S1L35 – Women Empowerment, feat. Miss Carla Addaawan from Tabuk City
A law class is an ideal environment to immerse yourself in current events and issues, something I encourage my students to do. Law is dynamic, you don’t study law in a vacuum. You study it in relation to everyday facts that impact your own life.
“Miss Carla…” I haven’t even finished saying her name yet and this girl leaped on to her feet already.
“Miss Carla…uh…Carla…I’m not sure how to pronounce your last name…Miss Carla?”
“Addaawan, sir!”
“Adda ken awan?” I clarified, while the class started giggling at the amazing novelty of the name.
“Yes, sir, basically. My name literally means ‘here’ and ‘not here’ at the same time, sir!”
“I know, I know…that’s why I don’t know whether to mark you present or absent,” I said, “from where are you, Miss Addaawan?”
“I’m from Tabuk, Kalinga, sir.”
“Oh, yes, Tabuk, Kalinga—beautiful place. I know the Wangdalis from there,” I said, recalling a good client from years ago.
Female law students are growing in number, while the number of male students is declining steadily. Personally, I have no preference between the two although one of my students, Ms. Deema Niwala, always chides me about being sexist—and to some degree she is correct.
I am very subtly partial FOR women because in my experience, female law students study harder, work harder and try harder than the gentlemen.
And there’s something else I really like about girls in law school: they have beautiful, ABSOLUTELY READABLE handwriting!
You have to be a handwriting expert to read the test booklets of some of the gentlemen. Once I had a student complain about his test score, appealing his wrong answer in the last question. So I said, “Alright, Albert, I’ll give you the benefit of all my doubt. Read back to me your answer to the last question.”
The fellow took his test booklet, opened it to the last page then stared at the page for a long time. He squinted his eyes, tilted his head to the left, then to the right and every which way—he was trying to but he can’t even read his own handwriting! His classmates laughed so hard, I was afraid Deema might break the floor tiles stomping her feet as she laughed. His classmates basically jeered him back to his seat.
Back to our Tabuk girl. “Miss Carla, please read your Constitutional principle upholding women empowerment…”
“Yes, sir! It’s in Article II Section 14. The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men.”
“Listen, class, we have a lot of excellent women legislators in Congress. We have had two women Presidents—Cory Aquino and Gloria Arroyo. But how far have we really gone in ensuring ‘fundamental equality before the law of women and men?” I asked and no sooner have I finished when Deema interrupted.
“Forget the whole law, sir, we don’t even have equal CRIMINAL PROCEDURES for men and women,” the Tublay girl said.
“And, of course you have PROOF of that, right Miss Deema?”
“Yes, sir. Four senators were jailed between 2013 to the present: Juan Ponce Enrile, Bong Revilla, Jinggoy Estrada and Leila de Lima. Only the woman, Leila de Lima, is still in jail and the crime she is accused of does not even involve any loss of public funds. It’s not fair, sir. It’s just plain…SEXISM SIIIIR!” Deema said, gritting her teeth on the last two words.
“True that,” I agreed, “although in the case of Senator Enrile, he is nine-six years old. Age is a mitigating circumstance under Article 13 of your Revised Penal Code and it applies as early as when you reach age 70 only.” I reminded the class.
“It’s only a mitigating circumstance sir, not an exonerating one,” Deema said softly, trying not to embarrass me.
“That’s correct, Miss Deema,” I said, trying to backpedal awkwardly, “and the Order granting him bail came out in just a year.”
“Male judges really think and decide FAST when the accused is a MAN, don’t they sir?” Deema asked teasingly.
“I suppose so,” I conceded, “which makes me wonder why the Muntinglupa lady judge handling the de Lima case only inhibited in June 2021 when Senator de Lima has been in jail since February 2017.” the class looked up, a little surprised at the information.
“Female judges really think and act SLOW when the accused is a WOMAN, don’t they Miss Deema?” The class chuckled at both the parallel and the contrast.
“You see, class, there are no good or evil judges of either gender. There are only good or evil PEOPLE. A bad person will never be a good judge, regardless if it’s a man or a woman. That’s why you can’t have equality between men and women before the law if you focus on the men and women. You should focus on the law.”
“It’s not just the law, sir, it’s the whole society” Carla chimed in. She had been standing there for so long even though Deema was doing most of the talking, seated down.
“Oh, I’m sorry Miss Nasipnget-nalawag—”
“Addaawan, sir!”
“I’m sorry—Addaawan—it’s the self contrast in your name that my brain fixated on…you were saying it’s not just the law but society itself that perpetuates the inequality? Was that your point, Miss Carla?”
“Yes, sir. Like in the case of Senator Enrile. He is the principal accused and yet he is out on bail. His ‘girlfriend’ Gigi Reyes who is only an accomplice, has been in jail seven years now, and she is bashed viciously by media just because she is much too young for him. But how come nobody bashes Michael Yamson? That is society’s double standard,” Carla said.
“Michael WHO??”
“Michael Yamson! The young and handsome ‘boy toy’ of Senator Manny Pacquiao’s mother, Dionisia Pacquiao—who is 67 years old,” Deema blurted out again.
I saw my chance! “Boy toy? Did you say ‘boy toy??’—SEXISM, DEEMAAAA!!” the whole class erupted in guffaws. Deema blushed, realizing her professor can play the sexism game too.
So I banged the blackboard again.
“Seriously, class, I don’t know anything about the extramarital affairs of Senator Enrile. At age 96, I imagine he can only chase women now on his wheelchair and only if those women are running downhill. But the case of pañera Gigi has no gender element in it,” I explained. Even Deema nodded in agreement now.
“I want you to focus not on the lack of law on gender equality, but on existing law that perpetuates gender inequality. Miss Carla, do us a favor and read Article 211 of your Civil Code.”
“Here it is, sir, Article 211: ‘The father and the mother shall jointly exercise parental authority over the persons of their common children. In case of disagreement, the FATHER’s decision shall prevail…”
Deema’s eyebrows—the worst I’ve seen them do so far was meet in the middle of her forehead. For the first time, I saw those eyebrows actually CROSS over each other on her forehead.
“Now, don’t overreact, class. What Miss Puraw-nangisit read—”
“Addaawan, sir…”
“Right, right—what Miss Addaawan read is an economical provision meant to keep the cost of managing a family low. You cannot have couples suing each other in court to break a tie every time they argue.
“But the law changes dramatically if you inject a few adjectives, sir,” Carla said.
“Really? Give an example, Miss Carla…”
“Yes, sir… ‘the drug-addicted and sexually-maniacal father AND the mother shall jointly exercise parental authority…in case of disagreement on who their teenage daughter should sleep with at night, the drug-addicted and sexually-maniacal father’s decision shall prevail.”
“Right,” I said, “I think the class gets the picture.”
“And those are NOT even the worst adjectives I can think of, sir” said Miss Addaawan.
“How would you improve that provision then, Carla?”
“Sir, I would rewrite the second sentence, ‘in case of disagreement, the same shall be resolved in favor of the best interest of the child.” Carla proposed.
“You see, Miss Addaawan, that doesn’t improve the law by much. Now who will interpret ‘the best interest of the child’? That’s what the law tries to avoid, ambiguous grey areas like that,” I said.
Deema is wildly flailing her hands in the air—and I could have sworn I was starting to see smoke come out of her nose and ears.
“Alright, Miss Deema, before you explode there, will you help Miss Addaawan polish her proposed amendment. WHO will interpret the phrase ‘best interest of the child?”
“THE CHILD, SIR!” Deema said and stomped her foot at the same time. “In many domestic abuse cases, a little girl wants to run into her mother’s arms, but the drug-crazed father enjoys the legal presumption that his decision-making judgment is superior. Time for that presumption to disappear, sir!”
Suddenly the classroom began sounding like a busy fishmarket, everybody talking at the same time, nobody understanding what anybody else was saying.
I banged the blackboard again. I actually spend more time banging this blackboard than writing on it!
“Class, your Civil Code took effect on August 30, 1950—that’s more than SEVENTY-ONE years ago. Back in that gentler era, fathers were respected so much that their moral disposition was the legal standard of care. Miss Carla would you please read Article 1163 of your Civil Code…”
“Here it is, sir, Article 1163: Every person obliged to give something is also obliged to take care of it with the proper diligence of a good father of a family..” Carla read.
“Remember that phrase ‘proper diligence of a good father of a family’ class, you will encounter that phrase numerous times not only in the Civil Code but in many other special laws, too. Maybe it’s a sad thing that society no longer honors fathers as much. But all that tells me, gentlemen,” I said, addressing the male class population, “is that you guys have a lot of work ahead of you, by way of earning a legal presumption.” Nods and smiles all across the room.
“There’s just a couple of bothersome things I can’t get out of my mind regarding Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Bong Revilla, sir” Deema reprised.
“What are they, Deema?”
“First, they were already around in 1950…”
“They sure were, I’m pretty sure they can all sing Elvis Presley songs,” I said, trying to end the class on a lighter mood, “and what’s the second thing, Deema?”
“They are all fathers.”
About the Author
The author is a writer and lawyer based in Baguio City, Philippines. Former editor of the Gold Ore and Baguio City Digest, professor of journalism, political science and law at Baguio Colleges Foundation (BCF). He is a photographer and video documentarist. He has a YouTube channel called “Parables and Reason”
About Images: Some of the images used in the articles are from the posts in Atty. Joel Rodriguez Dizon’s Facebook account, and/or Facebook groups and pages he manages or/and part of.