yung magde-defend?

Kasi kung let's say, rapist yung nasasakdal,

dandun ka, magpa-prosecute ka ng rapist.

Hindi ikaw yung magde-defend ng rapist.

At least ako, pwede ako maging prosecutor siguro.

Doon ang gagawin ko.

Pero I can't imagine myself defending a rapist to be compelled na alam kung rapist siya tapos ipagtatanggol ko pa rin.

For me, parang hindi ko kaya yun.

But then again, I suppose there are lawyers who can do that.

Ano kasi sir Comixman, kahit na factually you know the person is a criminal or a rapist, you have to represent him in court.

Obligation ng lawyer na mag-represent sa kanya sa court kasi walang criminal case na magpro-proceed kung walang lawyer.

So, someone has to defend him.

Kaya nga meron tayong public attorneys kasi pag walang tatanggap na private lawyer sa kaso niya,

then a government lawyer as represented by the public attorney's office will represent him in the case.

You said kanina you were a public, nagpaw ka rin for a couple of years.

12:08.000 --> 12:09.000

Hindi ko tatanungin niya mga kung anong nangyari.

Pero how was that experience?

Defending people na parang you think might be really guilty.

Ang prinsipi ko kasi sir Comixman is if the person is really guilty,

like let's say meron ako naging kliyente sa PAO na father siya who raped her daughter.

So, I asked him ano ba talaga? Ano ba talaga nangyari? Did you rape your daughter?

Yes, attorney.

So, what I told him is nagkasala ka then you have to decide now kung you want to proceed with the case or you have to plead guilty.

So, dalawa lang yan.

Kami kasi sa government sir Comixman, mas may discretion kami to advise clients to really plead guilty

kasi pag private lawyer ka, meron kasing pera involved and it might be difficult for the lawyer to refuse.

So, kami we can always convince yung mga guilty clients talaga to plead guilty para maibsan yung sintensya.

Kasi meron kasing tinatawag na plea bargaining provision na kahit na nagkasala ka,

pag nagplead guilty ka, mag-mitigate yung criminal liability mo.

For example, 10 years lang, magiging 7 years na lang yung penalty of imprisonment mo.

So, bargaining talaga?

So, we avail of bargaining para maibsan yung pagkakasala mo provided na naaamin ka sa kaso.

But meron din talaga sigurong lawyers na kahit na rapist yung tao or guilty of a crime for example,

they will find ways to have their clients go scot-free.

Do you think that's a personal opinion lang?

Personal opinion lang?

Do you think that's a kind of, what's the right word to say?

I don't know. Ang naisip ko, bastardization e.

Di naman siguro.

But to be honest, wala akong empirical data to prove na meron talaga mga lawyers na ganoon.

Probably meron but kung meron man, they're just a few.

Di naman bastardization but siguro.

Ano kasi sir Melo, kami kasi mga lawyers, kahit na alam namin na nagkasala yung client namin,

sa mata ng batas, he is still an innocent person.

Meron kasing presumption of innocence.

So even if he is the most guilty person in the eyes of the public, in the eyes of the law,

he is still innocent until or unless proven guilty.

So wala kaming guilt feeling noon.

Ang mag-prove kasi ng guilt is yung prosecution.

So if I am a defense counsel and even if I know that my client has really committed the particular crime,

wala akong magiging konsensya or hindi ako makokonsensya dahil hindi naman ako ang mag-prove ng innocence ng client ko

because my client is presumed innocent.

So ang mag-prove ng guilt is yung kabila.

So kung hindi mag-prove ng kabila yung guilt ng client ko, then my client remains to be innocent.

Do you think yung innocent until proven guilty, yun yung naging standard,

do you think, kunyari lang, hypothetical lang,

could it have been better if the opposite is applied?

Parang guilty unless proven innocent?

What is the benefit of choosing innocent first, assuming innocent first, than assuming guilt?

Mas maganda yung presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Imagine, put yourself in the shoes of a person or under a system of government or in a criminal justice system

na you are presumed guilty until proven innocent.

Philosophically speaking, it's really hard.

So the wisdom is really, mas citizen-friendly yung presumed innocence.

At sa comics man, yung criminal laws natin always favor the accused.

Kasi for a crime, in order to convict an accused for a crime,

the prosecution must prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Yung ebedensya na walang kaduda-duda.

Dahil pag nakapag-present ng evidence yung kabila,

that will create doubt on the guilt of the accused,

the court has no recourse, has no choice but to acquit the accused.

Mahirap kasi yung prosecution dahil ang task ng fiscal is to prove the elements of the crime.

Kung may isang elemento ng krimen na hindi mo ma-prove, ma-acquit yung accused.

So it will be grounds for not proving beyond reasonable doubt.

Yes, yes.

Kasi nakalista talaga doon.

Kasi ganoon ang impression ko.

Kaya may mga listahan na doon yung elements of the crime.

For you to say that it's murder, may listahan ng mga kailangan, present yun.

Yun yung elements of the crime na natawag.

So kailangan macheck out mo lahat yun.

Kailangan nakalaga yun lahat sa kaso, sa information,

tapos kailangan ma-prove mo each of the elements of the crime with evidence.

Kung may isang element ng crime na hindi mo na-prove,

then the court will have to dismiss the case or acquit the accused.

Because you have not proven the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

So kahit doon sa iba, sa ibang bawat, present na yung iba, let's say tatlo yun.

So dalawa, present.

Tapos yung isa lang ang hindi, acquit yun.

Acquit yun.

Sabagay, kasi parang kaya kailangan strictly defined yung mga ano.

Yun yung mga pinagde-debatehan nila, yung mga definitions sa when they create laws, di ba?

Yes, tama.

And what is the process of creating laws?

Tapos fiscal.

Kasi parang just going back doon sa question ko kanina about Senate,

yung mga senador yung gumagawa ng batas, di ba?

Yes.

Paano yun pala?

Minsan kasi parang yung iba, diretso yun sa Senate hearing.

Ang pagkakaalam ko kasi dati, congressman muna, sa congress muna bago yakit sa Senado.

I'm not so particular, Sir Comicsman, but sa pagkakaintindi ko,

merong isang, for example, merong senador or merong congressman na mag-propose ng batas.

Ang tawag ng proposed na batas, bill.

Tapos yung bill, for example, if the bill is about public security and safety,

ipapasok nila yun sa isang committee ng Senate.

Tapos yung committee ng Senate will have the option to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation

to help craft that law or improve on that bill na sinadgest or inendorsed ng isang congressman or senador.

So once the bill passes the committee stage, it will go through several readings.

First reading, second reading, third reading.

And then there will be a counterpart bill in the Senate.

So yung dalawang versions ng bill, yung House bill at Senate bill will be merged into one.

So mag-perform sila ng bicameral conference committee composed of representatives of the Senate and the House.

Tapos sila na yung committee na mag-finalize ng bill.

Tapos pag na-finalize na yung bill as recommended by the bicameral conference committee,

ibabalik yun sa respective chambers ng Congress for approval.

Pag na-approve, then it will become a law that needs to be signed by the President.

So like yung RA 11648, that was a creation of bills filed in both houses, the Senate and the House.

So it was merged into one and then this improved version of the bill, ito yung ipinasa dun sa President for his signature.

Kasi a bill will not become a law without the approval of the President.

So ang tawag dun is legislative mill. Dadaan pa yun sa maraming pagbubusisi, revisions, amendments,

until the bill will be in its final form for the approval of the President.

And the President can also veto na hindi niya i-approve.

Yes. Meron siyang veto power. Yes.

Hassle yun kung antagal na dapat siya biveto.

That's part of the checks and balances system in our constitutional government.

Tapos isang tao lang yung mag-a-approve final.

Pero I suppose it works. Kasi ganun naman halos lahat ng gobyerno sa mundo na may demokrasya na merong katulad ng sistema natin.

Pero ang essence is, to a common person, a law is just something na nakasulat.

Pero kung paano naging nakasulat siya, pinag-debatehan niya ng mga tao, ng mga congressman, ng mga senador,

and these are philosophical ideas based on expertise.

And then hindi lang mga senador, they will invite also experts to give suggestions on a particular law

like yung pag-draft ng RA 11648, raising the age of sexual consent from 2016.

They consider the recommendation of these UN committees recommending that the age of consent be raised from 12 to 16.

So recommendation yun ng mga eksperto na nagtataguyod sa kapakanan ng mga bata at kababaiyan.

And I suppose those experts would be let's say social workers.

Would include social workers or NGO people or psychologists, medical people.

So not particularly kailangan abogado yung mga nandun.

Kasi yun ang isang impression na kailangan abogado ang gagawa ng batas.

Wala kasing monopoly of knowledge. Merong mga disciplines na kailangan bakinggan din.

Sabi mo yung mga experts, so-called experts.

Before a bill becomes a law, ang daming i-consider doon.

Hindi lang yung voice ng lawmakers, pati na yung different sectors ng society.

Yes. Like let's say kung batas ito tungkol sa let's say the building code.

Gagawa ka ng batas. Siyempre kailangan mo ng mga architects o mga engineers doon.

Hindi mo kailangan ng abogado doon.

Kailangan mo yung abogado maybe to word the law properly.

To check the legality of the provision.

Pero yung essence ng batas na yun would come from the wisdom of people involved doon sa mga gumagawa doon and maapektuhan.

Tama.

Kunti na lang. Mayroon pa dito.

It's okay.

But I think kasi gusto ko ng pag-usapan yan kasi I think there have been a lot of misconceptions not just on social media.

Kahit nung lumalaki ako, I suppose kasi I recognize yung importance of course of lawyers.

I recognize that to become a lawyer you have to prove a lot.

You need to be of certain caliber of a person to become one.

I recognize I have nothing against lawyers.

Pero there are times kasi na parang lawyer lang yung magaling.

I don't think that is the case.

I don't think that is the case.

I think wisdom.

Ine-equate kasi nung ibang mga tao na lawyer equals knowing it all about society, about law, about government.

Sometimes naman yung government hindi nga alam nung ibang lawyer.

Kasi iba naman yung madaming aspeto ng government.

Hindi lang tungkol sa batas.

So there is this, what's the right word?

Hindi naman siguro bother pero ano yung impression, how do you take that impression na lang siguro?

Of parang lawyers, the reputation of lawyers being having people expect so much from you guys.

How do I say this?

Mataas kasi yung tingin ng mga tao sa lawyers especially sa Provincia Sir Comicsman.

Ang taas ng tingin nila sa amin.

They see us as learned men na we are like a cure to their ills.

Parang ganoon.

Pag nakipag-usap sila sa abogado, in-expect nila na magliliwanag yung problema nila.

Parang ang dami yung expectations bilang isang abogado na they think they can solve all your problems.

But in truth, isang aspeto lang ng buhay ang importante ang isang abogado pag may kaso ka.

Or pag may mga legal problems ka na kailangan mo ng consultation.

Yun lang yun.

So parang ano na kasi.

It has been implanted in our consciousness na ang taas ng tingin ng tao sa abogado.

Yung abogado lang ang parang fiesta kung nagbabar exam.

So dyan pa lang, malalaman mo na mataas talaga yung pagtingin ng mga tao sa mga abogado.

I have nothing against that naman.

Kasi a lot of lawyers really deserve it.

Hindi naman biro talaga.

Yes, hindi talaga biro.

Just like any other profession, pag nag-succeed ka doon.

Especially if you become really successful as a lawyer.

Tama.

Pero I think, I suppose it can be good din sometimes.

Depende na ako sino yung abogado.

Kasi hindi mo naman masisisi.

When you become a lawyer, you become a part of an elite group of people whether you like it or not.

Mayroon talagang elite characteristic on becoming a lawyer.

And I recognize that.

Pero to say that lawyers or to think, have the impression of just because you're a lawyer, you are the answer to everything.

Like you said, parang cure to all illness.

Parang siyang Boston C.

Shout out kay Doc Adam.

Lahat ng sakit, pinapagaling.

Siguro pwede ko idagdag pa doon and people would automatically lower themselves.

Parang ay, ano siya, abogado kasi siya.

I don't know.

I suppose it's human instinct na rin.

Because to become a lawyer is really hard, Sir Comicsman.

Diyan siguro nagsisimula yung paghanga ng mga tao sa abogado dahil we have to go through several layers before we can get our license.

So four years of law school, ang dami mong dapat pag-aralan.

Hindi lang criminal law, civil law, political law, taxation law.

All aspects of human activity na may batas na naggo-govern.

Ang tawag nga is from womb to tomb.

Simula lang nasa sinapupunan ka pa ng nanay mo, may batas na naggo-govern sa'yo.

Like bawal yung abortion.

Abortion is a crime.

So yung fetus, pinuprotektahan na ng batas dahil meron tayong crime na abortion.

So tanang...

Tana naman.

Sorry sorry nakalimutan ko.

Lahat ng aspects ng human activity, merong batas na naggo-govern.

Kaya hindi naman siguro kung isang aspeto lang ng batas, hindi naman masyadong mahirap pero dahil sa dami ng provisions na pag-aaralan mo,

yan mahirap talaga maging abogado.

Tama. Tama naman talaga yun.

Teka.

About lawyers pa rin.

So ano ba yung bar?

Ano ba yung bar?

I'm gonna ask the stupid questions for the sake of everyone.

Ano ba yung bar? Bakit importante yun?

Yung bar is similar to a board exam.

Yan ang exam na dapat mong ipasa para mabigyan ka ng lisensya bilang abogado, mabigyan ka ng roll number.

Bakit bar ang tawag? Hindi board exam?

Yung bar kasi parang symbolic yan ba na in a courtroom, merong bar separating the public from the lawyers.

In a typical courtroom, although sa Pilipinas siguro wala lang masyadong ganyan, merong bar separating lawyers from the people in the gallery.

So yan yung parang symbolic na name yan na hindi ka makakaupo doon sa table of lawyers, sa mga seats na afforded to lawyers kung hindi ka abogado.

Dahil merong bar.

O pwede rin yan na, ano ba ang tawag doon?

So basically yan yung history ng bar?

I think yan siguro yung symbolic meaning niya kaya bar ang tawag.

I see. Okay so parang cultural.

Ba't icheck ko, Sir Comicsman, baka magkamali ako.

Sige, sige.

Medyo philosophical ka kasi ako in my case, nung nagkuha ko ng law, abogasya, hindi ko na tinanong kung ano ba yung ibig sabihin ng bar.

To be honest, when I took up law, gusto kong maging abogado, ang tawag doon bar exam, hindi ko na tinanong ano ba etymology ng bar?

Saan pagaling yung word na bar?

So kahit magtanong ka sa ibang lawyers o sa ibang mga law students, hindi nila alam kung ano talagang ibig sabihin ng bar.

Nobody bothered to ask ka ba yung bar?

Kasi parang inaano ko siya. So ano ba yung bar?

Pwede yung ibang board.

Sige, sige. Ihanapin natin.

Tama ako, Sir Comicsman. Meron ako.

Ayun, sige, sige.

The term bar originally refers to the physical barrier that separated the public from the space where judges, lawyers and other court officials work.

Over time, the term bar came to refer euphemistically to the legal profession as a whole in reference to the fact that the barristers and lawyers carry out their profession beyond the physical bar.

The bar exam is so-called because you have to pass it in order to be allowed beyond the bar in a professional capacity.

So tama ako.

Tama, tama, tama. O nga, nabasa ko rin. Tama, tama si Biscayne.

Pwede ka lang makaupo dun sa seats na afforded to lawyers and judges pag abugado ka. Kaya merong bar.

So parang historic, historical yung reason kung bakit bar.

Yes.

I see. So ano kayaan yung board? Meron bang may board?

That's a question for another day.

Board. Siguro yung ibang harang plywood lang.

Anyway, anyway.

Pero ano? Ano ba yung mga tawag dito? May mga community ba ang mga attorney?

Yes.

Sorry, sorry. Yung integrated bar of the Philippines. Ano ba yun? Ano siya? Kailangan ba siya?

Sa akin kasi pag naririnig ko sa mga balita parang napaka importante ng opinion nila. Parang ganun. Ano ba yun?

Yan ang professional organization na mandatory for us to be a part of that group.

Is it government, out government?

When you become a lawyer, you have to become a member of the IBP. You have to pay dues and you have to abide by certain rules.

Kaya ano yan? Creation ng Supreme Court. Meron talagang IBP dahil ang IBP siya yung nag-serve as check on lawyers.

I see.

Siya ang liason officer between the Supreme Court and the legal profession. Pero the IBP is composed of lawyers. Yung president ng IBP, lawyer. Lahat puro lawyers.

Okay. So what are the official responsibilities of a lawyer?

Depende. Like what I said kanina, you have to distinguish between government lawyers and private lawyers.

Private lawyers, your main responsibility is to help the cause of your client. Make sure that the interests of your client are protected.

Ganun din sa government lawyering. You have to follow certain rules. For example, in the case of prosecutors, then we have to do our best to protect the interest of the state.

I see. What are the typical aspirations of a new law student? Parang pangarap ko sa maging ganito ako pag naging abogado.

Typical yan. First week of law school, first year, andami pa nila. After a month, parang one half, nag-drop out na.

Talaga? Yes. Ang high ng mortality rate sa law school.

Hindi naman literal na mortality rate. So during the first sem, andami pa nila. Mga two sections. Pag second sem, isang section na lang tapos 30 na lang sila na mga students.

Sa graduation, ilan na lang? Lima?

Kasi maliit na law school lang kami. During pag fourth year na sila, usually mga eight or ten graduates lang kami.

Kasi hinahasa talaga yung mga sujante para sino lang yung deserving na umapak ng fourth year, makaabot ng fourth year, yun lang yung iaalaw.

Kasi pag fourth year ka na, malapit ka na mag-take ng bar.

So yung typical law student ba? Would dream to become a justice?

So far in my 16 years of being a professor, wala pa akong narinig na gusto nilang mag-justice. Ang gusto lang nila is gusto nilang mag-abogado. Yun lang.

First step to become a lawyer.

Tapos just see and find out na lang.

One step at a time.

Okay. Unless siguro meron, they come from a lawyer family.

Usually they have high hopes. They are excited. Tapos after a week, medyo takot na dahil serious na yung mga professors.

Talaga? Anong expectation pag pumasok ka ng law school? Are you a terror prof? Do you have a reputation?

Terror ba yung ano?

Hindi ko ma-define kung terror ako o comicsman. But if I have to be a tiger, I will be a tiger.

Okay. Kung kailangan. So reasonable naman yung pagiging?

Lenient ako. But when it comes to exams, dapat pumasa ka. So dapat you'll meet my standard. Because if you don't meet my standard, then at the end of the semester, medyo dihado ka sa grading. Mabagsak ka talaga.

Well, I suppose if there are students of Fiscal EJ watching this, you can comment.

Para alam ni Fiscal EJ kung sinong ibabagsak niya. Joke lang.

I am reasonable enough naman. Although, hindi maiwasan talaga comicsman na meron talagang hindi aabot sa standard na hindi papasa.

Well, based on the photo that you posted with your students, I suppose you are a well-loved.

Kunti lang.

I suppose you are a well-loved or at least loved enough for them to…

Loved enough. And then they were so happy when they learned of the news na nanalo tayo sa DB. Sabi nga nila, Fiscal kahit na ibabagsak mo pa kami, proud pa rin kami na maging students mo.

Parang naawa ka na sa kanila. Okay, sige.

They were so happy. They were so elated na a professor, ang teacher nila is nanalo in an event such as that debate.

You can consider that as a national event. Kasi buong ano.

Hindi kasi. Hindi man national na sponsored. Pero global nga. May mga nanonood doon from all over the world.

Kung ako yung professor din kita, syempre matutuwa rin ako. Especially if…

You can probably notice, Sir Comicsman, na iba yung demeanor ko ngayon kesa sa doon sa actual debate.

Oo nga.

Parang mahihain ako. Parang hindi nga ako makapag-express. Parang nahihirapan nga ako mag-express kasi mahihain talaga ako.

But when it comes to when the going gets tough, so to speak, I can also be tough.

So yun na. Again, to students and former students of Fiscal EJ who are watching, you can write your testimonials in the comment section.

I will ask them to subscribe to Comicsman.

Thank you. Thank you.

Pero syempre may mga privileges ang mga lawyers. Kaya nga siguro may mga certain decorum that's expected from lawyers because may mga responsibilities and privileges.

With great power comes great responsibility. Parang ganoon.

Doon sa live ni Melo, yung una nating live Fiscal, parang we talked about yung mga CPRA ba yun? Yung mga ethics na ginawa.

Code of Ethics ng Lawyers. Yes.

So I suppose that had always existed, no?

Yes. But the new Code of Ethics now has a new provision. Ang tawag doon, responsible use of social media.

Kasi alam din naman ng Supreme Court na marami na rin mga lawyers na gumagamit ng social media.

And the Supreme Court has advised lawyers to be prudent and circumspect in their social media activities.

What are the things that were mentioned in that new guideline?

Sa pagkakaremember ko lang is you must be careful in the information you are giving in social media.

Wala namang taong hindi nagkakamali but as much as possible since you are a lawyer, people listen to you.

Your word is a cure to their ills, so to speak.

So you also have the responsibility to make sure that the information you are spreading on social media is closer to the truth.

It may not be the whole truth but at least it's closer to what should be the proper interpretation of the law.

But then again, do you think it's enough or too much?

Kasi everybody has the right to speak naman. Do you think that encroaches your ability to speak freely?

Hindi naman kasi freedom of expression, Sir Comicsman, is not absolute.

So meron kang freedom, meron din responsibility involved.

So the higher your position, the higher your educational attainment or the higher your profession, then the greater is your responsibility to society.

So hindi yan affront to our right to freely express ourselves.

Do you think that's a hindrance?

With more reason that we should be careful with what we spread on social media because people listen to us.

Tama. Like the Spider-Man quote nga, diba?

So you have no, kumbaga wala kang objection dun?

Wala, wala. Because that comes with the territory.

What do you mean territory?

That comes with being a lawyer.

Ah okay. Kumbaga like…

Kasi pag nagbigay ka ng maling advice on social media, it might spread like wildfire.

Maraming tao ang maniniwala tapos yun ang susundin nila.

So mahirap yan if it goes unchecked.

Yeah. Definitely. Lalo na kung…

And how frustrating is it for you when may ganong nangyayari na parang there are lawyers who would spread misinformation so to speak?

Hindi naman siguro pa ganun ka prevalent yung misinformation.

Wala naman akong nakikitang parang malala na yung pag-spread ng misinformation. So far wala pa.

But kung meron man, I don't know. Depende na lang kung may ma-encounter ako na ganyan.

But in general, of course, ayaw mong may mangyaring ganyan.

How about lawyers parang acting, ano bang tamang word? Maybe undignified, unlawyer-esque.

You can say siguro nakakahiya yung mga ginagawa na parang hindi respetable yung mga makikita when they carry themselves in public.

Anong masasabi pa ganun?

As much as possible kasi, Sir Comicsman, ayaw kong mag-even comment in general kasi baka may mga lawyers din na matatamaan.

But the usual reaction, kahit na hindi mo kaparehas ng profession, let's say if you see a doctor doing something unkindly in social media, parang parang taken aback.

So applicable naman lahat ng klaseng professions, lahat ng klaseng activities.

Pag may unsightly, ungodly or unkindly na ginagawa ang isang tao, you'll always react negatively.

But that's the reason why there is this code of ethics for lawyers dahil it serves as our guide to what we should do in social media, not just in social media but in the way we deal with people, with our colleagues, our courts.

Merong tinatawag na fourfold responsibilities yung isang abogado.

For what? I'm sorry?

Fourfold responsibilities. Responsibility to your client, responsibility to your community, to the courts, to your colleagues.

So merong mga guidelines doon na dapat mong sundin. And it is all codified, contained in our code of ethics.

I suppose tama talaga na may ganoon kasi it's with the reverence allotted to lawyers especially by the public.

Kasi parang siguro kasama rin yun na parang kaya revered ang mga lawyers sa society natin.

Kasama yun na parang you are expected to carry yourselves a little bit better siguro. Would that be fair to say?

Kasi lawyer kayo. You're supposed to be a learned man. You're supposed to know things that the common folk would not.

Tama. Tama.

Siguro matatapos na tayo fiscal.

Sige. Sige.

Teka.

Pasensya na talaga sa Tagalog ko Sir Comicsman. Medyo nahihirapan talaga ako mag-express in Tagalog.

No. No. No. Speak in English if you must. Okay lang yun.

Mas maganda kasi pag Tagalog kasi parang mas marami yung nakakaintindi ba?

O nga.

Problemo ko lang dapat magsanay na talaga ako mag-Tagalog.

Sige. Sige. Sige. I'll help you anyway I can.

Maka in time. In time. In time. I might be this ano na.

Maggano tayo. Magpodcast tayo. Practice lang yan e. Diba?

Tama. Tama.

Magpodcast tayo frequently.

Ito. Isang ano. What is a good lawyer for you? Tingin mo. So what would you expect your best students to become?

Mga parang ganun.

A good lawyer is someone who is an example to his students.

Ang reputation niya sa trabaho niya dapat makita ng mga tao na he performs his job well.

In my case as a prosecutor, not to lift my own bootstraps, Sir Comicsman,

I always try to study my cases before hearing date, before the trial date.

Kahit na, let's say, in a particular day, nakahilera yung mga 8 trial cases na inaapiran ko.

So I always make it a point that before I present a witness to the witness stand, kinakausap ko muna.

Mahirap nun. Kahit isang case lang, you have to prep your witness. You have to study the case.

So as much as possible, the people who know me here in Ormoc City know that I am so passionate when it comes to trials of cases.

So I think nakikita nila yun sa practice ko. Kaya medyo I have earned a reputation as a fiscal stricto, but in a good way.

And I think that is one thing that my students can learn from me.

And I always tell them that in everything you do, whatever it is, you should always be passionate about it.

So when they learn of the news that I won in the debate, they ask me,

Sir ano ba yung ginawan para maging confident kayo dun sa debate?

Kasi sa tingin nila during the debate daw, I look so confident, calm, composed.

I told them, preparation lang talaga because nothing beats preparation.

And then of course, never underestimate your opponent.

And yun lang, yung passion, discipline.

And then I think, ang tingin kasi sa mga tao, sa mga abugado is parang may angas.

But in my case, parang wala akong angas as a lawyer.

Parang ganoon lang.

So I look like a simpleton if people see me.

Parang just like any other ordinary guy.

So I think yun siguro ang pwede kong ma-leave the legacy insofar as lawyering is concerned.

I know I am a prosecutor but hindi ako conscious na prosecutor ako.

Parang ganoon ba, if I talk to you, if I talk to Melo, if I talk to …

I always treat them as equals.

And that is one thing that I …

Wala akong aura of superiority, parang ganoon.

Because ang belief ko kasi, Sir Comicsman, marami akong matututunan even from those who are not lawyers like you.

Ang dami kong natutunan sa'yo, kay Melo, sa ibang tao.

So wala talaga akong aura of superiority if you see me.

Wala talaga.

I can attest.

Actually, when I first met you on Zoom, when we were having a dry run,

and for you to …

Nung nalaman ko that you are asking Melo to help you out,

parang diba parang talaga, you have the humility.

Because that's what I see in it.

Diba yung iba, like I said, people are mocking you for doing it.

They think na parang, yung iba pa nga parang ang dating, parang nandadaya ka.

Tapos parang, eh kasi ano siya eh, ganyan.

Ano ba nangyaring?

Paano ba naging bandalaya yun?

Kaya nga eh.

Wala namang nakalagay na hindi sila pwedeng gawin ng saria na gawin nila yun themselves.

Diba?

Kailan naging bandalaya or dirty tactics yung dry run?

Ano ba?

Wala naman akong inargabiadong tao in so far as preparing for the debate is concerned.

Diba? At saka if you think na kung hindi mo ginawa, if you chose not to do it, then that's on you.

Considering that this is an online debate,

this is my first time to engage in an online debate so hindi talaga ako marunong sa mga teke-teke na ganyan.

Ngayon lang ako naka-encounter, ngayon ko lang nalaman na mayroon palang stream yard.

Sipin mo.

Diba?

I have not tried going live on YouTube so everything is new to me.

So kaya I asked Melo to help me.

I asked you na if you can assist me in preparation for this debate and fruit of our labor.

Diba? Nanalo tayo.

And I am very proud to be part of this endeavor.

Diba? Tapos kaya sabi ko talaga bakit ganyan? Why can't you just be gracious?

It's so disappointing.

And then you, when you did your thank you note, diba?

It is so respectful. You're not even gloating.