1

Transcending Stereotypes, Refocusing Priorities:

The Law as Real and the Real Lawyering
Noel Cagigas Felongco I

In a TEDx talk in UP Diliman,1 now Supreme Court Associate Justice Marvic Leonen
discussed why lawyers do matter in society. For him, one the reasons why lawyers matter is that
the law is real. Yes, real. The law is real to those who need it, to those who have nothing else to
cling on to but on the law. The context is far from negligible. He discussed about certain situations
in the Philippines wherein the law had been manifested into real action, real results, and real
justice from former NPAs2 going back to the society, to indigenous peoples being protected from
environmental hazards brought about by commercial bullies. As soon to be lawyers, realizing the
real-ness of the law, transcending from textbooks and library works, formulating substantial
courses of actions toward effecting real effects and results in the society must be top-priority.
Indeed, one of the most interesting areas in the Philippine jurisdiction, yet ironically a road less
travelled by, is Environmental Law, particularly delving into the critical issue on Climate Change.
The article written by Siobhan McInerney-Lankford is Socrates to the modern world,
especially to the legal intelligentsia and to the political sector. It poses questions which the intended
audience ought to have asked themselves, yet failed to do so for one reason or another. Yet, again,
asking these questions is one matter; answering them and acting on the answers, if any, are a
different one. Thus, this paper aims to discuss two main topics as points of reaction/reflection on
the article: (1) the needed efforts to get out of the shackles and illusion of stereotypes, thereby
effecting substantial social justice through addressing climate change and (2) the critique of
lawyering vis--vis issues on Climate Change and Human Rights in the International sphere.
Effort-less?
Perhaps, the reason why climate change has not been an attractive area of focus is partly
attributed to the rather subconscious stereotype that it belongs to the expertise of the scientists, of
the mathematicians, and inventors. Also, perhaps it is because of the idea that people cannot do
anything about it anymore. The whole world is doomed. It should just wait for its end to come and
become just another barren clump of cold rocks floating meaninglessly in the vacuum of void-ness
in space. That is sad. Very. Sad.
It is sad because this indicates malignant laxity, threatening complacency and a wrong
sense of passing the ball and never wanting to receive the ball back.
Climate Change, for Lawyers also
People of this modern age need to realize that these are illusions that shackle them to the
belief that climate change is for the scientific geeks, for the inventors, for the mathematicians etc.
Everyone should realize that every profession, every expertise, can contribute to finding solutions
to the problem. Besides, the phenomenon of climate change is not only about the weather, or the
climate, or the science behind it. It transcends science. In fact, it even reaches certain areas which
are least expected to be affected for climate change has already undermined, as continues to
undermine, a broad range of internationally protected human rights, e.g., right to health and even
life, etc.3 It is clear and convincing, therefore, that climate change is not merely for scientists, but
also for other people who are expected to make a change, who are expected to have the capacity

1
For reference, See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcBr4fdNGvI&feature=youtu.be. Accessed from
the World Wide Web: October 20, 2014.
2
New Peoples Army, an insurgent group in the Philippines.
3
Stephen Humphreys, Climate Change and Human Rights: A Rough Guide (London: Rough Guide, Ltd.,
2008), 3.

2
to influence the course of history, who are expected to guard rights of his fellow beings: the
lawyers.
Paradigm Shift
There is this notion in the Philippines that when a person has Atty. before his/her name,
he/she is one who goes to court every day, who argues every time, and who earns a lot of cash by
just making up stories and helping the bad guys enjoy the liberty they do not deserve. Wannabe
lawyers tend to adopt such notions when they enter law school. Consequently, the motivations
they have when they think of the future is to become that person, embellished with fame and
glamour. But in reality, that is not lawyering. It is time to abandon such a view. It is time to consider
to travel the road less travelled by. The public view to lawyering must be reconsidered in order to
see that lawyering is not about glamour and style, not about just about money and fame. It is about
making the public realize that the law is real, that the law touches peoples lives.
The first step, therefore, is to have a paradigm shift: to look at lawyering as a means of
substantiating the law into results, into incarnation of justice which the people can feel and see.
Priorities Refocused
Having set the initiatory part of this process, the substantive part follows, that is, the efforts
to address the threats of Climate Change to the most cherished of any individual: Human rights.
Climate change has been found to be a threat to destroy many cultures of peoples and communities,
especially the poor and vulnerable ones.4 It has been said that Low-lying, coastal developing
countries and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are likely to be most acutely affected by the
declining environmental conditions due to climate change.5 Notice that this kind of vulnerability
is anchored not on nature, but on the perceived inequalities in society. Those who have less
resources are more likely to be adversely affected even worse. Here, the law must come in, as
parens patriae, as protector of the vulnerable.
Responsibility Toward Each Other
Perhaps, the most fundamental aspect of addressing climate change vis--vis human rights
is duty and responsibility.6 In the Philippines, inter-generational responsibility had been introduced
in the legal system.7 But in the international community, there is no binding legal concept which
expresses the inevitable reality that each country has a responsibility toward the others, especially
those which are vulnerable.
Unless such is achieved, there would be no true law that could address the problem of
human rights in relation to climate change, for international responsibility must be rooted on a
strong sense of personal duty towards each fellow citizen of this world. There cannot be true and
real lawyering, if there is no law that recognizes such responsibilities. And there cannot be such a
law, if there is no recognition of the personal duties people have for each other.
There is therefore a need to redirect the focus of the world, from acquiring personal gain,
to that of extending help and service toward the oppressed, setting aside greed and lust for power,
and assuming the mindset of being responsible of each other, regardless of race and color.

Center for International Environmental Law, Climate Change and Human Rights: A Primer (USA:
Washington DC), 1.
5
Environmental Justice Foundation, A Nation Under Threat: The Impacts of Climate Change on Human
Rights and Forced Migration in Bangladesh (London: Environmental Justice Foundation, 2012), 5.
6
See Immanuel Kants Philosophy of Duty and Morality, also known as Deontology. For reference, see
Joaquim Siles i Borrais, Evil, Freedom and Responsibility: An Essay on Kants Moral Philosophy (Richmond Journal
of Philosophy, Summer 2003).
7
See Oposa v. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993.