Semester 2 Field Lecture 9 - SINE DIE: the Mother of All Legal Fictions

had no idea people would be so fascinated!

So many of my friends reacted personally, by email, by PM and a few on the comments section itself about my article in the Layman School of Law about CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE and how seemingly ILLOGICAL the whole idea about this “being presumed to know what you don’t actually know” thing really is.

The topic is, indeed, very long. So, yes, there will be more discussion about this CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE principle with my Omega Class students in coming ‘class episodes’ soon. Abangan!

But while we’re on the topic of ILLOGICAL actions, let me amuse you with another LEGAL FICTION that I did NOT learn in law school but personally experienced. Of course, I did my research to further my understanding of it afterwards.

As background, from 1988 to 1992, I worked in the House of Representatives of the Congress of the Philippines, under House Speaker Ramon V. Mitra. I was the Chief-of-staff of Baguio Congressman Honorato “Honor” Y. Aquino, who was historically the first elected congressman of the just-created legislative district of Baguio City.

Many of the meetings of congressmen, especially in the different standing committees, were actually attended by their chiefs-of-staff, especially with so many committee hearings happening at the same time.

Even the busiest and most hardworking of them doing “lagare”—the term for someone flitting from one meeting to another while both are going on simultaneously—would never be able to cover all his meetings.

But as long as that congressman responded to the roll call at the start of the meeting, he can physically leave the room. He remains CONSTRUCTIVELY PRESENT so long as his chief-of-staff, who is his alter ego, is in the room!

If you think that’s strange, you “ain’t seen nothing yet.”

In the late afternoon until evening, starting at 4:00 PM, the congressmen would repair to the main session hall—yes, that cavernous hall with the giant Philippine flag draped in front that you always see on television—and again respond to the roll call.

Quorum is usually only determined at the START of the session, after the roll call. After quorum is declared, again these solons with overly itchy feet start moving around the main floor, darting in and out of the session hall.

What do they do? Everything—smoke in the lounge, go to the rest room, grab a quick bite in the cafeteria, sneak back in their offices to take calls, even entertain constituents who have travelled far just to see them in the visitors’ reception room. They can do anything EXCEPT leave the building (not without informing the House sergeant-at-arms).

Again, back at the session hall, they are CONSTRUCTIVELY present, and it’s an all-too-common sight to see one of them delivering a privilege speech to a FULL PLENARY SESSION with hundreds of empty chairs. That solon spoke to a FULL HOUSE, and you can “fact-check” the quorum, the records will bear this out.

Strange, huh? Again, that’s NOTHING. Here’s the Mother of All Constructive Legal Fiction:

A session is usually adjourned early, between 8:00 to 9:00 PM. But on very rare occasions, a certain bill must be passed by a certain deadline, or else the resulting measure would be legally infirm (for ex. A resolution affirming or denying the declaration of martial law or state of emergency, which must be passed within 24 hours, Congress cannot adjourn in the middle of its deliberation).

But what if there’s not enough time? Especially when it involves a very contentious subject, and the floor debates are long-winded and fierce. Time flies fast, and as the clock nears midnight, the majority floor leader rises (usually as pre-arranged) and the dialogue goes this way:

Majority Floor Leader: “Mister Speaker! Point of parliamentary inquiry…!”

Speaker: “Majority floor leader is recognized to state his point of parliamentary inquiry.”

MFL: “Mister Speaker! May we please know what time it is now?”

SPKR: “The Chair notes for the record that it is FIVE MINUTES before midnight.”

MFL: “Mister Speaker! May I move for the suspension of the Rules, on essential parliamentary errand?”

SPKR: “The Rules are hereby suspended!” (He bangs the gavel. He MUST bang the gavel, no motion is carried until he does!)

MFL: (with the Rules suspended) “Mister Speaker! May we move that the Sergeant-at-arms be directed, on essential parliamentary errand, to stop the clock at exactly one minute BEFORE midnight.” (the hall reverberates with solons yelling “Second!!!”)

SPKR: “So moved and seconded, the House Sergeant-at-arms is directed to stop the clock at exactly one minute before midnight.”

I saw the Sergeant-at-arms run somewhere behind the “stage”—I don’t even know where he went—then quickly returns and climbs up the podium where the Speaker was standing. The Speaker leans over, cups his ears to listen to the seargent-at-arms reporting something.

SPKR: “The sergeant-at-arms reports, and so the Chair duly notes, that the clock has been stopped at exactly one minute before midnight.”

MFL: “Mister Speaker! We move to unsuspend the Rules and to resume the Session.” (many yells of “Second!!!”)

SPKR: “Session resumed, the Rules are in place, the Chair notes that the plenary body is now in session SINE DIE.”

“Sine Die” (pronounced “see-neh dee-yeh”) literally means “into the next day.” And that’s exactly what happens. The session continues and the congressmen carry on their floor debates until 3:00 or 4:00 AM of the following day. But frequently the Majority floor leader rises to reassure everyone that “everything is okay.”

MFL: “Mister Speaker! Point of parliamentary inquiry. May we know again what time it is now?”

SPKR: “The Chair notes, based on the clock in the session hall, that the time is one minute before midnight of September 23!” even though, in reality, it was already 4:00 AM of September 24!

The session hall has no windows, so you can’t really see outside. So although the Speaker keeps reporting the time as “one minute before midnight” if you go OUTSIDE, the sun is well above the horizon on the east.

In other words, if you go outside, you walk straight into “today” but if you step back into the session hall you step back into “yesterday!” I bet PAGASA could never understand THAT.

The point of fiction is that whatever vote is taken on any measure, it is recorded as having been rendered on that "frozen" day, regardless what actual day it was when the voting took place. Why? Because as far as Congress was concerned, by agreement of its Members, time STOOD STILL one minute before midnight.

Believe me, that “ONE MINUTE” is the LONGEST one minute you’ve ever experienced. I have seen that “one minute” last for THREE DAYS! Every time, the Speaker is only bound to report the time as reflected in the clock at the session hall.

And here’s the clincher: I have never even actually SEEN that darned clock! There is NO CLOCK in the session hall. Everything—the physical clock, the stopping of the time, the freezing of the dates—all of it is UNQUESTIONABLY TRUE by legal fiction only. But perfectly valid, totally compliant with the Rules (because the logical anomaly is committed WHILE these Rules are suspended) and perfectly LEGAL.

Whenever I explained this to my law students in the past, I couldn’t stop them from laughing (Miss Deema Niwala from Alpha Class could have blasted a hole right through the floor for stomping her feet so hard!).

But what can I say? ONLY lawyers seem to possess the imagination flexible enough to accept the concept of CONSTRUCTIVE LEGAL FICTION because it really requires a certain level of maturity, of tolerance or immunity to credulity--to do this.

Lawyers and lawmakers literally possess the ability to overrule and suspend the operation of universal physical truth as defined by true geniuses like Albert Einstein. They can will an alternative universe of truths into existence, founded on CONSTRUCTIVE LEGAL FICTION simply by agreeing among themselves!

No wonder ang yayabang nila…or NAMIN! But now, you also ALREADY KNOW what WE know.*

Semester 2 Lecture 8 - BBM Spoke to a Full House of Empty Chairs

ood evening, class. Can you count off, please?”

It was an unusual instruction to give an evening law class, because rarely is attendance ever checked in these classes. These people are not undergraduates, you can give these guys a bit of slack. In fact, it’s not uncommon for a few students to come staggering into class as late as a half hour. Most professors, myself included, don’t even mind. If a student is unfaithful in attending class, he only punishes himself because nobody is going to bend bendwards for him so he can catch up with the rest of the class.

“We’re twenty-six, sir,” Miss Pinky Maglia Rosa reported, “and there’s probably 3 or 4 more that’s already in the building and running up the stairs right now.”

“Thank you, Miss Pinky, please remain standing. Can you recall for everyone’s benefit what we discussed in this class last Monday?”

“Uh…sir, we talked about the unconstitutional manner by which Vice-president Sara Duterte was trying to create a special police intelligence unit which was civilian in character and national in scope without the involvement of the National Police Commission, and you said this was extralegal, at best,” the young Fil-Italian mestiza recounted flawlessly.

“And can you characterize the manner in which your classmates behaved as I was discussing all that?” I asked next.

The girl hesitated, “Uh…I’m…I’m not really sure how to answer that question, sir. Can you be more specific?”

“Sure,” I said, “can you specifically describe the specific behavior in which your classmates who belong to this specific class specifically displayed as I discussed that specific topic?” Everyone laughed.

“I’m sure you have a point, sir,” Miss Pinky groused.

“Yes, I do. You see, no matter how specific I get, I really doubt that you would be able to recall very much about audience reaction if you were truly paying attention to the topic at hand. You might barely remember your own reaction, but you must remember what the lesson was. You see, class, in an event that involves delivering a message, the main thing IS the message. In fact, the only thing that really amounts to any importance is the message.”

“Why do I have a feeling this has something to do with the speech of President Marcos at the UN General Assembly recently, sir?” Miss Pinky twitted.

“Because you are a perceptive law student, Miss Pinky, and you have a Political Science bachelor’s degree. Don’t ask me how I know, I have this habit of stalking my students on Facebook,” I smirked.

“I do have a PoliSci background, sir.”

“Right. Then you can tell us what the other term for the ‘UN General Assembly’ is.”

“It’s also called the UN Plenary Body, sir.”

“And what does ‘plenary’ mean and how is that delegate grouping different from an ordinary ‘convened committee’?”

“Sir, the Plenary Body refers to the total membership of an organization, except only those whose membership standing is impaired or suspended. Any smaller grouping of delegates is a convened committee, or an ordinary committee.” Miss Pinky answered.

“Why--can the Plenary Body not function as a committee also?” I followed up.

“It can, sir. In fact, it is the only permanent committee, sir, that’s why it’s called the ‘Committee of One.’ It is all standing committees combined into One.”

“Now, let me go back to this class. You counted you are 26 tonight, were you 26 last Monday?” I asked.

“I have no idea, sir. We did not count off last Monday,” Miss Pinky answered.

“That’s right, there could have been more, there could have been less. There could have been some classmates of yours you were absent. Now to be fair, when I prepare the questions for your exam, should I be concerned that some people might not have been around and might not have heard our discussion last Monday, Miss Pinky?”

“No, sir.”

“Why not? Suppose Mr. Roberto Sigalot was late that day, wouldn’t he have a right to complain that he did not hear the topic, so he shouldn’t be expected to be able to answer well in the exam?”

“No, sir. He belongs to this class, and this class is a PLENARY body. He is a member and is expected to know what every other member knows. That means, he is assumed to understand everything we understood from your lecture, regardless whether he was present or not. All that matters is that the lecture was DELIVERED.” Miss Pinky reasoned.

“THE…LECTURE…WAS…DELIVERED,” I repeated it slowly.

“Take note, Omega Class of junior law students,” I began to talk sentimentally, “what you just learned is the very important but very mysterious legal concept called ‘CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE.’ There are certain things in law that you are assumed to know, because you are expected to know it, EVEN IF YOU DON’T ACTUALLY KNOW IT. This is based on the assumption that the procedure to LET YOU KNOW was followed and it doesn’t really matter if you actually took advantage of that procedure. Do I make myself clear?”

My whole class shouted together, “NO, SIR!!!”

“Hahaha!” I couldn’t help laughing, “let me see if I can help you understand it better. Miss Ursula Bahag-hari, how many laws do we have in the Philippines?”

“Uh…sir, I think of latest count there are more than 10,200 Republic Acts, but all in all more than 38,950 individual permanent Philippine statutes if we include Presidential Decrees and other special laws.”

“That many, huh? Okay, now how many of these have you read?”

“Oh, my God! Sir! I could barely cover the 200 cases you assigned for our reading! I don’t know…maybe…ten? fifteen? Not very many, for sure,” Miss Ursula admitted.

“But are those laws effective ON YOU, or are you EXEMPTED from their coverage because you’ve never read them?” I asked.

“Oh, no, sir. I am covered by all of them and I cannot use ignorance as an excuse. Article 3 of the Civil Code states ‘ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith.”

“But is that fair, Miss Ursula? Why can’t you be excused if you are ignorant of the law?”

“Sir, because nobody is really ignorant of the law. The law is made known to all because all laws were promulgated, meaning they were published for everybody to take CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE of.”

“There you go,” I said, “everybody has CONTRUCTIVE NOTICE of the law. You know class, Article 2 of your Civil Code is very clear—laws become final 15 days following the completion of their publication in the Official Gazette, but I’m going to let you in on a little secret. I have been a practicing lawyer for decades, and I am 59 now—I have never actually held a copy of the Official Gazette in my hands!”

My whole class gasped all together, they couldn’t believe what I just told them.

“But whether I have read the law or not, as long as it was published in the Official Gazette, I am PRESUMED to have read it, as much as each and every one of you. You never really have to read any particular law, until you actually need to know how it affects you. But when you do your research and you finally ACTUALLY read the law, then at that very moment that you read it for the first time, the legal fiction kicks in. You are now considered to have read it AS IF YOU ARE READING IT 15 DAYS AFTER ITS PUBLICATION in the Official Gazette, no matter if the law was published BEFORE YOU WERE EVEN BORN.”

My whole class goes, “Oooooohhhhh….!” And then they all start giggling, finding the legal fiction totally amusing.

“That’s not all,” I teased, “it is also assumed that you have UNDERSTOOD what the law means, even if you CAN’T EVEN READ. It’s up to you to inform yourself, do whatever you have to, the whole duty of the State is just to give CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE of the law. Isn’t that amazing?”

“Sir, can we go back to how is this relevant to the President’s speech at the UN?” Miss Pinky reminded.

“Of course,” I put down my eyeglasses as I shifted topics, “I’m sure you’ve seen all those Facebook memes mocking the President because he was delivering his speech at the UN General Assembly when there were so many empty chairs—”

“Those were NOT empty chairs, sir,” Miss Pinky, the PoliSci graduate interrupted me.

“No, they were not. And the President was not addressing an empty hall, either. He was addressing the UN Plenary Body….take over for me, Miss Pinky.”

“Sir, the UN General Assembly Hall is the home of the Plenary body, and since Plenary means ‘ALL’ then any single individual in that hall actually embodies ALL of the UN delegates. Just like only 1,000 people are usually interviewed in a poll survey but their answer is assumed to reflect the opinion of 100 million voters because those 1,000 respondents are a representative sample of the plenary voting population,” the girl expounded

“But the memes said no one was even listening to the President while he was speaking, is that correct?” I followed up.

“Oh, my God, NO Sir! ALL Members of the UN General Assembly were not only listening, they heard and understood EVERY WORD of his message. His speech was a CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE to the whole world. The records of the minutes of that Plenary Session will say, ‘Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. DELIVERED a message’ and every country in the entire international community will get a full transcript of that whole message, sir.” Miss Pinky explained.

“Wait, Miss Pinky, are you telling me that because the President SPOKE ON RECORD TO THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY. They were all actually constructively present?”

“Yes, sir. The President spoke before a FULL HOUSE.”

“A FULL HOUSE, Miss Pinky? With all those empty seats?”

“People who see the empty seats are BLIND TO THE LEGAL FICTION, sir. They don’t see the PLENARY BODY because they don’t even know the MEANING of ‘PLENARY!”

“Did you get that, class? So now you’ll understand why the following day, the French President Emmanuel Macron also delivered his speech in front of all those empty chairs—”

“Those chairs were NOT empty sir,” Miss Pinky reiterated.

“Right,” I said, “You now fully understand the twin concepts of CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE and PLENARY REPRESENTATION. So from now on I don’t want any of you acting like ignoramuses out there and repeating what wrong ideas you see on Facebook posted by other ignoramuses, is that clear?” All my students nod.

“Yes, Miss Pinky, what is it? You forgot to say something?”

“I think the word is IGNORAMI, sir.”*

Semester 2 Lecture 7 - Is there a 'Backdoor' Approach to Creating a shadow PNP?

ood evening class,” I was clutching the day’s newspaper as I walked into my Omega Class, making sure the headline story was clearly showing. I did this on purpose, hoping to see which of my junior law students had done any advance reading of their 1987 Constitution, being that the class was still on Article II.

“Somebody is really keen on violating the Constitution so soon after just taking office huh, Professor?”

“You think so, Roberto?” I recognized Roberto Sigalot, the fellow who ‘inherited’ his parents’ empty condo unit in Baguio and thought enrolling in law school might be a great idea to kill time while staying in it.

“I’m just reacting to the headline story in that newspaper you’re holding, sir,” he said, then with a sing-song voice he quoted the headline, “VP Sara defends P150-Million confidential funds in DepEd Budget.”

“Well, I hope you read the whole story anytime earlier today, Mr. Sigalot, because I’d hate to see someone being judgmental on the Vice-president based on just one short sentence,” I responded.

“Oh, I Googled her all day today, sir. I was really trying hard to see her point. I gave her the benefit of all my doubt, but I still came to the same conclusion.”

“Which is…?”

“She violates TWO very important provisions of the 1987 Constitution—”

“TWO? Wow. Really?” I interrupted , “that’s a very bold conclusion. I'm impressed, Roberto, especially since the last time I read the Constitution, it did NOT have any provision dealing exclusively with the Vice-president.”

His classmates all turned to look at him as if to say, “Lagot! Saan mo hinugot yung reasoning mo??”

“That’s right, sir, there is NO article exclusively about the vice-president. In fact, the Constitution doesn’t even bother to define the duties of a vice-president. But I submit that she violated her oath of office by exceeding her duties and overstepping her authority under the Constitution.”

“That’s very interesting,” I decided to sit down for the long explanation that I knew had to follow, “Tell us, Roberto, how can she possibly EXCEED her duties if the Constitution does not even define what those duties are?”

“Well, sir the Constitution required her to take an oath before assuming office, and the oath goes like this: ‘I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties as Vice-President of the Philippines, preserve and defend its Constitution, execute its laws, do justice to every man, and consecrate myself to the service of the Nation. So help me God,” Mr. Sigalot recited from memory.

“Okay, so far,” I said, “so what do you think happened. God didn’t help her?”

“I’m sure God was trying, sir, but she chose to listen to Greed and Ambition, instead when she asked Congress to allocate P500-million for the Office of the Vice President first and another P150-million pesos ALL in ‘confidential funds’ for her office and for DepEd, in clear violation of Article VI, Section 25, paragraph 2—”

“My, my...WHAT does that provision say?” I poked deeper.

“Sir, it states that ‘No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations bill unless it relates specifically to some particular appropriation therein. Any such provision or enactment shall be limited in its operation to the appropriation to which it relates.”

“You may have a point there, Roberto, but so your classmates can understand better, tell them what’s wrong with blind items in a budget,” I coaxed him along.

“Sir, appropriation is not only about allocating money, but also about ensuring that money is actually spent for the purpose it was allocated for. So, okay, she might say I want P650-million total appropriated for ‘intelligence funds.’ That’s the APPROPRIATION, but what’s the PURPOSE? Congress does not only have the power of budget appropriation but ALSO budget oversight. But it’s impossible to track money if you have no idea where it is going. That’s why ‘confidential funds’ are anathema to government spending,” Roberto explained.

“Anathema…that’s a big word,” I played along, “but you know, Roberto, if you had read VP Sara’s official statement in the papers, she explained in microdetail the purposes why she needs all that money—”

“I know, sir, I read that too,” the boy insisted, “she said the money will be used for intelligence gathering to single out those threats to the national security lurking within the institutions of government, sort of like flushing out any ‘sleeper cells’ of the CPP-NPA that are buried deep inside the government and only waiting to be activated so they can work to overthrow the government from the inside. She’s saying the money will be used to purify the government from all elements and influences of communism and terrorism.”

“And you don’t agree with that objective?” I asked.

“I think that objective is dishonest and illusory sir, and certainly not worth spending P650-million for.”

“What’s so dishonest about trying to remove any Vladimir Putin-wannabes in government?” I coaxed him clarify some more.

“First of all, sir, the Office of the Vice President is a BRAND NEW agency every time there’s a new vice -president. SHE will be the only one responsible for staffing that entire agency, appointing every man, woman and LGBTQ-person in it because it is HER office, HER department, HER exclusive domain. Why would she need P500-million to make sure that SHE doesn’t appoint any communist-terrorists?”

The class gives a long, “Oooooohhhh….! Oo nga naman.”

“Hmmm…I see,” I rub my chin to indicate that I thought he made a valid point, “On the other hand, Mr. Sigalot, there are more than 800,000 public school teachers NATIONWIDE under DepEd and all of them have been there BEFORE VP Sara ever became DepEd Secretary. Don’t you think she might be justified being a little bit leery with them?”

“No, sir, public school teachers are some of the most loyal troops of the government, no matter who is the President or Vice-president. If she thought these ultra-conservative maestros and maestras had a single communist bone in their bodies, they certainly have a funny way of showing their communist leanings by helping HER and President Bongbong Marcos win!” this brings the class to a healthy laugh.

“Solid point there, Roberto,” I acknowledgeed, “and maybe that’s why she is asking for LESS money for the DepEd’s ‘intelligence fund’—ONLY P150-million,” and the class roars in guffaw.

“But allow me to play devil’s advocate just a little bit more, Mr. Sigalot,” I said, intent on defending my pañera Inday Sara as much as I can, for as long as I can, “The vice-president wasn’t just talking about rooting out communist-terrorists. She was also concerned about gathering intelligence to uncover drug syndicates, human trafficking syndicates, gambling syndicates and other organized crime syndicates that may be lurking within these government institutions. Certainly you’ll agree that fighting these vicious criminals is going to take extensive field operations, both open and covert. I mean, you’re talking of a NATIONWIDE network of highly-trained undercover agents, informants, and in this day and age, maybe even panels of cyber-experts. All these have to be part of an elaborate system of NATIONWIDE coordination. So can you just imagine the level of organization needed for something like THAT, Roberto?”

“Yes, I can, sir. It would be in the magnitude of the operations of the PNP itself and THAT is how she violates the Constitution a SECOND time, sir “

“I’m sorry, you kinda lost me there somewhere, Mr. Sigalot…..Go back to, ‘magnitude of operation of the PNP’ is WHAT??” I feigned inattentiveness to help him set up his punch line.

“Sir, what VP Sara is trying to set up indirectly is her own NATIONWIDE law detection and enforcement network but bypassing the selection and qualification process prescribed by the Constitution. She's using a backdoor approach to create a shadow PNP, but one that is completely under HER exclusive control."

“And would you care to state that particular constitutional provision that shows that what she is attempting to do is extralegal?” I challenged the boy.

“Yes, sir, it’s Article XVI, Section 6 which states ‘The State shall establish and maintain ONE POLICE FORCE WHICH SHALL BE NATIONAL IN SCOPE and civilian in character, to be administered and controlled by a NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION.” Roberto recited, again from memory.

“In short, you’re saying that VP Sara is acting like a one-woman National Police Commission?”

“Yes, sir, and all those spineless congressmen, congresswomen and senators are not even putting up any semblance of opposition, not even a hint of fiscalizing, or check-and-balancing…NOTHING!”

“Uh-huh…well…” this time I was groping for words. The boy made a solid argument, “P650-million ‘intelligence funds’ allocated and approved in under NINE MINUTES, I guess you’re right. That is not a lot of opposition or check-and-balancing at all.”

My Omega Class looked totally disgusted as the realization sank in their heads.

“Did you get all of that, class? Did you learn something out of your classmate’s amazing research?” I said, looking approvingly in the direction of Mr. Roberto Sigalot.”

“Yes, sir, we learned something REALLY very eye-opening,” Miss Ursula Bahag-hari answered for the class.

“Really? And what is that?” I just wanted to confirm.

“Our congressmen, congresswomen and senators are all SPINELESS!” the class exploded in guffaws and high-fiving all around.

“You people are disgusting!” I joked, “CLASS DISMISSED!”*

Semester 2 Lecture 6 - Why The British Monarch will always be White and Protestant

ood evening class.”

“Good evening, sir…”

You could tell that the longest Christmas season in the world has begun right here in the Philippines just from the way my students have started to dress as soon as the first of the “ber-ber” months came on.

September, technically, is still part of the rainy season but since wading through floodwaters is not really a common experience in this mountainous city, I just know that that’s not the reason why the ladies of Omega Class are wearing tall boots.

“Hmm...I don’t seem to recall seeing some horses tied down in front of the college so how did you pistoleras make it to class tonight, huh?”

They laugh.

“These are not cowboy boots sir, those things went out with the 70’s. Anyway we’re not cowgirls,” Miss Ursula Bahag-hari chided.

“I’m glad to hear that,” I said, “especially because in this day and age gender is no longer bipolar. We’d have to make adjustments for political correctness in case those might be cow-LGBTQ boots.” More giggles.

“These are winter boots, sir,” Miss Pinky Maglia Rosa chimed in, “it’s one of the subtle perks of studying in Baguio City. This time of year we can indulge in four-season fashion like they could never do in Manila!”

“Well, nothing wrong with pretending you’re in North America or Europe,” I answered back, “And now with Queen Elizabeth II dead, there’s so much media coverage of those four-season countries, you know--England, Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland…I mean going Anglo-Saxon is trending hottest all over social media this past week.”

“Oh, you’re telling us, sir,” Miss Pinky sassed, “we’re up to our ears in royal trivia. There’s practically nothing else on cable TV and the internet except Queen Elizabeth this, Queen Elizabeth that, it’s so sickening. In fact, me and my classmates—”

“My classmates and I,” I corrected again.

“Right, sir—my classmates and I were just saying what an irony it is that the birthplace of Constitutional Law is also where you can find the most unconstitutional form of government—that disgusting and pompous monarchy!”

“Funny you should mention that, Miss Pinky, because I wanted us to discuss a little bit about ‘constitutional monarchy’ and the myth that it is a form of government.”

“It isn’t?” Miss Ursula squawked.

“No, it is not,” I began to explain, “the English Monarchy and the British Parliament are parallel institutions. One doesn’t really owe its existence to the other, but one cannot really survive without the other. To understand how that system works, first I want you to ignore the royals for the timebeing, act like they didn’t exist, and just focus on the workings of the British parliament.”

“It is the first and therefore the oldest parliament in history, that’s why it is sometimes called the ‘Mother of all Parliaments.’ It has two chambers, the House of Lords and the House of Commons. Now I want you ignore the House of Lords, for the timebeing, act like it didn’t exist—”

“This is a strange way of studying any government, sir, we keep dividing it into two parts and discarding one part,” Miss Ursula interjected.

“It just looks that way, Miss Ursula, but actually what we’re doing is setting aside the ceremonial institutions so we can take a closer look at the functional institutions,” I said.

“Oh! Right, sir, please continue,” the girl said, eliciting laughter from her classmates for sounding like she was giving ME permission.

“Thank you, Miss Ursula. Now for the remainder of this lecture, let’s try to keep the number of interruptions to a minimum of, say, NONE.” More guffaws.

“Anyway, as I was saying before I was rudely interrupted, you take the House of Commons and just imagine that everything that happens in our own bicameral Congress, with the Senate and the Lower House combined, is what happens in their House of Commons under one roof. That’s it. Now you understand how the British government works.”

The whole class stares at me with glassy eyes.

“Wait, sir, what about the House of Lords? happened to the House of Lords?? Where is the Queen or King in all that??”

“I just told you,” I said, “Everything that happens in OUR Congress is what happens in their House of Commons—including freak accidents like Robin Padilla, Lito Lapid, Bong Revilla and near-misses like Harry Roque and Larry Gadon. So you end up with somebody filing a bill to criminalize ghosting and such other stupid ideas. When you hear about all these things, what do you feel, Miss Pinky?”

“Sir, I feel like screaming at the top of my voice ‘IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE WHO CAN DO SOMETHING TO STOP THESE IDIOTS??!” Miss Pinky literally yelled, startling her classmates.

“There you go,” I said, “If you were in London, the answer to your question would be, ‘Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus who grants wishes and it’s called the House of Lords!”

My class goes a long “Oooooohhh….!”

“You see, class, although the House of Commons does most of the heavy lifting legislation-wise, the House of Lords must always concur with it. Under their system, those two houses must always agree. If they disagree once or twice too often, it’s the failure of the Prime Minister whose job it is to act as primary liaison or ‘bridge diplomat’ between them—”

“And they oust him with a vote of No-Confidence, right sir?” Miss Ursula butted in.

“Yes, and as soon as there is a new prime minister, then logically he’ll want to reorganize parliament too. So parliament is not really ‘dissolved’ like it is reported in the news, it’s just reconstituted.” My students nod their heads furiously—it’s sinking in.

“After that, guess who the new prime minister went to see first, before anyone else?”

“The Queen,” Miss Pinky fills in

“Right,” I said, “but, of course, starting now it’s going to be the King. Now, they will chit-chat for a while, drink afternoon tea, but at the end of the day, all that really matters is that the prime minister receive the royal charge, or ROYAL ORDER from the King, and can you do an impression of the King doing that, Miss Pinky?”

The girl stood up, faced her classmates and in a stiff British accent said, “Mister Prime Minister, go forth ye and form me a Government!” her classmates clap their hands lightly, amused at the imaginary scenario.

“Now to answer your last question, which I know none of you will remember to ask, how are these officials selected? Those belonging to the House of Commons are elected by district, or by burroughs actually, and they are called Members of Parliament of ‘MP’s’. But those in the House of Lords are hybrid, some of them represent permanent sectors, a few are elected at-large but a good number of them are appointed by the Queen or starting now, by the King. They are called Lords or Ladies. What do you think is the implication of that, Miss Ursula?”

“Sir, I think the British are determined to keep the nobility of their culture and politics at all costs. So while they will allow commoners to rise in government through popular elections, they reserve by law a permanent hold on power for the ruling class that no pretensions of democracy can dilute. That's why they are hell-bent on preserving the elite culture of the royalty, because to them the English royal tradition is the gold standard for all of modern human society—snobbish, terse, pompous, civilized and genteel. I forget the exact term for it, sir.”

“It’s WASP.”

“Wasp, as in hornet or bumblebee, sir?”

“No, WASP--as in White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. THAT, to the British Monarchy, is the highest benchmark of English culture, government and society. The King or Queen will always be white and will always be affiliated with the Church of England and his highest perpetual duty is to be the 'Defender of the Faith.' So you can drop all wishful thinking that Meghan Markle would ever become a true royal—or any of her children for that matter.”*

Semester 2 Lecture 5 - The Philippines Renounces War as an Instrument of National Policy

ood evening, class.”

“Good evening. sir.”

Still laboring under some kind of somber mood, my Omega Class was less exuberant again tonight. But we teachers have tricks in our bags that we pull out on a need-to-use basis—and tonight I needed an instant perk up before discussing a very neglected provision of the 1987 Constitution.

“Aaah…before I change my mind and on account of the fact that I was too busy this past two days, I’m thinking if I should still give that quiz I announced last time—”

I saw everybody bolt upright in their seats, and start looking around nervously, “May in-announce ba si Sir na magku-quiz last meeting?? Bakit hindi ko narinig??”

“Of course, it will be a shame to waste all that effort on your part, because I know you all studied hard for that quiz and then here I come cancelling it just like that, after you’ve burned the midnight oil studying, so to speak. I mean, how unfair is that?…so maybe we should—”

Somebody interrupted me, “Ah, actually, sir, me and my classmates—”

“My classmates and I,” I corrected.

“Pardon me, sir—MY CLASSMATES AND I were just talking and we said, you know, what the heck let’s all just study hard whether there’s going to be a quiz or not, you know, so really if we have that quiz, you know, or not anymore, you know, it’s really not going to make..uhhh…you know, it’s not gonna make that big a difference, you know…so…you know, don’t mind cancelling it, sir, you know…we’ll be just fine because we really LOVE studying hard, you know…!”

“Yes, I certainly know a lot now,” I answered the girl—it was my pompous Eurasian ex-pat, Ms. Pinky Maglia Rosa who was playing “class savior.”

I continued, “but, you know, there’s no such thing as a ‘free lunch,’ you know, so if I’m going to cancel the quiz—” (which I really did not announce last meeting) “what’s going to be ‘in it’ for me, you know…?” I finished with a big stupid grin on my face reminiscent of Dr. Seuss’ cat of cartoon fame.

“Sir, how about, one of us will just give a summary of the chapter right off the bat, you don’t even need to call anyone for recitation, you know, give everyone a chance to let off some tension and really be able to listen well and absorb knowledge to the optimal degree!”

“OP…TI…MAL… DEG…REE… huh?” I repeated her big word satirically. “Alright, I’m game. So, let us see, who might that ONE person be, class?”

They shouted, in all four voices soprano, alto, tenor and bass, “Sir, we volunteer HER!” pointing to Miss Pinky.

“Well, Miss Pinky, I hope this teaches you a thing or two about the messianic principle.”

“Messianic principle, sir? Wha—what is THAT?”

“The people you’re willing to die for are the very ones who will shout that you be crucified,” I said. She looked at me first for a few dumfound seconds, then turned sideways to look at her classmates who, by now, were all comfortably slouching in their chairs.

“Fine. I’ll do it!” she said, “Article II, Section 2, the Philippines renounces war—” I interrupted her right away.

“Ah, ah, ah…not so fast! I want us to lay down some basic premises and definitions first before bouncing it off the codal provision. So, Miss Pinky, in your own words, tell me what ‘national policy’ means.”

The girl took a deep breath and said, “Aaaaah---rufaglo dibooshky swakarat binufukal rombodabi bludabaf brunelsooo…” her classmates erupted in guffaws, making ME look stupid for some reason.

“Are you mocking me, Miss Pinky?? I said define national policy!”

“But, sir, you said IN MY OWN WORDS…” more laughter.

“You are trouble, young lady,” I said, “okay, okay, you got me there. So now, Miss Pinky, in WORDS FROM THE ENGLISH VOCABULARY, tell the class what ‘national policy’ means.”

“National policy is the sum total of all the government’s intention on what to do in every aspect of the national life, to which it will commit all the resources of the State in pursuing programs that will redound to the public good and uplift the lives of all its citizens…People versus—”

“No, no, no—I said I don’t want to hear case titles and citations,” I cut her short, “you law students all know about ‘stare decisis’ but you always tend to forget about ‘pro hac vice’ and ‘obiter dicta’—do you know what I mean, Miss Pinky?”

“Yes, sir, we read one Supreme Court decision and just because it is a precedent we think it always applies to all cases for all time. Sometimes the Supreme Court really just wants to say one thing to be applied one time, too.”

“Did you get that, class? I don’t want you just to read cases, I want you to UNDERSTAND THEM,” I emphasized by banging the blackboard behind me.

“Now tell us, Miss Pinky, what are some of these aspects of the national life that the national policy seeks to address?”

“Uh, sir…the economy, peace and order, education, health care, housing, employment, climate of business, the environment, food security, human rights, transportation, data communication…more, sir?”

“No, that’s enough. Now if we go to war with a country—you can pick any country you want—is it going to achieve the goals of the government in all these aspects you just enumerated?”

“No, sir, of course not,” the girl answered.

“And why NOT, what is war anyway?”

“War is a military confrontation between two sovereigns as a result of the total failure of diplomatic efforts to resolve their conflicts.”

“And how is war waged, Miss Pinky, with what equipment and assets?”

“With soldiers, sir, armed to the teeth with weapons of mass destruction.”

“Of course,” I said, “and what is the ultimate aim of a country that goes to war?”

“The complete destruction or subjugation of its enemy, sir.”

“Good. Now you can read the codal provision. Go ahead.”

“Yes, sir…Article II, Section 2, the Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy--”

“STOP!” I said, startling the girl.

“Now, Miss Pinky, I want you to re-read just that part of the provision, not even the whole provision, just that first part. But I want you to substitute the definitions you gave for ‘war’ and ‘national policy’ for the corresponding word in the constitutional provision, did you get that? Alright, go!”

“Well, sir…uh… ‘the Philippines renounces…uh…the use of military soldiers armed to the teeth with weapons of mass destruction intending to completely destroy or subjugate after the total failure of diplomacy…uh…as instruments for addressing the concerns of the nation in the aspects of the economy, peace and order, education, health care, housing, employment, climate of business, the environment, food security, human rights, transportation, data communication---wow this is really weird, sir! I’ve never tried reading the constitution this way before…” Miss Pinky said.

“Well, tonight, class, I want you to realize that that is exactly the opposite of what our government is doing. Can you cite some of these popular wars that you might come across the news on any given day, Miss Pinky?”

“Well, sir, there’ the War on Drugs, War on Poverty, War on Corruption, War on Inflation---how come is it really, sir, that we just love declaring all these ‘wars’ on our own citizens right within our own country and yet nobody seems to be alarmed enough to say something about it?”

“Because they read that provision and think that the word ‘war’ is meant to be taken in the international context, when in fact what it really means is…..?”

“The Philippines renounces the policy of declaring war against its own citizens,” Miss Pinky completed my sentence.

“That’s good. Miss Maglia Rosa, you may sit down,” I finally relieved the girl.

“Now for next meeting, class, just for context, I want you to skip the rest of that provision, about adopting the generally-accepted principles of international law yada yada all of that is bullshit, when we get summoned by the International Criminal Court all we do is just pull out of the Rome Agreement, so obviously we don’t have the slightest clue what international obligation means. So just skip that part and go to Section 3 right away, is that clear? Class dismissed.”

Miss Maglia Rosa caught up with me in the hallway, and started walking beside me towards the exit.

“Sir, I wanted to ask you a personal question that really means a lot to me. I mean, it’s something that’s really aching to be told from the heart.”

“Save your breath, Miss Pinky. Yes I am happily married and old enough to be your grandfather. Although come to think of it, I am entitled to the mitigating circumstance of old age if I ever get convicted for sexually harassing a--” she interrupted me.

“Can I bring my dog to class?”

“Can you WHAT??”

“I have a golden retriever dog sir, he’s about 6 years old so he’s a little big, but I really want to bring him with me every place because he’s such a loyal and ferocious body guard, but I’m not sure about the school’s policy on bringing pets into the building, Sir. Can I?

I stopped on my tracks and faced the girl, “That’s been aching to be told from your heart??”

“He’s a wonderful dog, sir.”

I thought about it long.

“Tell you what, Miss Pinky, you bring that dog and if you can sneak the mutt past the security guard out front, I’ll allow him in class as long as you can prevent him from reciting too loud.”

“What if the security guard doesn’t allow it, sir?”

“We’ll gouge out both of those beautiful blue eyes of yours. He’ll allow it the next time.*

Semester 2 Outfield Lecture 1 - Approval of Appointment versus Approval of Choice

former law dean asks a very pertinent question: if BENECO does not agree that NEA has the power to appoint a general manager of an electric cooperative, then why do they submit their appointment of a GM to NEA?

The answer is simple: because that is the procedure. But that is not an implied grant of power to appoint on the part of NEA. By the same token, if NEA thinks it is the one to appoint a GM, then why does it have to submit the final list of names of the nominees to the GM post to the Board of Directors?

The power to appoint a GM in favor of the Board of Directors is express (explicit). The law says so. The good dean’s suggestion that NEA also has the power to appoint is merely implied. Only he thinks so.

So many people are thrown off by that phrase “subject to approval by NEA.” Let me explain.

When you get married, you have to file an application for a Marriage License. Your application must be “APPROVED” by the Local Civil Registrar. To make that decision, the registrar will check if both parties are capacitated--meaning both husband- and wife-to-be possess all the capacities and none of the impediments to contract marriage under the Family Code. If there’s no problem, he “APPROVES” the application and issues the prospective couple their marriage license.

BUT the Civil Registrar CANNOT DISAPPROVE the application because he doesn’t think the man and woman would make a good couple!

That’s none of his business. That is NOT the “APPROVAL” that he is authorized by the law to make. All he is empowered by the law to do is to determine if the applicants meet the STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS ONLY--not the practical requirements of good character, pleasing personalities, compatible zodiac signs, financial capacity, promise of sexual fulfillment yada yada.

Now apply that concept to NEA. The only thing NEA can “APPROVE” is whether GM Licoben and the BENECO Board of Directors can “get married,” metaphorically speaking. NEA cannot tell the Board, “Ay, huwag yan! Ang panget! Ito na lang si Marya, mas guwapo!”

Pakialam nyo ba.*