2007 Bar exam passers are bogus lawyers?

I stumbled across an interesting topic in the Southwestern University (SWU) Cebu City Philippines, School of Law alumni association friendster group.

The topic in the discussion board I am referring to is the one which reads “2007 Bar exam Passers are BOGUS lawyers.”

I opened the post and it contained a link to a forum wherein an argument was made on why the 2007 Bar exam passers are BOGUS lawyers.

I posted a reply in the SWU Alumni Association friendster group and argued why I think he is wrong in concluding that the 2007 bar exam passers are bogus lawyers. Perhaps he said this because he forgot to take his mental health medication but instead took Diet pills that work fast hehehehe. Anyway Here is my response:

I am sorry to say that the one who wrote the argument that the “2007 Bar exam Passers are BOGUS lawyers” is a complete idiot.

For the record I am not a 2007 bar exam passer. (I passed the 2006 bar)

His major premise is that “Under the Rules of Court, a bar examinee is deemed to have passed if he obtains a general average of 75 percent in all subjects without falling below 50 percent in any subject.”

Minor premise is “Last 2007 since the passing rate was adjusted from the traditional 75 percent to 70 percent. The Bar Committee also decided to lower the disqualification rate on Labor and Civil Law from 50 to 45 percent.

His conclusion is “Because of this, I consider the 2007 bar exam passers as bogus lawyers because they did not attain the standards required by the Rules of Court.”

What an idiotic and flawed logic! His thinking is based on the premise that the Rules of Court are absolute.

This person forgot that according to the 1987 constitution in particular Article VIII, Sec. 5 subpar. 5 that “The Supreme Court shall have the following powers . . . Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, THE ADMISSION TO THE PRACTICE OF LAW, the integrated bar . . . “

In other words, the Supreme Court is given the power to determine who will be admitted to the bar. The actions of the Supreme Court in lowering the passing rate for the 2007 bar exam is perfectly valid and within the scope of its powers as mandated by the Constitution.

Letifico ut idiots

Like what you just read ? Check these out !


zmd Hi ! my name is  Zigfred Diaz, Thanks for visiting my personal blog ! Never miss a post from this blog. Subscribe to my full feeds for free. Click here to subscribe to zdiaz.com by Email

You may also want to visit my other blogs. Click here to learn stock marketing investing.  Click here to learn more about How to Earn cash online. Visit my travel blog to learn more about great travel ideas.


This entry was posted in Law, Law Practice, Law students and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to 2007 Bar exam passers are bogus lawyers?

  1. Cathy Laine says:

    How I’d love to see the look on that guy’s face when he reads this!!! Assuming he can understand it perfectly… Hehehe…

  2. Very bone-breaking Mr. Z! What on earth will someone call it “Bogus”? Hayz, loser guro ng nagcomment ana…

  3. zigfred says:

    Cathy and X: I have nothing against people who fail the bar. But I strongly feel that he failed the 2007 bar exams. If he did, then the best thing that he should have done was not to call those who passed as “Bogus.” Rather, he should have taken it as a learning experience :-)

  4. nuissance says:

    Nice Article. I also stumbled across that forum but I can no longer find the topic. It was apparently deleted because of that idiot and ignorant poster. Hatred aside, the forum is quite nice because they give free legal advice and free bar review materials.

  5. roger timol says:

    I could not help but give my view regarding this matter calling the 2007 passers as bogus. Come to think of it,why would the SC scale down the passing rate?why would it sacrifice its set standards? I coudn’t help but otherwise come to the conclusion that law graduates are not at par with the standards set by the rules anymore.Maybe law schools should be more discriminating in letting someone pass their curriculum so the SC does not have to sacrifice its’ standards just to obviate the dillema of having a scarcity of lawyers due to incompetence brought about by the decline in the educational system provided by law schools. If anyone is to blame, it’s the law schools and no one else! Thank You…

  6. Glenn says:

    What will it profit a man if he wins an argument but losses a friend?
    Lawyers ought to write gentlemanly even if emphatic in tone.

  7. lex mathematica says:

    ==================================================
    “The Letter KILLETH, but the Spirit Giveth LIFE!”
    ==================================================

    There’s that “immutable law” that “NO LAW IS IMMUTABLE” for any LAW should be a “LIVING ENTITY” able to GROW with MAN and SOCIETY, lest we can have the same scribbled on running water rather than carved it in our hearts or etched it in our minds.

    This is precisely the reason why the Constitution specified a provision that mandates the Supreme Court and accorded the latter those pertinent powers.

  8. zigfred says:

    Lex: I couldn’t agree more !

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>