Reflections of Dean Raul Pangalangan on the Bar Exams

There’s a lot of comments on the proposed bar exam reforms. Some say that a major overhaul of the entire system is needed. Some, on the other hand, say that the bar exams is acceptable as it is, and no reforms are needed. Perhaps the opinion of the Political Law examiner for the 2007 bar exams, Dean Raul Pangalangan, would carry more weight. Here’s a portion of what Dean Pangalangan said in his PDI column:

We must take the same path taken in the United States: multiple-choice questions and machine-corrected exams. This was already proposed by former Supreme Court Justice Vicente V. Mendoza, but it will entail a radical redesign of the process. Multiple-choice questions are best vetted through a panel of examiners and testing professionals — so there goes the solitary examiner and this whole system of cloak-and-dagger secrecy.

In response, it has been argued that essay questions are needed to judge the candidate’s facility with language and ability to analyze and to explain. Then, I argue, let’s retain a 20 percent essay portion for the exam, but mainly to test expressive abilities. In other words, let’s not overburden the whole process when all we want to target is a specific ability.

During my student days in U.P., our remedial law professor, now Dean Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, gave us one exam consisting entirely of multiple-choice questions. We thought that a multiple-choice exam would be easy. We were wrong, dead wrong, and it was an experience that made many of us wish for more easy-type questions.

In closing, allow me to congratulate the new Dean of my alma mater, Dean Marvic M.V.F. Leonen.

[poll id=”21″]

49 comments

  1. if there is a better way to conduct the BAR examinations, wouldnt you think the SC already implemented that way… for many many years, the SC used this method simply because it works….

    instead of looking for so many other ways… why dont examinees simply master the way we are doing this since the early 1900’s

  2. Ang galing nyong dalawa mga Attys.Ang mga abogado pag natalo sa kaso kulong lang ang client pero pag doctor na ang pumalpak sa operation patay ang patient. Pero bakit palaging low-mortality rate sila 50% palagi ang passing nila n twice a year pa n multiple choice lahat so alam agad ang result n computer ang taga-check hindi tulad ng bar kung saan yung examiner n mga kung sino-sino lang na inutusan nya pag d sya pwede.Left n right ang medical malpractice, yung OFW na nagpa-lipo who died din as reported in TV patrol,recently yung kay calayan yung alleged botched penile enlargement, yung sa medical city case na naiwan ng doctor yung instrument sa loob ng body ng patient n as a result he died,yung rectal surgery cebu scandal.Sa tingin ko lang sana sa kanila ang dapat 1/4 lang ang pumasa kasi public health ang involved at sa bar naman ang gawing 50% passing n twice a year na rin n multiple choice 80% n 20% as suggested by a noted authority in political law n 2007 bar examiner dean Raul Pangalangan in his Inquirer column n pag mostly multiple choice na computer na ang taga-check hindi yung subjective na examiner n alam agad ang result parang yung mga PRC conducted exams n alisin na ang five-flunk rule na yan,unfair kasi bar lng ang meron yung ibang professions wala niyan unlimited pa rin parang sun to sun. hehe.I think now is the time to reform the bar exam kasi even CJ Puno said nauubos na ang mga trial lawyer kasi lahat ay pumupunta sa corporate practice n yearly maraming lawyer n judges ang napapatay mostly case related.Ang SC ay sumasabay na sa global trend pagdating sa bar reforms pero gradual lang parang ang bagal kasi unti-unti pa lang nitong ini-incorporate ang multiple choice. iIn the end, nasa kanilang kamay pa din ang pagreform ng mabilis sa bar exam. Sana lang ang chairman ngayon 2008 bar ay maawain at hindi hirapan ang mga tanong para hindi gawin rason ang unusually strict corrections n madaming pumasa kasi kawawa naman ang mga barrristers ang hirap kayang magrebyu yung gastos wyl doing it n ung mga nakaasa sa kanila yung mga nagbenta ng carabao sa province para lang may pangrebyu tapos sasabit lang.

    1. i feel your pain, @obama. medical students who review for the boards are in no better position, sleep-deprived and the fear of brain atrophy.

      in the end, it’s not about the format of the question, but the quality of every question to extract higher-order thinking from the examinee.

  3. Wow, the solution to this is so damn simple. The problem with our country is we are a people who truly lack basic common sense, in other words practicality. Whenever there’s some concern (like the inability to test reasoning and expressive writing ability in multiple choice) it suddenly becomes an insurmountable problem. It’s as if people say, oh no, what a big problem we can never solve it. Well this is the attitude of losers, not winners and the hallmark of stagnation, instead of progress.

    If the Supreme Court really wants to test reading and writing ability, they could simply use a test that’s already there for everyone, administered by people who’ve done it for almost a century. I’m talking about the IELTS test started by a consortium of English-speaking countries. Yes, it will take swallowing our pride but let’s face it, English is NOT a language native to this country, it would be best to, I don’t know, let primarily English speaking countries decide who reads and writes English best. If most of the passing lawyers would be able to get a perfect 8.0 (native speaker rating) on the IELTS I would be very, very surprised given the horrific grammar and spelling that some lawyers are wont to throw around.

    Lastly, I have to laugh at the people who think we shouldn’t “copy” multiple choice because we have our “own” system. Here again is another case of false Filipino pride in something that we should not be proud of. Another case of, because it’s Filipino “espesyal” it’s the best. Well, I hate to break it to you, but geez, look at our laws they are copies almost word for word from the Spanish Law, which in itself was copied almost word for word from the Napoleonic Code. Additionally, essay-type questions are used extensively by the British, only in their case they have the common sense to employ committees of checkers who correct a single subject and cross-check, rather than rely on a single examiner as only a nation of impractical people can do.

    Seriously, let’s look around us before coming to the notion that our method is best and needs no reform. Look at our damn country, it is a screwed up mess. The first step to change, is an admission of the sorry state of things.

  4. haha jna ,masususkat ba ng four corner ng lasale ang nalalaman ng isang tao,assurance ba na kaw eh magiging good lawyer ate kasi pumasa ka,well hopefully your luck will run out someday and kami naman kakantyaw sa iyo o sana love ones mo mangamote din sa exam sa ano man kinder o sa algebra makaganti lang sa iyo hehe 🙂 well noong 1900s eh kokonti pa ang batas gaga at kokonti pa ang decision ng sc,bwisit na bar to wala ako ma alala sa la salle hehe.

  5. whether multiple choice exam or the essay type, if you guys are ready to rumble the bar exams, it doesn’t really matter. Ang dami nyong reklamo eh, just study, study and study!!! It is not the type of exam that contributes to a barrister’s flunking, it is his preparation that makes or breaks his objective of passing. It is the barrister’s unassailability that determines his fate, not the type of exams….

  6. …and Divine intervention. It’s no longer within the Bar examinees control right now. Just continue praying. Have faith.

  7. …But is Law, Logic and Language present in a multiple-choice exam? Obviously, an essay type of question would test whether the 3 elements are present, and whether the examinees is just bluffing or not.

    second, why is there a need to highlight the topnotchers? I think there is no need. It is in practice that matters.

  8. @clark

    (quote)second, why is there a need to highlight the topnotchers? I think there is no need. It is in practice that matters. (/quote)

    similarly why is there a need to rank test takers from Engineering boards, nursing boards and take note UP TO the 20th rank!

    I can only think of two reasons:
    1. first the pride that comes from placing in the exams, simula primary school ginagawa na un eh..
    2. It somehow gives a jumpstart to the careers ng mga bagong lawyers, lalo na kung hindi ka naman from the supposedly BIG THREE law schools.

    mag IELTS daw ang mga abogado? haha
    English is just a tool…lawyers use. Even if you apply grammatical rules in most of the so-called copied laws, the wordings of the law will fail miserably what with the “changing” grammatical rules of today. Plus, maraming matatas mag Ingles na abogado pero BOPOLS..marami rin SABLAY sa Ingles na abogado pero respetado sa practice.

  9. There are two problems here:

    First, an essay exam is necessary. A good writing skill is indespensable to the legal profession. Litigations are not simnply won with legal knowledge. It is in the first place, a battle of “pleadings.” Legal knowledge, by itself, is not enough, to win a court trial. The lawyer’s ability to express himself, to call the attention of the court to the points he raised, and to make known his arguments are indispensable factors. Hence, for us to have competent lawyers, it is essential that we license only to those have the writing skills.

    Second. However, it seems to be a fact that the bar results are subject to the whims and caprices of the examiners.

    Let’s face it. The examiners are not required to justify their judgments on the examinees answers. The fate of the bar aspirant who toiled day and night in his years of preparation, who sacrificed huge amount of money (including that of his family) just to be an officer of the court, who set aside almost all his personal luxury just to ear the noblest of all profession, is in the hands overly-mighty discretion of his examiner. The personal preferences of his examiner, his moods and health at the time of the checking MAY destroy, without any acceptable justification at all, the poor candidate’s dream.

    Ergo, while we cannot afford to produce lawyer’s unequipped with legal writing skills, we cannot, at the same time, subject legal dreams TOTALLY to the malice and caprices of the examinees.

    I humbly agree to the proposed part- multiple choice and part essay exam.

  10. I came across this Facebook account when I was searching for random Bar trivia about bar flunkers, I’m inviting everyone to take a look and I really believe to the rationale of the Sobers and I quote:

    “At least four years in our pre-law courses, four years or more in our Bachelor of Laws, minimum of six months in our pre-bar review, and tremendous amount of physical, mental, and emotional pressure! Imagine four consecutive Sundays of grueling exams without the assurance of passing! Whew! And for us flunkers the ordeal is far more excruciating than the rest. Considered as the hardest licensure examination in the Philippines, the present form of bar exams appears to be fair enough. If an examinee does his job well and studies, then he has a good chance of making it; it seems as simple as that. But all of us study, and maybe all of us pray; yet not everyone passes. Indeed, this is the kind of examination wherein flunking is the general rule while passing is the exception. At most, the Supreme Court would only pass 20-25 percent of the examinees who take the bar. As a matter of fact, in the latest bar exam result, only 8% of the examinees supposedly passed in accordance with the standards of the examiners; hence the Supreme Court had to lower the passing grade to accommodate an additional 16%. Well and good for those who made it, but depression for those who didn’t. But why is it that every time the results are released, we always hear news about many deserving examinees surprisingly but actually flunking the bar for a reason known only to the examiners? Is it because of poor penmanship? Or awful grammar? Perhaps. But we really don’t think so. The truth remains that many deserving examinees don’t make it in spite of their good penmanship, good command of the English language, sufficient knowledge of the law, and use of logical reasoning. The fact also remains that every barrister does his/her job and studies well, and it would be ridiculous to think that he/she would waste 5 years or more of his/her life just to suffer the ruthless penalty of flunking the bar. In other words, each one of us had invested our time, effort, and money just to pass the bar, thus no one could blame us if we didn’t make it. So what could be the most logical reason why we flunked? It’s because of the obsolete system which causes injustice to the honest and innocent examinees. The Supreme Court still uses the type of bar exams dating back as early as the time of Manuel L. Quezon when only very few examinees were taking the bar. This system, to our mind, is not anymore applicable nowadays considering the number of hopefuls applying every year. Imagine at least 6,000 examinees answering 8 notebooks each, which totals to at least 48,000 notebooks, with only 8 or 16 examiners checking them, and for barely 4-6 months – manually! And considering that these human examiners are likewise practicing lawyers, deans, and professors, who are similarly burdened with other concerns, do you think that they would be able to devote 100% of their time in just checking the exams? Otherwise stated, is there a hundred percent assurance that they would be able to give justice to their responsibility as checkers considering the volume of notebooks to be checked vis-a-vis the very limited period given to them? Or perhaps the best question is: Are they really able to check all the notebooks? In the same vein, why is it that we encounter bar scandals such as the controversial leakage of the questions in Mercantile Law in the 2003 bar exams? And if people think that it was the last of its kind, they should think again. The outdated system of bar examinations, unbridled leakages of bar questions, and undue advantages given to some fortunate barristers are but few to mention. Thus, how would someone expect fairness in the bar exams?

    The end does not justify the means. If this country produces lawyers out of an obsolete mode, leakages, accommodations, and undue advantages, how would the people expect them to function uprightly once they are already in the practice of law? (This is not to say, however, that all is guilty. Credit must be given to those who made it in all honesty and with full confidence in the Lord.) Are we then to constantly produce the same breed of lawyers such as those involved in several scandals in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the government (many to mention)? Are we to continuously allow the unscrupulous members of the bar, as well as the outside forces, to surreptitiously remove the mantle of neutrality and apolitical nature of the judiciary? Or are we to stand our ground and in our own humble way become catalysts of change in the judicial system, especially in the conduct of the bar exams? Accordingly, have you ever thought that this could be one of God’s reasons why we flunked? That even though we were not able to attain our goal in the meantime, then at least, we would be able to bring to their attention the tumor which is slowly razing our judicial system, and through our concerted efforts, offer a long-term solution to remedy its present illness. Besides, through this noble purpose, we will have the opportunity to totally wipe out the unconstructive notion, which for several decades had been ascribed to bar flunkers. We will be able to prove that we flunked the bar not because we are the dumbest among the creatures of the earth as some (including the lousy examiners who flunked us) would unfairly believe, but rather because we were merely victims of an evidently deteriorating system.

    On the lighter aspect of our plight, come to think of it, out of say 6,000 examinees, only 1,400 or so pass. Only 1,400 or so rejoice during the Holy Week, while the 4,600 really feel Holy Week! While the passers acutely savor their success and celebrate, we, the flunkers, are alone in our rooms, crying, feeling depressed, trying to figure out the rationale of our existence, or worse, contemplating on the idea of ending it! Pure stupidity! It doesn’t make any sense! We are more than twice their number and yet we consider ourselves losers! We are more than twice their number and yet we are silent; so silent that we had already forgotten the very essence of our dream of becoming lawyers, i.e., the assertion of a right! In the first place, we are far better-looking than any of them! I remember my classmate telling me, “I don’t care how many times I flunk the bar, all I know is that I’m beautiful!” That’s the spirit! Kidding aside, we are tougher than anyone else! Surviving the bar exams is itself an achievement. Surviving it twice or more make us tougher twice or more than anyone else! Besides, our predicament is not even a matter of life and death. Isn’t it that God will make a way where there seems to be no way? Everything is possible to God! We may not have made it on our first, second, third, or more attempts, but the battle isn’t over till it’s over! There is always the so-called “another chance.” Who knows, we might hit the jackpot this time around! All we have to do is to give ourselves another chance if we are really determined to fulfill our goal since there is no other way, as of this time, to enter the practice of law in the Philippines, except to successfully hurdle the bar! Also, it’s not yet the end of the world for us. We still have lots and lots of opportunities in life. Bar is not our life, but only a part of it. I’m pretty sure that God is just using our bar experiences to make us tougher – to make us better persons. Or maybe, He is utilizing it to make us realize that we’re already missing out a lot of good stuffs, especially His blessings, because we are overly preoccupied with our dream of becoming lawyers. He wanted to remind us that there are more important things to do in this world; that we should not waste too much of our time in pleasures which are purely of human origin, like the study of law and that of becoming lawyers. Perhaps, He wanted us to devote more of our time with our family and friends. By giving too much attention to our goal, we may have already forgotten the simple things which give joy to the human spirit. We might have already forgotten the true meaning of happiness; the kind of happiness which could not be measured by success as man measures it. Whether we admit it or not, we realize so many things after flunking the bar. Some view it as punishment or a sort of misfortune; hence, they end up regretting it for the rest of their lives. But for us, let us see it rather in a brighter perspective. Flunking the bar is really a blessing in disguise since it made us better persons. Now we’re tougher. We can now see the true meaning of life – a life which is not measured by fame, career, or fortune, but rather measured by the love of our family and friends, and most importantly, by our relationship with our Creator.

    People who might enjoy seeing us fall may feel relieved. They may even call this society a concrete form of sour grape or a mere mode of escape. One thing is for sure though; they have absolutely no idea of what we’ve been through. And they cannot take away the fact that we are survivors and that each one of us is an epitome of what a truly tough person is!”

    So cheer-up! If it’s really the desire of our hearts, then God, in His infinite mercy, will definitely give it to us in His own appointed time!

    “I can do everything through Him who gives me strength.”
    Philippians 4:13

    -Society of bar exam survivors(SOBERS) FACEBOOK ACCOUNT

    1. Than’x for quoting our rationale! Everyone is welcome to join whether flunker or not as long as he/she is sober.

  11. change, indeed, most of the times, is seen on a negative side. but to me, whether what kind of examination or under what process students of law taking the bar exam shall be had to undertake is not a question here, because in the end, still those who have acquired a good foundation of law or those who have studied well will ultimately pass it.

    will there be less quality of bar passers if we introduce some changes in the current bar exam format? i don’t think so.

    with this in mind, i share the same thought of dean pangalangan.

  12. TO ALL JUSTICES OF SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,

    TO ALL DEANS OF THE COLLEGE OF LAW,

    TO ALL GRADUATING LAW STUDENTS,

    TO ALL FRESH GRADUATE IN COLLEGE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ENROLL IN THE COLLEGE OF LAW,

    TO ALL FRESH GRADUATE OF HIGH SCHOOL WHO WOULD LIKE TO TAKE LAW IN THE FUTURE.

    TO ALL PARENTS WHO DREAM TO HAVE A CHILD FROM THE FAMILY TO BE A LAWYER,

    PLEASE READ MY REPLY………………………………………………………..

    SINCE 1900 TO 2011 THERE IS ONLY ONE LAW COURSE OR DEGREE A NEW GRADUATE OF COLLEGE CAN ENROLL BECAUSE YOU CAN NOT ENROLL IN LAW COURSE NOT BEING A GRADUATE OF FOUR YEARS COURSE OF ANY PROGRAM IN THE PHILIPPINES… ONLY ONE TYPE OF PROGRAM FOR LAW , BACHELOR OF LAW.

    THERE IS NO SPECIALIZATION IN LAW EDUCATION IN THIS COUNTRY MEANING AFTER GRADUATION IN THE COLLEGE OF LAW, A NEW LAW GRADUATE KNOW NAUGHT WHAT IS HIS/HER SPECIALTY PRIOR TO AND AFTER TAKING THE BAR EXAM. MEANING AFTER PASSING THE BAR HE/SHE CAN ACCEPT CASES OF ANY KIND EVEN NOT OF HIS EXPERTISE, A VERY DANGEROUS PRACTICE OF PROFESSION IN THE PHILIPPINES. ON ONE HAND, WHY THERE IS A NEED FOR A NEW LAWYER WHO PASSED THE EXAM TO APPLY IN LAW OFFICE AND SERVED THE SENIOR LAWYERS THERE AS XEROX OPERATOR JUST TO LEARN HOW TO PRACTICE? WHY? DID THEY NOT LEARNED FROM THE LAW SCHOOL THEY GRADUATED HOW TO HANDLE THE CASE ALONE WITHOUT NECESSITY OF BEING A SLAVE IN LAW OFFICE? GRANTED THAT WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF NEW PHYSICIANS EVERY YEAR WHO PASSED THE BOARD EXAM WITHOUT SPECIALIZATION AND PRACTICE IN PUBLIC ACCEPT PATIENTS PRESCRIBING DRUGS AND OPERATING HUMAN ORGAN NOT BEING A SPECIALIST IN PARTICULAR . WILL YOU TRUST YOUR LIFE TO SUCH DOCTOR OF MEDICINE? OF COURSE NOT, BUT ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN THE PHILIPPINES NEW LAWYERS WHO PASSED THE BAR HAS NO SPECIFIC SPECIALTY, DAMN TO YOUR HEART CONTENT PEOPLE FROM LEGAL EDUCATION AND PRACTICE THIS IS AN EMERGENCY NOTICE TO ALL TRADITIONAL AND CONSERVATIVE FILIPINO LAWYERS. REGRETTABLY SO TO SPEAK HIS HONORABLE CJ CORONA, I WOULD SAY .DOWN FROM THE NEWLY PASSER OF THE BAR LAST 2010 UP TO THE OLDEST LIVING FILIPINO LAWYERS TODAY AND THAT WILL INCLUDE YOU SIR AND YOUR ASSOCIATE JUSTICES OF SUPREME COURT WERE ALL CONSIDERED PRODUCTS OF TRADITIONAL AND CONSERVATIVE LAW EDUCATIONS
    RESULTING TO TOO UNCONTEMPORARY PRACTICE OF LAW THAT CAN REALLY PLAY A GOOD FIGHT AS DEFENDER OF JUSTICE AGAINST GLOBAL AND ADVANCE TECHNOLOGY OF ENEMIES OF LAW AND JUSTICE RESULTING TO CONSIDERED THE MOST ROTTEN CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN THE WORLD TODAY IS THE PHILIPPINE JUSTICE SYSTEM
    CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL SUCCESSFUL BAR PASSER,,YOU ARE NOW KNOWN ATTORNEY JACK OF ALL CASES …….MASTER OF NOTHING…..

    DEAR HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE CORONA……..FOR ME YOU ARE THE MOST HUMBLE CHIEF JUSTICE IN HE HISTORY OF SUPREME COURT OF WHAT HAD HAPPENED TO YOU WHEN THE PRESIDENT OF THIS REPUBLIC DO NOT WANT YOUR FACE BUT HE FORGOT THAT HE MUST RESPECT YOUR AUTHORITY OR YOUR UNIFORM LIKE A POLICE OFFICER NOT YOUR PERSONAL ATTITUDE… SECOND HUMBLE CHIEF JUSTICE TO YOU IS THE LATE CJ FERNANDO WHO USED TO COVER EMELDA WITH AMBRELLA WHEREVER SHE GO LIKE A MEMBER OF PSG DUE TO POLITICAL RESPECT TO MARCOSES.

    HIS HONORABLE OPEN YOUR MIND TO RADICALLY REFORM THE BAR EXAMINATION IN THE PHILIPPINES BECAUSE THE BAR EXAM AND PRACTICE OF LEGAL PROFESSION IN THE PHILIPPINES IS SO TRADITIONAL AND CONSERVATIVE BUT THE CRIMINAL AND THE KINDS OF CRIME IN OUR PRESENT WORLD CAN NOT BE SAVE BY HARDEST BAR EXAM, LEGENDARY LAW PROFESSORS, EXCELLENT LAW BOOKS AND LONG LNG STUDY OF LAW IN THE COLLEGE AND LONG LONG CONTENTS OF ALL KINDS OF LAW BRANCHES IN THE BAR EXAM……..SEE WHAT PINOY COMMENTED TO LAWYERS? LETS FACE THE TRUTH OF INNOVATIVE CHANGE, IF WE INSIST CHANGES, MANY WILL GOT ANGRY BECAUSE ACCORDING TO ALL PRODUCTS OF TRADITIONAL LAWYESR, THEY PAID AND SACRIFICE A LOT IN REVIEW IN STUDYING LAW FOR EIGHT YEARS AND NOW THEY WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THE BAR EXAM NO WAY ACCORDING TO THEM… THEY SHOULD ALSO SUFFER WHAT WE HAVE HAD EXPERIENCED,,,, NO NO NO MR CJ CORONA, WHAT PEOPLE NEEDS IS GENUINE AND CONTEMPORARY LEGAL EDUCATION, BAR EXAM AND PRACTICES THAT IS GLOBALLY COMPETITIVE NOT ONLY FOCUSING IN LAW, WE MUST PROVIDE OTHER TYPE OF BAR EXAM EXCLUSIVE FOR CRIMINAL LAWYER, MARITIME, JUVENILE , ENVIRONMENTAL ATTORNEY SO PEOPLE MAY DEPEND THEIR LIFE IN COURT. ALLOW THE PREMIERE AGENCY OF THE GOVERNMENT WHO IS PRIMARY RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL EXAM AND LICENSE TO PINOY PROFESSIONALS, THE PROFESSIONAL REGULATION COMMISSION, TO HAVE A NEW BOARD EXAM FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE TO PRODUCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ATTORNEYS AND NOT MONOPOLIZE BY YOUR OFFICE HIS HONORABLE WHICH IS NOT HEALTHY IN MODERN WORLD OF REGULATING PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE BECAUSE, SUPREME WAS ESTABLISH PRIMARILY TO INTERPRET LAWS AND NOT PREPARE EXAMS AND REGULATE LEGAL PRACTICE ALTHOUH IT IS NORMAL AS AN ADDITIONAL DUTY BUT GIVE IT TO PROPER AGENCY OF THE REPUBLIC WHICH IS THE PRC, THE ONLY POWERFUL AGENCY EXPERT TO WORK FOR THAT PARTICULAR GOVERNMENT FUNCTION AS WHAT MANY SE ASIAN COUNTRIES DID AND NOT GIVE BURDEN TO SUPREME COURT LIKE SINGAPORE, INDIA , MALAYSIA, BRUNEI AND THE POWERFUL GIANT OF ASIA, CHINA. OH GOD HAVE MERCY TO OUR LAW PROFESSION……………

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *