This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Tambayan Philippines Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Education This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I added this latest article in Inquirer.net, since, this article lacks any history on these aspects. Please do not vandalize. -- The first bar exam was held in 1901, with 13 examinees, while the 2008 bar examination is the 107th (given per Article 8, Section 5, 1987 Constitution). The 2001 bar exam had the highest number of passers -- 1,266 out of 3,849 examinees, or 32.89%, while 2006 had the highest examinees -.6,187. Also, the 2003 bar exam was marred by controversy when the Court ordered a retake of the Mercantile law due to questionnaire leakage.Inquirer.net, First bar exam in RP held in 1901, with 13 test takers

The 2001 bar exams is also special in that all the valedictorians of the recognized top three law schools in the country placed in the top ten. Moreover, even the salutatorians of two of these top schools likewise placed. Furthermore, even the first honorable mention of one of these top schools also placed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.18.241 (talk) 16:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Among all bar topnotchers, the highest general average is 96.7%, attained by Florenz D. Regalado (future Supreme Court Associate Justice) of San Beda College of Law in 1954, but it was former senator Tecla San Andres-Ziga who became the first woman to top the bar, scoring 89.4 percent in 1930. In 1913, pre-war record was made by Manuel Roxas with 92%, but in 1914, Manuel Goyena beat the record at 93%. Senator San Andres-Ziga (1963-1969) record was broken in 1937 by Cecilia Munoz-Palma with 92.6%. In 1936, Diosdado Macapagal, the 9th president, topped the bar exams with a mark of 89.85%. In 1939, Ferdinand Marcos got the highest score of 92.35 %. In 1944, Jovito Salonga and Jose W. Diokno tied the highest score of 95.3%.Inquirer.net, Regalado’s 96.7% remains unsurpassed in RP bar exams history

There is a need to post here the landmark bar events since by experience some would vandalize these due to crab mentality. This remains a notice to prevent vandalism. - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ateneo topped and broke the record of lowest top bar grade[edit]

With 4 of the 10 top placers, Ateneo made Philippine history, when Ona got 83.55% breaking the latest lowest record of 84%. - --Florentino floro (talk) 08:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only 3 out of the top 10 came from the Ateneo de Manila. Rmcsamson (talk) 08:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Objection: the critical fact is that the 4th placer Ruby M. Luy is from Ateneo de Davao and is also Ateneo, since Ateneo Rockwell originated from Ateneo Buendia Makati where I placed 12th in 1983 - where UP and Ateneo failed 60%, only 21.3% passed[1][2] and I was full second honors; but this law school came from Padre Faura in 1975; now, the Original Ateneo where Rizal studied was at the Blue Eagles gym where we studied ROTC 1972; anyway, just an opinion from a jobless judge in a pretend world. Congratulations to all the passers. Final point, I am not proud to be Atenean, and if the past will be here again, I will never study in this school where crab mentality proliferates. They never followed St. Ignatius ratio studiorum. I also never listened to my professors, since I studied by myself, since the professors were so weird that they often gave exam questions which were never included in lectures. I never reviewed but by myself too just to top the bar. But with all these, I am jobless now, no takers.[3]. ---Florentino floro (talk) 09:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The critical distinction is that the Ateneo de Manila and the Ateneo de Davao are not the same. Their law schools are not the same either. Nor are their respective boards of trustees, administrators, and so on. The Ateneo de Manila Law School traces its origins in 1936 to the Ateneo de Manila campus in Padre Faura (where the Ateneo transferred in 1933 after a fire broke out in Intramuros, destroying the original Ateneo where Rizal studied). The Padre Faura campus remained open until 1976 (housing the law school and some graduate units, while the rest of the university transferred to Loyola Heights), until the law school transferred to the Salcedo campus (more precisely, along H.V. De La Costa St., not Buendia), and then to Rockwell Center in 1998. The Ateneo de Davao College of Law opened in 1961. While it is perfectly safe to say that Ruby M. Luy is also an Atenean, it is erroneous to say that she took law at the same Ateneo as did Mercedita Ona. Rmcsamson (talk) 09:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You stated and I quote: "Only 3 out of the top 10 came from the Ateneo de Manila. Rmcsamson (talk) 08:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)" Now, your stance is "The critical distinction is that the Ateneo de Manila and the Ateneo de Davao are not the same." Of course, the former is the country while the latter is only a part of, or a town of this Blue Monarchy or Bughaw na Republika ng mga alimango, so to speak. In other words, Ateneo conferred upon my dwarves full second honors, and taught me to ride space ships to TRANCE and place the 1983 bar, but it gave me only LL.B.; but you will be, hoping, Juris doctor, unlike us in 1982/83, but we are part of this Crustacean blue school, where my classmate in tax II Cesar L. Villanueva is the the precious lobster. Now, to the point of this discussion: Ateneo de Manila University is a private university run by the Society of Jesus in the Philippines. It began in 1859 when the City of Manila handed control of the Escuela Municipal de Manila in Intramuros, Manila to the Jesuits. It was then a state-subsidized school. It became a private school during the American occupation of the Philippines, and has moved from Manila to its current location. It received its university charter in 1959. The founding of the Ateneo de Manila University finds its roots in the history of the Society of Jesus as a teaching order in the Philippines. :The first Spanish Jesuits arrived in the Philippines in 1581 as missionaries. They were custodians of the ratio studiorum, the Jesuit system of education developed around 1559. Within a decade of their arrival, the Society, through Fr. Antonio Sedeño, founded the Colegio de Manila (often referred to as the Colegio de San Ignacio or Colegio Máximo de San Ignacio in historical textbooks) in Intramuros in 1590. The Colegio formally opened in 1595, and was the first school in the Philippines. The Escuela eventually changed its name to Ateneo Municipal de Manila in 1865, when it became accredited as an institution of secondary education. It began by offering the bachillerato or bachelor's degree, as well as courses leading to certificates in agriculture, surveying, and business. Jose Rizal, who would later be named National Hero of the Philippines, enrolled for his secondary studies in 1872, and went on to graduate in 1877 with a Bachelor of Arts degree. He continued studying at the Ateneo for a license in land surveying. After Americans occupied the Philippines in the early 1900s, the Ateneo de Manila lost its government subsidy from the city and became a private institution. The Jesuits removed the word Municipal from the school’s official name soon after, and it has since been known as the Ateneo de Manila. In 1908, the American colonial government recognized the Ateneo de Manila's college status and licensed its offering the bachelor’s degee and certificates in various disciplines, including electrical engineering. The Ateneo campus also housed other Jesuit institutions of research and learning, such as the Manila Observatory and the San Jose Major Seminary. :: So, Ateneo de Manila per Wikipedia included these children: • Ateneo de Zamboanga • Ateneo de Naga • Ateneo de Davao • Loyola-Culion • Xavier[4]; It's claws are: Professional schools: Graduate School of Business | Law School | School of Government | School of Medicine and Public Health; The Ateneo de Davao University (AdDU) is a private Catholic university founded administered by the by the Society of Jesus in the island of Mindanao in the Philippines in 1948 .[5]College of Law -In June, 1961, then Rector Rev. Hudson Mitchell, S.J. established the Ateneo Law School.Noted alumni * Antonio Carpio (B.A. 1970 Economics) - Associate Justice of the Philippine Supreme Court. A final point: from 1975 to 1985 I made Ateneo History by snatching the 91% criminal law review grade by the most fierce terror of the times, Dean Antonio L. Gregorio. I was hated by my classmates since I was a loner, resisted fraternities and was a barbarian. Unlike law students, I only bring racing program called "Dividen Dazo" from my school Collegio de Santa Ana Park[6]; like today, many Filipino editors got angry to me, since I debate in a unique way citing bulks of authorities; well, Jesuits forced me to be this way.[7]While my classmate Tonette Brion's spouse Arturo D. Brion topped the bar without any Atenean in the top 10 record of 40 years, he never broke my 91% record and he will never ever break my Ateneo record of jobless judge since 1999. Not as name dropper, you can ask how I begged mercy from Ateneo Human Rights Carlos Medina. I donated my book to his office, to the student's council and to the Ateneo Law Library[8][9] - --Florentino floro (talk) 09:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is my position, and that is a position which is supported by facts.Rmcsamson (talk) 10:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It will be a sad day for Ateneans, if Ateneo de Manila would not treat, include and officially call Ateneans all those who studied and graduated from all those schools included in Wikipedia Ateneo de Manila. The critical the fact: all the schools under Ateneo de Manila are "Ateneo". - --Florentino floro (talk) 10:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, but that was hardly my position. I did write this earlier: "While it is perfectly safe to say that Ruby M. Luy is also an Atenean, it is erroneous to say that she took law at the same Ateneo as did Mercedita Ona." This is because, as I have also written earlier, the Ateneo de Manila and the Ateneo de Davao are not the same. They are not the same institution. Their law schools are not the same either. Nor are their respective boards of trustees, administrators, and so on. The name "Ateneo" is given to Jesuit institutions of higher learning in the Philippines. But this does not at all mean that they are the same institution. Rmcsamson (talk) 10:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rmcsamson is correct. TheCoffee (talk) 07:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NOTED. ---Florentino floro (talk) 05:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I updated this sub-section but it was vandalized. I updated the 1920 entry there since Ona erased that record with 83:55%. Wikipedia had done lots to fight vandalism by vindictive editors, or those with troubled minds. We cannot really do anything since such is an epidemic, and the more we correct the same as in cancer it causes eruption. So, I discovered a way to prevent vandalism in Wiki, by copy pasting my important edits in the article's talk page, hoping that others will revert the deleted edit. But I am not a paranoid to believe that vendetta will be cured, since it is therapy for Filipino crab mentality. So, I reproduce here my entry which might be vandalized (I have no problem with vandalism in foreign articles since some Filipino crustaceans could not muster the vote vis-a-vis foreign editors who put in their watch list, the articles where I edited (giggle): The lowest is 83.55%, obtained by Ateneo Law School's Mercedita L. Ona, 83.55%, 2008, which erased the prior record of 84.10%, obtained by Adolfo Brillantes of Escuela de Derecho de Manila (now Manila Law College Foundation) in 1920.^[1][2] - --Florentino floro (talk) 05:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that it was in 1973, the Ericta Bar Scandal, when the bitter quarrel of money and corruption erupted between Justice Vicente Ericta and Justice Amuerfina Melencio-Herrera (now PHILJA directress). Herrera exposed the peeping tom by Ericta to the grades to let his son pass. So, all the S.C. corrupt Justices resigned and Ferdinand Marcos appointed the new S.C. Justices. The Supreme Court permanently banned the changing of passing grades other than 75% with 50% passing in any and all subjects. So, since 4 incumbent S.C. Justices CJ Puno, Ynares-Santiago, Carpio Morales, and Velasco had relatives, then they inhibited, but the OBC did dilly-dally from Friday to Saturday the release of the Bar Exams, submitting the false reason that the OBC would still review the names of 109 law schools. So, in order that bar flunker children and kins of these 4 Goddess/es of Faura would pass and escape the FUN of the 3 mystic dwarves, as what happened in the 1948 Bar Flunkers case and 1973 folly, the Rules of Court since 1973 was perforce amended, making these lucky and prosperous children happy and benevolent. But since Wikipedia does not permit original research, I would need data or facts and links from Wikipedia genius or beloved Filipino editors or even admins who are blue blooded Ateneans who believe in crab mentality or crustacean concept of truth, justice and rule of law, which St. Ignatius formulated at Loyola, Spain. Please do submit here or in Tambayan, the numbers and grades of Ateneo (and other law schools) bar passers, to determine if the kins of S.C. Justices got grades in any subject below 50% and average of less than 75%, so that I can say bingo and I will edit this article accordingly. When I personally met thrice, Tricia Nicole Q. Velasco, daughter of then Court Administrator Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., in 2002, I told her to desist from taking law at the Ateneo (she failed the UP entrance test), coz I told her that I was full second honors Ateneo 1982 and placed 12, 87.55%, 1983 bar with only 21.3% passed (UP and Ateneo, 60% failed and they cried in groups), but I was accused by the Court Administrator of gross ignorance of law (like here of Wiki rules). Later, on April 6, 2006, with all my honors and records, I was convicted and sentenced guilty beyond reasonable doubt of gross ignorance of the law as recommended by her father Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. and fined by him and them $ 780 or P 40,000[10]. Without bitterness in my heart, I congratulate Tricia Nicole Q. Velasco for passing the tough bar exams, and I vouch that my mystic angel of death LUIS would confer upon her the medal of valor and fortune cookie. Please edit my trance message if this is too long. But I want Ateneans to read this, since Wikipedia must expand this article to ferret the truth. - --Florentino floro (talk) 07:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As interesting as these allegations and statements of personal opinion are, please note the following Wikipedia policies and be guided accordingly: WP:NOT#OR and WP:SOAP. Rmcsamson (talk) 18:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The scandals that rocked the Court are hereunder, but if you have still other scandals and links, please add. In the 1930s, a distant relative of Imelda Romualdez Marcos who was a Justice in the High Court resigned after a controversy involving the bar examinations. Justice Ramon Fernandez was forced to protect his name and honor when he resigned because of a bar examination scandal.[11] On November 23, 1979, the High Court, per Justice Pacifico de Castro ordered new examinations in labor and social legislation and taxation. On May 7, 1982, 12 of the Supreme Court's 14 justices resigned amid expose "that the court fixed the bar-examination score of a member's son so that he would pass." Justice Vicente Ericta was accused to have personally approached the bar chairman to inquire whether his (Ericta's) son passed the bar. Ferdinand Marcos accepted the resignations and appointed the new Justices. Chief Justice Enrique Fernando wept at a news conference as he accepted responsibility for rechecking and changing the exam score of Gustavo Ericta, son of Justice Vicente Ericta.^[1] Associate Justice Fidel Purisima, chairman of the bar committee, did not disclose that he had a nephew who was taking the bar examination in that year. He was merely censured and his honoraria as bar examiner were forfeited. On September 24, 2003, the Supreme Court, per a bleary-eyed Associate Justice Jose Vitug, annulled the tests results on mercantile law after "confirmation of what could be the most widespread case of cheating in the 104-year-old bar exams".^[2] Since the 1982 "Ericta Scandal", it was only in 2008 that the Court relaxed the fixed rules on passing grades amid the inhibitions of 5 Justices whose relatives took the exams. --Florentino floro (talk) 10:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Role of the Supreme Court, Criticisms[edit]

At last C.J. Panganiban wrote on this: In 2008, only 5% (of the 5,626 who took the 2007 tests, or less than 300) got the passing grade of 75%. Thus, the Supreme Court adjusted the standard to 70% and the disqualification rate in 3 subjects (civil, labor and criminal law) from 50 to 45%. Accordingly, 1,289 or 22.91%, “passed.” This passing grade reduction is highly unusual, since it last happened in the 1981 exam when the passing grade was lowered to 72.5%, which led to the resignation of all the justices. President Ferdinand Marcos re-appointed all but 2 of the Justices. Prior to 1982, the passing mark jumped unpredictably from year to year: 69.45 percent in 1946; 69 in 1947; 70 in 1948, 1963, 1972 and 1974; 71 in 1961; 71.5 in 1953, 1964 and 1965; 72 in 1957, 1958, 1959, 1960 and 1967; 72.5 in 1954, 1962 and 1981; 73 in 1950, 1956, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1975, 1978 and 1980; 73.5 in 1955 and 1979; 74 in 1949, 1951, 1952, 1966, 1971, 1973 and 1977; and 74.5 in 1976. In 1954, the Court lowered the passing grade to 72.5%, even if the passing percentage was already at its highest at 75.17%. In 1999, moves to lower the passing grade to 74% failed, after Justice Fidel Purisima, bar committee chairman failed to disclose that his nephew took the examination. He was censured and his honoraria was reduced to half.^[3] But he failed to point a finger on the 5 S.C. Justices who inhibited so that their children or kins would pass, when these kids really failed. - --Florentino floro (talk) 07:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC) Here is a good or the best part of this article on TIPS for future research.[12]--Florentino floro (talk) 04:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The old link of the official website of the Philippine Supreme Court was changed from the old http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph/ to the new: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/ Hence, all former links of the e-library and decisions added or edited here in Wikipedia are deemed dead links and you can now look at them all in this new link.--Bar 2009 (talk) 06:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Iron.bridge has been adding lists of the law firms which certain bar examinees now belong to, as well as their respective fraternities. I've removed them because I think that's unnecessary advertising, promotion, and boosterism not compliant with WP:NOT. Moreover, I also think that it is no longer contributory to the development of the topic of the article, which is the examination. There might be a way to discuss the relationship between high-scoring examinees and certain law firms and fraternities in general terms, however. Hopefully discussion here can help flesh out the matters that need discussing. Rmcsamson (talk) 07:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]