Opinion on ANC Square Off: CVC Law debate
Posted at 10/10/2008 6:34 PM | Updated as of 10/10/2008 6:34 PM
Opinion on ANC Square Off: CVC Law debate
The grand finals debate between Arellano University of Manila and Ateneo de Davao University sponsored by ANC last October 8, 2008 was sensational and definitely a cliff-hanger. Both teams defended their sides expertly, backed by careful and painstaking reasearch and delivered with near perfect eloquence. The Ateneo de Davao, though young and less experienced, defended bravely and stood against their gross onslaught of Arellano, more mature and experienced.
The team from Arellano got the nod of the panel of judges as winner. That's alright. No problem there. However, when one of the judges openly admitted that he is an alumni, a member of the law faculty, and most of all a member of the Board of Trustees of Arellano University, a lot of eyebrows were raised. With all these qualifications tagged to his name, the playing field became obviously uneven. The least he could have done was refrain from becoming a member of the panel and could have appointed somebody in his law firm to take his place.
Atty. Jose C. Sevilla
viewer
jose.sevilla50[at]yahoo.com
The article read:
Arellano University swept aside Ateneo de Davao University to take the crown in the finals of the CVC Law Debates on ANC's Square Off.
Opposing the proposition that term limits of elective officials should be lifted, Arellano countered the two main arguments of ADDU - that term limits curtail the citizen's freedom of choice and that they encourage family dynasties - with an unothodox premise and plenty of chutzpah.
Some analysts failed to grasp how Arellano could claim - complete with medical descriptions of stress-related ailments - that the framers of the Constitution had meant term limits to serve as state-imposed "sabbaticals" for politicians to get needed rest and rejuvenation before running again. But maybe because ADDU - unable to move beyond its memorized speeches - didn't effectively refute Arellano.
Maybe it was because Arellano appeared so much more poised and confident than ADDU. Or maybe the judges felt refreshed by the sheer audacity of Arellano's position. At any rate, the judge gave the win to Arellano, unanimously.
And while many scratched their heads for awhile, all eventually conceded to the unassailability of the decision, coming no less from the biggest of CVC Law's bigwigs, Raoul R. Angangco, Simeon V. Marcelo, and Avelino J. Cruz, Jr.
Head Judge, former defense secretary Avelino "Nonong" Cruz, Jr. prefaced his announcement with congratulations to both teams.
"There is ample evidence here that there will be enough defenders of the rule of law in the future and that bodes very well for the future of this country where we need a lot of defenders of the rule of law because of the many transgressions that are going on."
Then he announced that Arellano's Luis Warren, who was already the Texters' Choice for Best Speaker, was also the Judges' Choice for that honor, winning an LG Viewty cameraphone, a trophy and a 3-day trip for 2 to Boracay.
And then Arellano was declared the Winner and Champion, taking home Acer laptops and the CD-ROM Lex Libris Law Library Series.
As the raucous Arellano contingent formed a victory parade towards the alma mater - their good luck Mama Mary statue hoisted high - and while Square Off producers' phones buzzed non-stop with text complaints in Cebuano, Marcelo, Angangco and Cruz repaired, unperturbed, to the steakhouse next door.
Cruz is prodded about why, given that the scores for Best Speaker were tied between Warren and ADDU's Therese Gemelo, he didn't choose to make the charitable gesture when he knew that Arellano had won the Grand Prize anyway. "I suppose that would have been the Solomonic decision. But I made what I believed was the right decision".
Marcelo reveals that even though the judging in the Finals seemed to favor Arellano so decidedly, it was an ADDU debater that has caught CVC's recruiting eye. Angangco muses that the earlier eliminations of top-ranked Ateneo de Manila and U.P sent the heartening meassage that every (under)dog has his day.
Cruz waxed prophetic; " The response to the CVC Law Debates has been so strong that I'm sure students everywhere are inspired. The quality of public discourse will get better and better. This is good for the country, I tell you."
Pancho Villaraza, the law firm's senior partner who wasn't on the show, sent a telepathic note: Thse debates are worth doing again. We will do this again.
To the writer,
I want to know who is the author of this article, and for the author, whoever you are, you should apologize for your absurd opinions and for your intense mockery, you could have stated the facts blandly, your sheer opinion was not needed in stating the news. Kudos to Arellano Law, they deserve to win because they have worked hard for it. If you want to make a commentary, this is not a proper forum to do so. The freedom of speech, although mandated by our constitution, must be exercised with utmost care.
I am disappointment with the way ABS-CBN presented news, it is obviously biased. I will be waiting for a reply with a complete explanation regarding how you formulated this article.
stef viola
stef_viola[at]yahoo.com
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend