LEGAL ETHICS PRELIMINARY Legal Ethics, Meaning.—It is the branch of moral science which treats of the duties which an attorney owes to the court, to his client, to his colleagues in the profes- sion and to the public (Malcolm, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 8 [1949]) as embodied in the Constitution, Rules of Court, the Code of Professional Responsibility, Canons of Profes- sional Ethics, jurisprudence, moral law and special laws. Legal Ethics, A Prescribed Subject.—Legal Ethics is a prescribed subject in all law schools. It provides the needed moral foundation in the study of law intended to guide the student throughout his life. It has been one of the subjects in Bar Examinations in the Philippines since 1918. Significance Of Legal Ethics. —The practice of law which covers a wide range of activities characteristic of the legal profession, including the pursuit and defense of clients’ rights and interests before the courts, will be transgressive, anarchic, riotous, lawbreaking, defiant and disobedient to courts—if there are no sets of governing Tules to limit the parameters and tame the exercise of the profession. Legal Ethics will guard against the abuses and ills of the profession such aS dishonesty, decéit, immorality, negligence, slothness, lack of diligence and the many2 LecaL Eruics forms of malpractice of the members of the Bar. On the positive side, it will raise the standard of the legal profes. sion, encourage and enhance the respect for the law, assure an effective and efficient administration of justice, assist in the keeping and maintenance of law and order in coordination with the other Departments of the Govern- ment. It also provides the basis for the weeding out of the unfit and the misfit in the legal profession for the protec- tion of the public. Original Bases Of Legal Ethics.—Legal Ethics in the Philippines is originally based and rooted in the following 1. Canons of Professional Ethics. The Canons were framed by the American Bar Association in 1908. The same were adopted in the Philippines in 1917 by the Philippine Bar when the country was still a colony of the United States. The Canons were subsequently revised. The revised Canons were adopted in the Philippines in 1946 2. Supreme Court Decisions. Many of our rules on ethics were drawn from decisions of our Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United States which have relevance and bearing to the practice of law in the country. 3. Statutes. Some laws provide for sources of legal ethics like the Civil Code (Art. 1491 [5], Art. 2208), the Revised Penal Code (Art. 209) and many special laws. 4. Constitution. The Constitution bestowed on the Supreme Court the prerogative to promulgate rules on the admission to the Bar, the integration of the bar! and legal sistance to the underprivileged 5 [5h 1987 Constitution), “pened (Art VIL Section 5 | 5. | Treatises and Publications, Works on the subject of well-known autho1 5 as standards anthers have been used and cited by courts Practice of aw. uReS On the right conduct in the the nent Basis Of Philippine Legal Ethics —T0d2’: oe main basis of our legal ethics is the Code of Profes” ‘The “¢ Provisions were based on the 1973 ConstitutionPRELIMINARY 3 sional Responsibility. It is the embodiment into one Code of the various pertinent and subsisting rules, guidelines and standards on the rule of conduct of lawyers sourced from the Constitution, Rules of Court, Canons of Profes- sional Ethics, statutes, special laws, treatises and deci- sions which must be observed by all members of the Bar in the exercise of their profession whether in or out of court as well as in their public and private lives. The Code of Professional Responsibility was initially drafted in 1980 by the IBP Committee On Responsibility, Disciplinesand Disbarment and was submitted to the Supreme Court for approval. It took the Supreme Court more than seven years to decide on its formal promulgation as a code of ‘conduct for members of the Bar. The Code of Professional Responsibility was finally promulgated by the Supreme Court on June 21, 1988. The Code is a judicial command, not a suggestion, promul- gated as it is by no less than the Highest Court of the land which has supremacy of supervision over all members of the Bar. Importance Of The New Code.—The Code has pro- vided the legal profession an impression of identity and sense of independence attuned to the local traditions, practices and customs in the country. This sense of iden- tity and independence ‘has given the Filipino lawyer the feeling of pride and emancipation from foreign Canons. There seems to be nothing more which is not covered by the Code of Professional Responsibility compared to the American Canons of Professional Ethics which have for Many years (starting in 1917) nurtured the code of ethics for the Filipino lawyers. As the years go onward, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and the Supreme Court may find reasons and time to improve the Code of Professional Responsibility to better enhance and strengthen the ethics of the legal Profession.e LecaL Emmics Definitions Of Terms Commonly Used In Legal Ethics to the whole body of at. Bar and Bench. Bar refers torneys and counsellors; collectively, the members of the legal profession; they are figuratively called the “bar” to distinguish them from the “bench,” which terms denote the whole body of judges (See Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 148) Bar refers to the “collectivity of persons whose names appear in the Roll of Attorneys (Garcia vs. De Vera, 418 SCRA 27) In the Philippines, it is kown as the Integrated Bar of the Philippines where membership is mandatory. Bar Admission. Act by which one is licensed to prac- tice before courts of a particular state or jurisdiction after Satisfying certain requirements such as bar examinations, Period of residency or admission on grounds of reciprocity ears as member of bar of another jurisdic- tion (Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Editior n, p. 149), ____ Lawyer. This is the general term for a person trained in the law and authorized to advise or represent others in legal matters, A lawyer is a person licensed to pra : ctice law (Black's ‘aw Dictionary, 6th Ed., p. agg) Practice law ( in aoe Lawyer. A lawyer who Personally handles cases » administrative agencies or boards which means engaging in actual trial work either { for the defense of ° r the prosecution or f cases of clients, Practisi, law. “Practice Sia Sr One engaged in the practice of the means any activity, in or out of court Knowledge, treint i application of jaw, legal procedure. Practice of law ig to ind experience, ‘To engage in the teristics of the rofe Perform those acts which are charac” Bive notice or faa ae Generally, to practice law is t? Service requires the wee ein of service, which device OF oF skal” (Cayetano vs. Monsod, 204 a ‘egal knowledge . 10).PRELIMINARY 5 (Note: All trial lawyers are practising lawyers, but not all practising lawyers are trial lawyers) Client. One who engages the services of a lawyer for legal advice or for purposes of prosecuting or defending a suit in his behalf and usually for a fee. Attorneys-at-Law. That class of persons who are by license, officers of the courts, empowered to appear, prosecute and defend, and upon whom peculiar duties, responsibilities and liabilities are developed by law as a consequence (Cui vs. Cui, 120 Phil. 729). An attorney-at-law is a person admitted to practice law in his respective state and authorized to perform both civil and criminal legal functions for clients, including drafting of legal documents, giving of legal advice, and representing such before courts, administrative agencies, boards, etc. (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 128). (Note: Attorney-at-law is synonymous with counsel- lor-at-law, lawyer, attorney, counsel, “abogado” and “bo- ceros”). Alawi vs. Alauya 268 SCRA 639 Facts: Alauya is the incumbent executive clerk of court of the 4th Judicial Shari'a District in Marawi City. A complaint was filed against him by Sophia Alawi with the Supreme Court seeking his dismissal from the service. Alawi's complaint is anchored on Alauya’s “malicious and libelous charges” resulting in undue injury to her honor and reputation, contained in letters sent to E.B. Villarosa and Company and Home Mortgage Finance Corporation. In his letter to the Asst. Clerk of Court, Atty. Marasigan, Alauya signed his name with the prefix “Atty.” Issue: As an officer of the Shari'a court, is Alauya entitled to use the title “Attorney”? Held: As regards Alauya’s use of the title of “At- torney,” this Court had already the occasion to dec-LecaL ETHICS lare that persons who pass the Shari'a Barare not full-fledged members of the Philippine Bar, hence may only practice law before Shari'a courts. While one who has been admitted to the Shari'a Bar, and one who has been admitted to the Philippine Bar, may both be considered “counsellors,” in the sense that they give counsel or advice in a professional ca- pacity, only the latter is an “attorney.” The title of “at- torney” is reserved to those who, having obtained the necessary degree in the study of law and successfully taken the Bar Examinations, have been admitted to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and remain members thereof in good standing; and it is they only who are authorized to practice law in this jurisdic- tion. ‘Alauya says he does not wish to use the title, “counsellor” or “counsellor-at-law,” because in his re- gion, there are pejorative connotations to the term, or it is confusingly similar to that given to local legisla- tors. The ratiocination, valid or not, is of no moment. His disinclination to use the title of “counsellor” does not warrant his use of the title of attorney. In re: Garcia 2 SCRA 985 Facts: A Filipino citizen who had finished the law course in Spain and thereafter allowed to practice the profession in said country, filed a petition to prac- tice law in the Philippines without passing the re- quired bar examinations provided for in Section 1 of Rule 127 of the Rules of Court. Issue: Can Arturo E. Garcia be admitted to practice law in the Philippines without passing the ar? Held: After due considerations, the Court re- solved to deny the petition on the following grounds: (1) The provisions of the Treaty on Academic Degrees and the Exercise of Professions between the Republic of the Philippines and the Spanish State can not be invoked by applicant. Under Article 11 thereof:PRELIMINARY, “The Nationals of each of the two countries who shall have obtained recogni- tion of the validity of their academic de- grees by virtue of the stipulations of this Treaty, can practice their professions within the territory of the Other, xxx.” (Italics supplied). from which it could clearly be discerned that said ‘Treaty was intended to govern Filipino citizens desir- ing to practice their profession in Spain, and the citi- zens of Spain desiring to practice their professions in the Philippines. Applicant is a Filipino citizen desiring to practice the legal profession in the Philippines. He is therefore subject to the laws of his own country and is not entitled to the privileges extended to Span- ish nationals desiring to practice in the Philippines. (2) Article I of the Treaty, in its pertinent part, provides: “The nationals of both countries who shall have obtained degrees or diplomas to practice the liberal professions in either of the Contracting States, issued by compe- tent national authorities, shall be deemed competent to exercise said professions in the territory of the Other, subject to the laws and regulations of the latter. x x x” It is clear, therefore, that the privileges provided in the Treaty invoked by the applicant are made ex- pressly subject to the laws and regulations of the con- tracting State in whose territory it is desired to exer- cise the legal profession; and Section 1 of Rule 127, in connection with Sections 2, 9, and 16 thereof, which have the force of law, require that before any- one can practice the legal profession in the Philip- pines he must first successfully pass the required bar examinations; and (3) The aforementioned Treaty, concluded bet- ween the Republic of the Philippines and the Spanish State could not have been intended to modify the laws and regulations governing admission to the8 Lecat Ernics practice of law in the Philippines, for the reason that the Executive Department may not encroach upon the constitutional prerogative of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules for admission to the practice of law in the Philippines. xxx (See: Sec. 5, Art. VIII, 1987 Phil. Constitution for the present provision). Attorney-in-Fact. An attorney-in-fact is simply an agent whose authority is strictly limited by the instrument appointing him, though he may do things not mentioned in his appointment necessary to the performance of the duties specifically required of him by the power of attorney appointing him, such authority being necessarily implied (Philippine Legal Encyclopedia, p. 66). His authority is Provided in a special power of attorney or general power of attorney or letter of attorney. An attorney-in-fact is not necessarily a lawyer. A counsel de oficio need not be a lawyer. In localities where members of the bar are not available, the court may appoint any person, resident of t! repute for probity and ability, to di 7, Rule 116, Rules of Court [1985)) » a counsel de oficio is a lawyer or attorney appointed ae 7 cut to represent a Party, usually an indigent =a * i7.@ criminal case (People vs. Daban, 43 SCRA Attorney Ad Hoc. 4 Person named and appointed by id an absentee defendant in the suit in ment is made (Bi “5 & Co., 83 La Aaa Soa vs. Factor’s court to defen: which the appoint Traders InsurancePRELIMINARY 9 as his agent upon whom service of papers may be made (Reynolds vs. Reynolds, 21 Cal. 2d 580, 134 P.2d 251, 254) An attorney of record is one who has filed a notice of appearance (e.g., through a praecipe) and who hence is formally mentioned in court records as the official attorney of the party. Once an attorney becomes an attorney of record, he often cannot withdraw from the case without court permission (Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 129). De Leon vs. Court of Appeals 383 SCRA 216 Held: When a party is represented by counsel of record, service of orders and notices must be made upon said attorney and notice to the client and to any other lawyer, not the counsel of record, is not notice in law (De Leon vs. Court of Appeals, 383 SCRA 216). Of Counsel. To distinguish them from attorneys of record, associate attorneys are referred to as “of counsel” (6 Am. Jur. 264). Lead Counsel. The counsel on either side of a liti- ated action who is charged with the principal manage- ment and direction of party's case, as distinguished from his juniors or subordinates, is said to “lead in the cause,” and is termed the “leading counsel” on the side. It may also refer to the chief or primary attorney in class action or multi-district litigation (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 888) House Counsel. Lawyer who acts as attorney for business though carried as an employee of that business and not as an independent lawyer. Generally, such lawyer advises business on day to day matters. Larger businesses have legal departments with attorneys assigned to special- ized areas of law affecting particular business; e.g.. labor law, taxes, personal injury litigation, corporate law. etc. (Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 740)10 Lecat ETHICS Amicus Curiae. Literally, it means, a friend of the court. A person with strong interest in or views on the subject matter of an action, but not a party to the action, may petition the court for permission to file a brief, osten- sibly on behalf of a party but actually to suggest a ration- ale consistent with its own views. Such amicus curiae briefs are commonly filed in appeals concerning matters of a broad public interest; e.g., civil rights cases (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 82). Experienced and impartial attorneys may be invited by the Court to appear as amici curiae to help in the dis- position of issues submitted to it (Sec. 36, Rule 138, RRC as amended by Resolution of the Supreme Court, dated May 20, 1968). Amicus Curiae Par Excellence. Bar associations who appear in court as amici curiae or friends of the court are referred as amicus curiae Par excellence. An amicus curiae has no control over the suit and has no right to institute any Proceedings therein; the amicus curiae cannot assume functions of a party in an action or pro- ceedings pending before the court. Ordinarily, the amicus Curiae cannot file a pleading in a case. e “ Pi an amicus curiae acts merely as a consultant a a ie ry Court in a doubtful question or issue pending © amicus curiae serves without compensation. Bar As: eae sociation. An association of members of the ession like the Integrated B, i ‘ar of ines where membership is integrated or mies a Phitipne, ie aa voluntary bar associations in the Pine Lawyers Ase ippine Bar Association, The Philip- the Philippines, Vanguang ws tial Lawyers Association of ssocieud Of the Philippine Constitution." ia Bar , Philippines Association, Catholic Lawyers’ Guild of the Society of International Law. Philippine “The VPC 's Presently headeq by the autho: r.PRELIMINARY ll WILOCI, WLAP, FIDA, ASEAN (Philippines) and many others. Commission On Bar Discipline (CBD).—This is the National Grievance Investigators Office referred to in Section 2, Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court. During the presidency of Dr. Leon Garcia as National president of the IBP, upon suggestion of Commissioner Ernesto L. Pineda, this Grievance Office was named Commission on Bar Discipline and those appointed in that body were called Commissioners. The CBD is the investigating arm of the Supreme Court on administrative matters involving disbarment cases against lawyers. Its recommendation is subject to review by the IBP Board of Governors. If the resolution of the latter is one of suspension or disbarment, it is auto- matically elevated to the Supreme Court for final disposi- tion. Nature Of Proceedings In The CBD.—While the Commission on Bar Discipline is not a court, the proceed- ings therein are nonetheless part of a judicial proceeding, a disciplinary action being in reality an investigation by the Supreme Court into the misconduct of its officers or an examination into his character (Sambajon vs. Suing, 503 SCRA 1). Other Relevant Terms And Definitions Advocate. The general and popular name for a law- yer who pleads on behalf of someone else (Philippine Legal Eneyetopacia, p, 2i). Cae whe ta lencced in the law wad duly admitted to practice law (17 C.J.S. 102). . An advocate is one who Pleads the cause of another fore a tribunal or judicial court; a counsellor (Villegas Vs. Legaspi, 113 SCRA 45). _ Barrister. (England). A Person entitled to practice law yn advocate or counsel in superior courts (17 CJ-S. 102, 103). In England, an advocate; a counsellor learned 'e law who has been admitted to plead at the bar, ant12 LeGaL Etuics who is engaged in conducting the trial or argument of causes. A person called to the bar by the benchers of Inns of Court, giving exclusive right of audience in the Supreme Court (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 151). Solicitor. (England). A person prosecuting or defend- ing suits in Courts of Chancery (17 C.J.S. 102). And a Court of Chancery is a court which administers equity and proceeding according to the forms and principles of equity (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 356). Solicitor. (Philippines). A government lawyer at- tached with the Office of the Solicitor General. Proctor. (England). Formerly, an attorney in the ad- miralty and ecclesiastical courts whose duties and busi- ness correspond exactly to those of an attorney-at-law or solicitor in Chancery (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edi- tion, p. 1207) Titulo de Abogado. It means not mere possession of the academic degree of Bachelor of Laws but membership in the Bar after due admission thereto, qualifying one for the practice of law. In Spanish the word “titulo” is defined as “testimonio o instrumento dado para ejercer un empleo, dignidad o profesion” (Diccionario de la Lengua Espanola, Real Academia Espanola, 1974 ed., p. 1224) and the word “abogado,” as follows: “Perito en el derecho positivo que s¢ dedica a defender en juicio, por es escrito o de palabra, los derechos 0 intereses de los litigantes, y tambien a dar dictmen sobre las cuestiones 0 puntos legales que se le consultan.” (Id., p. 5). A Bachelor's degree alone, conferred by a law school upon completion of certain academic re quirements, does not entitle its holder to exercise the legal profession. The English equivalent of ‘abogado’ is lawyer OF attomey-at-law. This term has a fixed and general signifi cation, and has reference to that class of persons who are by license officers of the courts, empowered to appe@ Prosecute and defend, and upon whom peculiar duties: responsibilities and liabilities are devolved by law a8 4 consequence (Cui vs. Cui, 11 SCRA 759).PRELIMINARY 13 Integration Of The Bar.—The integration of the Phil- ippine Bar means the official unification of the entire lawyer population, and this requires membership and financial support of every attorney as condition sine qua non to the practice of law and the retention of his name in the Roll of Attorneys of the Supreme Court. Organized by or under the direction of the State, an Integrated Bar is an official national body of which all lawyers are required to be members—they are, therefore, subject to all the rules prescribed for the governance of the Bar, including the payment of a reasonable annual fee for the effective discharge of the purposes of the Bar, and adherence to a code of professional ethics or professional responsibility. (Letter of Atty. Cecilio Y. Arevalo, Jr., Re- questing Exemption from Payment of IBP Dues, 458 SCRA 209). Integrated Bar Of The Philippines.—Integrated Bar of the Philippines is the national organization of lawyers created on January 16, 1973 under Rule 139-A, Rules of Court, and constituted on May 4, 1973 into a body corpo- Tate by Presidential Decree No. 181. General Objectives Of The IBP.—The general objec- tives and purposes of the IBP are the following: 1. To elevate the standards of the legal profession: 2. To improve the administration of justice; 3. To enable the Bar to discharge its public respon” sibility more effectively; 4. To assist in the administration of justice: 5. To foster and maintain on the part of its members high ideals of integrity, learning, professional competence, Public service and conduct; f its of its 6. To safeguard the professional interests members;14 Leca Erxics 7. To cultivate among its members a spirit of cor- diality and brotherhood; 8. To provide a forum for the discussion of law, ju- risprudence, law reform, pleading, practice and procedure, and the relation of the Bar to the Bench and to the public and publish information relating thereto; 9. To encourage and foster legal education; 10. And to promote a continuing program of legal research in substantive and adjective law, and make reports and recommendations thereon. (Per Curiam Reso- lution of the Supreme Court, January 9, 1973) Membership In The IBP Chapter.—A lawyer does not automatically become a member of the IBP chapter where he resides or works after becoming a full-fledged member of the Bar. He has the discretio} mn. to choose the IBP Chapter he wants to join (See: Garcia vs. De Vera, 418 SCRA 27) Without paying IBP dues, a lawyer cannot engage in Practice of law, no matter how limited is his practice (Santos, Jr. vs, Llamas, 322 SCRA 529). The exemption from Payment of income tax granted to senior citizens by y Republic Act No. 7432 does not in- clude payment of membership or association dues of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (id.). Similarly, as regards dues, they are not entitled to twenty percent (20%) discount. There Is No Retirement In The IBP.—There is n0 Such thing as retirement in the IBP as understood in labor law. A lawyer, however, may terminate his bar member ship after filing the Tequired verified notice of termination with the Secretary of the Integrated Bar (In re: Atty. Jose Principe, Bar Matter No. 543, September 20, 1990). IBP Is A Non. Political Bar.—The Int shall be strictly non-political, and integrated Bar ee every activity tending t? impair this basic feature is Strictly prohibited and shall be Penalized accordingly. No lawyer holding an elective:PRELIMINARY 15 judicial, quasi-judicial, or prosecutory office in the Gov- ernment or any political subdivision or instrumentality thereof shall be eligible for election or appointment to any position in the Integrated Bar or any Chapter thereof. A Delegate, Governor, officer or employee of the Integrated Bar, or an officer or employee of any Chapter thereof shall be considered ipso facto resigned from his position as of the moment he files his certificate of candidacy for any elective public office or accepts appointment to any judi- cial, quasi-judicial, or prosecutory office in the Govern- ment or any political subdivision or instrumentality thereof (Rule 139-A, Section 13). When Constituted As A Body Corporate.—The IBP was constituted as a body corporate on May 4, 1973 under PD. 181. Positions In IBP Are Honorary. —Except as may be specifically authorized or allowed by the Supreme Court, no Delegate or Governor and no national or local officer or committee member shall receive any compensation, allow- ance or emolument from the funds of the Integrated Bar for any service rendered therein or be entitled to reim- bursement for any expense incurred in the discharge of his functions (Rule 139-A, Section 14). Voluntary Bar Associations—All voluntary Bar as- Sociations now existing or which may hereafter be formed may co-exist with the Integrated Bar but shall not operate at cross-purposes therewith (Rule 139-A, Section 17). Effectivity Of Rule 189-A.—Rule 139-A, which is the Rule on the Integration of the Bar became effective on January 16, 1973, The first election of IBP Chapter officers Was held on February 17, 1973. On March 17, 1973, the House of Delegates (composed of IBP Chapter Presidents and some other designated Delegates) elected the Board of Governors, which in turn elected the National Officers of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Membership Is Mandatory. —Membership in the Na- tional IBP is mandatory. It is not a violative of a lawyer's16 LecaL Enics ate (In re: Edillon, 101 SCRA 612). Law- freedom to associ: er he wants to join. yer may choose however the Chapt ‘The IBP Is The Investigating Arm Of The Supreme Court In The Investigation Of Disbarment Cases — Under Rule 139-B, the IBP is given the power to entertain cases of disbarment filed before it, or cases filed before the Supreme Court and referred to it for investigation, report, and recommendation. It does not, however, have the power to suspend or disbar. Its recommendations are subject to appeal to the Supreme Court which alone has the preroga- tive to disbar. [The disciplinary powers of the IBP are treated in the Chapter on Disbarment]. ADMISSION TO PRACTICE LAW Power To Admit To Practice, Vested In The Su- preme Court.—The power of admission to the practice of law is vested by the Constitution in the Supreme Court. The 1987 Constitution’ explicitly so provides: “SEC. 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: (1) xxx (5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, Practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the Speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish. in fe e ae Substantive rights. Rules of proce- een pee and quasi-judicial bodies shall Court." (art, Vin wue8® disapproved by the Supreme * VIIL See. 5 (5), 1987 Constitution) * Unlike the 193 stitution did not provi or supplement the Ru 5 and 1973 Constitutions, the 1987 Com ide power to the Legislature to repeal, alte? r pi “S Promulgated by the Supreme CourtApmission To Practice Law 17 ‘The constitutional power to admit candidates to the legal profession is a judicial function and involves the exercise of discretion. Petition to that end is filed with the Supreme Court, as are other proceedings invoking judicial action (In re: Cunanan, 94 Phil, 534; In re: Almacen, 31 SCRA 562; In re: Lanuevo, 66 SCRA 245). ‘The Supreme Court acts through a Bar Examination Committee in the exercise of its judicial function to admit candidates to the legal profession. Thus, “In the exercise of this function, the Court acts through a Bar Examination Committee, composed of a member of the Court who acts as Chairman and eight (8) members of the Bar who act as examiners in the eight (8) bar subjects with one subject assigned to each. Acting as a sort of liaison officer between the Court and the Bar Chairman, on one hand, and the individual members of the Committee, on the other. is the Bar Confidant who is at the same time a deputy clerk of the Court. Necessarily, every act of the Com- mittee in connection with the exercise of discretion in the admission of examinees to membership of the Bar must be in accordance with the established rules of the Court and must always be subject to the final ap- proval of the Court.” (In re: Lanuevo, 66 SCRA 245). Basic Requirements For All Applicants For Admis- sion To The Bar — “Sec. 2. Requirements for all applicants for admission to the bar—Every applicant for admission as a member of the bar must be a citizen of the Phil- ippines, at least twenty-one years of age, of good moral character, and a resident of the Philippines; and must produce before the Supreme Court satisfac- tory evidence of good moral character, and that no charges against him, involving moral turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any court in the Philip- Pines.” (Section 2, Rule 138, RRC) —It ordi- Academic Requirements For Candidates s of study narily takes a candidate a period of eight (8) Ye"18 LecaL EtHics after graduation from high school to finish Law, and take the Bar Examinations. Before he is allowed to enroll in the College of Law, he must have already earned a bachelor’s degree in arts or sciences which ordinarily takes four years to finish. This is what is referred to as Pre-Law Course. The Law course itself is ordinarily finished in another four years of study with completed courses on civil law, commercial law, remedial law, criminal law, public and private international law, political law, labor and social legislation, medical jurisprudence, taxation and legal ethics (See Rule 138, Sections 5 and 6, RRC). No Particular Law School Has A Monopoly Of Knowledge Of The Law. — Atty. Melvin D.C. Mane vs. Judge Medel Belen AM. No. RTJ-08-2119, June 30, 2008 Held: An alumnus of a particular law school has no monopoly of knowledge of the law. By hur- dling the Bar Examinations which this Court admin. isters, taking of the lawyer's oath, and signing of the Roll of Attorneys, a lawyer is presumed to be compe- tent to discharge his functions and d n luties as, inter alia, an officer of the cou the sine qua non by moral character 11 py, c14° with the possession of good d mo: that with regard to the hold and continue tq or2! character, the candidate must to possess it e ven aft been al Profession, after he hasApission To Practice Law 19 After passing the Bar Examinations, the candidate shall take his lawyer's oath before the Supreme Court (Rule 138, Section 17, RRC) followed later by his signing of the Roll of Attorneys—in which Roll he is assigned a per- manent number. Thereafter, he is issued a certificate of membership by the Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court. From this point in time, he is deemed authorized to prac- tice law in the Philippines (Rule 132, Section 18, RRC). Disqualification To Take The Bar Examinations.— In the Matter of the Disqualification of Bar Examinee Haron S. Meling in the 2002 Bar Examinations 431 SCRA 146° Held: The requirement of good moral character is not only a condition precedent to admission to the practice of law, its continued possession is also es- sential for remaining in the practice of law. By concealing the existence of such pending cases, the applicant then flunks the test of fitness even if the cases are ultimately proven to be umwar- ranted or insufficient to impugn or affect the good moral character of the applicant. While Practice Of Law Is A Privilege, It Has Also The Nature Of A Right.—The practice of law is not a pro- Perty right but a mere privilege (In re: Scott, 53 Nev. 24, 292 P. 291) and as such must bow to the inherent regula. tory power of the Court to exact compliance with the ee public responsibilities™* (In re: Edillon, 84 SCRA Private practice of law contemplates a succession of acts of the same nature habitually or customarily holding one’s self to the public as a lawyer (Borja, Sr. vs. Sulyap, : See also: In re: Ramon Galang, 66 SCRA 282 Cecilio 5 w80: In Te: Del Rosario, 52 Phil, 399; Letter of Atty. IBP Due, Arevalo. Jr. Requesting Exemption from Payment ues, 458 SCRA 209,20 LacaL Eriics Inc., 399 SCRA 601; Lim-Santiago vs. Sagucio, 486 SCRA 24; Uy vs. Gonzales, 426 SCRA 422). It is not also a natural or constitutional right. In The Matter Of The Petition For Authority To Continue Use Of Firm Name Ozaeta, Romulo, Etc.‘ 92 SCRA 1 Held: A partnership for the practice of law can- not be likened to partnerships formed by other pro- fessionals or for business. For one thing, the law on accountancy specifically allows the use of a trade name in connection with the practice of accountancy. “A partnership for the practice of law is not a legal en- tity. It is a mere relationship or association for a par- ticular purpose. x x x It is not a partnership formed for the purpose of carrying on a trade or business or of holding property.” Thus, it has been stated that “the use of a nom de plume, assumed or trade name in law practice is improper.” xxx “The right to practice law is not a natural or con: stitutional right but is in the nature of a privilege or JSranchise. It is limited to persons of good moral char- acter with special qualifications duly ascertained and certified. The right does not only presuppose in its Possessor integrity, legal standing and attainment, but also the exercise of a special privilege, highly per sonal and partaking of the nature of a public trust. While it is unquestionable that the practice of law is 2 privilege, it is also in the nature of a right because the lawyer cannot be prevented from practising law except for valid reasons as the practice of law is not a matter of State’s grace or favor (Ex Parte Garland, 18 L. ed. 366: Wilner vs. Committee On Character and Fitness, 10 L. ed: 2d 224), * See also: Bongalonta vs. Castillo, 240 SCRA 310.Apmission To Practice Law 21 An instance of a valid reason where a lawyer may bt prevented from appearing in court is the provision of the Constitution prohibiting Senators or Representatives from appearing before courts and Electoral Tribunals. Thus, in Marcos and Concordia vs. Chief of Staff, AFP (89 Phil. 246), lawyers Ferdinand Marcos and Manuel Concordia were disqualified to appear as counsel for the accused in the General Court-Martials. ‘The Supreme Court held: “A constitutional provision extending to the ac- cused the right to be represented by counsel in any trial court whatever. applies to a court-martial and gives the accused the undeniable right to defend by counsel, and a court-martial has no power to refuse an attorney the right to appear before it if he is prop- erly licensed to practice in the courts of the country. (89 Phil. 246). In another case, it was held that the Director of the Philippine Patent Office cannot restrict lawyers from ap- pearing before the said Office by requiring them to pass first an examination to cover patent law and jurisprudence and the rules of practice in the said Office. Any member of the Philippine Bar in good standing may practice law anywhere and before any entity, whether judicial or quast he Philippines (Philippine judicial or administrative, in Lawyers’ Association vs. Agrava, 105 Phil. 173) without need of passing another examination. ‘The ruling applies to all quasi-judicial bodies. Lawyers cannot also be prevented from seeing their clients under detention. Lawyers cannot also be deprived of their license to practice law without due process. In a sense, the privilege to practice law is also a right by oa " But just like any other rights, it is subject to limitations. of Who Are Entitled To Practice Law? ne 7 Court explicitly states who are entitled to prac’ the Philippines.22 LecaL ETHICS “SECTION 1. Who may practice law.—Any per- son heretofore duly admitted as a member of the bar, or hereafter admitted as such in accordance with the provisions of this rule, and who is in good and regular standing, is entitled to practice law.” (Rule 138, Sec. 1, RRC). Practice Of Law, Concept.—Generally, to engage in the practice is to do any of those acts which are character- istic of the legal profession (In re: David, 93 Phil. 461). It covers any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal principles, practice or procedure and calls for legal knowledge, training and experience (PLA vs. Agrava, 105 Phil. 173; J.K. Mercado, etc. vs. De Vera, 371 SCRA 251). Strictly speaking, the word practice of law implies the customary or habitual holding of oneself to the public as a lawyer and demanding compensation for his legal services (People vs. Villanueva, 14 SCRA 111; OCA vs. Ladega, 350 SCRA 331; Borja, Sr. vs. Sulyap, Inc., 399 SCRA 601; Aguirre vs. Rana, 403 SCRA 342). Latest Ruling On The Meaning Of Practice Of Law.—The Supreme Court’ has recently laid down the definition of practice of law in the Philippines, following the modern concept. Cayetano vs. Monsod 201 SCRA 210 Facts: On June 5, 1991, the Commission on Appointments confirmed the nomination of Monsod as Chairman of the COMELEC. On June 18, 1991, he took his oath of office. On the same day, he assumed office as Chairman of the COMELEC. * The decision penned bi ae y Justice Edgardo Paras was © ies by Justices Fernan, Narvasa, Melencio-Herrera. eliciano. Justices Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz and Padilla dissent Justices Sarmiento, Regalado and Davide, Jr. did not take pat7 OoVe 1e Apission To Practice Law Challenging the validity of the confirmation by the Commission on Appointments of Monsod’s nomi- nation, petitioner as a citizen and taxpayer, filed the instant petition for Certiorari and Prohibition praying that said confirmation and the consequent appoint. ment of Monsod as Chairman of the Commission on Elections be declared null and void. Atty. Christian Monsod is a member of the Phil- ippine Bar, having passed the bar examinations of 1960 with a grade of 86.55%. He has been a dues paying member of the Integrated Bar of the Philip- pines since its inception in 1972-73. He has also been paying his professional license fees as lawyer for more than ten years. (p. 124, Rollo). After graduating from the College of Law (U.P.) and having hurdled the bar, Atty. Monsod worked in the law office of his father. During his stint in the World Bank Group (1963-1970), Monsod worked as an operations officer for about two years in Costa Rica and Panama, which involved getting acquainted with the laws of member-countries, negotiating loans and coordinating legal, economic, and project work of the Bank. Upon returning to the Philippines in 1970, he worked with the Meralco Group, served as chief execu tive officer of an investment bank and subsequently of @ business conglomerate, and since 1986, has ren- dered services to various companies as a legal and economic consultant or chief executive officer. As for- mer Secretary-General (1986) and National Chairman (1987) of NAMFREL, Monsod’s work involved being knowledgeable in election law. He appeared for NAM- FREL in its accreditation hearings before the Comelec. In the field of advocacy, Monsod, in his personal ca- pacity and as former Co-Chairman of the Bishops Businessmen’s Conference for Human Development, has worked with the under privileged sectors, such as the farmer and urban poor groups, in initiating, lobby- ing for and engaging in affirmative action for the agrar- ian reform law and lately the urban land reform bill. Monsod also made use of his legal knowledge as 4 member of the Davide Commission, a quasi:judicial body, which conducted numerous hearings (1990) and 2324 Lacan Ernics as a member of the Constitutional Commission (1986. 1987), and Chairman of its Committee on Accountabil- ity of Public Officers, for which he was cited by the President of the Commission, Justice Cecilia Munoz: Palma for ‘innumerable amendments to reconcile gov- ernment functions with individual freedoms and public accountability and the party-list system for the House of Representative.’ (pp. 128-129 Rollo) (Italics sup- plied). xxx Held; Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law. le- gl procedure, knowledge, training and experience. ‘0 engage in the practice of law is to perform those ‘acts which are characteristics of the profession. Gen- erally, to practice law is to give notice or render any kind of service, which device or service requires the use in any degree of legal knowledge or skill.” (111 ALR 23). xxx Interpreted in the light of the various definitions of the term “practice of law,” particularly the modem concept of law practice, and taking into consideration the liberal construction intended by the framers of the Constitution, Atty. Monsod’s past work experiences as a lawyer-economist, a lawyer-man- ager, a lawyer-entrepreneur of industry, a lawyer- negotiator of contracts, and a lawyer-legislator of both the rich and the poor—verily more than satisfy the constitutional requirement—that he has been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.“ Dissenting Opinions In Monsod Case. Justice Hugo Gutierrez, Jr. dissented as follows “Inspite of my high regard for Mr. Monsod; ! cannot shirk my constitutional duty. He has never engaged in the practice of law for even one year. He is a member of the bar but to say that he has practice law is stretching the term beyond rational limits See also: J.K. Mercado and Sons Agricultural Ent’ prises, Inc. vs. de Vera, 371 SCRA 251Apmission To Practice Law 25 “A person may have passed the bar examina- tions. But if he has not dedicated his life to the law, if he has not engaged in an activity where membership in the bar is a requirement I fail to see how he can claim to have been engaged in the practice of law.” 3K KKK “The Constitution uses the phrase ‘engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.’ The delibe- rate choice of words shows that the practice envi- sioned is active and regular, not isolated, occasional, accidental, intermittent, incidental, seasonal, or ex- temporaneous. To be ‘engaged’ in an activity for ten years requires committed participation in something Which is the result of one’s decisive choice. It means 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. Justice Teodoro R. Padilla who also dissented said— “What constitutes practice of law? As commonly understood, ‘practice refers to the actual performance or application of knowledge as distinguished from mere possession of knowledge; it connotes an active, habit- ual, repeated or customary action. To ‘practice’ law, or any profession for that matter, means, to exercise or pursue an employment or profession actively, habitu- ally, repeatedly or customarily. Therefore, a doctor of medicine who is employed and is habitually performing the tasks of a nursing aide, cannot be said to be in the ‘practice of medicine.’ A certifled public accountant who works as a clerk, cannot be said to practice his profession as an accountant. In the same way, a lawyer who is employed as a business executive or a corporate manager, other than as head or attorney of a Legal De- partment of a corporation or a governmental agency. cannot be said to be in the practice of law. cay _ustice Isagant A. Cruz, another dissenter has this to26 Lecat Eruics “Coming now to the qualifications of the Private respondent, I fear that the ponencia may have been too sweeping in its definition of the phrase ‘practice of law’ as to render the qualification practically tooth- less. From the numerous activities accepted as em- braced in the term, I have the uncomfortable feeling that one does not even have to be a lawyer to be en- gaged in the practice of law as long as his activities involve the application of some law, however peri pherally. The stock broker and the insurance adjuster and the realtor could come under the definition as they deal with or give advice on matters that are likely ‘to become involved in litigation.” The lawyer is considered engaged in the practice of law even if his main occupation is another busi- ness and he interprets and applies some law only as an incident of such business. That covers every com- Pany organized under the Corporation Code and regulated by the SEC under P.D. 902-A. Considering the ramifications of the modem society, there is hardly any activity that is not affected by some law or government regulation the businessman must know about and observe. In fact, again going by the defini- tion, a lawyer does not even have to be part of a busi- ness concern to be considered a practitioner. He can be so deemed when, on his own, he rents a house or buys a car or consults a doctor as these acts involve his knowledge and application of the laws regulating such transactions. If he operates a public utility vehi- cle as his main source of livelihood. he would still be deemed engaged in the practice of law because he must obey the Public Service Act and the rules and Tegulations of the Energy Regulatory Board The ponencia quotes an American decision de- fining the practice of law as the ‘performance of any acts . . . . in or out of court, commonly understood to be the practice of law,’ which tells us absolutely noth- ing. The decision goes on to say that ‘because lawyers perform almost every function known in the commer- cial and governmental realm, such a definition would obviously be too global to be workable.’ADMISSION To PRacTICE Law 27 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. It is enough that his activities are incidentally (even if only remotely) con- w, ordinance, or regulation. The The author who has been in the active practice of law for more than three decades, fully agrees with the dissent- ing opinions, for truly, for one to be a Practising lawyer or to engage in the Practice of law, he must be in actual, active and habitual exercise of his legal knowledge or skill Specially in court appearances and pleadings and this is done generally for compensation. The decision of the Su; preme Court in People vs. Vil- lanueva (14 SCRA 109, 196: 5) must be maintained— “x x x Practice is more than an isolated appear- ance, for it consists in frequent or customary actions, 4 Succession of acts of the same kind. In other words, it is frequent habitual exercise (State v. Cortner, 127, P. 1, 87 Kan. 864, 42 LRA, M.S. 768). Practice of law ‘o fall within the prohibition of statute has been in- terpreted as customarily or habitually holding one's self out to the public, as a lawyer and demanding Payment for such services," General Coverage Of Practice Of Law. tice of his Profession, a licensed attorney af engages in three Principal types of profes: legal adv —In the prac- it law generally sional activity: ice and instructions to clients to inform them Tights and obligations\\preparation for clients of nts requiring knowledge of legal principles not Possessed by ordinary laymanCdnd appearance for clients ina Public tribunals which Pp 0 det OSsess power and authority Srmine rights of life, liberty, and property according of their “ See also: Tite Giiniins on tn Jah Od OLay eee 28 Laca. Ernics to law, in order to assist in proper interpretation and enforcement of law. (Ulep vs. Legal Clinic Inc., 223 SCRA 378). Basic Characteristics Of The Practice Of Law— Practice of law is not a matter of right but merely a privi- lege bestowed upon individuals who are not only leaned in the law but who are also known to possess good moral character (Tan vs. Sabandal, 206 SCRA 473). Practice of Jaw is not a money-making venture (Canlas vs. CA, 164 SCRA 160). Law advocacy is not capital that yields profits The returns it births are simple rewards for a job done or service rendered. It is a calling that, unlike mercantile pursuits which enjoy a greater deal of freedom from gov ernment interference, is impressed with public interests, for which it is subject to State regulation (Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co. vs. Court of Appeals, 181 SCRA 377) Practice of law cannot be assigned or inherited, but must be earned by hard study and good conduct (In re Clifton, 155, Am. 324). It is not a right de jure (In re: Elis. 203, p. 957). Practice of law is a privilege burdened with conditions (Adez Realty vs. CA, 251 SCRA 201) Private practice of law contemplates a succession of acts of the same nature habitually or customarily holding one's self to the public as a lawyer (Borja, Sr. vs. Sulyap. Inc., 399 SCRA 601; Lim-Santiago vs. Sagucio, 486 SCRA 24; Uy vs. Gonzales, 426 SCRA 422). It is reserved only to those who are academically trained in law and possessed of good moral character not only at the time of his admission to the Bar but even mort So, thereafter, to remain in the practice of law (See People vs, Tuanda, 181 SCRA 692; Melendrez vs, Decena, 176 SCRA 662; In Re: AIC. Argosino, 246 SCRA 14) The practice of law is a Profession and not a business a is an essential part in the administration of justice: * fes ssion in pursuit of which sit: u Pecuniary reward is com! ered as merely incidental; it is a a of learned art‘ApMission To Practice Law 29 the interest of public service (See Koscoe Pound, The Lawyer From Antiquity to Modern Times, p. 5). Non-Lawyers Who Are Authorized To Appear In Court. —The general rule is that only those who are li- censed to practice law can appear and handle cases in court. There are however exceptions, to wit: 1. In cases before the Municipal Trial Courts, a party may conduct his own case or litigation in person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for that purpose (Rule 138, Section 34, RRC; Laput vs. Ber- nabe, 55 Phil. 621; Cantimbuhan vs. Cruz, Jr., 126 SCRA 190) 2. Before any other court, a party may conduct his litigation personally. But, if he gets someone to aid him, that someone must be an authorized member of the bar (Rule 138, ibid). He is bound by the same rules in con- ducting the trial of his case. He cannot, after judgment, claim he was not properly represented by counsel (see People vs. Sim Ben, 98 Phil. 138; See also: People vs. Larrafiaga, 421 SCRA 530; Cruz vs. Cabrera, 441 SCRA 211) Cruz vs. Mina 522 SCRA 387 Held: The basic question is whether the peti- tioner, a law student, may appear before an inferior court as an agent or friend of a party litigant. The courts a quo held that the Law Student Practice Rule as encapsulated in Rule 138-A of the Rules of Court, prohibits the petitioner, as a law stu- dent, from entering his appearance in behalf of his fa- ther, the private complainant in the criminal case without the supervision of an attorney duly accred- ited by the law school. Rule 138-A or the Law Student Practice Rule, Provides:30 Lecat Erxics “RULE 138-a LAW STUDENT PRACTICE RULE “Section 1. Conditions for Student Practice —A Jaw student who has successfully completed his 3rd year of the regular four-year prescribed law curricu- lum and is enrolled in a recognized law school’s clini- cal legal education program approved by the Supreme Court, may appear without compensation in any civil, criminal or administrative case before any trial court, tribunal, board or officer, to represent indigent clients accepted by the legal clinic of the law school. Sec. 2. Appearance.—The appearance of the law student authorized by this rule, shall be under the direct supervision and control of a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly accredited by the law school. Any and all pleadings, motions, briefs. memoranda or other papers to be filed, must be signed by the supervising attorney for and in behalf of the legal clinic However, in Resolution dated June 10, 1997 in Bar Matter No. 730, the Court En Banc clarified: ‘The rule, however, is different if the law stu- dent appears before an inferior court, where the issues and procedure are relatively simple. In in- ferior courts, a law student may appear in his per sonal capacity without the supervision of a law yer. Section 34, Rule 138 provides: Sec. 34. By whom litigation is conducted—I0 the court of justice of the peace, a party may Col” duct his litigation in person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for that purpose, or Wi the aid of an attorney. In any other court, a party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of a? attorney. In any other court, a party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of an attorney. and his appearance must be either personal or by a duly a thorized member of the bar.Apmission To Practice Law 31 Thu: law student may appear before an in- ferior court as an agent or friend of a party with- out the supervision of a member of the bar. XXX There is really no problem as to the application of Section 34 of Rule 138 and Rule 138-A, In the former, the appearance of a non-lawyer, as an agent or friend of @ party litigant, is expressly allowed, while the lat- ter rule provides for conditions when a law student, not as an agent or a friend of a party litigant, may ap- pear before the courts. Petitioner expressly anchored his appearance on Section 34 of Rule 138. The court a quo must have been confused by the fact that petitioner referred to himself as a law student in his entry of appearance. Rule 138-A should not have been used by the courts @ quo in denying permission to act as private prose- cutor against petitioner for the simple reason that Rule 138-A is not the basis for the petitioner's ap- pearance. Section 34, Rule 138 is clear that appearance before the inferior courts by a non-lawyer is allowed, irrespective of whether or not he is a law student. As succinctly clarified in Bar Matter No. 730, by virtue of Section 34, Rule 138, a law student may appear, as an agent or a friend of a party litigant, without the Supervision of a lawyer before inferior courts.” 3. In a criminal case before a municipal trial court in a locality where a duly licensed member of the Bar is Not available, the judge May appoint a non-lawyer who is a resident in the province, of good repute for probity and ability to aid the accused in his defense (Rule 116, Sec. 7. RRC). If there are available members of the bar, the judge Cannot appoint a non-lawyer as defense counsel for the accused (Paar vs. Borromeo, 79 Phil. 344). 4. A senior law student who is enrolled in a recog- nized law school’s clinical education program approved by the Supreme Court may appear before any court without Compensation, to represent indigent clients accepted by32 LacaL Ernics the Legal Clinic of the law school. The student shall be under the direct supervision and control of an IBP member duly accredited by the law school (Rule 138-A, Sec. 1 RRC). 5. Under the Labor Code, non-lawyers may appear before the National Labor Relations Commission or any Labor Arbiter, if (1) they represent themselves, or if (2) they represent their organization or members thereof with written authorization of the latter, or (3) they are duly accredited members of any legal aid office duly recognized by the Department of Justice, or the Integrated Bar of the Philippines in cases referred to by the latter (Art. 222, P.D 442, as amended; Kanlaon Construction Enterprises Co Inc. vs. NLRC, 279 SCRA 337). 6. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer can repre- sent a claimant before the Cadastral Court (Act No. 2259, Section 9). 7. Any person appointed to appear for the Govern: ment of the Philippines in accordance with law (Rule 138. Sec. 33, RRC). 8. A non-lawyer may represent a party before the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DA- RAB). Those mentioned above are allowed to appear only it certain cases. They do not practice law. All members of the Bar may practice law. A nom lawyer who practices law will be guilty of illegal practice Jaw (Zeta vs. Malinao, Adm. Case No. P-220, Dec. 20, 1978) Punishment For Persons Who Pretend To Be L@¥” yers.—The unauthorized practice of law by assuming to an attorney and acting as such without authority const! tutes indirect contempt which is punishable by fine % imprisonment or both (Tan vs. Balajadia, 484 SCRA 659) A Disbarred Or Suspended Lawyer Had No Mote Authority To Appear In Court As A Lawyer Amat) Balon, Jr., who was disbarred previously (414 SCRA 5! '™!:‘Apwission 70 Practice Law 33 but continued to represent himself as a lawyer was found ilty of indirect contempt by the Supreme Court and fined P30,000.00 with imprisonment in case of failure to pay within five (5) days. A suspended lawyer cannot prac- tice law during the period of his suspension (In re: David, Adm. Case No. L-98, 93 Phil. 461 (1958). PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO CANNOT PRACTICE LAW IN THE PHILIPPINES The following public officials are prohibited to engage in the private practice of law: 1. Judges and other officials or employees of the su- perior court (Rule 138, Section 35, RRC);" 2. Officials and employees of the Office of the Solici- tor General (Ibid); 3. Government prosecutors (People vs. Villanueva, 14 SCRA 109; Aquino vs. Blanco, 79 Phil. 647); 4. President, Vice President, Members of the Cabi- net, their deputies and assistants (Art. VIII, Section 13, 1987 Constitution); 5. Members of Constitutional Commissions (Art. IX- A, Section 2, 1987 Constitution).’ 6. Members of the Judicial Bar Council;* 7. Ombudsman and his deputies (Art. IX, Section 8 (2nd par.], 1987 Constitution) 8. All governors, city and municipal mayors (R.A. No. 7160, Section 90);* * See Comments under Rule 5.07 for judges and clerks of Court who were dismissed for practising law. ” Commission on Elections, Commission on Audit, Civil Service Commission; IX-A, Section 2, 1987 Constitution. ” See: Minute Resolution, JBC-003, In Re: Appointment of Atty, Melvin Encanto, as JBC member, 14 May 1992 * Constitutionality of Section 90, RA 7160 was SU by the Supreme Court in t. of Interior sen Javellana vs. Dept. istained yr, 21234 LecaL Etnics 9. Those who by special law are Prohibited from en. 8aging in the practice of their legal profession.” Public Officials With Restrictions In The Practice Of Law.—Some public officials are not absolutely disquali- fied to practice law. They are merely subject to certain restrictions: (a) Under the Constitution, no Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies (Art. VI, Section 14, 1987 Constitution). Since the practice of law covers a wide range of legal activities (see Cayetano vs. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210), the Senator or Congressman is allowed to engage in the other aspects of the law practice such as the giving of legal advice to cli- ents, negotiating contracts in behalf of clients which necessitates legal knowledge, preparation of documents of conveyancing and similar others. (b) Under the Local Government Code (R.A. No. 7160, Section 90), Sanggunian members may practice their professions, provided that if they are members of the Bar, they shall not: (1) Appear as counsel 1 before any court in any civil case wherein a local govern: ment unit or any office, agency. or instrumentality of the government is the adverse party: a Appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the national or local government 's ww Used of an offense committed in relation to his of ice: (3) Collect any fee for their appearance in adminis- trative proceedings involving the local government unit of which he is an official; and * See R.A. No. 6713, Sect '° Javellana vs. Dept. have violated RA 7160. tion 7, [b-2] 5 libid.)—where lawyer was foundnis- it of and t° Apmission To Practice Law 35 (4) Use property and personnel of the Government except when the sanggunian member concerned is defend- ing the interest of the Government. (ec) Under RA 910, Section 1, as amended, a retired justice or judge receiving pension from the Government, cannot act as counsel in any civil case in which the Gov- ernment or any of its subdivisions or agencies is the ad- verse party or in a criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the Government is accused of an offense in relation to his office. Resumption Of Privilege To Practice Law By A Filipino Lawyer Who Lost Philippine Citizenship But Later Acquired Dual Citizenship. — Petition For Leave To Resume Practice Of Law, Benjamin M. Dacanay, Petitioner, B.M. No. 1678, December 17, 2007 Facts: Dacanay was admitted to the Philippine bar in March 1960. He practiced law in the Philip- pines until his migration to Canada in December 1998 to seek medical attention to his ailments. Later, in May 2004, he became a Canadian citizen. On July 14, 2006, he acquired Philippine citi- zenship pursuant to RA No. 9225. On same day, he took his oath of allegiance as a Filipino citizen before the Philippine Consulate General in Toronto, Canada. He returned to the Philippines and intends to Practice law. Hence, this Petition. Issues: (1) Has Dacanay ceased to become a member of the Philippine Bar after he lost his Filipino citizenship following his naturalization in Canada? (2) May he be allowed to resume his privilege to Practice law in the Phili ippines after reacquiring Phil- ippine citizenship? ea (3) Assuming he qualifies to resume the privi- lege to practice law, is it automatic? >36 Lect. Ernics Held: Given the foregoing, may a lawyer who has lost his Filipino citizenship still practice law in the Philippines? No as a general rule. (1) The Constitution provides that the practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens save in cases prescribed by law." Since Filipino citizenship is a requirement for admission to the bar, loss thereof terminates membership in the Philippine bar and, conse- quently, the privilege to engage in the practice of law. In other words, the loss of Filipino citizen- ship ipso jure terminates the privilege to practice law in the Philippines. The practice of law is a privilege denied to foreigners. (2) The exception is when Filipino citizenship {s lost by reason of naturalization as a citizen of an- other country but subsequently reacquired pursu- ant to RA No. 9225. This is because “all Philippine citizens who become citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizen ship under the conditions of [RA No. 9225]. There- fore, a Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of another country is deemed never to have lost his Philippine citizenship if he reacquires it in accor- dance with RA No. 9225. Although he is also deemed never to have terminated his membership in the Philippine bar, no automatic right to resume law practice accrues. (3) Under RA No, 9225, if a person intends to practice the legal profession in the Philippines and he Teacquires his Filipino citizenship pursuant to its pro- visions “(he) shall apply with the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such practice Stated otherwise, before a lawyer who reacquires Filipino citizenship pursuant to RA No, 9225 ca? Tesume his law practice, he must first secure from this Court the authority to do so, conditioned 02 (a) the updating and payment in full of the a" nual membership dues in the IBP; "® See last paragraph of Section 14, Article Xl.Apmission To Practice Law 37 (b) the payment of professional tax; (c)_ the completion of at least 36 credit hours of mandatory continuing legal education: this is spe- cially significant to refresh the applicant/petitioner's knowledge of Philippine laws and update him of legal developments and (@)_ the retaking of the lawyer's oath which will not only remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a lawyer and as an officer of the Court, but also renew his pledge to maintain allegiance to the Repub- lic of the Philippines. BACKGROUND OF CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY The Code of Professional Responsibility is the princi- pal source and basis of the rules of ethics for members of the Bar who do not belong to the judiciary. For judges and justices, it is the Code of Judicial Ethics as enhanced by the New Code of Judicial Conduct. The Code of Professional Responsibility applies to lawyers in the government service except the magistrates (Avance vs. Liwanag, 406 SCRA 300) All lawyers are bound to uphold and obey the Cons- titution, the laws of the country, the legal orders of duly constituted authorities and the different mandates of legal ethics with the end in view of assuring that justice is served to everyone without discrimination and that the legal profession is always placed in high esteem and res- pect. In revivifying the canons of legal ethics for all lawyers, the Supreme Court has approved and promulgated the Code of Professional Responsibility on June 21, 1988—drafted in 1980 by the IBP Committee on Responsibility. Discipline and Disbarment! and submitted to the Supreme Court foF " For brevity, reference to the Comments of the aa mittee On Responsibility, Discipline and Disbarmert Cae drafted the Code is hereafter referred to as “Report of mittee.”i se 38 LecaL AND Jupicial Erics approval. The Committee was chaired by Dean Irene Cortes, later appointed Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Before the promulgation of the Code, the Supreme Court had promulgated Rule 139-B (Disbarment and Discipline of Attorneys) of the Revised Rules of Court granting the Integrated Bar of the Philippines the concur- rent power to investigate its members—preserving however the final authority to suspend and disbar attorneys to the High Court The Code is substantially based on the Canons of Professional Ethics of the American Bar Association. Supreme Court Not Predisposed To Grant Full In- dependence To The IBP.—While some quarters in the legal profession have been advocating the complete inde- pendence of the IBP from the Supreme Court on matters of its administration and the power to discipline all members including those in the Government service, the Supreme Court, is not yet predisposed or persuaded to agree with this clamor for independence. In fact, in Circular No. 3-89. February 9, 1989, the Supreme Court, just a few months after it had approved and promulgated the Code of Profes: sional Responsibility, clarified (during the pendency of the investigation of charges against certain Justices of the Court of Appeals), that the IBP Commission On Bar Disci- pline™ has no authority to investigate incumbent justices and judges by interpreting the second paragraph of Sec tion 1 of Rule 139-B of the Revised Rules of Court as "ot applicable to them: Thus, “(Ihe Supreme Court reiterated its reso- lution dated 19 November 1988 directing that all complaints against justices and Judges of the lower courts filed before the Commission On Bar Discipline should promptly be referred to the ‘Supreme Court for appropriate action. The Supreme Court interpreted The author was then Commissioner of the Commissi™™ On Bar Discipline having taken his oath of office on August * 1988. »BackGROUND OF Cope OF PROFESSIONAL 39. Resronsiatary Section 1, second paragraph of Rule 139-1 of the Re vised Rules of Court, such that “attorneys—tn the government service” should be understood as not in. cluding members of the Court of Appeals, the ganbayan, the Court of Tax Appeals and judges of other courts. In general, the Court refers to thos who perform judicial functions and before whose courts the members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines appear in the exercise of thelr profession.” (Re: Letter of Acting Presiding Justice, Rodolfo A. Nocon, etc, of the Court of Appeals, 3 Jan. 1989, En Bane, Minute Resolution). wnd When the clarification was handed down, a great number of IBP leaders were disappointed, for they belleve that members of the judiciary should be investigated by an independent body, and not by members of the same judi. lal structure. They are afraid, comradeship might affect the outcome of the investigation. In the US, it i is the American Bar Association which has the power of di isbarment and discipline. Code Of Professional Responsibility Is Binding On All Lawyers. Violation Thereof Is A Ground For Disci- Plinary Action—It must be recalled that while the Can- ons of Professional Ethics have not been reduced to statu- tory rules, nonetheless, they have attained the level of duct which every attorney must obey and Director of Lands vs. Ababa, 88 SCRA 523). With more reasons should the present Code of Professional Responsibility be accorded greater respect and recognition ¥ all members of the Bar, Promulgated as it was, by no c8s than the Highest Court of the land. Considering that the Canons of Professional Responsibility were promul- Sated in the exercise of the constitutional authority of the40 Lecat Eruics Supreme Court concerning the admission to the Practice of law (Art. VIII, Section 5 [5], 1987 Constitution), it natu- rally follows that the Canons like the Rules of Court, when not contrary to any legal provision, have the force and effect of law and any breach thereof will make the lawyer liable for disciplinary action for professional misconduct,"* DUTIES OF ATTORNEYS UNDER THE REVISED RULES OF COURT The Revised Rules of Court enumerates the duties of an attorney: {a) To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and to support the Constitution and obey the laws of the Philippines; (b) To observe and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers; (c) To counsel or maintain such actions or proceed- ings only as appear to him to be just, and such defenses only as he believes to be honestly debatable under the law: (d@) To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him, such means only as are consistent with truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer of an artifice or false statement of fact or law; (c) To maintain inviolate the confidence, and 4 every peril to himself, to preserve the secrets of his client, and to accept no compensation in connection with his client's business except from him or with his knowledg? and approval; (9 To abstain from all offensive personality and (° advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or reputation © 4 ' See Alvero vs. Dela Rosa, 76 Phil. 428; Domingo A Santos vs. David, 68 Phil, 134; Tadlip vs. Borres, Jr., 474 SC 441.to fa and SRA BACKGROUND OF CoDE oF PROFESSIONAL 41 RESPONSIBILITY party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which he is charged; (Not to encourage either the commencement or the continuance of an action or proceeding, or delay any man’s cause, from any corrupt motive or interest; (h) Never to reject, for any consideration personal to himself, the cause of the defenseless or oppressed: ()_ In the defense of a person accused of crime, by all fair and honorable means, regardless of his personal opinion as to the guilt of the accused, to present every defense that the law permits, to the end that no person may be deprived of life or liberty, but by due process of law. (Rule 138, Section 20, Rules of Court). Duties Of Attorneys Spread In The Code Of Profes- sional Responsibility—The aforementioned duties of attorneys are expressly or impliedly incorporated, though dispersely, in the Code of Professional Responsibility. Thus, letter (a) is part of Canon 1; letter (b) is part of Canon 11; letter (c) is implied in Rule 15.05; letter (d) is implied in Canons 3 and 10; letter (e) is incorporated in Canon 21 and Rule 20.03; letter (f) is part of Canon 8 and Rule 8.01; letter (g) is part of Rule 1.03; letter (h) is incor- Porated as Rule 2.01; letter (i) is part of Rule 14.01 and Rule 19.01. The Code of Professional Responsibility has imposed other duties and obligations on the part of the members of the Bar based on law, Jurisprudence and time-honored Principles of justice and equity. Nature Of The Position Of An Attorney As An Offi- cer Of The Court.—An attorney is not an officer in the enstitutional or statutory meaning of the term (National Savings Bank vs. Ward, 100 U.S. 195). However, in a lmited sense, he is considered a public officer occupying a (uast-judicial office (Langan vs. Borkowski, 43 ALR 622: People vs. Sesbreno, 130 SCRA 465). Having been admit- ted to practice of law by no less than the Supreme Court which alone has the authority to admit persons to practice tp42 Leal Eruics law before all courts in the entire country, the lawyer jg considered an Officer of the Courts—which incidentally are all created by law. As such an Officer, he directly participates in the administration of justice, either as private practitioner or public prosecutor. Through him, the judicial machinery is set in motion by his filing of cases in court on which the judge is called upon to act. His partici pation in the dispensation of justice is indispensable. If there are no lawyers, courts cannot operate to dispense justice. His intimate and indispensable relationship to the court makes him a part of the court. Hence, the reference to him as “Officer of the Court.” Nature Of Legal Profession.—The legal profession is a form of public service or public trust intimately related to the administration of justice, in the practice of which pecuniary rewards are considered as merely incidental. It must signify for its followers a mental and moral setting apart from the multitude—it is a priesthood of justice (See Ledesma vs. Climaco, G.R No. 12815, June 28, 1974) The practice of law is a profession and not a business as it is an essential part in the administration of justice, 2 profession in pursuit of which pecuniary reward is consi ered as merely incidental; it is a pursuit of learned art i? the interest of public service (See Koscoe Pound, TH Lawyer From Antiquity to Modern Times, p. 5).Coe oF PRoFEssioNal. RESPONSIBILITY 43 ‘The Lawyer and Society CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY CHAPTER I—THE LAWYER AND SOCIETY CANON 1. A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTI- TUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND, AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES. Rule 1.01—A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishon- est, immoral or deceitful conduct. Rule 1.02—A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the legal system. Rule 1.03—A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay any man's cause Rule 1.04—A lawyer shall encourage his clients to avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement.44 Lecat Etuics CANON 1. A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTI. TUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND, PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LE. GAL PROCESSES. COMMENTS: Lawyer's Primary Duty To Society Or State; Attor- ney's Oath.—It is the lawyer's primary duty to society or State to uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and legal processes. This duty is enshrined in the Attorney's Oath which every lawyer in this country has to take before he is allowed to practice law. The full text reads— of to solemnly (place of birth) swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; I will support its Constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities therein; I will do no falsehood. nor consent to the doing of any in court; I will not wittingly nor willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the court as to my clients; and I impose upon myself this voluntary obligation without any Gemal Feservation or purpose of evasion. So help me oa The Rules of Court in enumerating the duties of @ lawyer also ordains the attorney, “(T)o maintain allegian® {0 the Republic of the Philippines and to support the Constitution and obey the la ines” (Rule iseteen on anes Wws of the Philippine “See: Form 28, appended to the Rules of Court as revis™! on Oct. 25, 1979 (91 SCRA xv),Cope oF PRoressional. RESPONSIBILITY 45 ‘The Lawyer and Soctety Lawyer's Oath Is A Sacred Trust, Not A Mere Cere- mony.—The Lawyer's Oath, to which all lawyers have subscribed in solemn agreement to dedicate themselves to the pursuit of justice, is not a mere ceremony or formality for practicing law to be forgotten afterwards, nor is it mere words, drift and hollow, but a sacred trust that lawyers must uphold and keep inviolable at all times. (Ting-Dumali vs. Torres, 427 SCRA 108). In re: Gutierrez 5 SCRA 661 Held: Of all classes and professions, the lawyer is most sacredly bound to uphold the laws. He is their sworn servant; and for him, of all men in the world, to repudiate and override the laws, to trample them un- der foot and to ignore the very bonds of society, ar- gues recreancy to his position and office and sets a pernicious example to the insubordinate and danger- ous elements of the body politic (Ex Parte Wall, 107 U.S. 263, 27 Law ed., 552, 556)."* Delay No Man For Money Or Malice. —The lawyer's cath imposes upon every lawyer the duty to delay no man for money or malice (Reyes vs. Gaa, 246 SCRA 64). Lawyers Will Be Disciplined For Disobeying Legal Orders Or Processes Of Courts.—Lawyers must not only uphold and obey the Constitution and the laws but also legal orders or processes of courts. Thus a lawyer was admonished for his failure to in- form the Supreme Court of his answer or reaction to his appointment by the Court as counsel for one of the appel- lants (People vs. Dalusag, 62 SCRA 540). And a lawyer was Teprimanded for failure to file the Comment required of him by the Supreme Court (Luzon Mahogany Timber Industries, Inc. vs. Castro, 69 SCRA 384). ™ See Cojuangco, Jr. vs. Palma, 438 SCRA 307-46 Lecat Ernics Suspension was meted out to a lawyer for failure to file Comment despite the several extensions he asked for and which were granted by the Court (Casals vs. Cusi, Jr. 52 SCRA 58; see also Achacoso vs. CA, 51 SCRA 424) i And for continuing to practice law in clear violation and open defiance of the original resolution of suspension from the practice of law, the Supreme Court ordered the name of the lawyer stricken out from the Roll of Attorneys (Geeslin vs. Navarro, 185 SCRA 230). Lawyers are particularly called upon to obey court orders and processes, and this deference is underscored by the fact that willful disregard thereof may subject the lawyer not only to punishment for contempt but to disci- plinary sanctions as well (Bantolo vs. Castillon, dr., 478 SCRA 443). Graver responsibility is imposed upon a lawyer than any other to uphold the integrity of the courts and to show respect to their processes (Bantolo vs. Castillon, Jr., 478 SCRA 443). All lawyers are expected to recognize the authority of the Supreme Court and to obey its lawful processes and orders and if he has not taken this to heart, he is unfit to engage in the practice of law (Marcelo vs. Court of Appeals. 242 SCRA 352). A Lawyer Who Issued Bouncing Checks Violates The Law And Is Subject To Disbarment Or Suspension. People vs. Tuanda’® 181 SCRA 692 Facts: A lawyer was convicted of Violation of B.P. Blg. 22 which the Court considered a crime in- "* See also: Co vs. Bernardino, 285 SCRA 102; PAGCOR ¥S Carandang, 480 SCRA 512; Huyssen vs. Gutierrez, 485 SCRA 244; Moreno vs. Araneta, 457 SCRA 328; Vda. de Espino ‘e Presquito, 432 SCRA 609; Barrios vs. Martinez, 442 SCRA 32 Arroyo-Posidio, 520 SCRA 111.Cope oF PROFESSIONAL REsPoNsiBILity ‘The Lawyer and Society volving moral turpitude as this mischief creates not only @ wrong to the payee or holder, but also an in. jury to the public, The lawyer was suspended by the Court of Ap- peals. She went to the Supreme Court asking for the lifting of the Order of suspension arguing that the is suance of the bouncing checks does not relate to the exercise of her legal profession. Held: We should add that the crimes of which respondent was convicted also import deceit and vio- lation of her attorney's oath and the Code of Profes- sional Responsibility under both of which she was bound to ‘obey the laws of the land.’ Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude might not (as in the instant case, violation of B.P. Bg. 22 does not) relate to the exercise of the profession of a lawyer; however, it certainly relates to and affects the good moral char- acter of a person convicted of such offense. In Melen- drez vs. Decena, this Court stressed that ‘the nature of the office of an attorney at law requires that she shall be a person of good moral character. This quali- fication is not only a condition precedent to an ad- mission to the practice of law; its continued posses- sion is also essential for remaining in the practice of law.’ (Suspension affirmed) Sanchez vs. Somoso 412 SCRA 569 Held: When respondent paid, with a personal check from a bank account which he knew had al- ready been closed, the person who attended to his medical needs and persisted in refusing to settle his due obligation despite demand, respondent exhibited an extremely low regard to his commitment to the oath he has taken when he joined his peers, seriously and irreparably tarnishing the image of the profession he should, instead, hold in high esteem. His conduct deserves nothing less than a severe disciplinary sanc- tion, 4748 Lecat Eruics Significance Of Lawyer's Oath —By swearing the lawyer's oath, an attorney becomes a guardian of truth and the rule of law, and an indispensable instrument in the fair and impartial administration of justice—a vital function of democracy, a failure of which is disastrous to society (Busifios vs. Ricafort, 283 SCRA 407). Effect Of Failure To Take The Attorney's Oath—A successful bar candidate who was allowed to sign by the Clerk of the Supreme Court to sign the Roll of Attorney's but was unable to take his oath before the Supreme Court, although he paid his IBP dues and listed as “qualified voter” in IBP affairs, cannot be admitted to the Bar with- out having actually taken his oath of office as an attorney (im re: Elmo S. Abad, B.M. No. 139, March 18, 1983) Oath Alone Will Not Make A Bar Passer A Full Fledged Member Of The Bar.—A bar passer must not only take his oath as a member of the Bar, but he must also sign the Roll of Attorneys. This last act makes him a full-fledged lawyer (Aguirre vs. Rana, 403 SCRA 343). Rule 1.01.—A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dis honest, immoral or deceitful conduct. COMMENTS: Lawyer Must Constantly Be Of Good Moral Charac- ter.—A lawyer should not engage or participate in any unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. The moral character he displayed when he applied for admis Sion to the Bar must be maintained incessantly. Other wise his peg 9 Practice the legal profession may > People vs. Tuanda Adm. Case No. 3360 Jan. 30, 1990 Held: The nature of the office of an attorney at law requires that she shall be a person of good moral a.Cove oF PRoFEssional. REsPoNsiBILity 49 The Lawyer and Society character. This qualification is not only a condition precedent to an admission to the practice of law; its continued possession is also essential for remaining in the practice of law." The commission of unlawful acts, specially crimes in- volving moral turpitude, acts of dishonesty in violation of the attorney's oath, grossly immoral conduct and deceit are grounds for suspension or disbarment of lawyers (Rule 138, Section 27, RRC) Purpose Of Requirement For Good Moral Charac- ter— Dantes vs. Dantes 438 SCRA 582 Held: The purposes for the requirement of good moral character are: (1) to protect the public; (ii) the protect the public image of lawyers; and (li) to protect, prospective clients. The Supreme Court added a fourth: to protect errant lawyers from themselves. Unlawful Acts Or Violation Of Laws.—A lawyer is bound to uphold the Constitution and obey the laws of the land (Rule 138, Sec. 20 [a], RRC). He can be disciplined for violating the laws of the country. Being a lawyer, he is Supposed to be a model in the community in so far as Tespect to the law is concerned. Thus, a lawyer was suspended for promoting an or- 8anization designed to violate or evade the laws against crime with knowledge of its aims (In re: Terrell, 2 Phil. 266). So, also a lawyer who agreed to purchase opium—a Prohibited drug—although the sale was not consummated because he was robbed of the purchase price by the ven- dors (Piatt vs. Abordo, 58 Phil. 350). And a lawyer who "See also: Melendrez vs. Decena, 176 SCRA 662; Villa- guea Vs. Sta. Ana, 245 SCRA 707; In Re: Al C. Argosino, 246 pa 14; Huyssen vs. Gutierrez, 485 SCRA 244: Lijauco vs. 'tado, 500 SCRA 301.o Leca Etnics engineered a scheme through his brother to defraud an Sag person was disbarred (In re: Quiambao, 102 Phil The transgression of any is a repulsive and reprehensible act which the court will not countenance (Gonzaga vs. Realubin, 242 SCRA 322). A lawyer who after borrowing court records stole ex: hibits by tearing them off, was disbarred for the second time.'” He descended to the level of a common thief (Fer- nandez vs. Benjamin Grecia, Adm. Case No. 3694, June 17, 1993, 223 SCRA 425). Provision of law by a lawyer The law violated need not be a penal law. Thus, the violation of Art. 1491 of the Civil Code by a lawyer is a sufficient ground for disciplinary sanction (Bautista vs. Gonzales, Adm. Case Matter No. 1625, 12 Feb. 1990). A lawyer was disbarred for transmitting and distrib- uting the stolen Bar Examination questions to some mem- bers of his fraternity to give them undue advantage over the other examinees (Re: 2003 Bar Examinations, 42! SCRA 703). A lawyer was suspended for committing dishonesty concerning the excuses for his failure to attend hearing! and lack of respect for legal orders (Batac, Jr. vs. Cru Jr., 538 SCRA 135). Unlawful Conduct.—Unlawful conduct includes an lation of the statutory prohibition on a government or ployee to “engage in the private practice of [his] Poe ait unless authorized by the Constitution or law, Pro with that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict {his] official functions” (Lim-Santiago vs. Sagucio. SCRA 11) Conviction For Crimes Involving Moral me tude—A number of lawyers have been suspen J state’ ‘7 He was already disbarred before and then rein: ‘This is his second disbarment.Cope oF PRorEssional, ResronsisiLiry 51 The Lawyer and Society disbarred for conviction of crimes involving moral turpi- tude such as estafa, (In re: Abesamis, 102 Phil. 1182; In re: Jaramillo, 101 Phil. 323; In re: Vinzon, 19 SCRA 815: Medina vs. Bautista, 12 SCRA 1); bribery (In re: Delos Angeles, 106 Phil. 1); murder (In re: Gutierrez, 5 SCRA 661); bigamy (In re: Peralta, 101 Phil. 313); seduction (De Jesus-Paras vs. Vailoces, 111 Phil. 569); abduction (In re: Basa, 41 Phil. 275); concubinage (In re: Isada, 60 Phil 915; Leynes vs. Veloso, 82 SCRA 325); smuggling (In re: Rovero, 92 Phil. 128); falsification of public document (In re Avancena, 20 SCRA 1012); violation of B.P. Big. 22 (People vs. Tuanda, Adm. Case No. 3360, 30 Jan. 1990) The lawyers involved in the aforementioned cases had shown their unfitness to protect the administration of justice, or are no longer of good moral character, which therefore justifies their suspension or disbarment (Rule 138, Sec. 27, RRC). Honesty, Still The Lawyer's Best Virtue.—Lawyers must deal with their clients, brother lawyers, courts of Justice and the public with honesty. Honesty is essential for every lawyer to retain his standing as a member of the bar (People vs. Gilmore, 177 NE 710). Lawyers must always conduct themselves in their professional and non-professional life with good moral character and without deception. __ Dishonesty is condemned and is a ground for disci- Plinary action. Some Cases Of Dishonesty And Deceit Which Me- rited Discipline By The Supreme Court. 1. Misappropriation of client’s funds (Macoco vs Diaz, 40 0.G. 17; Capulong vs. Alino, 22 SCRA 491; Cabi- 820 vs. Rodrigo, 57 Phil. 20; Aya vs. Bigornia, 57 Phil. 8 In re: Paraiso, 41 Phil. 24; In re: Booram, 39 Phil. 247; In ey Bamberger, 49 Phil. 946; Quilban vs. Robinol, 171 ae 769; Businos vs. Ricafort, 283 SCRA 415: Co vs. emardino, 285 SCRA 102 (1998).52 Lecat Erxics 2. Act of fraudulently concealing dutiable importa. tion or smuggling (In re: Rovero, 92 Phil. 128). 3. Giving false statements under oath in an Infor- mation Sheet submitted in connection with the lawyer's application for the position of Chief of Police (Calo vs, Degamo, 20 SCRA 447). 4. Wanton falsehood made in an ex Parte petition in court wherein the lawyer attached affidavit of his grandfa- ther and which affidavit he notarized knowing that the supposed affiant is already dead (Agdoma vs. Celestino, 6 SCRA 637). 5. Manuevering reconveyance of property in the name of the lawyer instead of the client—in a case involv. ing sale with pacto de retro (Imbuido vs. Fidel Sor Man- gonon, 4 SCRA 760). 6. Submission or presentation of mutilated copies of certain documents to court for the Purpose of deceiving and misleading it (Annotation, 45 Am. St., Rep. 852; cited in Martin, Legal Ethics, 198: 8 Ed., p. 241). 7. Falsification of Srades in the Bar Examinations (in re: Del Rosario, 52 Phil. 399). 8. Collecting several thou: that counsel would allegedly ap to the Supreme Court of th necessary for him to go to sand pesos on the pretense peal the complainant's case ie United States, and that it was Washington, D.C. which he did. knowing that the decision could no longer be appealed because itis already final (Malegrito vs. Barba, 58 Phil- 9. Inducing someo: that it is not for sale (In 10. Del: the client (Lict ne to buy a piece of land knowing re: Quiambao, 102 Phil. 940). ayed failure to account money collected for ‘uanan vs. Melo, 170 SCRA 100). 11. Stealing evidence attached 7 to the rt rect (Fernandez vs. Grecia, Adm, Case No 3694, June ut 1993), —_Cope oF ProressioNAL RESPONSIBILITY 53 ‘The Lawyer and Society 12. Adamant refusal to return money he received but intended for a party and issuing a bouncing check in payment therefor (Castillo vs. Taquines, 254 SCRA 554) 13. Notarization of a falsified deed of sale of his cli- ent’s property (Roces vs. Aportadera, 243 SCRA 108: Reyes vs. Maglaya, 243 SCRA 214). 14. Misappropriating the settlement amount which he received for the client (Resurrecion vs. Sayson, Adm. Case No. 1037, Dec. 14, 1998). 15. Evading payment of debt (Yuson vs. Vitan, 496 SCRA 540 [2006)). 16. Misrepresenting that he was still connected with a law firm (Afurong vs. Aquino, 315 SCRA 77). 17. Committing falsehood in stating in his Urgent Motion for Postponement that he had to appear in another case, when there was none (id.). 18. A lawyer who altered a material date to make it appear that her Notice of Appeal was timely filed commit- ted an act of dishonesty (Rivera vs. Corral, 384 SCRA 1 Perea vs. Almadro, 399 SCRA 322) 19. Notarizing of documents despite expiration of notarial commission (Modejar vs. Rubia, 496 SCRA 1). Morality, Concept.—Morality is that quality (or property) of a human act whereby it measures up to what it should be as a step towards the objective last end of human action, or fails so to measure up. It consists there- fore in the relation existing between human acts and the norm of morality (Ethics, Paul Glenn, 1965 Ed., p. 100). The Norm Of Morality—Glenn explained the norm of morality as follows—“There is an eternal plan for the ordering or government of all acts and movements in the universe, and that this plan directs things towards their last end. But, as we also learned, man is free and rational; he is not coerced (in the field of free choice) by the plan, but is meant to recognize it by his reason and freely follow it in all his free or human acts. Human acts which are in54 LecaL EtHics harmony with the eternal plan are good; those not in harmony with it are evil. Now, the eternal plan is the Eternal Law which is the Divine Reason (and Will) express- ing itself in the ordering of the universe. Thus human acts are good or evil inasmuch as they agree or conflict with the Divine Reason. Now, how is the Divine Reason recog- nized by man? Obviously by human reason, which pro- nounces on individual human acts—in a word, by Con- science. Hence, the Eternal Law (Divine Reason) on the one hand, and conscience (human reason) on the other, constitute the Norm of Morality. From this it will be seen that we were right when we said that human acts are good or evil inasmuch as they agree or conflict with the dictates of reason (divine and human).” “The Divine Reason, or the Eternal Law, is the ulti- mate Norm of Morality. But that which serves man imme- diately in action, that which is available to his proximate use, is human reason pronouncing upon the good or evil of individual human acts: in other words, conscience is the proximate Norm of Morality.” “Summing the matter up, we say that the Norm of Morality is, remotely and ultimately (but primarily). the Eternal Law; while proximately (but secondly) it is con science. In reality, then, there are not two norms but only one; for conscience is the judgment of human reasom recognizing and applying the Eternal Law in individual human acts.” “A human act, to be a morally good act, must be found in agreement with the Norm of Morality on all three Points, i.e., it must be good in itself or objectively, in its end, and in its circumstances. A human act is evil i! fails to conform with the Norm of Morality in any one the points or determinants, viz.: (a) the act itself (i.e object); (b) the end of the agent; (c) the circumstances other than the end of the agent ({bid., p. 103)." Morality As Understood In Law.—This is a hu™” standard based on the natural moral law which is e™be ded in man’s conscience and which guides him to 40 & :Cope oF ProressionaL RESPONSIBILITY 55 ‘The Lawyer and Society and avoid evil. Immorality then is the doing of an act which is contrary to conscience. And moral turpitude includes everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals (in re: Basa, 41 Phil. 275). Immoral conduct has been defined as “that conduct which is willful, flagrant, or shameless, and which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the good and res- pectable members of the community” (Arciga vs. Mani- wang, 106 SCRA 591). Immorality is not confined to sexual conduct (Alfonso vs. Juanson, 228 SCRA 239). A lawyer should have moral integrity in addition to professional probity (Arciga vs. Maniwang, Ibid.; Talens- Dabon vs. Arceo, 259 SCRA 354) Morality Must Be A Lasting Virtue —Lawyers are expected to abide by the tenets of morality, not only upon admission to the Bar but also throughout their legal ca- reer, in order to maintain one’s good standing in that exclusive and honoured fraternity. Good moral character is more than just the absence of bad character. Such character expresses itself in the will to do the unpleasant thing if it is right and the resolve not to do the pleasant thing if it is wrong. (Cordon vs. Balicanta, 337 SCRA 662; See also: Barrientos vs. Libiran-Meteoro, 487 SCRA 209). Moral Character Distinguished From Good Reputa- tion.—Moral character is what a person really is. Royong vs. Oblena 7 SCRA 871 Held: The respondent also maintains that he did not falsify his petition to take the bar examina- tions in 1954 since according to his own opinion and estimation of himself at that time, he was a person of good moral character. This contention is clearly erro- neous. One's own approximation of himself is not a gauge to his moral character. Moral character is not @56 Lecat ETHICS subjective term, but one which corresponds to objec- tive reality. Moral character is what a person really is, and not what he or other people think he is. As for- mer Chief Justice Moran observed: An applicant for license to practice law is required to show good moral character, or what he really is, as distinguished from good reputation, or from the opinion gener- ally entertained of him, the estimate in which he is held by the public in the place where he is known. As has been said, ante the standard of per- sonal and professional integrity which should be ap- plied to persons admitted to practice law is not satis- fied by such conduct as merely enables them to es- cape the penalties of criminal law. Good moral char- acter includes at least common honesty. (3 Moran, Comments on the Rules of Court, 1957 ed. 626, citing In re: Weinstein, 42 P. (2d) 744 B.L.D., Cooper vs. Greeley, 1 Den. N.Y. 3447; In re: Del Rosario, 52 Phil. 399; and People vs. Macauley, 82 N.E. 612). Respondent, therefore, did not possess a good moral character at the time he applied for admission to the bar. He lived an adulterous life with Bricia An- geles, and the fact that people who knew him seemed to have acquiesced to his status, did not render hima person of good moral character. It is of no moment that his immoral state was discovered then or now as he is clearly not fit to remain a member of the bar. Advincula vs. Macabata 517 SCRA 609 Held: In Bar Matter No. 1154,"* good moral eae was defined as what a person really is, a8 fon general ‘Tom good reputation, or from the opin- Sanne mA entertained of him, or the estimate in is known. Moral ee the public in the place where he but one which wpenatacter is not a subjective term Corresponds to objective reality.