[Resolution. March 18, 1954.

] In the Matter of the Petitions for Admission to the Bar of Unsuccessful Candidates of 1946 to 1953; ALBINO CUNANAN ET AL., Facts: The Congress passed Republic Act 972, also known to be the controversial Bar Flunkers Act of 1953 which has the title An Act To Fix The Passing Marks for Bar Examinations from 1946 up to and Including 1955. Section 1 of said Republic Act provides that any bar candidate who obtained the following general average in their corresponding bar examination year, without obtaining a grade below 50% in any subject, shall be allowed to take and subscribe the oath of office as member of the Philippine Bar: from 1946 to 195170%; 1952- 71%; 1953- 72%; 1954- 73%; and 1955- 74%. Section 2 of said Republic Act provides that any bar candidate who obtained a grade of seventy-five per cent in any subject in any bar examination after July 4, 1946 shall be deemed to have passed in such subject or subjects and such grade or grades shall be included in computing the passing general average that said candidate may obtain in any subsequent examinations that he may take. 1,094 examinees will be benefited by the Republic Act. Petitions were filed, however, questioning the validity of Republic Act 972. Issue: Whether or not Republic Act 972 is CONSTITUTIONAL. Held: The Court held Republic Act 972 to be partly constitutional, declaring the portion in Section 1 referring to the 1946 to 1952 examinations and all of Section 2 as unconstitutional, and declaring the remaining portions of the law as valid and shall continue in force. First of all, Republic Act 972 was passed to admit to the Bar those candidates who suffered from insufficiency of reading materials and inadequate preparation because of the aftermath of the Japanese occupation. The Court declared some parts unconstitutional because: 1. Its declared purpose is to admit candidates who failed in the bar examinations of 1946-1952, and who are certainly inadequately prepared to practice law. It obliges the Tribunal to perform something contrary to reason and in an arbitrary manner, and this is a manifest encroachment on the constitutional responsibility of the Supreme Court. 2. It is a judgment revoking the resolution of the Court on the petitions of the 810 candidates without having examined their respective examination papers. In attempting to do it directly, Republic Act No. 972 violated the Constitution. 3. Congress has exceeded its legislative power to repeal, alter and supplement the rules on admission to the Bar. Such additional or amendatory rules are intended to regulate acts subsequent to its promulgation and should tend to improve and elevate the practice of law, and these are just considered minimum norms. It is therefore the primary and inherent prerogative of the Supreme Court to render the ultimate decision on who may be admitted and may continue in the practice of law according to existing rules. 4. The reason advanced for the pretended classification of candidates, which the law makes, is contrary to facts which are of general knowledge and does not justify the admission to the Bar of law students inadequately prepared. The pretended classification is arbitrary. It is undoubtedly class legislation. 5. Article 2 of Republic Act No. 972 is not embraced in the title of the law, contrary to what the Constitution enjoins, and being inseparable from the provisions of article 1, the entire law is void. Because of lack of votes, the portion pertaining to the 1953-1955 is declared valid and shall continue in force.