agonizing feeling

earlier tonight, word spread around law school that the 2007 bar exam results would come out tomorrow. the tension spread as the source of the news was no less than a message from the Supreme Court's spokesperson.

well, i just hope and pray that the barristers who would be barred from taking the exam for the nth time will have passed by now and that most if not ALL the barristas from ADdU would pass.

by the way, the changes in the law school's deanship have really made an impact on me. first, the school's Board of Trustees found it better to install a not so promising dean than a professor whose mere presence commands respect. the former is a lousy teacher and can be likened to a sleeping pill (imagine falling asleep when your eyes are wide open), while the latter is a very accomplished professor albeit bent on his ways and means of teaching and giving grades.

the Board of Trustees disqualified the latter professor on moral grounds (politics and religion really do come hand in hand). some have argued that the late dean was not himself a morally upright man as he was given to his vices which eventually led to his body's decay. so, why was there suddenly a criterion on morality?

moreover, the deanship requires that the would-be-dean should possess a master's degree in law. the appointed dean does not have one. there are other professors who have been in law school for long and have earned their master's degree, and outside the Philippines at that.

so, how is it possible that an institution such as the law school could be led by an "incompetent" but not by an "immoral?" the institution is after all, not a school for religious teachings and anything that has to do with morality. it is a school for higher learning which necessitates a person with a propensity to erudition.

what is really more SHOCKING is the fact that, as early as the first semester, the former professor claimed no interest whatsoever in steering the wheels of the law school by saying that he is a busy man and that he is not at all interested. i guess he slipped or LIED when he said he wasn't interested because he accepted the appointment. therefore, he is also not "moral" considering that he lied.

ahh.. the bother that people would go through just to have an attachment or prefix to their names - DEAN ****** ******

i just could not believe that he had the temerity to do that knowing fully well that he gave word to us that he is not interested and that he has another commitment (the IBP's local chapter).

just thinking of him now sitting at that desk where a sign indicates the person behind the desk to be the dean makes me puke all over.

hay.. i will never look up to him in the same way that i did the late dean.

he is not qualified.

with the school's fate in his hands, i can only pray for a miracle.