EDITORIAL - Judicial rot

There were the usual images of jubilation and disappointment as the Supreme Court released last week the list of those who passed the latest Bar examination. A total of 1,108 out of 5,349 examinees passed the Bar, which was topped by a member of the controversial law firm headed by President Arroyo’s personal lawyer.

This Bar exam was marred by a scandal over the leak of test questions in one subject, which was traced to someone working at the former law firm of resigned justice secretary Hernando Perez. The results of that exam were invalidated, but the scandal will always cast a cloud of doubt over the general results of the 2003 Bar. That was one leak that was caught. How many others managed to slip past the Bar exam committee?

Cheating in the Bar is hardly the best way to launch a career in law. Yet over the years there have been too many reports of exam leaks that the public can’t help thinking that cheating is becoming institutionalized in the Bar. A twisted fraternity culture in the law profession gives certain examinees undue advantage over those who lack the right connections. The repeated leaks might have helped propel the careers of certain lawyers, but they have also diminished the prestige of the examinations and are threa-tening to turn the Bar into a farce.

When careers in law are launched in such a manner, it is no longer surprising that there is so much rot in the nation’s justice system. Justice – and a temporary restraining order – can be bought at the right price. Words and phrases such as "fix-cals" and "hoodlums in robes" were coined out of public frustration over corruption in the justice system. Judicial corruption has adversely affected many facets of life inclu-ding the anti-crime campaign and the investment climate, contribu-ting to the weakening of this republic.

Still, the nation’s newest lawyers are young and supposedly idea-listic. They may yet do their part in cleaning up a profession that is being consumed by its rotten members.