Post-Bar thoughts: A non-Bar LL. B. program?

Published May 9, 2017, 10:00 PM

By J. Art D. Brion

http://news.mb.com.ph/2017/05/09/post-bar-thoughts-a-non-bar-ll-b-program/

Before the 2016 Bar exams fade into history, let me share with our readers some of my
residual thoughts on legal education and the legal profession.

Congratulations to new lawyers

Congratulations to our new lawyers, their parents and loved ones, and their law schools.
I reserve my special congratulations to the dean of the University of San Carlos, Dean
Joan Largo, whose activism in the field of legal education and consistent nurturing of the
USC Law School led to its present triumph – 4 bar topnotchers (including No. 1) and a
100% passing rate for 2016. She bested our 1974 class record of 1 topnotcher (No. 1) and
a 100% passing rate.

While many law schools have shown passing rate improvements, I hope that the current
results will not delude us into misconceptions about the state of our legal education. We
have to look at the whole legal education situation, i.e., not solely from the prism of the
outstanding and improved law schools, but from those of the rest of the law schools in the
country.

This look should perhaps include a reassessment of the current pre-law programs to
ensure that those entering law schools have what it takes to handle the rigors of law
school, particularly in English communications. The Legal Education Board (LEB) should
have no problem taking this look as it is part of the Commission on Higher Education
(CHED). In fact, it should now have a good gauge of the entering freshmen’s capacities
based on the first PhiLSAT scores. Anyway, the bottom line is: more than ever, the LEB
has to continue its improvement and reform missions, hopefully with the support of the
entire legal education community. Legal education is one of the foundations on which the
future of the legal profession is built.

Amendment of the LEB charter

A priority for the LEB is the amendment of its charter, Rep. Act No. 7662. The LEB needs
to augment and strengthen its structure in a hurry in order to respond to the demands of
reform; it needs support personnel, an increased budget, a good measure of autonomy,
and a specific definition of where it should situate itself – within the umbrella of the
Executive or the Judiciary. Perhaps, Congress should also explore areas that legislation
has not fully defined in the past, such as the exact parameters of the exclusive authority
of the LEB in exercising its regulatory functions over legal education.
In this bid for amendments, the participation of the whole legal education community
would be invaluable to convince Congress that time is of the essence in acting on the
amendments. A ready justification, aside from the need to improve legal services to the
public, is the preparation for the coming Asean integration that would involve the practice
of professions. Incidentally, some professions have already been integrated or are
scheduled for integration.

Non-Bar LL.B. degree program

Today, there is only one route towards the focused study of law as a subject – through
either an LL.B. or a J.D. that leads to admission to the practice of law after passing the
Supreme Court’s Bar examinations. Based on information from the LEB, only lawyers can
teach Bar subjects in law schools. Perhaps Congress would opt to widen the available
teaching base by opening a separate route of specialization in law without the burden of
passing the Bar examinations.

Congress may also want to consider that not a few law students are enrolled, not for the
purpose of becoming lawyers, but merely to secure an LL.B. or a J.D. degree to qualify for
jobs requiring legal knowledge (without amounting to the practice of law); for job
promotion; as foundational base for further academic studies; or to simply widen their
knowledge base in their current specialization (such as information technology or
medicine). This is very true for members of the police and those engaged in investigation
and law enforcement such as the personnel of the National Bureau of Investigation. My
wife is a chemist while our son is a computer engineer and they both later opted to take
up law.

Purely as an example of the non-Bar degree approach, the LEB may want to formulate a
program – as an alternative to the current bachelor’s degree pre-law requirement – that
would only require two years of intensive and well-defined pre-law studies (in social
sciences, languages. mathematics and philosophy), that would prepare students for the
strengths they need in law school. They can then proceed to law school proper and, after
completion of their third year, graduate with a non-Bar LL.B. degree.

Thus, they would have a law degree that would not qualify them for the practice of law but
would provide them knowledge in the exercise of professions and activities outside of law
practice. At this point, they can perhaps work as senior legal researchers; in top
management positions; in their own professional disciplines fortified by their knowledge
of the law; or in senior management or support capacities that the Supreme Court would
allow in relation with the practice of law. They can teach Bar subjects in law schools –
once allowed by law, rule or regulation – after they shall have acquired their masteral
degree and passed a qualifying exam administered by the LEB.
To qualify for the Bar, they only have to enroll and complete their 4th year in the law
program, which currently consists mainly of law review classes. (The Court can of course
require additional conditions as pre-qualification for the Bar exams.) To be sure, these
are matters of administrative regulation that the Commission on Higher Educ ation, the
LEB and the Court can work out, but Congress can still pave the way by creating the
opening and strong legal basis for such regulation.

Looking to the future

In no time at all, we will start another school year. For the law schools and the legal
education community, this should be a different year with the infusion of the live thought
that excellence in the Bar exams are not impossibilities for provincial law schools
equipped with the preparations modeled by the USC system of legal instructions. Of
course, the coming school year should be a busier one for the LEB because of the reforms
it has placed on the table.

You can contact me at jadb.legalfront.mb@gmail.com.