0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
34 Ansichten5 Seiten
This document discusses the constitutionality of Republic Act 972, also known as the "Bar Flunkers Act of 1953". The act aimed to admit candidates to the bar who failed examinations from 1946 to 1952 due to insufficient study materials and inadequate preparation. However, the Supreme Court finds several issues with the act:
1) It encroaches on the constitutional responsibility of the Supreme Court to regulate admission to the bar.
2) By retroactively admitting candidates who failed examinations, it effectively revokes judgments of the Supreme Court, which only the Court has the power to do.
3) Congress exceeded its authority in attempting to revise or alter resolutions of the Supreme Court.
Therefore, the Court rules
This document discusses the constitutionality of Republic Act 972, also known as the "Bar Flunkers Act of 1953". The act aimed to admit candidates to the bar who failed examinations from 1946 to 1952 due to insufficient study materials and inadequate preparation. However, the Supreme Court finds several issues with the act:
1) It encroaches on the constitutional responsibility of the Supreme Court to regulate admission to the bar.
2) By retroactively admitting candidates who failed examinations, it effectively revokes judgments of the Supreme Court, which only the Court has the power to do.
3) Congress exceeded its authority in attempting to revise or alter resolutions of the Supreme Court.
Therefore, the Court rules
This document discusses the constitutionality of Republic Act 972, also known as the "Bar Flunkers Act of 1953". The act aimed to admit candidates to the bar who failed examinations from 1946 to 1952 due to insufficient study materials and inadequate preparation. However, the Supreme Court finds several issues with the act:
1) It encroaches on the constitutional responsibility of the Supreme Court to regulate admission to the bar.
2) By retroactively admitting candidates who failed examinations, it effectively revokes judgments of the Supreme Court, which only the Court has the power to do.
3) Congress exceeded its authority in attempting to revise or alter resolutions of the Supreme Court.
Therefore, the Court rules
In the Matter of the Petitions for Admission to the Bar of
Unsuccessful Candidates of 1946 to 1953; ALBI! CUAA "acts# Congress passed Republic Act Number 972, commonly known as the Bar lunkers! Act o" #9$%&' (n accordance with the said law, the )upreme Court then passed and admitted to the bar those candidates who had obtained an a*erage o" 72 per cent by raising it to 7$ percent& A"ter its appro*al, many o" the unsuccess"ul postwar candidates +led petitions "or admission to the bar in*oking its pro*isions, while other motions "or the re*ision o" their e,amination papers were still pending also in*oked the a"oresaid law as an additional ground "or admission& -here are also others who ha*e sought simply the reconsideration o" their grades without, howe*er, in*oking the law in .uestion& -o a*oid in/ustice to indi*idual petitioners, the court +rst re*iewed the motions "or reconsideration, irrespecti*e o" whether or not they had in*oked Republic Act No& 972& RA 972 Bar Flunkers Act of 1953 Objectives0 to admit to the Bar those candidates who su1ered "rom0 2a3 (nsu4ciency o" reading materials and 2b3 inade.uate preparation& By its declared ob/ecti*e, the law is contrary to public interest because it .uali+es #,596 law graduates who con"essedly had inade.uate preparation "or the practice o" the pro"ession& 7 Admission to practice o" law is almost without e,ception conceded e*erywhere to be the e,ercise o" a /udicial "unction& Admission to practice ha*e also been held to be the e,ercise o" one o" the inherent powers o" the court& 7 (" the legislature cannot indirectly control the action o" the courts by re.uiring o" them construction o" the law according to its own *iews, it is *ery plain it cannot do so directly, by settling aside their /udgments, compelling them to grant new trials, ordering the discharge o" o1enders, or directing what particular steps shall be taken in the progress o" a /udicial in.uiry& $%L&# (n decreeing the bar candidates who obtained in the bar e,aminations o" #968 to #9$2, a general a*erage o" 75 per cent without "alling below $5 per cent in any sub/ect, be admitted in mass to the practice o" law, the disputed law is not a legislation9 it is a /udgment : a /udgment re*oking those promulgated by this Court during the a"orecited year a1ecting the bar candidates concerned9 and although this Court certainly can re*oke these /udgments e*en now, "or /usti+able reasons, it is no less certain that only this Court, and not the legislati*e nor e,ecuti*e department, that may be so& Any attempt on the part o" any o" these departments would be a clear usurpation o" its "unctions, as is the case with the law in .uestion& 'A(I!AL%# -he public interest demands o" legal pro"ession ade.uate preparation and e4ciency, precisely more so as legal problem e*ol*ed by the times become more di4cult& An ade.uate legal preparation is one o" the *ital re.uisites "or the practice o" law that should be de*eloped constantly and maintained +rmly& -o the legal pro"ession is entrusted the protection o" property, li"e, honor and ci*il liberties& -o appro*e o4cially o" those inade.uately prepared indi*iduals to dedicate themsel*es to such a delicate mission is to create a serious social danger& ;oreo*er, the statement that there was an insu4ciency o" legal reading materials is grossly e,aggerated& "AC() !" ($% CA)%# (n the manner o" the petitions "or Admission to the Bar o" unsuccess"ul candidates o" #968 to #9$%9 Albino Cunanan et& al petitioners& (n recent years "ew contro*ersial issues ha*e aroused so much public interest and concern as R&A& 972 popularly known as the Bar lunkers! Act o" #9$%&' <enerally a candidate is deemed passed i" he obtains a general a*e o" 7$= in all sub/ects w>o "alling below $5= in any sub/ect, although "or the past "ew e,ams the passing grades were changed depending on the strictness o" the correcting o" the bar e,aminations 2#968? 72=, #967? 89=, #96@? 75= #969?76=, #9$5?#9$% A 7$=3& Belie*ing themsel*es to be "ully .uali+ed to practice law as those reconsidered and passed by the )&C&, and "eeling that they ha*e been discriminated against, unsuccess"ul candidates who obtained a*erages o" a "ew percentages lower than those admitted to the bar went to congress "or, and secured in #9$# )enate Bill no& #2, but was *etoed by the president a"ter he was gi*en ad*ise ad*erse to it& Not o*erriding the *eto, the senate then appro*ed senate bill no& %72 embodying substantially the pro*isions o" the *etoed bill& -he bill then became law on Bune 2#, #9$% Republic Act 972 has "or its ob/ect, according to its author, to admit to the Bar those candidates who su1ered "rom insu4ciency o" reading materials and inade.uate preparations& By and large, the law is contrary to public interest since it .uali+es #,596 law graduates who had inade.uate preparation "or the practice o" law pro"ession, as e*idenced by their "ailure in the e,ams& ())CD) E -FD CA)D0 Gue to the "ar reaching e1ects that this law would ha*e on the legal pro"ession and the administration o" /ustice, the )&C& would seek to know i" it is CEN)-(-C-(ENAH& An ade.uate legal preparation is one o" the *ital re.uisites "or the practice o" the law that should be de*eloped constantly and maintained +rmly& -he Budicial system "rom which ours has been deri*ed, the act o" admitting, suspending, disbarring, and reinstating attorneys at law in the practice o" the pro"ession is concededly /udicial& -he Constitution, has not con"erred on Congress and the )&C& e.ual responsibilities concerning the admission to the practice o" law& -he primary power and responsibility which the constitution recogniIes continue to reside in this court& (ts retroacti*ity is in*alid in such a way, that what the law seeks to cure' are not the rules set in place by the )&C& but the lack o" will or the de"ect in /udgment o" the court, and this power is not included in the power granted by the Const& to Congress, it lies e,clusi*ely w>in the /udiciary& Reasons "or Cnconstitutionality0 #& -here was a mani"est encroachment on the constitutional responsibility o" the )upreme Court& 2& (t is in e1ect a /udgment re*oking the resolution o" the court, and only the )&C& may re*ise or alter them, in attempting to do so R&A& 972 *iolated the Constitution& %& -hat congress has e,ceeded its power to repeal, alter, and supplement the rules on admission to the bar 2since the rules made by congress must ele*ate the pro"ession, and those rules promulgated are considered the bare minimum&3 6& (t is a class legislation $& Art& 2 o" R&A& 972 is not embraced in the title o" the law, contrary to what the constitution en/oins, and being inseparable "rom the pro*isions o" art& #, the entire law is *oid& FDHG0 Cnder the authority o" the court0 #& -hat the portion o" art& # o" R&A& 972 re"erring to the e,aminations o" #968 to #9$2 and all o" art& 2 o" the said law are unconstitutional and there"ore *oid and w>o "orce and e1ect& 2& -he part o" AR- # that re"ers to the e,aminations subse.uent to the appro*al o" the law 2#9$%? #9$$3 is *alid and shall continue in "orce& 2those petitions by the candidates who "ailed the bar "rom #968 to #9$2 are denied, and all the candidates who in the e,amination o" #9$% obtained a <DN A*e& o" 7#&$= w>o getting a grade o" below $5= in any sub/ect are considered as ha*ing passed whether they ha*e +led petitions "or admissions or not&