I never post “academic” papers but this is a bit of an exception because I want to preserve a memory. Oftentimes, law school compels you to go through fay-yah! But also, the people responsible for smoldering you are the ones who ultimately inspire you. This is a short and rather cheesy reflection paper I made on a talk I now doubly appreciate. With her awe-inspiring dissent in the recently upheld decision on the plagiarism case against Justice Del Castillo, my brief “encounter” with Madame Justice Sereno will now be etched in memory.
The newly-appointed She of the SC: Profiling and Musings
(Reflection Paper on Lady Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno’s Talk)
Law is more than a profession; it’s passion for the most junior Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. She was nothing short of my expectation; in fact the Lady Justice deconstructed my already preset impression of the role she took for herself – monotonous, assured, ne plus ultra. Though not mere representation of the Judiciary, it was comforting to know that the quality of her character communicated a sense of idealism and in a way though passé, a sense of faith to the institution.
She used rhetoric that did not merit sarcasm. From someone who consciously chose a relatively recluse life – the high price she had to pay – the Lady Justice seemed delighted in recounting her own law school experience and narrating what seemed sundries but were, in fact, practicalities of the legal career path. Questions were stanchly answered with the right balance of modesty and savvy – mindful of her audience, never bordering on too much. Unsolicited advice was even much appreciated. I, for one, needed to hear from someone in the judicial pedestal the possibility of realizing the seeming impossibility that is law school. It was great relief and privilege, perhaps, to glean a positive opinion of such a personality. Digressing from impartial judgment so often taught, I therefore admit to admiring her character. One is led to smile thinking the President might have made a fine choice after all.
I understand that the Justice is not mere representation of the Judiciary, but it is comfort – and if I may add, motivation - especially to the ears of a first year law student, that quality of character and a high sense of idealism are not only wishful thinking in the said branch. She is no embodiment, but she is hope for virtue where it is believed to be premium.
The talk effected a gentle and perhaps, personal stirring of dreams or ambitions. Initially, I projected a discussion of the most pertinent legal (or political) issues, but there was minimal discourse of the same. As a matter of fact (or of personal opinion), she did not disappoint. The talk granted what I secretly implored: the oxymoron of practical idealism, of modest surefootedness, of a gentle strength, of an actual life in law. Every once in a while, a law student needs to be reminded of why he/she is pursuing this “road less travelled” – elitist in disposition but noble in design. The talk afforded us that much needed reminder.
I know I NEEDED to hear that.
Here’s to reading more sense and sensibility. I hope she does not disappoint – ever.
