You are on page 1of 19

Cayetano vs Monsod We are faced here with a controversy of far-reaching proportions.

While ostensibly only legal issues are involved, the Court's decision in this case would indubitably have a profound effect on the political aspect of our national existence. The 19 ! Constitution provides in "ection 1 #1$, %rticle &'-C( There shall be a Co))ission on *lections co)posed of a Chair)an and six Co))issioners who shall be natural-born citi+ens of the ,hilippines and, at the ti)e of their appoint)ent, at least thirtyfive years of age, holders of a college degree, and )ust not have been candidates for any elective position in the i))ediately preceding -elections. -owever, a )a.ority thereof, including the Chair)an, shall be )e)bers of the ,hilippine /ar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years. #*)phasis supplied$ The afore0uoted provision is patterned after "ection l#l$, %rticle '&&-C of the 19!1 Constitution which si)ilarly provides( There shall be an independent Co))ission on *lections co)posed of a Chair)an and eight Co))issioners who shall be natural-born citi+ens of the ,hilippines and, at the ti)e of their appoint)ent, at least thirty-five years of age and holders of a college degree. -owever, a )a.ority thereof, including the Chair)an, shall be )e)bers of the ,hilippine /ar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.' #*)phasis supplied$ 2egrettably, however, there see)s to be no .urisprudence as to what constitutes practice of law as a legal 0ualification to an appointive office. /lac3 defines 4practice of law4 as( The rendition of services re0uiring the 3nowledge and the application of legal principles and techni0ue to serve the interest of another with his consent. &t is not li)ited to appearing in court, or advising and assisting in the conduct of litigation, but e)braces the preparation of pleadings, and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, conveyancing, the preparation of legal instru)ents of all 3inds, and the giving of all legal advice to clients. &t e)braces all advice to clients and all actions ta3en for the) in )atters connected with the law. %n attorney engages in the practice of law by )aintaining an office where he is held out to be-an attorney, using a letterhead describing hi)self as an attorney, counseling clients in legal )atters, negotiating with opposing counsel about pending litigation, and fixing and collecting fees for services rendered by his associate. #Black's Law Dictionary, 1rd ed.$ The practice of law is not li)ited to the conduct of cases in court. #Land Title Abstract and Trust Co. v. Dworken, 159 6hio "t. 51, 191 7.*. 89:$ % person is also considered to be in the practice of law when he( ... for valuable consideration engages in the business of advising person, fir)s, associations or corporations as to their rights under the law, or appears in a representative capacity as an advocate in proceedings pending or prospective, before any court, co))issioner, referee, board, body, co))ittee, or co))ission constituted by law or authori+ed to settle controversies and there, in such representative capacity perfor)s any act or acts for the purpose of obtaining or defending the rights of their clients under the law. 6therwise stated, one who, in a representative capacity, engages in the business of advising clients as to their rights under the law, or while so engaged perfor)s any act or acts either in court or outside of court for that purpose, is engaged in the practice of law. # tate e!. rel. "ckittrick v..C. . Dudley and Co., 1:5 ".W. 5d 99, 1;: <o. 95$ This Court in the case of #hilippine Lawyers Association v.Agrava, #1:9 ,hil. 1!1,1!8-1!!$ stated( The practice of law is not li)ited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court= it e)braces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, the )anage)ent of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before .udges and courts, and in addition, conveying. &n general, all advice to clients, and all action ta3en for the) in )atters connected with the law incorporation services, assess)ent and conde)nation services conte)plating an appearance before a .udicial body, the foreclosure of a )ortgage, enforce)ent of a creditor's clai) in ban3ruptcy and insolvency proceedings, and conducting proceedings in attach)ent, and in )atters of estate and guardianship have been held to constitute law practice, as do the preparation and drafting of legal instru)ents, where the work done involves the deter$ination by the trained legal $ind of the legal effect of facts and conditions. #9 %). >r. p. 585, 581$. #*)phasis supplied$ #ractice of law under )ode) conditions consists in no s)all part of wor3 perfor)ed outside of any court and having no i))ediate relation to proceedings in court. &t e)braces conveyancing, the giving of legal advice on a large variety of sub.ects, and the preparation and execution of legal instru)ents covering an extensive field of business and trust relations and other affairs. Although these transactions $ay have no direct connection with court proceedings, they are always sub%ect to beco$e involved in litigation. They re0uire in )any aspects a high degree of legal s3ill, a wide experience with )en and affairs, and great capacity for adaptation to difficult and co)plex situations. These custo)ary functions of an attorney or counselor at law bear an inti)ate relation to the ad)inistration of .ustice by the courts. 7o valid distinction, so far as concerns the 0uestion set forth in the order, can be drawn between that part of the wor3 of the lawyer which involves appearance in court and that part which involves advice and drafting of instru)ents in his office. &t is of i)portance to the welfare of the public that these )anifold custo)ary functions be perfor)ed by persons possessed of ade0uate learning and s3ill, of sound )oral character, and acting at all ti)es under the heavy trust obligations to clients which rests upon all attorneys. #<oran, Co$$ents on the &ules of Court, ?ol. 1 @1991 ed.A , p. 889-888, citing 'n re (pinion of the )ustices @<ass.A, 19; 7.*. 111, 0uoted in &hode 's. Bar Assoc. v. Auto$obile ervice Assoc. @2.&.A 1!9 %. 119,1;;$. #*)phasis ours$

The Bniversity of the ,hilippines Caw Center in conducting orientation briefing for new lawyers #19!;-19!9$ listed the di)ensions of the practice of law in even broader ter)s as advocacy, counselling and public service. 6ne )ay be a practicing attorney in following any line of e)ploy)ent in the profession. &f what he does exacts 3nowledge of the law and is of a 3ind usual for attorneys engaging in the active practice of their profession, and he follows so)e one or )ore lines of e)ploy)ent such as this he is a practicing attorney at law within the )eaning of the statute. #Barr v. Cardell, 199 7W 115$ ,ractice of law )eans any activity, in or out of court, which re0uires the application of law, legal procedure, 3nowledge, training and experience. 4To engage in the practice of law is to perfor) those acts which are characteristics of the profession. Denerally, to practice law is to give notice or render any 3ind of service, which device or service re0uires the use in any degree of legal 3nowledge or s3ill.4 #111 %C2 51$ The following records of the 19 8 Constitutional Co))ission show that it has adopted a liberal interpretation of the ter) 4practice of law.4 <2. E6F. /efore we suspend the session, )ay & )a3e a )anifestation which & forgot to do during our review of the provisions on the Co))ission on %udit. <ay & be allowed to )a3e a very brief state)entG T-* ,2*"&H&7D 6EE&C*2 #<r. >a)ir$. The Co))issioner will please proceed. <2. E6F. This has to do with the *ualifications of the $e$bers of the Co$$ission on Audit. A$ong others, the *ualifications provided for by ection ' is that +They $ust be "e$bers of the #hilippine Bar+ , ' a$ *uoting fro$ the provision , +who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years+. To avoid any )isunderstanding which would result in excluding )e)bers of the /ar who are now e)ployed in the C6% or Co))ission on %udit, we would like to $ake the clarification that this provision on *ualifications regarding $e$bers of the Bar does not necessarily refer or involve actual practice of law outside the C(A -e have to interpret this to $ean that as long as the lawyers who are e$ployed in the C(A are using their legal knowledge or legal talent in their respective work within C(A, then they are *ualified to be considered for appoint$ent as $e$bers or co$$issioners, even chair$an, of the Co$$ission on Audit. This has been discussed by the Co))ittee on Constitutional Co))issions and %gencies and we dee) it i)portant to ta3e it up on the floor so that this interpretation )ay be )ade available whenever this provision on the 0ualifications as regards )e)bers of the ,hilippine /ar engaging in the practice of law for at least ten years is ta3en up. <2. 6,C*. Will Co))issioner Eo+ yield to .ust one 0uestion. <2. E6F. Ies, <r. ,residing 6fficer. <2. 6,C*. 's he, in effect, saying that service in the C(A by a lawyer is e*uivalent to the re*uire$ent of a law practice that is set forth in the Article on the Co$$ission on Audit. <2. E6F. -e $ust consider the fact that the work of C(A, although it is auditing, will necessarily involve legal work/ it will involve legal work. And, therefore, lawyers who are e$ployed in C(A now would have the necessary *ualifications in accordance with the #rovision on *ualifications under our provisions on the Co$$ission on Audit. And, therefore, the answer is yes. <2. 6,C*. Ies. "o that the construction given to this is that this is e0uivalent to the practice of law. <2. E6F. 0es, "r. #residing (fficer. <2. 6,C*. Thank you. ... # *)phasis supplied$ "ection 1#1$, %rticle &'-H of the 19 ! Constitution, provides, a)ong others, that the Chair)an and two Co))issioners of the Co))ission on %udit #C6%$ should either be certified public accountants with not less than ten years of auditing practice, or )e)bers of the ,hilippine /ar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years. #e)phasis supplied$ Corollary to this is the ter) 4private practitioner4 and which is in )any ways synony)ous with the word 4lawyer.4 Today, although )any lawyers do not engage in private practice, it is still a fact that the )a.ority of lawyers are private practitioners. #Dary <unne3e, (pportunities in Law Careers @?D< Career -ori+ons( &llinoisA, @19 8A, p. 19$.

%t this point, it )ight be helpful to define private practice. The ter), as co))only understood, )eans 4an individual or organi+ation engaged in the business of delivering legal services.4 #'bid.$. Cawyers who practice alone are often called 4sole practitioners.4 Droups of lawyers are called 4fir)s.4 The fir) is usually a partnership and )e)bers of the fir) are the partners. "o)e fir)s )ay be organi+ed as professional corporations and the )e)bers called shareholders. &n either case, the )e)bers of the fir) are the experienced attorneys. &n )ost fir)s, there are younger or )ore inexperienced salaried attorneyscalled 4associates.4 #'bid.$. The test that defines law practice by loo3ing to traditional areas of law practice is essentially tautologous, unhelpful defining the practice of law as that which lawyers do. #Charles W. Wolfra), "odern Legal 1thics @West ,ublishing Co.( <innesota, 19 8A, p. 991$. The practice of law is defined as the perfor)ance of any acts . . . in or out of court, co))only understood to be the practice of law. # tate Bar Ass'n v. Connecticut Bank 2 Trust Co., 1;9 Conn. 555, 1;: %.5d 81, !: @199 A @0uoting 3rievance Co$$. v. #ayne, 15 Conn. 159, 55 %.5d 851, 858 @19;1A$. /ecause lawyers perfor) al)ost every function 3nown in the co))ercial and govern)ental real), such a definition would obviously be too global to be wor3able.#Wolfra), op. cit.$. The appearance of a lawyer in litigation in behalf of a client is at once the )ost publicly fa)iliar role for lawyers as well as an unco))on role for the average lawyer. <ost lawyers spend little ti)e in courtroo)s, and a large percentage spend their entire practice without litigating a case. #'bid., p. 991$. 7onetheless, )any lawyers do continue to litigate and the litigating lawyer's role colors )uch of both the public i)age and the self perception of the legal profession. # 'bid.$. &n this regard thus, the do)inance of litigation in the public )ind reflects history, not reality. # 'bid.$. Why is this soG 2ecall that the late %lexander "yCip, a corporate lawyer, once articulated on the i)portance of a lawyer as a business counselor in this wise( 4*ven today, there are still uninfor)ed lay)en whose concept of an attorney is one who principally tries cases before the courts. The )e)bers of the bench and bar and the infor)ed lay)en such as business)en, 3now that in )ost developed societies today, substantially )ore legal wor3 is transacted in law offices than in the courtroo)s. Deneral practitioners of law who do both litigation and non-litigation wor3 also 3now that in )ost cases they find the)selves spending )ore ti)e doing what @isA loosely desccribe@dA as business counseling than in trying cases. The business lawyer has been described as the planner, the diagnostician and the trial lawyer, the surgeon. &@tA need not @beA stress@edA that in law, as in )edicine, surgery should be avoided where internal )edicine can be effective.4 # Business tar, 4Corporate Einance Caw,4 >an. 11, 19 9, p. ;$. &n the course of a wor3ing day the average general practitioner wig engage in a nu)ber of legal tas3s, each involving different legal doctrines, legal s3ills, legal processes, legal institutions, clients, and other interested parties. *ven the increasing nu)bers of lawyers in speciali+ed practice wig usually perfor) at least so)e legal services outside their specialty. %nd even within a narrow specialty such as tax practice, a lawyer will shift fro) one legal tas3 or role such as advice-giving to an i)portantly different one such as representing a client before an ad)inistrative agency. #Wolfra), supra, p. 8 !$. /y no )eans will )ost of this wor3 involve litigation, unless the lawyer is one of the relatively rare types J a litigator who speciali+es in this wor3 to the exclusion of )uch else. &nstead, the wor3 will re0uire the lawyer to have )astered the full range of traditional lawyer s3ills of client counselling, advice-giving, docu)ent drafting, and negotiation. %nd increasingly lawyers find that the new s3ills of evaluation and )ediation are both effective for )any clients and a source of e)ploy)ent. #'bid.$. <ost lawyers will engage in non-litigation legal wor3 or in litigation wor3 that is constrained in very i)portant ways, at least theoretically, so as to re)ove fro) it so)e of the salient features of adversarial litigation. 6f these special roles, the )ost pro)inent is that of prosecutor. &n so)e lawyers' wor3 the constraints are i)posed both by the nature of the client and by the way in which the lawyer is organi+ed into a social unit to perfor) that wor3. The )ost co))on of these roles are those of corporate practice and govern)ent legal service. #'bid.$. &n several issues of the Business tar, a business daily, herein below 0uoted are e)erging trends in corporate law practice, a departure fro) the traditional concept of practice of law. We are experiencing today what truly )ay be called a revolutionary transfor)ation in corporate law practice. Cawyers and other professional groups, in particular those )e)bers participating in various legal-policy decisional contexts, are finding that understanding the )a.or e)erging trends in corporation law is indispensable to intelligent decision-)a3ing. Constructive ad.ust)ent to )a.or corporate proble)s of today re0uires an accurate understanding of the nature and i)plications of the corporate law research function acco)panied by an accelerating rate of infor)ation accu)ulation. The recognition of the need for such i)proved corporate legal policy for)ulation, particularly 4)odel-)a3ing4 and 4contingency planning,4 has i)pressed upon us the inade0uacy of traditional procedures in )any decisional contexts. &n a co)plex legal proble) the )ass of infor)ation to be processed, the sorting and weighing of significant conditional factors, the appraisal of )a.or trends, the necessity of esti)ating the conse0uences of given courses of action, and the need for fast decision and response in situations of acute danger have pro)pted the use of sophisticated concepts of infor)ation flow theory, operational analysis, auto)atic data processing, and electronic co)puting e0uip)ent. Bnderstandably, an i)proved decisional structure )ust stress the predictive co)ponent of the policy-)a3ing process, wherein a 4)odel4, of the decisional context or a seg)ent thereof is developed to test pro.ected alternative courses of action in ter)s of futuristic effects flowing therefro). %lthough )e)bers of the legal profession are regularly engaged in predicting and pro.ecting the trends of the law, the sub.ect of corporate finance law has received relatively little organi+ed and for)ali+ed attention in the philosophy of advancing corporate legal education. 7onetheless, a crossdisciplinary approach to legal research has beco)e a vital necessity.

Certainly, the general orientation for productive contributions by those trained pri)arily in the law can be i)proved through an early introduction to )ulti-variable decisional context and the various approaches for handling such proble)s. Cawyers, particularly with either a )aster's or doctorate degree in business ad)inistration or )anage)ent, functioning at the legal policy level of decision)a3ing now have so)e appreciation for the concepts and analytical techni0ues of other professions which are currently engaged in si)ilar types of co)plex decision-)a3ing. Truth to tell, )any situations involving corporate finance proble)s would re0uire the services of an astute attorney because of the co)plex legal i)plications that arise fro) each and every necessary step in securing and )aintaining the business issue raised. #Business tar, 4Corporate Einance Caw,4 >an. 11, 19 9, p. ;$. &n our litigation-prone country, a corporate lawyer is assiduously referred to as the 4abogado de ca)panilla.4 -e is the 4big-ti)e4 lawyer, earning big )oney and with a clientele co)posed of the tycoons and )agnates of business and industry. Hespite the growing nu)ber of corporate lawyers, )any people could not explain what it is that a corporate lawyer does. Eor one, the nu)ber of attorneys e)ployed by a single corporation will vary with the si+e and type of the corporation. <any s)aller and so)e large corporations far) out all their legal proble)s to private law fir)s. <any others have in-house counsel only for certain )atters. 6ther corporation have a staff large enough to handle )ost legal proble)s in-house. % corporate lawyer, for all intents and purposes, is a lawyer who handles the legal affairs of a corporation. -is areas of concern or .urisdiction )ay include, inter alia( corporate legal research, tax laws research, acting out as corporate secretary #in board )eetings$, appearances in both courts and other ad.udicatory agencies #including the "ecurities and *xchange Co))ission$, and in other capacities which re0uire an ability to deal with the law. %t any rate, a corporate lawyer )ay assu)e responsibilities other than the legal affairs of the business of the corporation he is representing. These include such $atters as deter$ining policy and beco$ing involved in $anage$ent. # *)phasis supplied.$ &n a big co)pany, for exa)ple, one )ay have a feeling of being isolated fro) the action, or not understanding how one's wor3 actually fits into the wor3 of the orgarni+ation. This can be frustrating to so)eone who needs to see the results of his wor3 first hand. &n short, a corporate lawyer is so)eti)es offered this fortune to be )ore closely involved in the running of the business. <oreover, a corporate lawyer's services )ay so)eti)es be engaged by a )ultinational corporation #<7C$. "o)e large <7Cs provide one of the few opportunities available to corporate lawyers to enter the international law field. %fter all, international law is practiced in a relatively s)all nu)ber of co)panies and law fir)s. /ecause wor3ing in a foreign country is perceived by )any as gla)orous, tills is an area coveted by corporate lawyers. &n )ost cases, however, the overseas .obs go to experienced attorneys while the younger attorneys do their 4international practice4 in law libraries. #Business tar, 4Corporate Caw ,ractice,4 <ay 59,199:, p. ;$. This brings us to the inevitable, i.e., the role of the lawyer in the real) of finance. To borrow the lines of -arvard-educated lawyer /ruce Wassertein, to wit( 4% bad lawyer is one who fails to spot proble)s, a good lawyer is one who perceives the difficulties, and the excellent lawyer is one who sur)ounts the).4 #Business tar, 4Corporate Einance Caw,4 >an. 11, 19 9, p. ;$. Today, the study of corporate law practice direly needs a 4shot in the ar),4 so to spea3. 7o longer are we tal3ing of the traditional law teaching )ethod of confining the sub.ect study to the Corporation Code and the "ecurities Code but an incursion as well into the intertwining )odern )anage)ent issues. "uch corporate legal )anage)ent issues deal pri)arily with three #1$ types of learning( #1$ ac0uisition of insights into current advances which are of particular significance to the corporate counsel= #5$ an introduction to usable disciplinary s3ins applicable to a corporate counsel's )anage)ent responsibilities= and #1$ a devotion to the organi+ation and )anage)ent of the legal function itself. These three sub.ect areas )ay be thought of as intersecting circles, with a shared area lin3ing the). 6therwise 3nown as 4intersecting )anagerial .urisprudence,4 it for)s a unifying the)e for the corporate counsel's total learning. "o)e current advances in behavior and policy sciences affect the counsel's role. Eor that )atter, the corporate lawyer reviews the globali+ation process, including the resulting strategic repositioning that the fir)s he provides counsel for are re0uired to )a3e, and the need to thin3 about a corporation's= strategy at )ultiple levels. The salience of the nation-state is being reduced as fir)s deal both with global )ultinational entities and si)ultaneously with sub-national govern)ental units. Eir)s increasingly collaborate not only with public entities but with each other J often with those who are co)petitors in other arenas. Also, the nature of the lawyer's participation in decision4$aking within the corporation is rapidly changing. The $ode$ corporate lawyer has gained a new role as a stakeholder , in so$e cases participating in the organi5ation and operations of governance through participation on boards and other decision4$aking roles. 6ften these new patterns develop alongside existing legal institutions and laws are perceived as barriers. These trends are co)plicated as corporations organi+e for global operations. # *)phasis supplied$

The practising lawyer of today is fa$iliar as well with govern$ental policies toward the pro$otion and $anage$ent of technology. 6ew collaborative arrange$ents for pro$oting specific technologies or co$petitiveness $ore generally re*uire approaches fro$ industry that differ fro$ older, $ore adversarial relationships and traditional for$s of seeking to influence govern$ental policies . %nd there are lessons to be learned fro) other countries. &n *urope, 1sprit, 1ureka and &ace are exa)ples of collaborative efforts between govern)ental and business >apan's "'T' is world fa)ous. #*)phasis supplied$ Eollowing the concept of boundary spanning, the office of the Corporate Counsel co)prises a distinct group within the )anagerial structure of all 3inds of organi+ations. *ffectiveness of both long-ter) and te)porary groups within organi+ations has been found to be related to indentifiable factors in the group-context interaction such as the groups actively revising their 3nowledge of the environ)ent coordinating wor3 with outsiders, pro)oting tea) achieve)ents within the organi+ation. &n general, such external activities are better predictors of tea) perfor)ance than internal group processes. 'n a crisis situation, the legal $anagerial capabilities of the corporate lawyer vis4a4vis the $anagerial $ettle of corporations are challenged. Current research is see3ing ways both to anticipate effective )anagerial procedures and to understand relationships of financial liability and insurance considerations. #*)phasis supplied$ 2egarding the s3ills to apply by the corporate counsel, three factors are apropos( 7irst yste$ Dyna$ics. The field of syste)s dyna)ics has been found an effective tool for new )anagerial thin3ing regarding both planning and pressing i))ediate proble)s. %n understanding of the role of feedbac3 loops, inventory levels, and rates of flow, enable users to si)ulate all sorts of syste)atic proble)s J physical, econo)ic, )anagerial, social, and psychological. 6ew progra$$ing techni*ues now $ake the syste$ dyna$ics principles $ore accessible to $anagers , including corporate counsels. #*)phasis supplied$ econd Decision Analysis. This enables users to $ake better decisions involving co$ple!ity and uncertainty. 'n the conte!t of a law depart$ent, it can be used to appraise the settle$ent value of litigation, aid in negotiation settle$ent, and $ini$i5e the cost and risk involved in $anaging a portfolio of cases. #*)phasis supplied$ Third "odeling for 6egotiation "anage$ent. Co)puter-based )odels can be used directly by parties and )ediators in all lands of negotiations. %ll integrated set of such tools provide coherent and effective negotiation support, including hands-on on instruction in these techni0ues. % si)ulation case of an international .oint venture )ay be used to illustrate the point. @/e this as it )ay,A the organi+ation and )anage)ent of the legal function, concern three pointed areas of consideration, thus( #reventive Lawyering. ,lanning by lawyers re0uires special s3ills that co)prise a )a.or part of the general counsel's responsibilities. They differ fro) those of re)edial law. ,reventive lawyering is concerned with )ini)i+ing the ris3s of legal trouble and )axi)i+ing legal rights for such legal entities at that ti)e when transactional or si)ilar facts are being considered and )ade. "anagerial )urisprudence. This is the fra)ewor3 within which are underta3en those activities of the fir) to which legal conse0uences attach. &t needs to be directly supportive of this nation's evolving econo)ic and organi+ational fabric as fir)s change to stay co)petitive in a global, interdependent environ)ent. The practice and theory of 4law4 is not ade0uate today to facilitate the relationships needed in trying to )a3e a global econo)y wor3. (rgani5ation and 7unctioning of the Corporate Counsel's (ffice. The general counsel has e)erged in the last decade as one of the )ost vibrant subsets of the legal profession. The corporate counsel hear responsibility for 3ey aspects of the fir)'s strategic issues, including structuring its global operations, )anaging i)proved relationships with an increasingly diversified body of e)ployees, )anaging expanded liability exposure, creating new and varied interactions with public decision)a3ers, coping internally with )ore co)plex )a3e or by decisions. This whole exercise drives ho)e the thesis that 3nowing corporate law is not enough to )a3e one a good general corporate counsel nor to give hi) a full sense of how the legal syste) shapes corporate activities. %nd even if the corporate lawyer's ai) is not the understand all of the law's effects on corporate activities, he )ust, at the very least, also gain a wor3ing 3nowledge of the )anage)ent issues if only to be able to grasp not only the basic legal 4constitution' or )a3eup of the )ode) corporation. 4Business tar4, 4The Corporate Counsel,4 %pril 1:, 1991, p. ;$. The challenge for lawyers #both of the bar and the bench$ is to have )ore than a passing 3nowledge of financial law affecting each aspect of their wor3. Iet, )any would ad)it to ignorance of vast tracts of the financial law territory. What transpires next is a dile))a of professional security( Will the lawyer ad)it ignorance and ris3 opprobriu)G= or will he feign understanding and ris3 exposureG #Business tar, 4Corporate Einance law,4 >an. 11, 19 9, p. ;$. 2espondent Christian <onsod was no)inated by ,resident Cora+on C. %0uino to the position of Chair)an of the C6<*C*C in a letter received by the "ecretariat of the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents on %pril 59, 1991. ,etitioner opposed the no)ination because allegedly <onsod does not possess the re0uired 0ualification of having been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.

6n >une 9, 1991, the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents confir)ed the no)ination of <onsod as Chair)an of the C6<*C*C. 6n >une 1 , 1991, he too3 his oath of office. 6n the sa)e day, he assu)ed office as Chair)an of the C6<*C*C. Challenging the validity of the confir)ation by the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents of <onsod's no)ination, petitioner as a citi+en and taxpayer, filed the instant petition for certiorari and ,rohibition praying that said confir)ation and the conse0uent appoint)ent of <onsod as Chair)an of the Co))ission on *lections be declared null and void. %tty. Christian <onsod is a )e)ber of the ,hilippine /ar, having passed the bar exa)inations of 198: with a grade of 899K. -e has been a dues paying )e)ber of the &ntegrated /ar of the ,hilippines since its inception in 19!5-!1. -e has also been paying his professional license fees as lawyer for )ore than ten years. #p. 15;, 2ollo$ %fter graduating fro) the College of Caw #B.,.$ and having hurdled the bar, Atty. "onsod worked in the law office of his father. Huring his stint in the World /an3 Droup #1981-19!:$, "onsod worked as an operations officer for about two years in Costa &ica and #ana$a, which involved getting ac*uainted with the laws of $e$ber4countries negotiating loans and coordinating legal, econo$ic, and pro%ect work of the Bank. 8pon returning to the #hilippines in 9:;<, he worked with the "eralco 3roup, served as chief e!ecutive officer of an invest$ent bank and subse*uently of a business conglo$erate, and since 9:=>, has rendered services to various co$panies as a legal and econo$ic consultant or chief e!ecutive officer. As for$er ecretary43eneral ?9:=>@ and 6ational Chair$an ?9:=;@ of 6A"7&1L. "onsod's work involved being knowledgeable in election law. Ae appeared for 6A"7&1L in its accreditation hearings before the Co$elec. 'n the field of advocacy, "onsod, in his personal capacity and as for$er Co4Chair$an of the Bishops Business$en's Conference for Au$an Develop$ent, has worked with the under privileged sectors, such as the far$er and urban poor groups, in initiating, lobbying for and engaging in affir$ative action for the agrarian refor$ law and lately the urban land refor$ bill. "onsod also $ade use of his legal knowledge as a $e$ber of the Davide Co$$ission, a *uast %udicial body, which conducted nu$erous hearings ?9::<@ and as a $e$ber of the Constitutional Co$$ission ?9:=>49:=;@, and Chair$an of its Co$$ittee on Accountability of #ublic (fficers, for which he was cited by the #resident of the Co$$ission, )ustice Cecilia "uBo54#al$a for +innu$erable a$end$ents to reconcile govern$ent functions with individual freedo$s and public accountability and the party4list syste$ for the Aouse of &epresentative. ?pp. 9C=49C: &ollo@ ? 1$phasis supplied@ >ust a word about the work of a negotiating tea$ of which %tty. <onsod used to be a )e)ber. &n a loan agree)ent, for instance, a negotiating panel acts as a tea), and which is ade0uately constituted to )eet the various contingencies that arise during a negotiation. /esides top officials of the /orrower concerned, there are the legal officer #such as the legal counsel$, the finance )anager, and an operations officer #such as an official involved in negotiating the contracts $ who co)prise the )e)bers of the tea). #Duiller)o ?. "oliven, 4Coan 7egotiating "trategies for Heveloping Country /orrowers,4 "taff ,aper 7o. 5, Central /an3 of the ,hilippines, <anila, 19 5, p. 11$. #*)phasis supplied$ %fter a fashion, the loan agree)ent is li3e a country's Constitution= it lays down the law as far as the loan transaction is concerned. Thus, the )eat of any Coan %gree)ent can be co)part)entali+ed into five #9$ funda)ental parts( #1$ business ter)s= #5$ borrower's representation= #1$ conditions of closing= #;$ covenants= and #9$ events of default. #'bid., p. 11$. &n the sa)e vein, lawyers play an i$portant role in any debt restructuring progra$. Eor aside fro) perfor)ing the tas3s of legislative drafting and legal advising, they score national develop)ent policies as 3ey factors in )aintaining their countries' sovereignty. #Condensed fro) the wor3 paper, entitled 4Wanted( Hevelop)ent Cawyers for Heveloping 7ations,4 sub)itted by C. <ichael -ager, regional legal adviser of the Bnited "tates %gency for &nternational Hevelop)ent, during the "ession on Caw for the Hevelop)ent of 7ations at the %bid.an World Conference in &vory Coast, sponsored by the World ,eace Through Caw Center on %ugust 58-11, 19!1$. # *)phasis supplied$ Loan concessions and co$pro$ises, perhaps even $ore so than purely renegotiation policies, de$and e!pertise in the law of contracts, in legislation and agree$ent drafting and in renegotiation . 7ecessarily, a sovereign lawyer )ay wor3 with an international business specialist or an econo)ist in the for)ulation of a )odel loan agree)ent. Hebt restructuring contract agree)ents contain such a )ixture of technical language that they should be carefully drafted and signed only with the advise of co)petent counsel in con.unction with the guidance of ade0uate technical support personnel. # ee 'nternational Law Aspects of the #hilippine 1!ternal Debts, an unpublished dissertation, B.".T. Draduate "chool of Caw, 19 !, p. 151$. # *)phasis supplied$ % critical aspect of sovereign debt restructuringLcontract construction is the set of ter)s and conditions which deter)ines the contractual re)edies for a failure to perfor) one or )ore ele)ents of the contract. % good agree)ent )ust not only define the responsibilities of both parties, but )ust also state the recourse open to either party when the other fails to discharge an obligation. Eor a co)pleat debt restructuring represents a devotion to that principle which in the ulti)ate analysis is sine *ua non for foreign loan agree)ents-an adherence to the rule of law in do)estic and international affairs of whose 3ind B.". "upre)e Court >ustice 6liver Wendell -ol)es, >r. once said( 4They carry no banners, they beat no dru)s= but where they are, )en learn that bustle and bush are not the e0ual of 0uiet genius and serene )astery.4 #"ee 2icardo >. 2o)ulo, 4The 2ole of Cawyers in Eoreign &nvest)ents,4 &ntegrated /ar of the ,hilippine >ournal, ?ol. 19, 7os. 1 and ;, Third and Eourth Muarters, 19!!, p. 589$. 'nterpreted in the light of the various definitions of the ter$ #ractice of law+. particularly the $odern concept of law practice, and taking into consideration the liberal construction intended by the fra$ers of the Constitution, Atty. "onsod's past work e!periences as a lawyer4econo$ist, a lawyer4$anager, a lawyer4entrepreneur of industry, a lawyer4negotiator of contracts, and a lawyer4legislator of both the rich and the poor , verily $ore than satisfy the constitutional re*uire$ent , that he has been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years. /esides in the leading case of Luego v. Civil ervice Co$$ission, 1;1 "C2% 15!, the Court said(

Appoint$ent is an essentially discretionary power and )ust be perfor)ed by the officer in which it is vested according to his best lights, the only condition being that the appointee should possess the 0ualifications re0uired by law. &f he does, then the appoint)ent cannot be faulted on the ground that there are others better 0ualified who should have been preferred. This is a political *uestion involving considerations of wisdo$ which only the appointing authority can decide . #e)phasis supplied$ 7o less e)phatic was the Court in the case of #Central Bank v. Civil ervice Co$$ission, 1!1 "C2% !;;$ where it stated( &t is well-settled that when the appointee is 0ualified, as in this case, and all the other legal re0uire)ents are satisfied, the Co))ission has no alternative but to attest to the appoint)ent in accordance with the Civil "ervice Caw. The Co))ission has no authority to revo3e an appoint)ent on the ground that another person is )ore 0ualified for a particular position. &t also has no authority to direct the appoint)ent of a substitute of its choice. To do so would be an encroach$ent on the discretion vested upon the appointing authority. An appoint$ent is essentially within the discretionary power of who$soever it is vested, sub%ect to the only condition that the appointee should possess the *ualifications re*uired by law. # *)phasis supplied$ The appointing process in a regular appoint)ent as in the case at bar, consists of four #;$ stages( #1$ no)ination= #5$ confir)ation by the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents= #1$ issuance of a co))ission #in the ,hilippines, upon sub)ission by the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents of its certificate of confir)ation, the ,resident issues the per)anent appoint)ent= and #;$ acceptance e.g., oath-ta3ing, posting of bond, etc. . . . #Lacson v. &o$ero, 7o. C-1: 1, 6ctober 1;, 19;9= Don+ales, Caw on ,ublic 6fficers, p. 5::$ The power of the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents to give its consent to the no)ination of <onsod as Chair)an of the Co))ission on *lections is )andated by "ection 1#5$ "ub-%rticle C, %rticle &' of the Constitution which provides( The Chair)an and the Co))isioners shall be appointed by the ,resident with the consent of the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents for a ter) of seven years without reappoint)ent. 6f those first appointed, three <e)bers shall hold office for seven years, two <e)bers for five years, and the last <e)bers for three years, without reappoint)ent. %ppoint)ent to any vacancy shall be only for the unexpired ter) of the predecessor. &n no case shall any <e)ber be appointed or designated in a te)porary or acting capacity. %nent >ustice Teodoro ,adilla's separate opinion, suffice it to say that his definition of the practice of law is the traditional or stereotyped notion of law practice, as distinguished fro) the $odern concept of the practice of law, which )odern connotation is e!actly what was intended by the e$inent fra$ers of the 9:=; Constitution. <oreover, >ustice ,adilla's definition would re0uire generally a habitual law practice, perhaps practised two or three ti)es a wee3 and would outlaw say, law practice once or twice a year for ten consecutive years. Clearly, this is far fro) the constitutional intent. Bpon the other hand, the separate opinion of >ustice &sagani Cru+ states that in )y written opinion, & )ade use of a definition of law practice which really )eans nothing because the definition says that law practice 4 . . . is what people ordinarily )ean by the practice of law.4 True & cited the definition but only by way of sarcas) as evident fro) )y state)ent that the definition of law practice by 4traditional areas of law practice is essentially tautologous4 or defining a phrase by )eans of the phrase itself that is being defined. >ustice Cru+ goes on to say in substance that since the law covers al)ost all situations, )ost individuals, in )a3ing use of the law, or in advising others on what the law )eans, are actually practicing law. &n that sense, perhaps, but we should not lose sight of the fact that <r. <onsod is a lawyer, a $e$ber of the #hilippine Bar, who has been practising law for over ten years. This is different fro) the acts of persons practising law, without first beco$ing lawyers. >ustice Cru+ also says that the "upre)e Court can even dis0ualify an elected ,resident of the ,hilippines, say, on the ground that he lac3s one or )ore 0ualifications. This )atter, & greatly doubt. Eor one thing, how can an action or petition be brought against the ,residentG %nd even assu)ing that he is indeed dis0ualified, how can the action be entertained since he is the incu)bent ,residentG We now proceed( The Co))ission on the basis of evidence sub)itted doling the public hearings on <onsod's confir)ation, i)plicitly deter)ined that he possessed the necessary 0ualifications as re0uired by law. The .udg)ent rendered by the Co))ission in the exercise of such an ac3nowledged power is beyond .udicial interference except only upon a clear showing of a grave abuse of discretion a)ounting to lac3 or excess of .urisdiction. #%rt. ?&&&, "ec. 1 Constitution$. Thus, only where such grave abuse of discretion is clearly shown shall the Court interfere with the Co))ission's .udg)ent. &n the instant case, there is no occasion for the exercise of the Court's corrective power, since no abuse, )uch less a grave abuse of discretion, that would a)ount to lac3 or excess of .urisdiction and would warrant the issuance of the writs prayed, for has been clearly shown. %dditionally, consider the following( #1$ &f the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents re%ects a no)inee by the ,resident, )ay the "upre)e Court reverse the Co))ission, and thus in effect confir$ the appoint)entG Clearly, the answer is in the negative. #5$ &n the sa)e vein, )ay the Court re%ect the no)inee, who) the Co))ission has confir$edG The answer is li3ewise clear.

#1$ &f the Bnited "tates "enate #which is the confir)ing body in the B.". Congress$ decides to confir$ a ,residential no)inee, it would be incredible that the B.". "upre)e Court would still reverse the B.". "enate. Einally, one significant legal )axi) is( We )ust interpret not by the letter that 3illeth, but by the spirit that giveth life. Ta3e this hypothetical case of "a)son and Helilah. 6nce, the procurator of >udea as3ed Helilah #who was "a)son's beloved$ for help in capturing "a)son. Helilah agreed on condition that J 7o blade shall touch his s3in= 7o blood shall flow fro) his veins. When "a)son #his long hair cut by Helilah$ was captured, the procurator placed an iron rod burning white-hot two or three inches away fro) in front of "a)son's eyes. This blinded the )an. Bpon hearing of what had happened to her beloved, Helilah was beside herself with anger, and fu)ing with righteous fury, accused the procurator of reneging on his word. The procurator cal)ly replied( 4Hid any blade touch his s3inG Hid any blood flow fro) his veinsG4 The procurator was clearly relying on the letter, not the spirit of the agree)ent. &n view of the foregoing, this petition is hereby H&"<&""*H. "6 62H*2*H. 7ernan, C.)., 3riBo4A*uino and "edialdea, ))., concur. 7eliciano, )., ' certify that he voted to dis$iss the petition. ?7ernan, C.).@ ar$iento, )., is on leave. &egalado, and Davide, )r., )., took no part.

Separate Opinions

NARVASA, J., concurring( & concur with the decision of the )a.ority written by <r. >ustice ,aras, albeit only in the result= it does not appear to )e that there has been an ade0uate showing that the challenged deter)ination by the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents-that the appoint)ent of respondent <onsod as Chair)an of the Co))ission on *lections should, on the basis of his stated 0ualifications and after due assess)ent thereof, be confir)ed-was attended by error so gross as to a)ount to grave abuse of discretion and conse0uently )erits nullification by this Court in accordance with the second paragraph of "ection 1, %rticle ?&&& of the Constitution. & therefore vote to H*7I the petition.

PADILLA, J., dissenting( The records of this case will show that when the Court first deliberated on the ,etition at bar, & voted not only to re0uire the respondents to co))ent on the ,etition, but & was the sole vote for the issuance of a te)porary restraining order to en.oin respondent <onsod fro) assu)ing the position of C6<*C*C Chair)an, while the Court deliberated on his constitutional 0ualification for the office. <y purpose in voting for a T26 was to prevent the inconvenience and even e)barrass)ent to all parties concerned were the Court to finally decide for respondent <onsod's dis0ualification. <oreover, a reading of the ,etition then in relation to established .urisprudence already showed pri$a facie that respondent <onsod did not possess the needed 0ualification, that is, he had not engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years prior to his appoint)ent as C6<*C*C Chair)an. %fter considering carefully respondent <onsod's co))ent, & a) even )ore convinced that the constitutional re0uire)ent of 4practice of law for at least ten ?9<@ years4 has not been )et. The procedural barriers interposed by respondents deserve scant consideration because, ulti)ately, the core issue to be resolved in this petition is the proper construal of the constitutional provision re0uiring a )a.ority of the )e)bership of C6<*C*C, including the Chair)an thereof to 4have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years.4 #%rt. &'#C$, "ection 1#1$, 19 ! Constitution$. Muestions involving the construction of constitutional provisions are best left to

.udicial resolution. %s declared in Angara v. 1lectoral Co$$ission, #81 ,hil. 119$ 4upon the .udicial depart)ent is thrown the sole)n and inescapable obligation of interpreting the Constitution and defining constitutional boundaries.4 The Constitution has i)posed clear and specific standards for a C6<*C*C Chair)an. %)ong these are that he )ust have been 4engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years.4 &t is the bounden duty of this Court to ensure that such standard is )et and co)plied with. What constitutes practice of lawG %s co))only understood, 4practice4 refers to the actual perfor$ance or application of 3nowledge as distinguished fro) $ere possession of knowledge= it connotes an active, habitual, repeated or custo$ary action. 1 To 4practice4 law, or any profession for that )atter, )eans, to exercise or pursue an e)ploy)ent or profession actively, habitually, repeatedly or custo$arily. Therefore, a doctor of )edicine who is e)ployed and is habitually perfor)ing the tas3s of a nursing aide, cannot be said to be in the 4practice of )edicine.4 % certified public accountant who wor3s as a cler3, cannot be said to practice his profession as an accountant. &n the sa)e way, a lawyer who is e)ployed as a business executive or a corporate )anager, other than as head or attorney of a Cegal Hepart)ent of a corporation or a govern)ental agency, cannot be said to be in the practice of law. %s aptly held by this Court in the case of #eople vs. Dillanueva( 2 #ractice is $ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre*uent or custo$ary actions, a succession of acts of the sa$e kind. &n other words, it is fre0uent habitual exercise #"tate vs- Cotner, 15!, p. 1, ! Nan. 8;, ;5 C2%, <.". !8 $. ,ractice of law to fall within the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo)arily or habitually holding one's self out to the public as a lawyer and de)anding pay)ent for such services #"tate vs. /ryan, ; ".*. 955, 9 7.C. 8;;,8;!.$ ... #e)phasis supplied$. &t is worth )entioning that the respondent Co))ission on %ppoint)ents in a <e)orandu) it prepared, enu)erated several factors deter)inative of whether a particular activity constitutes 4practice of law.4 &t states( 1. Aabituality. The ter) 4practice of law4 i)plies custo)arily or habitually holding one's self out to the public as a lawyer #,eople vs. ?illanueva, 1; "C2% 1:9 citing "tate v. /oyen, ; ".*. 955, 9 7.C. 8;;$ such as when one sends a circular announcing the establish)ent of a law office for the general practice of law #B.". v. 7ey /os0ue, ,hil. 1;8$, or when one ta3es the oath of office as a lawyer before a notary public, and files a )anifestation with the "upre)e Court infor)ing it of his intention to practice law in all courts in the country #,eople v. He Cuna, 1:5 ,hil. 98 $. ,ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre0uent or custo)ary action, a succession of acts of the sa)e 3ind. &n other words, it is a habitual exercise #,eople v. ?illanueva, 1; "C2% 1:9 citing "tate v. Cotner, 15!, p. 1, ! Nan, 8;$. 5. Co$pensation. ,ractice of law i)plies that one )ust have presented hi)self to be in the active and continued practice of the legal profession and that his professional services are available to the public for co)pensation, as a service of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. #,eople v. ?illanueva, supra$. -ence, charging for services such as preparation of docu)ents involving the use of legal 3nowledge and s3ill is within the ter) 4practice of law4 #*rnani ,aOo, /ar 2eviewer in Cegal and >udicial *thics, 19 ed., p. citing ,eople v. ,eople's "toc3yards "tate /an3, 1!8 7./. 9:1$ and, one who renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a statute, and receives pay for it, is to that extent, practicing law #<artin, supra, p. :8 citing <endelaun v. Dilbert and /ar3et <fg. Co., 59: 7.I.". ;85$ &f co)pensation is expected, all advice to clients and all action ta3en for the) in )atters connected with the law= are practicing law. #*lwood Eitchette et al., v. %rthur C. Taylor, 9;%-C.2. 198-199$ 1. Application of law legal principle practice or procedure which calls for legal 3nowledge, training and experience is within the ter) 4practice of law4. #<artin supra$ ;. Attorney4client relationship. *ngaging in the practice of law presupposes the existence of lawyerclient relationship. -ence, where a lawyer underta3es an activity which re0uires 3nowledge of law but involves no attorney-client relationship, such as teaching law or writing law boo3s or articles, he cannot be said to be engaged in the practice of his profession or a lawyer #%gpalo, Cegal *thics, 19 9 ed., p. 1:$. 3 The above-enu)erated factors would, & believe, be useful aids in deter)ining whether or not respondent <onsod )eets the constitutional 0ualification of practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years at the ti)e of his appoint)ent as C6<*C*C Chair)an. The following relevant 0uestions )ay be as3ed( 1. Hid respondent <onsod perfor) any of the tas3s which are peculiar to the practice of lawG 5. Hid respondent perfor) such tas3s custo)arily or habituallyG 1. %ssu)ing that he perfor)ed any of such tas3s habitually, did he do so -%/&TB%CCI E62 %T C*%"T T*7 #1:$ I*%2" prior to his appoint)ent as C6<*C*C Chair)anG

Diven the e)ploy)ent or .ob history of respondent <onsod as appears fro) the records, & a) persuaded that if ever he did perfor) any of the tas3s which constitute the practice of law, he did not do so AAB'T8ALL0 for at least ten ?9<@ years prior to his appoint)ent as C6<*C*C Chair)an. While it )ay be granted that he perfor)ed tas3s and activities which could be latitudinarianly considered activities peculiar to the practice of law, li3e the drafting of legal docu)ents and the rendering of legal opinion or advice, such were isolated transactions or activities which do not 0ualify his past endeavors as 4practice of law.4 To beco)e engaged in the practice of law, there )ust be a continuity, or a succession of acts. %s observed by the "olicitor Deneral in #eople vs. Dillanueva( 4 *ssentially, the word private practice of law i)plies that one )ust have presented hi)self to be in the active and continued practice of the legal profession and that his professional services are available to the public for a co)pensation, as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. %CC62H&7DCI, )y vote is to D2%7T the petition and to declare respondent <onsod as not 0ualified for the position of C6<*C*C Chair)an for not having engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years prior to his appoint)ent to such position. CRU , J., dissenting( & a) sincerely i)pressed by the ponencia of )y brother ,aras but find & )ust dissent .ust the sa)e. There are certain points on which & )ust differ with hi) while of course respecting hisviewpoint. To begin with, & do not thin3 we are inhibited fro) exa)ining the 0ualifications of the respondent si)ply because his no)ination has been confir)ed by the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents. &n )y view, this is not a political 0uestion that we are barred fro) resolving. Heter)ination of the appointee's credentials is )ade on the basis of the established facts, not the discretion of that body. *ven if it were, the exercise of that discretion would still be sub.ect to our review. &n Luego, which is cited in the ponencia, what was involved was the discretion of the appointing authority to choose between two clai)ants to the sa)e office who both possessed the re0uired 0ualifications. &t was that 3ind of discretion that we said could not be reviewed. &f a person elected by no less than the sovereign people )ay be ousted by this Court for lac3 of the re0uired 0ualifications, & see no reason why we cannot dis0ualified an appointee si)ply because he has passed the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents. *ven the ,resident of the ,hilippines )ay be declared ineligible by this Court in an appropriate proceeding notwithstanding that he has been found acceptable by no less than the enfranchised citi+enry. The reason is that what we would be exa)ining is not the wisdo$ of his election but whether or not he was 0ualified to be elected in the first place. Co)ing now to the 0ualifications of the private respondent, & fear that the ponencia )ay have been too sweeping in its definition of the phrase 4practice of law4 as to render the 0ualification practically toothless. Ero) the nu)erous activities accepted as e)braced in the ter), & have the unco)fortable feeling that one does not even have to be a lawyer to be engaged in the practice of law as long as his activities involve the application of so)e law, however peripherally. The stoc3 bro3er and the insurance ad.uster and the realtor could co)e under the definition as they deal with or give advice on )atters that are li3ely 4to beco)e involved in litigation.4 The lawyer is considered engaged in the practice of law even if his )ain occupation is another business and he interprets and applies so)e law only as an incident of such business. That covers every co)pany organi+ed under the Corporation Code and regulated by the "*C under ,.H. 9:5-%. Considering the ra)ifications of the )odern society, there is hardly any activity that is not affected by so)e law or govern)ent regulation the business)an )ust 3now about and observe. &n fact, again going by the definition, a lawyer does not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner. -e can be so dee)ed when, on his own, he rents a house or buys a car or consults a doctor as these acts involve his 3nowledge and application of the laws regulating such transactions. &f he operates a public utility vehicle as his )ain source of livelihood, he would still be dee)ed engaged in the practice of law because he )ust obey the ,ublic "ervice %ct and the rules and regulations of the *nergy 2egulatory /oard. The ponencia 0uotes an %)erican decision defining the practice of law as the 4perfor)ance of any acts ... in or out of court, co))only understood to be the practice of law,4 which tells us absolutely nothing. The decision goes on to say that 4because lawyers perfor) al)ost every function 3nown in the co))ercial and govern)ental real), such a definition would obviously be too global to be wor3able.4 The effect of the definition given in the ponencia is to consider virtually every lawyer to be engaged in the practice of law even if he does not earn his living, or at least part of it, as a lawyer. &t is enough that his activities are incidentally #even if only re)otely$ connected with so)e law, ordinance, or regulation. The possible exception is the lawyer whose inco)e is derived fro) teaching ballroo) dancing or escorting wrin3led ladies with pubescent pretensions. The respondent's credentials are i)pressive, to be sure, but they do not persuade )e that he has been engaged in the practice of law for ten years as re0uired by the Constitution. &t is conceded that he has been engaged in business and finance, in which areas he has distinguished hi)self, but as an executive and econo)ist and not as a practicing lawyer. The plain fact is that he has occupied the various positions listed in his resu)e by virtue of his experience and prestige as a business)an and not as an attorney-at-law whose principal attention is focused on the law. *ven if it be argued that he was acting as a lawyer when he lobbied in Congress for agrarian and urban refor), served in the 7%<E2*C and the Constitutional Co))ission #together with non-lawyers li3e far)ers and priests$ and was a )e)ber of the Havide Co))ission, he has not proved that his activities in these capacities extended over the prescribed 1:-year period of actual practice of the law. -e is doubtless e)inently 0ualified for )any other positions worthy of his abundant talents but not as Chair)an of the Co))ission on *lections.

& have )uch ad)iration for respondent <onsod, no less than for <r. >ustice ,aras, but & )ust regretfully vote to grant the petition. !U"I#RR# , $R%, J., dissenting( When this petition was filed, there was hope that engaging in the practice of law as a 0ualification for public office would be settled one way or another in fairly definitive ter)s. Bnfortunately, this was not the result. 6f the fourteen #1;$ )e)ber Court, 9 are of the view that <r. Christian <onsod engaged in the practice of law #with one of these 9 leaving his vote behind while on official leave but not expressing his clear stand on the )atter$= ; categorically stating that he did not practice law= 5 voting in the result because there was no error so gross as to a)ount to grave abuse of discretion= one of official leave with no instructions left behind on how he viewed the issue= and 5 not ta3ing part in the deliberations and the decision. There are two 3ey factors that )a3e our tas3 difficult. Eirst is our reviewing the wor3 of a constitutional Co))ission on %ppoint)ents whose duty is precisely to loo3 into the 0ualifications of persons appointed to high office. *ven if the Co))ission errs, we have no power to set aside error. We can loo3 only into grave abuse of discretion or whi)sically and arbitrariness. "econd is our belief that <r. <onsod possesses superior 0ualifications in ter)s of executive ability, proficiency in )anage)ent, educational bac3ground, experience in international ban3ing and finance, and instant recognition by the public. -is integrity and co)petence are not 0uestioned by the petitioner. What is before us is co)pliance with a specific re0uire)ent written into the Constitution. &nspite of )y high regard for <r. <onsod, & cannot shir3 )y constitutional duty. -e has never engaged in the practice of law for even one year. -e is a )e)ber of the bar but to say that he has practiced law is stretching the ter) beyond rational li)its. % person )ay have passed the bar exa)inations. But if he has not dedicated his life to the law, if he has not engaged in an activity where $e$bership in the bar is a re*uire$ent & fail to see how he can clai) to have been engaged in the practice of law. *ngaging in the practice of law is a 0ualification not only for C6<*C*C chair)an but also for appoint)ent to the "upre)e Court and all lower courts. What 3ind of >udges or >ustices will we have if there )ain occupation is selling real estate, )anaging a business corporation, serving in fact-finding co))ittee, wor3ing in )edia, or operating a far) with no active involve)ent in the law, whether in Dovern)ent or private practice, except that in one .oyful )o)ent in the distant past, they happened to pass the bar exa)inationsG The Constitution uses the phrase 4engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.4 The deliberate choice of words shows that the practice envisioned is active and regular, not isolated, occasional, accidental, inter)ittent, incidental, seasonal, or exte)poraneous. To be 4engaged4 in an activity for ten years re0uires co))itted participation in so)ething which is the result of one's decisive choice. &t )eans that one is occupied and involved in the enterprise= one is obliged or pledged to carry it out with intent and attention during the ten-year period. & agree with the petitioner that based on the bio-data sub)itted by respondent <onsod to the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents, the latter has not been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years. &n fact, if appears that <r. <onsod has never practiced law except for an alleged one year period after passing the bar exa)inations when he wor3ed in his father's law fir). *ven then his law practice )ust have been extre)ely li)ited because he was also wor3ing for <.%. and ,h. H. degrees in *cono)ics at the Bniversity of ,ennsylvania during that period. -ow could he practice law in the Bnited "tates while not a )e)ber of the /ar thereG The professional life of the respondent follows( 1.19.1. 2espondent <onsod's activities since his passing the /ar exa)inations in 1981 consist of the following( 1. 1981-1981( <.%. in *cono)ics #,h. H. candidate$, Bniversity of ,ennsylvania 5. 1981-19!:( World /an3 Droup J *cono)ist, &ndustry Hepart)ent= 6perations, Catin %)erican Hepart)ent= Hivision Chief, "outh %sia and <iddle *ast, &nternational Einance Corporation 1. 19!:-19!1( <eralco Droup J *xecutive of various co)panies, i.e., <eralco "ecurities Corporation, ,hilippine ,etroleu) Corporation, ,hilippine *lectric Corporation ;. 19!1-19!8( Iu.uico Droup J ,resident, Eil-Capital Hevelop)ent Corporation and affiliated co)panies 9. 19!8-19! ( Einaciera <anila J Chief *xecutive 6fficer 8. 19! -19 8( Duevent Droup of Co)panies J Chief *xecutive 6fficer !. 19 8-19 !( ,hilippine Constitutional Co))ission J <e)ber . 19 9-1991( The Eact-Einding Co))ission on the Hece)ber 19 9 Coup %tte)pt J <e)ber 9. ,resently( Chair)an of the /oard and Chief *xecutive 6fficer of the following co)panies(

a. %C* Container ,hilippines, &nc. b. Hataprep, ,hilippines c. ,hilippine "B7syste)s ,roducts, &nc. d. "e)irara Coal Corporation e. C/C Ti)ber Corporation <e)ber of the /oard of the Eollowing( a. *ngineering Construction Corporation of the ,hilippines b. Eirst ,hilippine *nergy Corporation c. Eirst ,hilippine -oldings Corporation d. Eirst ,hilippine &ndustrial Corporation e. Draphic %telier f. <anila *lectric Co)pany g. ,hilippine Co))ercial Capital, &nc. h. ,hilippine *lectric Corporation i. Tarlac 2eforestation and *nviron)ent *nterprises .. Tolong %0uaculture Corporation 3. ?isayan %0uaculture Corporation l. Dui)aras %0uaculture Corporation #2ollo, pp. 51-55$ There is nothing in the above bio-data which even re)otely indicates that respondent <onsod has given the law enough attention or a certain degree of co))it)ent and participation as would support in all sincerity and candor the clai) of having engaged in its practice for at least ten years. &nstead of wor3ing as a lawyer, he has lawyers wor3ing for hi). &nstead of giving receiving that legal advice of legal services, he was the oneadvice and those services as an executive but not as a lawyer. The deliberations before the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents show an effort to e0uate 4engaged in the practice of law4 with the use of legal 3nowledge in various fields of endeavor such as co))erce, industry, civic wor3, blue ribbon investigations, agrarian refor), etc. where such 3nowledge would be helpful. & regret that & cannot .oin in playing fast and loose with a ter), which even an ordinary lay)an accepts as having a fa)iliar and custo)ary well-defined )eaning. *very resident of this country who has reached the age of discern)ent has to 3now, follow, or apply the law at various ti)es in his life. Cegal 3nowledge is useful if not necessary for the business executive, legislator, )ayor, barangay captain, teacher, police)an, far)er, fisher)an, )ar3et vendor, and student to na)e only a few. %nd yet, can these people honestly assert that as such, they are engaged in the practice of lawG The Constitution re0uires having been 4engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.4 &t is not satisfied with having been 4a )e)ber of the ,hilippine bar for at least ten years.4 "o)e %)erican courts have defined the practice of law, as follows( The practice of law involves not only appearance in court in connection with litigation but also services rendered out of court, and it includes the giving of advice or the rendering of any services re0uiring the use of legal s3ill or 3nowledge, such as preparing a will, contract or other instru)ent, the legal effect of which, under the facts and conditions involved, )ust be carefully deter)ined. #eople e! rel. Chicago Bar Ass'n v. Tinkoff, 199 &ll. 5 5, !! 7.*.5d 891= #eople e! rel. 'llinois tate Bar Ass'n v. #eople's tock 0ards tate Bank, 1;; &ll. ;85,1!8 7.*. 9:1, and cases cited. &t would be difficult, if not i)possible to lay down a for)ula or definition of what constitutes the practice of law. 4,racticing law4 has been defined as 4,racticing as an attorney or counselor at law according to the laws and custo)s of our courts, is the giving of advice or rendition of any sort of service by any person, fir) or corporation when the giving of such advice or rendition of such service re0uires the use of any degree of legal 3nowledge or s3ill.4 Without adopting that definition, we referred to it as being substantially correct in #eople e! rel. 'llinois tate Bar Ass'n v. #eople's tock 0ards tate Bank, 1;; &ll. ;85,1!8 7.*. 9:1. #,eople v. "chafer, ! 7.*. 5d !!1, !!8$

Eor one's actions to co)e within the purview of practice of law they should not only be activities peculiar to the wor3 of a lawyer, they should also be perfor)ed, habitually, fre0uently or custo)arily, to wit( xxx xxx xxx 2espondent's answers to 0uestions propounded to hi) were rather evasive. -e was as3ed whether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties in real-estate transactions where he was not the procuring agent. -e answered( 4?ery seldo).4 &n answer to the 0uestion as to how )any ti)es he had prepared contracts for the parties during the twenty-one years of his business, he said( 4& have no &dea.4 When as3ed if it would be )ore than half a do+en ti)es his answer was & suppose. %s3ed if he did not recall )a3ing the state)ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a large nu)ber of instances, he answered( 4& don't recall exactly what was said.4 When as3ed if he did not re)e)ber saying that he had )ade a practice of preparing deeds, )ortgages and contracts and charging a fee to the parties therefor in instances where he was not the bro3er in the deal, he answered( 4Well, & don't believe so, that is not a practice.4 ,ressed further for an answer as to his practice in preparing contracts and deeds for parties where he was not the bro3er, he finally answered( 4& have done about everything that is on the boo3s as far as real estate is concerned.4 xxx xxx xxx 2espondent ta3es the position that because he is a real-estate bro3er he has a lawful right to do any legal wor3 in connection with real-estate transactions, especially in drawing of real-estate contracts, deeds, )ortgages, notes and the li3e. There is no doubt but that he has engaged in these practices over the years and has charged for his services in that connection. ... #,eople v. "chafer, ! 7.*. 5d !!1$ xxx xxx xxx ... %n attorney, in the )ost general sense, is a person designated or e)ployed by another to act in his stead= an agent= )ore especially, one of a class of persons authori+ed to appear and act for suitors or defendants in legal proceedings. "trictly, these professional persons are attorneys at law, and nonprofessional agents are properly styled 4attorney's in fact=4 but the single word is )uch used as )eaning an attorney at law. % person )ay be an attorney in facto for another, without being an attorney at law. %bb. Caw Hict. 4%ttorney.4 % public attorney, or attorney at law, says Webster, is an officer of a court of law, legally 0ualified to prosecute and defend actions in such court on the retainer of clients. 4The principal duties of an attorney are #1$ to be true to the court and to his client= #5$ to )anage the business of his client with care, s3ill, and integrity= #1$ to 3eep his client infor)ed as to the state of his business= #;$ to 3eep his secrets confided to hi) as such. ... -is rights are to be .ustly co)pensated for his services.4 /ouv. Caw Hict. tit. 4%ttorney.4 The transitive verb +practice,+ as defined by -ebster, $eans 'to do or perfor$ fre*uently, custo$arily, or habitually/ to perfor$ by a succession of acts, as, to practice ga$ing, ... to carry on in practice, or repeated action/ to apply, as a theory, to real life/ to e!ercise, as a profession, trade, art. etc./ as, to practice law or )edicine,' etc....4 #"tate v. /ryan, ".*. 955, 951= *)phasis supplied$ &n this .urisdiction, we have ruled that the practice of law denotes fre0uency or a succession of acts. Thus, we stated in the case of ,eople v. ?illanueva #1; "C2% 1:9 @1989A$( xxx xxx xxx ... ,ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance, for it consists in fre0uent or custo)ary actions, a succession of acts of the sa)e 3ind. &n other words, it is fre0uent habitual exercise #"tate v. Cotner, 15!, p. 1, ! Nan. 8;, ;5 C2%, <.". !8 $. ,ractice of law to fall within the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo)arily or habitually holding one's self out to the public, as a lawyer and de)anding pay)ent for such services. ... . #at p. 115$ &t is to be noted that the Co))ission on %ppoint)ent itself recogni+es habituality as a re0uired co)ponent of the )eaning of practice of law in a <e)orandu) prepared and issued by it, to wit( l. Aabituality. The ter) 'practice of law' i)plies custo)arilyor habitually holding one's self out to the public as a lawyer #,eople v. ?illanueva, 1; "C2% 1:9 citing "tate v. /ryan, ; ".*. 955, 9 7.C. 8;;$ such as when one sends a circular announcing the establish)ent of a law office for the general practice of law #B.". v. 7oy /os0ue, ,hil. 1;8$, or when one ta3es the oath of office as a lawyer before a notary public, and files a )anifestation with the "upre)e Court infor)ing it of his intention to practice law in all courts in the country #,eople v. He Cuna, 1:5 ,hil. 98 $. ,ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance, for it consists in fre0uent or custo)ary action, a succession of acts of the sa)e 3ind. &n other words, it is a habitual exercise #,eople v. ?illanueva, 1; "C2% 1 :9 citing "tate v. Cotner, 1 5!, p. 1, ! Nan, 8;$.4 #2ollo, p. 119$ xxx xxx xxx While the career as a business)an of respondent <onsod )ay have profited fro) his legal 3nowledge, the use of such legal 3nowledge is incidental and consists of isolated activities which do not fall under the deno)ination of practice of law. %d)ission to the practice of law was not re0uired for )e)bership in the Constitutional Co))ission or in the Eact-Einding Co))ission on the 19 9 Coup %tte)pt. %ny specific legal activities which )ay have been assigned to <r. <onsod while a )e)ber )ay be li3ened to isolated transactions of foreign corporations in the ,hilippines which do not categori+e the foreign corporations as doing business in the ,hilippines. %s in the practice of law, doing business also should be active and continuous. &solated business transactions or occasional, incidental and casual transactions are not within the context of doing business. This was our ruling in the case of Anta$ Consolidated, 'nc. v. Court of appeals, 1;1 "C2% 5 @19 8A$.

2espondent <onsod, corporate executive, civic leader, and )e)ber of the Constitutional Co))ission )ay possess the bac3ground, co)petence, integrity, and dedication, to 0ualify for such high offices as ,resident, ?ice-,resident, "enator, Congress)an or Dovernor but the Constitution in prescribing the specific 0ualification of having engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years for the position of C6<*C*C Chair)an has ordered that he )ay not be confir)ed for that office. The Constitution charges the public respondents no less than this Court to obey its )andate. &, therefore, believe that the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents co))itted grave abuse of discretion in confir)ing the no)ination of respondent <onsod as Chair)an of the C6<*C*C. & vote to D2%7T the petition. Bidin, )., dissent

Separate Opinions NARVASA, J., concurring( & concur with the decision of the )a.ority written by <r. >ustice ,aras, albeit only in the result= it does not appear to )e that there has been an ade0uate showing that the challenged deter)ination by the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents-that the appoint)ent of respondent <onsod as Chair)an of the Co))ission on *lections should, on the basis of his stated 0ualifications and after due assess)ent thereof, be confir)ed-was attended by error so gross as to a)ount to grave abuse of discretion and conse0uently )erits nullification by this Court in accordance with the second paragraph of "ection 1, %rticle ?&&& of the Constitution. & therefore vote to H*7I the petition. "elencio4Aerrera, )., concur. PADILLA, J., dissenting( The records of this case will show that when the Court first deliberated on the ,etition at bar, & voted not only to re0uire the respondents to co))ent on the ,etition, but & was the sole vote for the issuance of a te)porary restraining order to en.oin respondent <onsod fro) assu)ing the position of C6<*C*C Chair)an, while the Court deliberated on his constitutional 0ualification for the office. <y purpose in voting for a T26 was to prevent the inconvenience and even e)barrass)ent to all parties concerned were the Court to finally decide for respondent <onsod's dis0ualification. <oreover, a reading of the ,etition then in relation to established .urisprudence already showed pri$a facie that respondent <onsod did not possess the needed 0ualification, that is, he had not engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years prior to his appoint)ent as C6<*C*C Chair)an. %fter considering carefully respondent <onsod's co))ent, & a) even )ore convinced that the constitutional re0uire)ent of 4practice of law for at least ten ?9<@ years4 has not been )et. The procedural barriers interposed by respondents deserve scant consideration because, ulti)ately, the core issue to be resolved in this petition is the proper construal of the constitutional provision re0uiring a )a.ority of the )e)bership of C6<*C*C, including the Chair)an thereof to 4have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years.4 #%rt. &'#C$, "ection 1#1$, 19 ! Constitution$. Muestions involving the construction of constitutional provisions are best left to .udicial resolution. %s declared in Angara v. 1lectoral Co$$ission, #81 ,hil. 119$ 4upon the .udicial depart)ent is thrown the sole)n and inescapable obligation of interpreting the Constitution and defining constitutional boundaries.4 The Constitution has i)posed clear and specific standards for a C6<*C*C Chair)an. %)ong these are that he )ust have been 4engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years.4 &t is the bounden duty of this Court to ensure that such standard is )et and co)plied with. What constitutes practice of lawG %s co))only understood, 4practice4 refers to the actual perfor$ance or application of 3nowledge as distinguished fro) $ere possession of knowledge= it connotes an active, habitual, repeated or custo$ary action. 1 To 4practice4 law, or any profession for that )atter, )eans, to exercise or pursue an e)ploy)ent or profession actively, habitually, repeatedly or custo$arily. Therefore, a doctor of )edicine who is e)ployed and is habitually perfor)ing the tas3s of a nursing aide, cannot be said to be in the 4practice of )edicine.4 % certified public accountant who wor3s as a cler3, cannot be said to practice his profession as an accountant. &n the sa)e way, a lawyer who is e)ployed as a business executive or a corporate )anager, other than as head or attorney of a Cegal Hepart)ent of a corporation or a govern)ental agency, cannot be said to be in the practice of law. %s aptly held by this Court in the case of #eople vs. Dillanueva( 2 #ractice is $ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre*uent or custo$ary actions, a succession of acts of the sa$e kind. &n other words, it is fre0uent habitual exercise #"tate vs- Cotner, 15!, p. 1, ! Nan. 8;, ;5 C2%, <.". !8 $. ,ractice of law to fall within the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo)arily or habitually holding one's self out to the public as a lawyer and de)anding pay)ent for such services #"tate vs. /ryan, ; ".*. 955, 9 7.C. 8;;,8;!.$ ... #e)phasis supplied$. &t is worth )entioning that the respondent Co))ission on %ppoint)ents in a <e)orandu) it prepared, enu)erated several factors deter)inative of whether a particular activity constitutes 4practice of law.4 &t states(

1. Aabituality. The ter) 4practice of law4 i)plies custo)arily or habitually holding one's self out to the public as a lawyer #,eople vs. ?illanueva, 1; "C2% 1:9 citing "tate v. /oyen, ; ".*. 955, 9 7.C. 8;;$ such as when one sends a circular announcing the establish)ent of a law office for the general practice of law #B.". v. 7ey /os0ue, ,hil. 1;8$, or when one ta3es the oath of office as a lawyer before a notary public, and files a )anifestation with the "upre)e Court infor)ing it of his intention to practice law in all courts in the country #,eople v. He Cuna, 1:5 ,hil. 98 $. ,ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre0uent or custo)ary action, a succession of acts of the sa)e 3ind. &n other words, it is a habitual exercise #,eople v. ?illanueva, 1; "C2% 1:9 citing "tate v. Cotner, 15!, p. 1, ! Nan, 8;$. 5. Co$pensation. ,ractice of law i)plies that one )ust have presented hi)self to be in the active and continued practice of the legal profession and that his professional services are available to the public for co)pensation, as a service of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. #,eople v. ?illanueva, supra$. -ence, charging for services such as preparation of docu)ents involving the use of legal 3nowledge and s3ill is within the ter) 4practice of law4 #*rnani ,aOo, /ar 2eviewer in Cegal and >udicial *thics, 19 ed., p. citing ,eople v. ,eople's "toc3yards "tate /an3, 1!8 7./. 9:1$ and, one who renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a statute, and receives pay for it, is to that extent, practicing law #<artin, supra, p. :8 citing <endelaun v. Dilbert and /ar3et <fg. Co., 59: 7.I.". ;85$ &f co)pensation is expected, all advice to clients and all action ta3en for the) in )atters connected with the law= are practicing law. #*lwood Eitchette et al., v. %rthur C. Taylor, 9;%-C.2. 198-199$ 1. Application of law legal principle practice or procedure which calls for legal 3nowledge, training and experience is within the ter) 4practice of law4. #<artin supra$ ;. Attorney4client relationship. *ngaging in the practice of law presupposes the existence of lawyerclient relationship. -ence, where a lawyer underta3es an activity which re0uires 3nowledge of law but involves no attorney-client relationship, such as teaching law or writing law boo3s or articles, he cannot be said to be engaged in the practice of his profession or a lawyer #%gpalo, Cegal *thics, 19 9 ed., p. 1:$. 3 The above-enu)erated factors would, & believe, be useful aids in deter)ining whether or not respondent <onsod )eets the constitutional 0ualification of practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years at the ti)e of his appoint)ent as C6<*C*C Chair)an. The following relevant 0uestions )ay be as3ed( 1. Hid respondent <onsod perfor) any of the tas3s which are peculiar to the practice of lawG 5. Hid respondent perfor) such tas3s custo)arily or habituallyG 1. %ssu)ing that he perfor)ed any of such tas3s habitually, did he do so -%/&TB%CCI E62 %T C*%"T T*7 #1:$ I*%2" prior to his appoint)ent as C6<*C*C Chair)anG Diven the e)ploy)ent or .ob history of respondent <onsod as appears fro) the records, & a) persuaded that if ever he did perfor) any of the tas3s which constitute the practice of law, he did not do so AAB'T8ALL0 for at least ten ?9<@ years prior to his appoint)ent as C6<*C*C Chair)an. While it )ay be granted that he perfor)ed tas3s and activities which could be latitudinarianly considered activities peculiar to the practice of law, li3e the drafting of legal docu)ents and the rendering of legal opinion or advice, such were isolated transactions or activities which do not 0ualify his past endeavors as 4practice of law.4 To beco)e engaged in the practice of law, there )ust be a continuity, or a succession of acts. %s observed by the "olicitor Deneral in #eople vs. Dillanueva( 4 *ssentially, the word private practice of law i)plies that one )ust have presented hi)self to be in the active and continued practice of the legal profession and that his professional services are available to the public for a co)pensation, as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. %CC62H&7DCI, )y vote is to D2%7T the petition and to declare respondent <onsod as not 0ualified for the position of C6<*C*C Chair)an for not having engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years prior to his appoint)ent to such position. CRU , J., dissenting( & a) sincerely i)pressed by the ponencia of )y brother ,aras but find & )ust dissent .ust the sa)e. There are certain points on which & )ust differ with hi) while of course respecting hisviewpoint. To begin with, & do not thin3 we are inhibited fro) exa)ining the 0ualifications of the respondent si)ply because his no)ination has been confir)ed by the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents. &n )y view, this is not a political 0uestion that we are barred fro) resolving. Heter)ination of the appointee's credentials is )ade on the basis of the established facts, not the discretion of that body. *ven if it were, the exercise of that discretion would still be sub.ect to our review. &n Luego, which is cited in the ponencia, what was involved was the discretion of the appointing authority to choose between two clai)ants to the sa)e office who both possessed the re0uired 0ualifications. &t was that 3ind of discretion that we said could not be reviewed.

&f a person elected by no less than the sovereign people )ay be ousted by this Court for lac3 of the re0uired 0ualifications, & see no reason why we cannot dis0ualified an appointee si)ply because he has passed the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents. *ven the ,resident of the ,hilippines )ay be declared ineligible by this Court in an appropriate proceeding notwithstanding that he has been found acceptable by no less than the enfranchised citi+enry. The reason is that what we would be exa)ining is not the wisdo$ of his election but whether or not he was 0ualified to be elected in the first place. Co)ing now to the 0ualifications of the private respondent, & fear that the ponencia )ay have been too sweeping in its definition of the phrase 4practice of law4 as to render the 0ualification practically toothless. Ero) the nu)erous activities accepted as e)braced in the ter), & have the unco)fortable feeling that one does not even have to be a lawyer to be engaged in the practice of law as long as his activities involve the application of so)e law, however peripherally. The stoc3 bro3er and the insurance ad.uster and the realtor could co)e under the definition as they deal with or give advice on )atters that are li3ely 4to beco)e involved in litigation.4 The lawyer is considered engaged in the practice of law even if his )ain occupation is another business and he interprets and applies so)e law only as an incident of such business. That covers every co)pany organi+ed under the Corporation Code and regulated by the "*C under ,.H. 9:5-%. Considering the ra)ifications of the )odern society, there is hardly any activity that is not affected by so)e law or govern)ent regulation the business)an )ust 3now about and observe. &n fact, again going by the definition, a lawyer does not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner. -e can be so dee)ed when, on his own, he rents a house or buys a car or consults a doctor as these acts involve his 3nowledge and application of the laws regulating such transactions. &f he operates a public utility vehicle as his )ain source of livelihood, he would still be dee)ed engaged in the practice of law because he )ust obey the ,ublic "ervice %ct and the rules and regulations of the *nergy 2egulatory /oard. The ponencia 0uotes an %)erican decision defining the practice of law as the 4perfor)ance of any acts . . . in or out of court, co))only understood to be the practice of law,4 which tells us absolutely nothing. The decision goes on to say that 4because lawyers perfor) al)ost every function 3nown in the co))ercial and govern)ental real), such a definition would obviously be too global to be wor3able.4 The effect of the definition given in the ponencia is to consider virtually every lawyer to be engaged in the practice of law even if he does not earn his living, or at least part of it, as a lawyer. &t is enough that his activities are incidentally #even if only re)otely$ connected with so)e law, ordinance, or regulation. The possible exception is the lawyer whose inco)e is derived fro) teaching ballroo) dancing or escorting wrin3led ladies with pubescent pretensions. The respondent's credentials are i)pressive, to be sure, but they do not persuade )e that he has been engaged in the practice of law for ten years as re0uired by the Constitution. &t is conceded that he has been engaged in business and finance, in which areas he has distinguished hi)self, but as an executive and econo)ist and not as a practicing lawyer. The plain fact is that he has occupied the various positions listed in his resu)e by virtue of his experience and prestige as a business)an and not as an attorney-at-law whose principal attention is focused on the law. *ven if it be argued that he was acting as a lawyer when he lobbied in Congress for agrarian and urban refor), served in the 7%<E2*C and the Constitutional Co))ission #together with non-lawyers li3e far)ers and priests$ and was a )e)ber of the Havide Co))ission, he has not proved that his activities in these capacities extended over the prescribed 1:-year period of actual practice of the law. -e is doubtless e)inently 0ualified for )any other positions worthy of his abundant talents but not as Chair)an of the Co))ission on *lections. & have )uch ad)iration for respondent <onsod, no less than for <r. >ustice ,aras, but & )ust regretfully vote to grant the petition. !U"I#RR# , $R%, J., dissenting( When this petition was filed, there was hope that engaging in the practice of law as a 0ualification for public office would be settled one way or another in fairly definitive ter)s. Bnfortunately, this was not the result. 6f the fourteen #1;$ )e)ber Court, 9 are of the view that <r. Christian <onsod engaged in the practice of law #with one of these 9 leaving his vote behind while on official leave but not expressing his clear stand on the )atter$= ; categorically stating that he did not practice law= 5 voting in the result because there was no error so gross as to a)ount to grave abuse of discretion= one of official leave with no instructions left behind on how he viewed the issue= and 5 not ta3ing part in the deliberations and the decision. There are two 3ey factors that )a3e our tas3 difficult. Eirst is our reviewing the wor3 of a constitutional Co))ission on %ppoint)ents whose duty is precisely to loo3 into the 0ualifications of persons appointed to high office. *ven if the Co))ission errs, we have no power to set aside error. We can loo3 only into grave abuse of discretion or whi)sically and arbitrariness. "econd is our belief that <r. <onsod possesses superior 0ualifications in ter)s of executive ability, proficiency in )anage)ent, educational bac3ground, experience in international ban3ing and finance, and instant recognition by the public. -is integrity and co)petence are not 0uestioned by the petitioner. What is before us is co)pliance with a specific re0uire)ent written into the Constitution. &nspite of )y high regard for <r. <onsod, & cannot shir3 )y constitutional duty. -e has never engaged in the practice of law for even one year. -e is a )e)ber of the bar but to say that he has practiced law is stretching the ter) beyond rational li)its. % person )ay have passed the bar exa)inations. But if he has not dedicated his life to the law, if he has not engaged in an activity where $e$bership in the bar is a re*uire$ent & fail to see how he can clai) to have been engaged in the practice of law. *ngaging in the practice of law is a 0ualification not only for C6<*C*C chair)an but also for appoint)ent to the "upre)e Court and all lower courts. What 3ind of >udges or >ustices will we have if there )ain occupation is selling real estate,

)anaging a business corporation, serving in fact-finding co))ittee, wor3ing in )edia, or operating a far) with no active involve)ent in the law, whether in Dovern)ent or private practice, except that in one .oyful )o)ent in the distant past, they happened to pass the bar exa)inationsG The Constitution uses the phrase 4engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.4 The deliberate choice of words shows that the practice envisioned is active and regular, not isolated, occasional, accidental, inter)ittent, incidental, seasonal, or exte)poraneous. To be 4engaged4 in an activity for ten years re0uires co))itted participation in so)ething which is the result of one's decisive choice. &t )eans that one is occupied and involved in the enterprise= one is obliged or pledged to carry it out with intent and attention during the ten-year period. & agree with the petitioner that based on the bio-data sub)itted by respondent <onsod to the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents, the latter has not been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years. &n fact, if appears that <r. <onsod has never practiced law except for an alleged one year period after passing the bar exa)inations when he wor3ed in his father's law fir). *ven then his law practice )ust have been extre)ely li)ited because he was also wor3ing for <.%. and ,h. H. degrees in *cono)ics at the Bniversity of ,ennsylvania during that period. -ow could he practice law in the Bnited "tates while not a )e)ber of the /ar thereG The professional life of the respondent follows( 1.19.1. 2espondent <onsod's activities since his passing the /ar exa)inations in 1981 consist of the following( 1. 1981-1981( <.%. in *cono)ics #,h. H. candidate$, Bniversity of ,ennsylvania 5. 1981-19!:( World /an3 Droup J *cono)ist, &ndustry Hepart)ent= 6perations, Catin %)erican Hepart)ent= Hivision Chief, "outh %sia and <iddle *ast, &nternational Einance Corporation 1. 19!:-19!1( <eralco Droup J *xecutive of various co)panies, i.e., <eralco "ecurities Corporation, ,hilippine ,etroleu) Corporation, ,hilippine *lectric Corporation ;. 19!1-19!8( Iu.uico Droup J ,resident, Eil-Capital Hevelop)ent Corporation and affiliated co)panies 9. 19!8-19! ( Einaciera <anila J Chief *xecutive 6fficer 8. 19! -19 8( Duevent Droup of Co)panies J Chief *xecutive 6fficer !. 19 8-19 !( ,hilippine Constitutional Co))ission J <e)ber . 19 9-1991( The Eact-Einding Co))ission on the Hece)ber 19 9 Coup %tte)pt J <e)ber 9. ,resently( Chair)an of the /oard and Chief *xecutive 6fficer of the following co)panies( a. %C* Container ,hilippines, &nc. b. Hataprep, ,hilippines c. ,hilippine "B7syste)s ,roducts, &nc. d. "e)irara Coal Corporation e. C/C Ti)ber Corporation <e)ber of the /oard of the Eollowing( a. *ngineering Construction Corporation of the ,hilippines b. Eirst ,hilippine *nergy Corporation c. Eirst ,hilippine -oldings Corporation d. Eirst ,hilippine &ndustrial Corporation e. Draphic %telier f. <anila *lectric Co)pany g. ,hilippine Co))ercial Capital, &nc. h. ,hilippine *lectric Corporation

i. Tarlac 2eforestation and *nviron)ent *nterprises .. Tolong %0uaculture Corporation 3. ?isayan %0uaculture Corporation l. Dui)aras %0uaculture Corporation #2ollo, pp. 51-55$ There is nothing in the above bio-data which even re)otely indicates that respondent <onsod has given the law enough attention or a certain degree of co))it)ent and participation as would support in all sincerity and candor the clai) of having engaged in its practice for at least ten years. &nstead of wor3ing as a lawyer, he has lawyers wor3ing for hi). &nstead of giving receiving that legal advice of legal services, he was the oneadvice and those services as an executive but not as a lawyer. The deliberations before the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents show an effort to e0uate 4engaged in the practice of law4 with the use of legal 3nowledge in various fields of endeavor such as co))erce, industry, civic wor3, blue ribbon investigations, agrarian refor), etc. where such 3nowledge would be helpful. & regret that & cannot .oin in playing fast and loose with a ter), which even an ordinary lay)an accepts as having a fa)iliar and custo)ary well-defined )eaning. *very resident of this country who has reached the age of discern)ent has to 3now, follow, or apply the law at various ti)es in his life. Cegal 3nowledge is useful if not necessary for the business executive, legislator, )ayor, barangay captain, teacher, police)an, far)er, fisher)an, )ar3et vendor, and student to na)e only a few. %nd yet, can these people honestly assert that as such, they are engaged in the practice of lawG The Constitution re0uires having been 4engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.4 &t is not satisfied with having been 4a )e)ber of the ,hilippine bar for at least ten years.4 "o)e %)erican courts have defined the practice of law, as follows( The practice of law involves not only appearance in court in connection with litigation but also services rendered out of court, and it includes the giving of advice or the rendering of any services re0uiring the use of legal s3ill or 3nowledge, such as preparing a will, contract or other instru)ent, the legal effect of which, under the facts and conditions involved, )ust be carefully deter)ined. #eople e! rel. Chicago Bar Ass'n v. Tinkoff, 199 &ll. 5 5, !! 7.*.5d 891= #eople e! rel. 'llinois tate Bar Ass'n v. #eople's tock 0ards tate Bank, 1;; &ll. ;85,1!8 7.*. 9:1, and cases cited. &t would be difficult, if not i)possible to lay down a for)ula or definition of what constitutes the practice of law. 4,racticing law4 has been defined as 4,racticing as an attorney or counselor at law according to the laws and custo)s of our courts, is the giving of advice or rendition of any sort of service by any person, fir) or corporation when the giving of such advice or rendition of such service re0uires the use of any degree of legal 3nowledge or s3ill.4 Without adopting that definition, we referred to it as being substantially correct in #eople e! rel. 'llinois tate Bar Ass'n v. #eople's tock 0ards tate Bank, 1;; &ll. ;85,1!8 7.*. 9:1. #,eople v. "chafer, ! 7.*. 5d !!1, !!8$ Eor one's actions to co)e within the purview of practice of law they should not only be activities peculiar to the wor3 of a lawyer, they should also be perfor)ed, habitually, fre0uently or custo)arily, to wit( xxx xxx xxx 2espondent's answers to 0uestions propounded to hi) were rather evasive. -e was as3ed whether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties in real-estate transactions where he was not the procuring agent. -e answered( 4?ery seldo).4 &n answer to the 0uestion as to how )any ti)es he had prepared contracts for the parties during the twenty-one years of his business, he said( 4& have no &dea.4 When as3ed if it would be )ore than half a do+en ti)es his answer was & suppose. %s3ed if he did not recall )a3ing the state)ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a large nu)ber of instances, he answered( 4& don't recall exactly what was said.4 When as3ed if he did not re)e)ber saying that he had )ade a practice of preparing deeds, )ortgages and contracts and charging a fee to the parties therefor in instances where he was not the bro3er in the deal, he answered( 4Well, & don't believe so, that is not a practice.4 ,ressed further for an answer as to his practice in preparing contracts and deeds for parties where he was not the bro3er, he finally answered( 4& have done about everything that is on the boo3s as far as real estate is concerned.4 xxx xxx xxx 2espondent ta3es the position that because he is a real-estate bro3er he has a lawful right to do any legal wor3 in connection with real-estate transactions, especially in drawing of real-estate contracts, deeds, )ortgages, notes and the li3e. There is no doubt but that he has engaged in these practices over the years and has charged for his services in that connection. ... #,eople v. "chafer, ! 7.*. 5d !!1$ xxx xxx xxx ... %n attorney, in the )ost general sense, is a person designated or e)ployed by another to act in his stead= an agent= )ore especially, one of a class of persons authori+ed to appear and act for suitors or defendants in legal proceedings. "trictly, these professional persons are attorneys at law, and nonprofessional agents are properly styled 4attorney's in fact=4 but the single word is )uch used as )eaning an attorney at law. % person )ay be an attorney in facto for another, without being an

attorney at law. %bb. Caw Hict. 4%ttorney.4 % public attorney, or attorney at law, says Webster, is an officer of a court of law, legally 0ualified to prosecute and defend actions in such court on the retainer of clients. 4The principal duties of an attorney are #1$ to be true to the court and to his client= #5$ to )anage the business of his client with care, s3ill, and integrity= #1$ to 3eep his client infor)ed as to the state of his business= #;$ to 3eep his secrets confided to hi) as such. ... -is rights are to be .ustly co)pensated for his services.4 /ouv. Caw Hict. tit. 4%ttorney.4 The transitive verb +practice,+ as defined by -ebster, $eans 'to do or perfor$ fre*uently, custo$arily, or habitually/ to perfor$ by a succession of acts, as, to practice ga$ing, ... to carry on in practice, or repeated action/ to apply, as a theory, to real life/ to e!ercise, as a profession, trade, art. etc./ as, to practice law or )edicine,' etc....4 #"tate v. /ryan, ".*. 955, 951= *)phasis supplied$ &n this .urisdiction, we have ruled that the practice of law denotes fre0uency or a succession of acts. Thus, we stated in the case of ,eople v. ?illanueva #1; "C2% 1:9 @1989A$( xxx xxx xxx ... ,ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance, for it consists in fre0uent or custo)ary actions, a succession of acts of the sa)e 3ind. &n other words, it is fre0uent habitual exercise #"tate v. Cotner, 15!, p. 1, ! Nan. 8;, ;5 C2%, <.". !8 $. ,ractice of law to fall within the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo)arily or habitually holding one's self out to the public, as a lawyer and de)anding pay)ent for such services. ... . #at p. 115$ &t is to be noted that the Co))ission on %ppoint)ent itself recogni+es habituality as a re0uired co)ponent of the )eaning of practice of law in a <e)orandu) prepared and issued by it, to wit( l. Aabituality. The ter) 'practice of law' i)plies custo)arilyor habitually holding one's self out to the public as a lawyer #,eople v. ?illanueva, 1; "C2% 1:9 citing "tate v. /ryan, ; ".*. 955, 9 7.C. 8;;$ such as when one sends a circular announcing the establish)ent of a law office for the general practice of law #B.". v. 7oy /os0ue, ,hil. 1;8$, or when one ta3es the oath of office as a lawyer before a notary public, and files a )anifestation with the "upre)e Court infor)ing it of his intention to practice law in all courts in the country #,eople v. He Cuna, 1:5 ,hil. 98 $. ,ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance, for it consists in fre0uent or custo)ary action, a succession of acts of the sa)e 3ind. &n other words, it is a habitual exercise #,eople v. ?illanueva, 1; "C2% 1 :9 citing "tate v. Cotner, 1 5!, p. 1, ! Nan, 8;$.4 #2ollo, p. 119$ xxx xxx xxx While the career as a business)an of respondent <onsod )ay have profited fro) his legal 3nowledge, the use of such legal 3nowledge is incidental and consists of isolated activities which do not fall under the deno)ination of practice of law. %d)ission to the practice of law was not re0uired for )e)bership in the Constitutional Co))ission or in the Eact-Einding Co))ission on the 19 9 Coup %tte)pt. %ny specific legal activities which )ay have been assigned to <r. <onsod while a )e)ber )ay be li3ened to isolated transactions of foreign corporations in the ,hilippines which do not categori+e the foreign corporations as doing business in the ,hilippines. %s in the practice of law, doing business also should be active and continuous. &solated business transactions or occasional, incidental and casual transactions are not within the context of doing business. This was our ruling in the case of Anta$ Consolidated, 'nc. v. Court of appeals, 1;1 "C2% 5 @19 8A$. 2espondent <onsod, corporate executive, civic leader, and )e)ber of the Constitutional Co))ission )ay possess the bac3ground, co)petence, integrity, and dedication, to 0ualify for such high offices as ,resident, ?ice-,resident, "enator, Congress)an or Dovernor but the Constitution in prescribing the specific 0ualification of having engaged in the practice of law for at least ten #1:$ years for the position of C6<*C*C Chair)an has ordered that he )ay not be confir)ed for that office. The Constitution charges the public respondents no less than this Court to obey its )andate. &, therefore, believe that the Co))ission on %ppoint)ents co))itted grave abuse of discretion in confir)ing the no)ination of respondent <onsod as Chair)an of the C6<*C*C. & vote to D2%7T the petition. Bidin, )., dissent