This writer saw the show of stand-up comedian Atty. Edward Chico last Friday at a sold-out venue in BGC, in a bar owned, nonetheless, by the family of the Senate President. Ironically, he opened his show with a “kamustahan,” a swipe at Senator Pia Cayetano’s trending meme.

Atty. Chico, a fellow columnist here at The DAILY TRIBUNE, presented a masterpiece of a show that lasted for nearly two hours, touching on a range of topics, from his personal life growing up in an imperfect family in the impoverished districts of Tondo, Manila, to his experiences as a lawyer navigating the absurdities of Philippine society and governance.

Yet what struck us most was his take on modern-day politics in the Philippines, which has turned increasingly toxic over the past two weeks, particularly within the halls of the Senate and which promises to escalate several notches higher with the impending impeachment trial proceedings involving Vice President Sara Duterte.

Comedy, when done properly, becomes more than entertainment. It becomes social commentary sharpened by wit instead of anger. Atty. Chico managed to criticize the state of public discourse without resorting to shouting, theatrics or intellectual shortcuts. In many ways, his performance reminded the audience of what our political climate sorely lacks today: restraint, intelligence and the discipline to think before speaking.

Nowadays, we need more intelligence taking the limelight instead of pinch-hitters and lawyers who simply shoot from the hip. Public discourse has become a gladiatorial arena where the loudest soundbite often prevails over the most reasoned legal argument. The legal profession, in particular, suffers when practitioners treat television cameras and social media clips as substitutes for careful legal analysis.

Take, for example, Atty. Jimmy Bondoc, a newly minted lawyer who spent most of his career singing ballads that made him famous. His recent public comment suggesting that a warrant intended for his client, Senator Ronald dela Rosa, may instead be served upon him as counsel so that he may, in turn, serve it to Senator  Dela Rosa, was legally untenable and fundamentally incorrect. Statements of that nature, particularly from members of the Bar, contribute to the erosion of public understanding of legal processes and constitutional procedure.

One may argue that such statements deserve sanctions or even invite discussions on professional accountability. But then again, all lawyers make mistakes. The practice of law is humbling precisely because it exposes one’s errors to public view. Atty. Bondoc, like any member of the profession, must be afforded the opportunity to rectify an incorrect public statement and clarify his position moving forward.

That, perhaps, is the greater lesson here. The answer to toxic discourse is not more toxicity. It is better discourse, with intelligence meeting intelligence. It is debate replacing mob rule. And perhaps there remains reason for optimism when lawyers like Atty. Chico can still command a full room, armed not with propaganda or rage, but with intellect, humor and the courage to make people think.