You wouldn’t hit your own brother in the face for no reason at all, would you? Unless, of course, you’re unusually perverted, or psychotic, but that’s another story.

So why would you inflict serious bodily injury on another person — even, sometimes, to the extent of causing death — just so you may call each other “brother”?

These questions once again come to the fore due to the recent conviction by Judge Shirley Magsipoc-Pagalialuan of the Regional Trial Court of Manila of 10 members of the Aegis Juris Fraternity based in the University of Santo Tomas (UST), the country’s oldest and the alma mater of our national hero, Dr. Jose Rizal. The accused were indicted seven years ago for the death of Horatio “Atio” Castillo III, a UST law student. It is a cause célèbre because of the personalities and institutions involved. Now they have been meted life in prison.

For seven years, Atio’s parents (Horatio Jr. and Carmina) dedicated their hearts and souls to seeking justice for their son, in the face of a largely inconclusive Senate probe and a slew of collateral legal battles that resulted in one landmark case — Balag v. Senate of the Philippines — brought by one of the accused who was ordered detained for contempt.

The said suit definitely enriched jurisprudence and was a permanent victory for civil rights with the holding that a person cannot be jailed for longer than the existence of the committee ordering his arrest. It was, however, a scant and temporary victory for Balag, who was convicted last 1 October along with his fellow fraternity “brothers.” Well, another good result was the passage of the stricter “Anti-Hazing Law of 2018,” or Republic Act 11053.

I cannot comment further on the case since it is surely one for automatic review due to the penalty involved, and thus remains sub judice. I must, however, say in general that it is high time that the law on hazing be brought to bear — and bear hard — on those who would participate in what I consider to be one of the most ridiculous and reprehensible practices that has survived to present-day civilized society.

The roots of hazing may be traced back to the misty beginnings of civilization. As far back as the time of the Greek philosopher Plato, founder of the Platonic Academy, hazing has been practiced, and in fact was roundly criticized by the famous Greek philosopher as having no place in his school. Nonetheless, it persisted, especially among secret societies as a test of one’s determination to become a member; and in military organizations, to show how physically fit a potential soldier was.

Hazing may be understandable — but not in itself justifiable — for recruits in the military, who are expectedly made to undergo training to fortify themselves for deadly combat, but for school organizations (including law fraternities), it is totally illogical, if not downright stupid. Future lawyers fight not with their fists but with their brains, and to require recruits to run the gauntlet of physical violence serves no purpose but to scar them for life and turn them into violent beings.

The “bond of common experience” often used by the fraternities as their apologia for hazing is, to be technical about it, a pile of putrefying excrement. There are other ways of proving one’s worth to an organization: commitment, loyalty, dedication. These are things that cannot be determined in one or two nights of unbridled bodily battering, but over time as the members of a fraternity go on through life. That is the “bond of common experience” that an organization should look for.

In fine, I must say to all those being baited by the assumed ambrosia of amity being offered by fraternities to entice you to undergo hazing: BEWARE! Those who mouth those lines are not after brotherhood; they are worse than your neighborhood hoods.