20/07/2026
When I was first admitted as an attorney, I was driven, aggressive, and highly motivated. I operated on the strict belief that the application of the law was absolute—black, white, and governed purely by merit and procedure.
My first major disillusionment came in a seemingly open-and-shut case. We approached the court for a default judgment against the Minister of Police, who had completely failed to defend the matter. By all legal logic, it was an unopposed victory.
Instead, during the proceedings, the presiding magistrate seemed visibly frustrated—almost angry at the "audacity" of suing the Minister. Long story short, she dismissed our default judgment application with costs. It was a baffling, unprecedented ruling that left even first-year law students scratching their heads.
That day was my first real encounter with the subjective application of the law. It was a harsh introduction to the reality that legal proceedings are not always a sterile, logical exercise. Over time, I have come to accept this unpredictability not as a flaw, but as the actual rule of the game.
The law is a powerful instrument, but its ex*****on is inherently human.
For the young lawyers and litigators out there: What was your first "reality check" in the courtroom?