I am a little intimidated with how I would fare in
fulfilling my role and responsibility as the new cell group leader. I hope I
can be accommodating and spontaneous enough in my interaction with the members
of my cell group. I hope I can make people feel welcomed. However, I am faced
with a challenge posed by the condition I have called Aspergers Syndrome. I
might find it difficult to know what to say or do in order to engage the other
members of the group. I become socially exhausted easily, and may appear aloof.
I might be socially oblivious to whether other people are bored with the line
of discussion I am bringing up, and may get carried away with pedantic
discussion of theology or biblical facts and history. I might appear insensitive
to the sentiments or emotions of those in my cell group, and may not be able to
provide the necessary support. Generally, people in my life do not find me a
suitable person to relate to in times of their troubles. I might be relatively
emotionless in the way I carry out worship and prayer sessions. I also have
trouble saying group prayers, such as prayers for meals, and opening and
closing prayers for group sessions.
I hope this first session would turn out well. I am afraid
that I would be paralyzed by fear or by the sensory overload from the number of
people that are in the cell group. Such paralysis happened to me during my
criminal law presentation last semester, and I was struggling throughout the
entire presentation to recall what I was trying to put forth and expressing
them in words. It may very well occur during VCF sessions as well. I take quiet
confidence that I have led discipleship group in my own church 3 times. I didn’t
think I fared too well on those occasions, but my discipleship group mates
affirmed me that I did okay.
My former cell group leaders, Charmaine and Sabrina, have
been very encouraging of me to assume the role of cell group leader. Their
words to me when I told them of my worries due to my having Aspergers Syndrome
have been most comforting and inspiring. Charmaine related to me the account of
various characters in the Bible whom God have chosen for his purposes despite
of their weaknesses. Sabrina related to me her own challenges in being the cell
group leader and why she chose to be one despite the challenges she knew she
would face. I suppose I want to challenge myself to be able to do things that
people without Aspergers Syndrome are able to do. I want to develop skills of
leading a group. The VCF would be a safe and accommodative avenue for me to
develop such skills. I want to be able to lead a normal life, and do things
other normal people do.
Today, I went to the pro-bono welcome tea session. I
have been considering joining the pro-bono club. I think it would give me a
fuller experience at law school. However, I am apprehensive of assuming too much
commitment for myself. The various projects that I can participate in for the
pro-bono club would require me to participate in the pro-bono activity a day or
two every week. I think my Christian commitments and activities consume much of
my time already. There is VCF cell group meeting and Central Bible Study
session on Wednesdays, Professor Thio’s bible study sessions on Fridays, Church
discipleship group on Saturdays, and the usual Sunday service. I need to
carefully consider whether I should take on any more commitments. Intuitively
speaking, I would give the pro-bono club a miss.
Professor Michael Dowdle conducted the second
seminar for comparative legal tradition today. It was about the history of the
common law. The common law legal system culminates very much by incremental
refashioning of the justice system by succession of governing kings of England
to conveniently expand their bureaucracy across England and to generate revenue
for their war and opulent living expenses. Compared to the civil law legal
system, there is relatively less intellectual foundation undergirding the
formulation of the common law legal system. The formalistic writ system was
conceived during the reign of Normandy King Henry the Second to establish a
convenient working judiciary system that administrate land dispute amongst the
nobles, and generate revenues for the King’s coffers. The purpose of the writ
system was never so much concerned about administration of justice, as it was
about implementing a system that regulates access to justice. The common man
could only seek justice from the King’s court if his complaints fell within a
specified category covered by the available writs. A purchase of the
appropriate writs for the dispute is made and the writ referred to the
Justiciar(judge-delegate appointed by the king) who would approve the referral
of the dispute to trial. Then after, the dispute is referred to a “petty assize”
consisting of a jury of 12 men from the province of the dispute whose verdict
settles the land dispute.
Due to the divide between the merchant class and aristocracy
class, the merchant-classed jury began making decision in disfavor of the
aristocracy class. In order to solve this issue of jury nullification (where
the jury makes a decision contrary to prevailing laws), the Nobles tried to
seize control by moving the decision from the jury into the hands of the judge.
The take-home question from the seminar is “Is
Singapore really a common law jurisdiction?” In tackling this question, I
suppose I first need to find out the characteristics of a “common law
jurisdiction”. However, all the seminar by Professor Michael Dowdle does is
tell me about the history of the formation of the common law. But all these
information are really redundant in giving me a characterization of what a
common law legal tradition is. If I should refer to Wikipedia, the main
characteristic of the common law tradition is the great precedential weight to
case law. This is a very straightforward characterization of the common law. It
is almost too simple to just conclude that Singapore is thus a common law
jurisdiction. I suppose I am missing out something.
No comments:
Post a Comment