Being a lawyer in these times – Prensa Libre

From the first days, everything that happened had already imprinted the stamp that characterizes a law school. One, every boy, fresh out of high school, was there with his fellows who, like one, were inspired to achieve the titles of the lawyer. I, from an early age, had taken that vocation.
Perhaps I followed in grandfather’s footsteps, although his time was long before mine. The truth is, I must admit that I was one of the lonely chickens on the first day of college. Did not know anybody. But the most relevant: I did not know anything about my career.
In the legal profession, mine was a blank page. Many arrived just as virgins as me. For this reason, the presence of those who brought a direct line of the previous professional generation became all the more relevant. A lineage, exercised and present in each class period, in each discussion. We could have been just disconnected kids. But we did know that the one who was out there was the son of the lawyer Balsells Tojo, that the father of those was the lawyer Reinoso Gil, or that the children of the then attorney De Léon Carpio were at the top. There is no doubt that the trajectory and the vision of the parents beat between us.

It was the Faculty of the Landívar, at the beginning of the 90’s. The Constitution, in its nursery years, was the source of light present in the inspiration of the most relevant teachers. Yes, it was known that there was a long way to go. Many pending questions to be developed. Tangles and conflicts possible only in a country as impossible as ours. But there was something that did seem to be a very clear consensus. And that was where and what he did not want to return to. There was an absolute repudiation of authoritarian power. To dictatorships. To the will of a few, and to the impotence of the many. Absolutism was frowned upon. A bad word. I think that civilism weighed on militarism. And that democracy was exciting. The Republic, the rule of law. That is why the rejection of Serrano Elías’ attempt was experienced with such vehemence. Because we were infected with the vigor, the passion, of the kinds of people like the remembered Midori Papadópolo, a gladiator of the Constitution, a hero in the classrooms. We had a lot of dispassionate professor, of course. But also enough references to understand that the most important decorum of our union role would be exercised by giving life to the aforementioned ideals. And all this with a valid purpose: to rebuild the ruins that we were inheriting. A better country than the one we received.

Thirty years have passed since then, and the Constitution is less exciting. The unattended tangles grew. The repudiation of the enemies of democratic liberalism has been dissipated. Now it turns out that there are those who forget the monstrous of terror. The despicableness of authoritarianism. The execrableness of the power superior to the rule of law. The motto of the time is that the generality defends their personal convenience. The stall. The little business. The Today. The I. The tangible result is a country of daily tragedies that cannot be resolved. We all know that the state as a whole is taken over by real mafias that no longer bother to hide. The violation of constitutionalism is flagrant. The guild reputation, rightly so, crushed. And for this reason, the silence of the Law schools – my alma mater, in mind – is not an accomplice, it is a partner. There is no excuse for silence. If they don’t let you speak, quit! I remember those college years when we entered that world of the constitutional ideal. It was permeated us by the generation that came before us. Our call is to pass it on to those who follow.

–