Read on Twitter
[ORAL ARGUMENTS; A Thread] Unlike the SCOTUS, oral arguments before the PHL SC are rare as the large docket does not allow all cases filed to be heard. In the rare instances when the Court does hear arguments, it usually involves constitutional and/or novel questions of law.
The session starts with the bailiff's proclamation, "Hear ye, hear ye, the Honorable, the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the Philippines..." as the members file into the Session Hall in reverse order of seniority (15th AJ to the CJ).
The bench is a half-oval and is curved, with the speaker's rostrum in the center facing the CJ directly. The members are seated in order of seniority with the CJ in the center seat, the SAJ (#2) to his right, and the third most senior to his left.
As the Court is complete (with 15 members), this is how they would be seated if all members are present. Pro-tip: even numbered Justices (according to their seniority) are to the right of the CJ, while odd-numbered Justices are to the left of the CJ.
The session starts with the CJ gavelling the session to order and the Clerk of Court (seated directly below the CJ) calling the appearances. Petitioners counsels are seated to the right of the CJ, while the Solicitor General and his team are seated to the left of the CJ.
Typically, petitioners' counsel are asked to give their opening statements first within a specified time limit; thereafter the Court will then start with interpellation, which can be open-ended as to time. Pro-tip: The one who asks the first question is the Member-in-Charge.
After interpellation of petitioners' counsel, the Solicitor General makes his/her opening statement, followed by interpellation. When the members of the Court are satisfied, the CJ will then direct the parties to submit their respective Memorandum within a period of time.
What do the questions posed during orals mean? The Justices often use the oral arguments as an opportunity to clarify the positions taken by counsels, including the SolGen; often, it is also a time to test knowledge through the use of hypotheticals.
But the Justices often also use orals to "argue" with each other on preliminary positions they may already have taken; often the questions show preliminary positions they may have taken and are often directed to the other members of the Court to see if they agree.
Pro-tip on covering an oral argument: Until the Decision comes out with the Justices votes, it isn't safe to conclude that a Justice is leaning towards a certain position based simply on his/her questions. Many Justices often take an opposite stance during interpellation.
Some Justices are more active during interpellation than others. Their interpellation styles differ--from the academic, open-ended questions to the more pointed, leading, cross-examination questions. Counsel is expected to prepare for all these types of interpellations.
What does it feel like to argue before the Supreme Court? Think of your worst law school recitation on your worst "bad day", multiply by a factor of 15--if you don't prepare well. But if you prepare well, then it can be an extremely enjoyable experience.
What's the secret to a fruitful oral argument? Good research, good writing. Oral arguments are not speeches or debates, they're opportunities at advocacy at the highest level. The BTS preparations before the orals are as important as , if not more important than, the orals.
What's the secret to handling interpellation during orals? Study, study, study, and then study again. Rehearse answers. Do moots or mocks before actual people. Train yourself to think on your feet especially when the question comes out of left field.
During my first oral argument on the death penalty, I was quizzed by J FDR (Florenz D. Regalado) about the difference between a Rule 45 and a Rule 65 certiorari; he smiled when I mentioned, “as Your Honor wrote in your book...”. It helps to be familiar with what they’ve written.
In that same orals, my Poli law review professor VV Mendoza interpellated me, often starting with “you will recall the case of ...”, as if picking up where we had left off in review class.
