Philippine e-Legal Forum

The “Suggested Answers to the 2006 Bar Examination Questions”, a 137-page book recently published by the Philippine Association of Law Schools (PALS), is not only very instructive and useful, but also an earnest manifestation of the organization’s goal of “honing the intellectual fitness of law students and improving legal education in the country, by giving future bar exam takers an idea on how to formulate appropriate answers to the bar questions”. This is eloquently underscored in the book’s foreword.

In the book, it is noted that emphasis has again been laid on extracting specific objective information by questions calling for definition, enumeration, and differentiation. Even questions in the form of problems are couched in objective terms. Other questions seem to be tests of what the examinees do not know instead of what they know, and, as usual, a number of stereotyped questions were asked. There were even two questions in Political and Public International Law reminiscent of quiz shows. Very few questions were picked from quizzers used as textbooks or cram texts in the review course. This practice should be discouraged in order not to bolster the perception that examiners lack the skill in the framing of intelligent questions or are unwilling to think of questions that genuinely test the mettle of the examinees.

Interestingly, however, the 2006 Bar Examiners gave some multiple choice questions which, in my view, gradually implement Bar Matter No. 1161 dated 8 June 2004 (Resolution on Reforms in the Bar Examinations). This Resolution requires the adoption, within a period of 2 to 5 years, of multiple choice questions for 30% to 40% of total items. The multiple choice questions asked in the 2006 Bar Exams (5% of the total number of questions on the basis of relative weight) are given below:

A) Political and Public International Law

1. Question No. VII (1) – 5%
2. Question No. VII (2) – 5%

B) Civil Law

1. Question No. XVI (1) – 2.5%
2. Question No. XVI (2) – 2.5%

C) Taxation

1. Question No. V (1) – 5%
2. Question No. V (2) – 5%
3. Question No. X – 5%

D) Remedial Law

1. Question No. II – 2.5 %

E) Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises

1. Question No. XV – 2.5%

It’s not surprising that the PALS minced no words in expressing valid concerns on the type of questions asked in the 2006 Bar Exams and offered a number of suggestions, including:

A) Political and Public International Law

1. Since Question No. IX (4) and IX (5) do not test the examinees’ knowledge of the law, it is suggested that they be disregarded.

B) Labor and Social Legislation

1. Question No. IX appears to be a proper question for political law.

C) Taxation

1. Question No. IV is an EVAT issue which is excluded from the bar coverage (Guidelines for 2006 Bar Examinations, 15 June 2006)

2. Question No. VII pertains to a tax percentage on gross receipts, which is excluded from the bar coverage (Guidelines for 2006 Bar Examinations, 15 June 2006)

3. Question No. XII is a concept pertaining to the VAT law, which is excluded from the bar coverage (Guidelines for 2006 Bar Examinations, 15 June 2006)

4. Question No. XV is a concept pertaining to the VAT law, which is excluded from the bar coverage (Guidelines for 2006 Bar Examinations, 15 June 2006)

D) Mercantile Law

1. Question No. II does not qualify the term “forced check”. An answer addressing liabilities of a drawer should be deemed sufficient. Answers addressing liabilities of parties should likewise be given credit.

E) Criminal Law

1. Question No. V pertains to R.A. 9344 which is excluded from the bar coverage (Guidelines for 2006 Bar Examinations, 15 June 2006)

2. Question No. XIII (3) is outside the coverage of the bar examinations.

3. Due to the length of the three-hour criminal law exam (17 numbers, 30 questions), as compared to mercantile law (16 numbers, 26 questions), it is requested that there be leniency in appreciating the answers of the examinees.

Nota Bene: I believe that Question Nos. III (3) and XII in criminal law, which may have escaped the attention of the PALS, appear to be an appropriate questions for remedial law and political/remedial law, respectively.

In criminal law, specifically, the relative weight of the questions are distributed as follows.

1. Questions pertaining to mala in se – 40%

2. Questions pertaining to mala prohibita – 22.50%

3. Questions pertaining to both mala in se and mala prohibita – 27.50%

4. Questions not properly pertaining to criminal law [Question Nos. III (3) and XII] – 10%

Nota Bene: The substantial percentage of questions pertaining to mala prohibita is quite disturbing and is a matter of serious concern because our own law curriculum does not prescribe a subject on special laws.

The questions asked in the 2006 Bar Examinations seek to test not so much the power of analysis of the examinee (or any law student for that matter), but the examinee’s retention and memory. As an insightful examinee griped: “When a prospective client approaches us, he will not ask us to define terms and enumerate”.

Since 1946, bar exam questions have been, by and large, of the objective type. There are no alternative answers in objective type questions, which hardly afford the bar examinee much leeway in formulating his response. True, there were conscious efforts in the past bar examinations to ask legal problems which would call for the use of logic and reasoning, as well as the intelligent application of the law. In the 2002 Bar Exams, however, the type of questions again reverted to the objective type (50% of the questions), to the dismay of many.

We, students of law, cannot blame our professors when they ask us to memorize provisions of law because that is precisely attributed to the very nature of questions asked in the bar exams, which lay more stress on memory work rather than reasoning. Over-emphasis on memorization develops the memory of student but the intelligent application of the law is not correspondingly increased. Instead of truly ascertaining the bar examinee’s logical reasoning and ability to analyze facts and apply the basic principles of law to squarely addressed the issues raised, the objective type questions probe the capacity to memorize a plethora of details, which may never be of any use in the actual work of a lawyer.

What can be done to accomplish one of the avowed objectives of the bar examinations – to test the intellectual capability and power of analysis of the examinee. The answer lies in the immediate and full implementation of the following reforms in the bar examinations already proposed by the Supreme Court, preferably starting next year.

1. Adoption of objective multiple-choice questions for 30% to 40% of the total number of questions.

2. Formulation of essay test questions and “model answers” as part of the calibration of test papers.