LAW 117 - ENGLISH FOR LAWYERS

LLB 1C AY 2017-2018

DEBATE
RULES AND GUIDELINES

October 2017

The following adopts, in part, the Rules and Guidelines of the 2 nd TSU Intercollegiate Debate Tournament,
and other reference materials online.

Format: MODIFIED OREGON OXFORD

1.1 A proposition shall be supported by three (3) main arguments - NECESSITY,

BENEFICIALITY, and PRACTICABILITY.

a.) NECESSITY There is a need for it ex. there is something wrong with the status quo.
b.) BENEFICIALITY It is beneficial.
c.) PRACTICABILITY It is feasible or practical.

Ex. Let it be resolved that the TSU College of Law require a standard uniform as dress code for its
students.

PRO

a.) NECESSITY - Due to the sheer number of students, there is a need to distinguish law
students from other students of TSU through a standard uniform.
b.) BENEFICIAL The dress code will benefit the students who need not worry about what
to wear everyday since there is a uniform.
c.) PRACTICAL/FEASIBLE Students will only spend P1000.00 for a set of 5 uniforms
versus buying clothes individually.

CON

a.) NECESSITY The College of Law students only have night and weekend classes as
opposed to the general student population of TSU, therefore there is no need to
distinguish law students from other students.
b.) BENEFICIAL The dress code is not beneficial because it limits the studetns right to
express themselves individually through their clothing.
c.) PRACTICAL/FEASIBLE Unlike regular clothing which students can use anytime or
anywhere outside of school or their prescribed work uniform for working students,
students will spend P1000 for a uniform they will only wear for two hours everyday and
spend more money on detergent as well as man hours for washing their clothes.

1.2 The constructive speakers are each given four (4) minutes to deliver his or her constructive
speech. The opposing debater will be given two (2) minutes to interpellate/ cross-examine
the debater who delivered the immediately preceding speech. The Whip speakers are each
given five (5) minutes to deliver their speeches.
 1.3 Interpellation questions shall only be questions that are answerable by yes or no. A
speaker that asks questions that are not categorically answerable by yes or no shall be
prevented from speaking by the moderator or judge.

1.4 A judge shall be allowed to interrupt and ask questions of each debater ONLY during his/her
speech.

1.5 The first to deliver his constructive speech is the AFFIRMATIVE SPEAKER for the
NECESSITY of their side.

1.6 The flow of the debate is as follows:

i. AFFIRMATIVE delivers Constructive Speech NECESSITY

ii. NEGATIVE Cross Examines AFFIRMATIVE (NECESSITY)
iii. NEGATIVE delivers Constructive Speech NECESSITY
iv. AFFIRMATIVE Cross Examines NEGATIVE (NECESSITY)
v. AFFIRMATIVE delivers Constructive Speech BENEFICIALITY
vi. NEGATIVE Cross Examine AFFIRMATIVE (BENEFICIALITY)
vii. NEGATIVE delivers Constructive Speech BENEFICIALITY
viii. AFFIRMATIVE Cross Examines NEGATIVE (BENEFICIALITY)
ix. AFFIRMATIVE delivers Constructive Speech PRACTICABILITY
x. NEGATIVE Cross Examine AFFIRMATIVE (PRACTICABILITY)
xi. NEGATIVE delivers Constructive Speech PRACTICABILITY
xii. AFFIRMATIVE Cross Examines NEGATIVE (PRACTICABILITY)
xiii. The AFFIRMATIVE whip* delivers his/her Speech
xiv. The NEGATIVE whip delivers his/her Speech

2. COMPETITION COMMUNICATIONS

2.1 Communications to team members during the debate shall only be LIMITED to WRITTEN
communication. Debaters on deck are not allowed to communicate with the audience.

2.2 No laptops, tablets, cellphone or any similar gadget shall be allowed DURING the debate.
Debaters, however, may bring index cards for their reference and 3 sheets of yellow pad per
team, for taking notes.

3. GRADING

3.1 There are three (3) criteria for judging: CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH or MATTER (40 pts),
PERSUASIVE SKILLS or MANNER (30 pts), INTERPELLATION (30 pts).

3.2 MATTER is based on the logic, arguments, evidence cited, preparation and analytic skills of
the debater in advancing his or her argument. The debater must be able to cite at least one
(1) law and one (1) case supporting his argument.

3.3 MANNER is based on the debaters public speaking skill, the clarity of the delivery of the
speech, correct usage of intonation, debaters level of confidence and how s/he persuades
the judge to his/her side.

3.4 INTERPELLATION is the ability of the debater to ask relevant questions to prove his point
during the cross examination of the opposing speaker done in a respectful manner.

3.5 DEDUCTIONS. The following shall be deducted from the overall score of the debater or
team:
 a.) Argument without any legal basis (ex. no law or case cited to support premise)
10 points
b.) Poor sentence construction and glaring grammatical errors 5 points
c.) Rude, discourteous behavior in general 10 points
d.) Any manner of cheating 10 points,
e.) Any other matter not covered shall be discussed and agreed upon by the judges, and the
deduction shall be a maximum of 10 points.
f.) Going over the time limit 10 points.

4. SUBMISSION OF POSITION PAPER (MATTER)

Prior to the debate, each team shall submit their respective position papers in support of their
side. The position paper shall be divided into 3 subsections and shall contain the research and
arguments in support of the teams side of the debate. Cases and jurisprudence must be cited in
full indicated as footnotes. Direct quotes must be enclosed in quotation marks. A soft copy should
be sent to jat.tabamo.tsulaw@gmail.com prior to the start of the debate.

5. BEST SPEAKER

5.1 One (1) best speaker shall be chosen per debate round.

5.2 The Best Speaker shall be chosen by the judges from either the winning or the losing team
by majority vote.

GUIDE FOR THE WHIP SPEAKERS:

* Whipspeakersarethelastconstructivespeakers.Constructivespeakersarethosewhobuildupargumentsand
clashpointsinthedebate.Althoughwhipspeakersdon'tusuallypresentnewarguments(theOppositionWhip
speakerisforbiddenfromdoingthisandit'stoolateinthedebateforanynewargumentstomakeahugeimpact
anyway)theycanpresentnewrebuttals,examples,analysisanddefenseofargumentsthathavealreadybeenmade.
Theydothisbydoingthefollowing:

A)Brieflysummarizeanddefendyourcase

It'simportantatthestartofthespeechtospendaminuteorlesstoemphasizethepointsmadebyyour
team.Thisremindstheaudiencewhatthecontributionofyourteamisandgivesyouacontextfromwhich
tomakeyourrebutallsandanalysis.Itwillbeeasiertocomparetheotherteam'sargumentstoyoursifyou
brieflysummarizethemfirst.

B)Summarizeandprioritizethemostimportantargumentsorissuesinthedebate.

Therewillbemanyargumentsandrebuttalsflyingaroundinthedebate.Youneedtoidentifythemain
themesormajorargumentsthataredominatingthedebateorthatyoufeelareimportant.Thispartisreally
important;youcannottalkabouteverythingthathasbeensaidsoyouwillhavetochoose.Choosingideas
thatarenotimportantwillmaketherestofyourspeechredundant.Beobjectivewhendecidingwhatthe
clashpointsareandbefairtotheotherteam.

C)Rebutandanalyzetheargumentsorissuesandsaywhyyourteamhasdonebetteronallofthem,mostofthemor
onthemostimportantones

Thisisthelargestpartofyourspeech.Onceyouhaveidentifiedthemajorissues,gothroughandrebutall
ofthem.Comparethemtoargumentsyourteamhasmadeandshowwhyyoursarebetter.
Don'tpresentnewarguments,butyoucanpresentnewanalysis,newexamples,newrebuttalsandgivesupportfor
argumentsthatyourteammateshavealreadymadeinthedebate