G.R. No.

100113 September 3, 1991

RENATO CAYETANO, petitioner,

vs.
CHRISTIAN MONSOD, HON. JOVITO R. SALONGA, COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENT, and HON.
GUILLERMO CARAGUE, in his capacity as Secretary of Budget and Management, respondents.

Renato L. Cayetano for and in his own behalf.

Sabina E. Acut, Jr. and Mylene Garcia-Albano co-counsel for petitioner.

PARAS, J.:p

We are faced here with a controversy of far-reaching proportions. While ostensibly only legal issues are
involved, the Court's decision in this case would indubitably have a profound effect on the political
aspect of our national existence.

The 1987 Constitution provides in Section 1 (1), Article IX-C:

There shall be a Commission on Elections composed of a Chairman and six Commissioners who
shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the time of their appointment, at least thirty-
five years of age, holders of a college degree, and must not have been candidates for any elective
position in the immediately preceding -elections. However, a majority thereof, including the
Chairman, shall be members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law
for at least ten years. (Emphasis supplied)

The aforequoted provision is patterned after Section l(l), Article XII-C of the 1973 Constitution which
similarly provides:

1
There shall be an independent Commission on Elections composed of a Chairman and eight
Commissioners who shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the time of their
appointment, at least thirty-five years of age and holders of a college degree. However, a majority
thereof, including the Chairman, shall be members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the
practice of law for at least ten years.' (Emphasis supplied)

Regrettably, however, there seems to be no jurisprudence as to what constitutes practice of law as a

legal qualification to an appointive office.

Black defines "practice of law" as:

The rendition of services requiring the knowledge and the application of legal principles and
technique to serve the interest of another with his consent. It is not limited to appearing in court, or
advising and assisting in the conduct of litigation, but embraces the preparation of pleadings, and
other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, conveyancing, the preparation of legal
instruments of all kinds, and the giving of all legal advice to clients. It embraces all advice to clients
and all actions taken for them in matters connected with the law. An attorney engages in the
practice of law by maintaining an office where he is held out to be-an attorney, using a letterhead
describing himself as an attorney, counseling clients in legal matters, negotiating with opposing
counsel about pending litigation, and fixing and collecting fees for services rendered by his
associate. (Black's Law Dictionary, 3rd ed.)

The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases in court. (Land Title Abstract and Trust Co. v.
Dworken, 129 Ohio St. 23, 193 N.E. 650) A person is also considered to be in the practice of law when
he:

... for valuable consideration engages in the business of advising person, firms, associations or
corporations as to their rights under the law, or appears in a representative capacity as an
advocate in proceedings pending or prospective, before any court, commissioner, referee, board,

2
 body, committee, or commission constituted by law or authorized to settle controversies and there,
in such representative capacity performs any act or acts for the purpose of obtaining or defending
the rights of their clients under the law. Otherwise stated, one who, in a representative capacity,
engages in the business of advising clients as to their rights under the law, or while so engaged
performs any act or acts either in court or outside of court for that purpose, is engaged in the
practice of law. (State ex. rel. Mckittrick v..C.S. Dudley and Co., 102 S.W. 2d 895, 340 Mo. 852)

This Court in the case of Philippine Lawyers Association v.Agrava, (105 Phil. 173,176-177) stated:

The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court; it embraces the
preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, the
management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before judges and courts, and in
addition, conveying. In general, all advice to clients, and all action taken for them in
matters connected with the law incorporation services, assessment and condemnation services
contemplating an appearance before a judicial body, the foreclosure of a mortgage, enforcement
of a creditor's claim in bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings, and conducting proceedings in
attachment, and in matters of estate and guardianship have been held to constitute law practice,
as do the preparation and drafting of legal instruments, where the work done involves the
determination by the trained legal mind of the legal effect of facts and conditions. (5 Am. Jr. p. 262,
263). (Emphasis supplied)

Practice of law under modem conditions consists in no small part of work performed outside of any
court and having no immediate relation to proceedings in court. It embraces conveyancing, the
giving of legal advice on a large variety of subjects, and the preparation and execution of legal
instruments covering an extensive field of business and trust relations and other affairs. Although
these transactions may have no direct connection with court proceedings, they are always subject
to become involved in litigation. They require in many aspects a high degree of legal skill, a wide
experience with men and affairs, and great capacity for adaptation to difficult and complex
situations. These customary functions of an attorney or counselor at law bear an intimate relation

3
 to the administration of justice by the courts. No valid distinction, so far as concerns the question
set forth in the order, can be drawn between that part of the work of the lawyer which involves
appearance in court and that part which involves advice and drafting of instruments in his office. It
is of importance to the welfare of the public that these manifold customary functions be performed
by persons possessed of adequate learning and skill, of sound moral character, and acting at all
times under the heavy trust obligations to clients which rests upon all attorneys.
(Moran, Comments on the Rules of Court, Vol. 3 [1953 ed.] , p. 665-666, citing In re Opinion of the
Justices [Mass.], 194 N.E. 313, quoted in Rhode Is. Bar Assoc. v. Automobile Service Assoc. [R.I.]
179 A. 139,144). (Emphasis ours)

The University of the Philippines Law Center in conducting orientation briefing for new lawyers (1974-
1975) listed the dimensions of the practice of law in even broader terms as advocacy, counselling and
public service.

One may be a practicing attorney in following any line of employment in the profession. If what he
does exacts knowledge of the law and is of a kind usual for attorneys engaging in the active
practice of their profession, and he follows some one or more lines of employment such as this he
is a practicing attorney at law within the meaning of the statute. (Barr v. Cardell, 155 NW 312)

Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal
procedure, knowledge, training and experience. "To engage in the practice of law is to perform those
acts which are characteristics of the profession. Generally, 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)

The following records of the 1986 Constitutional Commission show that it has adopted a liberal
interpretation of the term "practice of law."

4
MR. FOZ. Before we suspend the session, may I make a manifestation which I forgot to do during
our review of the provisions on the Commission on Audit. May I be allowed to make a very brief
statement?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Jamir).

The Commissioner will please proceed.

MR. FOZ. This has to do with the qualifications of the members of the Commission on Audit.
Among others, the qualifications provided for by Section I is that "They must be Members of the
Philippine Bar" I am quoting from the provision "who have been engaged in the practice of
law for at least ten years".

To avoid any misunderstanding which would result in excluding members of the Bar who are now
employed in the COA or Commission on Audit, we would like to make the clarification that this
provision on qualifications regarding members of the Bar does not necessarily refer or involve
actual practice of law outside the COA We have to interpret this to mean that as long as the
lawyers who are employed in the COA are using their legal knowledge or legal talent in their
respective work within COA, then they are qualified to be considered for appointment as members
or commissioners, even chairman, of the Commission on Audit.

This has been discussed by the Committee on Constitutional Commissions and Agencies and we
deem it important to take it up on the floor so that this interpretation may be made available
whenever this provision on the qualifications as regards members of the Philippine Bar engaging in
the practice of law for at least ten years is taken up.

MR. OPLE. Will Commissioner Foz yield to just one question.

MR. FOZ. Yes, Mr. Presiding Officer.

5
 MR. OPLE. Is he, in effect, saying that service in the COA by a lawyer is equivalent to the
requirement of a law practice that is set forth in the Article on the Commission on Audit?

MR. FOZ. We must consider the fact that the work of COA, although it is auditing, will
necessarily involve legal work; it will involve legal work. And, therefore, lawyers who are
employed in COA now would have the necessary qualifications in accordance with the
Provision on qualifications under our provisions on the Commission on Audit. And, therefore,
the answer is yes.

MR. OPLE. Yes. So that the construction given to this is that this is equivalent to the practice
of law.

MR. FOZ. Yes, Mr. Presiding Officer.

MR. OPLE. Thank you.

... ( Emphasis supplied)

Section 1(1), Article IX-D of the 1987 Constitution, provides, among others, that the Chairman and two
Commissioners of the Commission on Audit (COA) should either be certified public accountants with not
less than ten years of auditing practice, or members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in
the practice of law for at least ten years. (emphasis supplied)

Corollary to this is the term "private practitioner" and which is in many ways synonymous with the word
"lawyer." Today, although many lawyers do not engage in private practice, it is still a fact that the
majority of lawyers are private practitioners. (Gary Munneke, Opportunities in Law Careers [VGM Career
Horizons: Illinois], [1986], p. 15).

At this point, it might be helpful to define private practice. The term, as commonly understood, means
"an individual or organization engaged in the business of delivering legal services." (Ibid.). Lawyers who

6
practice alone are often called "sole practitioners." Groups of lawyers are called "firms." The firm is
usually a partnership and members of the firm are the partners. Some firms may be organized as
professional corporations and the members called shareholders. In either case, the members of the firm
are the experienced attorneys. In most firms, there are younger or more inexperienced salaried
attorneyscalled "associates." (Ibid.).

The test that defines law practice by looking to traditional areas of law practice is essentially tautologous,
unhelpful defining the practice of law as that which lawyers do. (Charles W. Wolfram, Modern Legal
Ethics [West Publishing Co.: Minnesota, 1986], p. 593). The practice of law is defined as the
performance of any acts . . . in or out of court, commonly understood to be the practice of law. (State Bar
Ass'n v. Connecticut Bank & Trust Co., 145 Conn. 222, 140 A.2d 863, 870 [1958] [quoting Grievance
Comm. v. Payne, 128 Conn. 325, 22 A.2d 623, 626 [1941]). Because lawyers perform almost every
function known in the commercial and governmental realm, such a definition would obviously be too
global to be workable.(Wolfram, op. cit.).

The appearance of a lawyer in litigation in behalf of a client is at once the most publicly familiar role for
lawyers as well as an uncommon role for the average lawyer. Most lawyers spend little time in
courtrooms, and a large percentage spend their entire practice without litigating a case. (Ibid., p. 593).
Nonetheless, many lawyers do continue to litigate and the litigating lawyer's role colors much of both the
public image and the self perception of the legal profession. (Ibid.).

In this regard thus, the dominance of litigation in the public mind reflects history, not reality. (Ibid.). Why
is this so? Recall that the late Alexander SyCip, a corporate lawyer, once articulated on the importance
of a lawyer as a business counselor in this wise: "Even today, there are still uninformed laymen whose
concept of an attorney is one who principally tries cases before the courts. The members of the bench
and bar and the informed laymen such as businessmen, know that in most developed societies today,
substantially more legal work is transacted in law offices than in the courtrooms. General practitioners of
law who do both litigation and non-litigation work also know that in most cases they find themselves
spending more time doing what [is] loosely desccribe[d] as business counseling than in trying cases.

7
The business lawyer has been described as the planner, the diagnostician and the trial lawyer, the
surgeon. I[t] need not [be] stress[ed] that in law, as in medicine, surgery should be avoided where
internal medicine can be effective." (Business Star, "Corporate Finance Law," Jan. 11, 1989, p. 4).

In the course of a working day the average general practitioner wig engage in a number of legal tasks,
each involving different legal doctrines, legal skills, legal processes, legal institutions, clients, and other
interested parties. Even the increasing numbers of lawyers in specialized practice wig usually perform at
least some legal services outside their specialty. And even within a narrow specialty such as tax
practice, a lawyer will shift from one legal task or role such as advice-giving to an importantly different
one such as representing a client before an administrative agency. (Wolfram, supra, p. 687).

By no means will most of this work involve litigation, unless the lawyer is one of the relatively rare types
a litigator who specializes in this work to the exclusion of much else. Instead, the work will require the
lawyer to have mastered the full range of traditional lawyer skills of client counselling, advice-giving,
document drafting, and negotiation. And increasingly lawyers find that the new skills of evaluation and
mediation are both effective for many clients and a source of employment. (Ibid.).

Most lawyers will engage in non-litigation legal work or in litigation work that is constrained in very
important ways, at least theoretically, so as to remove from it some of the salient features of adversarial
litigation. Of these special roles, the most prominent is that of prosecutor. In some lawyers' work the
constraints are imposed both by the nature of the client and by the way in which the lawyer is organized
into a social unit to perform that work. The most common of these roles are those of corporate practice
and government legal service. (Ibid.).

In several issues of the Business Star, a business daily, herein below quoted are emerging trends in
corporate law practice, a departure from the traditional concept of practice of law.

We are experiencing today what truly may be called a revolutionary transformation in corporate
law practice. Lawyers and other professional groups, in particular those members participating in

8
various legal-policy decisional contexts, are finding that understanding the major emerging trends
in corporation law is indispensable to intelligent decision-making.

Constructive adjustment to major corporate problems of today requires an accurate understanding

of the nature and implications of the corporate law research function accompanied by an
accelerating rate of information accumulation. The recognition of the need for such improved
corporate legal policy formulation, particularly "model-making" and "contingency planning," has
impressed upon us the inadequacy of traditional procedures in many decisional contexts.

In a complex legal problem the mass of information to be processed, the sorting and weighing of
significant conditional factors, the appraisal of major trends, the necessity of estimating the
consequences of given courses of action, and the need for fast decision and response in situations
of acute danger have prompted the use of sophisticated concepts of information flow theory,
operational analysis, automatic data processing, and electronic computing equipment.
Understandably, an improved decisional structure must stress the predictive component of the
policy-making process, wherein a "model", of the decisional context or a segment thereof is
developed to test projected alternative courses of action in terms of futuristic effects flowing
therefrom.

Although members of the legal profession are regularly engaged in predicting and projecting the
trends of the law, the subject of corporate finance law has received relatively little organized and
formalized attention in the philosophy of advancing corporate legal education. Nonetheless, a
cross-disciplinary approach to legal research has become a vital necessity.

Certainly, the general orientation for productive contributions by those trained primarily in the law
can be improved through an early introduction to multi-variable decisional context and the various
approaches for handling such problems. Lawyers, particularly with either a master's or doctorate
degree in business administration or management, functioning at the legal policy level of decision-

9
making now have some appreciation for the concepts and analytical techniques of other
professions which are currently engaged in similar types of complex decision-making.

Truth to tell, many situations involving corporate finance problems would require the services of an
astute attorney because of the complex legal implications that arise from each and every
necessary step in securing and maintaining the business issue raised. (Business Star, "Corporate
Finance Law," Jan. 11, 1989, p. 4).

In our litigation-prone country, a corporate lawyer is assiduously referred to as the "abogado de

campanilla." He is the "big-time" lawyer, earning big money and with a clientele composed of the
tycoons and magnates of business and industry.

Despite the growing number of corporate lawyers, many people could not explain what it is that a
corporate lawyer does. For one, the number of attorneys employed by a single corporation will
vary with the size and type of the corporation. Many smaller and some large corporations farm out
all their legal problems to private law firms. Many others have in-house counsel only for certain
matters. Other corporation have a staff large enough to handle most legal problems in-house.

A corporate lawyer, for all intents and purposes, is a lawyer who handles the legal affairs of a
corporation. His areas of concern or jurisdiction may include, inter alia: corporate legal research,
tax laws research, acting out as corporate secretary (in board meetings), appearances in both
courts and other adjudicatory agencies (including the Securities and Exchange Commission), and
in other capacities which require an ability to deal with the law.

At any rate, a corporate lawyer may assume responsibilities other than the legal affairs of the
business of the corporation he is representing. These include such matters as determining policy
and becoming involved in management. ( Emphasis supplied.)

10
In a big company, for example, one may have a feeling of being isolated from the action, or not
understanding how one's work actually fits into the work of the orgarnization. This can be
frustrating to someone who needs to see the results of his work first hand. In short, a corporate
lawyer is sometimes offered this fortune to be more closely involved in the running of the business.

Moreover, a corporate lawyer's services may sometimes be engaged by a multinational

corporation (MNC). Some large MNCs provide one of the few opportunities available to corporate
lawyers to enter the international law field. After all, international law is practiced in a relatively
small number of companies and law firms. Because working in a foreign country is perceived by
many as glamorous, tills is an area coveted by corporate lawyers. In most cases, however, the
overseas jobs go to experienced attorneys while the younger attorneys do their "international
practice" in law libraries. (Business Star, "Corporate Law Practice," May 25,1990, p. 4).

This brings us to the inevitable, i.e., the role of the lawyer in the realm of finance. To borrow the
lines of Harvard-educated lawyer Bruce Wassertein, to wit: "A bad lawyer is one who fails to spot
problems, a good lawyer is one who perceives the difficulties, and the excellent lawyer is one who
surmounts them." (Business Star, "Corporate Finance Law," Jan. 11, 1989, p. 4).

Today, the study of corporate law practice direly needs a "shot in the arm," so to speak. No longer
are we talking of the traditional law teaching method of confining the subject study to the
Corporation Code and the Securities Code but an incursion as well into the intertwining modern
management issues.

Such corporate legal management issues deal primarily with three (3) types of learning: (1)
acquisition of insights into current advances which are of particular significance to the corporate
counsel; (2) an introduction to usable disciplinary skins applicable to a corporate counsel's
management responsibilities; and (3) a devotion to the organization and management of the legal
function itself.

11
These three subject areas may be thought of as intersecting circles, with a shared area linking
them. Otherwise known as "intersecting managerial jurisprudence," it forms a unifying theme for
the corporate counsel's total learning.

Some current advances in behavior and policy sciences affect the counsel's role. For that matter,
the corporate lawyer reviews the globalization process, including the resulting strategic
repositioning that the firms he provides counsel for are required to make, and the need to think
about a corporation's; strategy at multiple levels. The salience of the nation-state is being reduced
as firms deal both with global multinational entities and simultaneously with sub-national
governmental units. Firms increasingly collaborate not only with public entities but with each other
often with those who are competitors in other arenas.

Also, the nature of the lawyer's participation in decision-making within the corporation is rapidly
changing. The modem corporate lawyer has gained a new role as a stakeholder in some cases
participating in the organization and operations of governance through participation on boards and
other decision-making roles. Often these new patterns develop alongside existing legal institutions
and laws are perceived as barriers. These trends are complicated as corporations organize for
global operations. ( Emphasis supplied)

The practising lawyer of today is familiar as well with governmental policies toward the promotion
and management of technology. New collaborative arrangements for promoting specific
technologies or competitiveness more generally require approaches from industry that differ from
older, more adversarial relationships and traditional forms of seeking to influence governmental
policies. And there are lessons to be learned from other countries. In
Europe, Esprit, Eureka and Race are examples of collaborative efforts between governmental and
business Japan's MITI is world famous. (Emphasis supplied)

Following the concept of boundary spanning, the office of the Corporate Counsel comprises a
distinct group within the managerial structure of all kinds of organizations. Effectiveness of both

12
long-term and temporary groups within organizations has been found to be related to indentifiable
factors in the group-context interaction such as the groups actively revising their knowledge of the
environment coordinating work with outsiders, promoting team achievements within the
organization. In general, such external activities are better predictors of team performance than
internal group processes.

In a crisis situation, the legal managerial capabilities of the corporate lawyer vis-a-vis the
managerial mettle of corporations are challenged. Current research is seeking ways both to
anticipate effective managerial procedures and to understand relationships of financial liability and
insurance considerations. (Emphasis supplied)

Regarding the skills to apply by the corporate counsel, three factors are apropos:

First System Dynamics. The field of systems dynamics has been found an effective tool for new
managerial thinking regarding both planning and pressing immediate problems. An understanding
of the role of feedback loops, inventory levels, and rates of flow, enable users to simulate all sorts
of systematic problems physical, economic, managerial, social, and psychological. New
programming techniques now make the system dynamics principles more accessible to managers
including corporate counsels. (Emphasis supplied)

Second Decision Analysis. This enables users to make better decisions involving complexity and
uncertainty. In the context of a law department, it can be used to appraise the settlement value of
litigation, aid in negotiation settlement, and minimize the cost and risk involved in managing a
portfolio of cases. (Emphasis supplied)

Third Modeling for Negotiation Management. Computer-based models can be used directly by
parties and mediators in all lands of negotiations. All integrated set of such tools provide coherent
and effective negotiation support, including hands-on on instruction in these techniques. A
simulation case of an international joint venture may be used to illustrate the point.

13
[Be this as it may,] the organization and management of the legal function, concern three pointed
areas of consideration, thus:

Preventive Lawyering. Planning by lawyers requires special skills that comprise a major part of the
general counsel's responsibilities. They differ from those of remedial law. Preventive lawyering is
concerned with minimizing the risks of legal trouble and maximizing legal rights for such legal
entities at that time when transactional or similar facts are being considered and made.

Managerial Jurisprudence. This is the framework within which are undertaken those activities of
the firm to which legal consequences attach. It needs to be directly supportive of this nation's
evolving economic and organizational fabric as firms change to stay competitive in a global,
interdependent environment. The practice and theory of "law" is not adequate today to facilitate the
relationships needed in trying to make a global economy work.

Organization and Functioning of the Corporate Counsel's Office. The general counsel has
emerged in the last decade as one of the most vibrant subsets of the legal profession. The
corporate counsel hear responsibility for key aspects of the firm's strategic issues, including
structuring its global operations, managing improved relationships with an increasingly diversified
body of employees, managing expanded liability exposure, creating new and varied interactions
with public decision-makers, coping internally with more complex make or by decisions.

This whole exercise drives home the thesis that knowing corporate law is not enough to make one
a good general corporate counsel nor to give him a full sense of how the legal system shapes
corporate activities. And even if the corporate lawyer's aim is not the understand all of the law's
effects on corporate activities, he must, at the very least, also gain a working knowledge of the
management issues if only to be able to grasp not only the basic legal "constitution' or makeup of
the modem corporation. "Business Star", "The Corporate Counsel," April 10, 1991, p. 4).

14
 The challenge for lawyers (both of the bar and the bench) is to have more than a passing
knowledge of financial law affecting each aspect of their work. Yet, many would admit to ignorance
of vast tracts of the financial law territory. What transpires next is a dilemma of professional
security: Will the lawyer admit ignorance and risk opprobrium?; or will he feign understanding and
risk exposure? (Business Star, "Corporate Finance law," Jan. 11, 1989, p. 4).

Respondent Christian Monsod was nominated by President Corazon C. Aquino to the position of
Chairman of the COMELEC in a letter received by the Secretariat of the Commission on Appointments
on April 25, 1991. Petitioner opposed the nomination because allegedly Monsod does not possess the
required qualification of having been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.

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.

Challenging the validity of the confirmation by the Commission on Appointments of Monsod's

nomination, petitioner as a citizen and taxpayer, filed the instant petition for certiorari and Prohibition
praying that said confirmation and the consequent appointment of Monsod as Chairman of the
Commission on Elections be declared null and void.

Atty. Christian Monsod is a member of the Philippine 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 Philippines
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

15
the Bank. Upon returning to the Philippines in 1970, he worked with the Meralco Group, served as chief
executive officer of an investment bank and subsequently of a business conglomerate, and since 1986,
has rendered services to various companies as a legal and economic consultant or chief executive
officer. As former Secretary-General (1986) and National Chairman (1987) of NAMFREL. Monsod's work
involved being knowledgeable in election law. He appeared for NAMFREL in its accreditation hearings
before the Comelec. In the field of advocacy, Monsod, in his personal capacity 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, lobbying for and
engaging in affirmative action for the agrarian reform law and lately the urban land reform bill. Monsod
also made use of his legal knowledge as a member of the Davide Commission, a quast judicial body,
which conducted numerous hearings (1990) and as a member of the Constitutional Commission (1986-
1987), and Chairman of its Committee on Accountability of Public Officers, for which he was cited by the
President of the Commission, Justice Cecilia Muoz-Palma for "innumerable amendments to reconcile
government functions with individual freedoms and public accountability and the party-list system for the
House of Representative. (pp. 128-129 Rollo) ( Emphasis supplied)

Just a word about the work of a negotiating team of which Atty. Monsod used to be a member.

In a loan agreement, for instance, a negotiating panel acts as a team, and which is adequately
constituted to meet the various contingencies that arise during a negotiation. Besides top officials
of the Borrower concerned, there are the legal officer (such as the legal counsel), the finance
manager, and an operations officer (such as an official involved in negotiating the contracts) who
comprise the members of the team. (Guillermo V. Soliven, "Loan Negotiating Strategies for
Developing Country Borrowers," Staff Paper No. 2, Central Bank of the Philippines, Manila, 1982,
p. 11). (Emphasis supplied)

After a fashion, the loan agreement is like a country's Constitution; it lays down the law as far as
the loan transaction is concerned. Thus, the meat of any Loan Agreement can be

16
compartmentalized into five (5) fundamental parts: (1) business terms; (2) borrower's
representation; (3) conditions of closing; (4) covenants; and (5) events of default. (Ibid., p. 13).

In the same vein, lawyers play an important role in any debt restructuring program. For aside from
performing the tasks of legislative drafting and legal advising, they score national development
policies as key factors in maintaining their countries' sovereignty. (Condensed from the work
paper, entitled "Wanted: Development Lawyers for Developing Nations," submitted by L. Michael
Hager, regional legal adviser of the United States Agency for International Development, during
the Session on Law for the Development of Nations at the Abidjan World Conference in Ivory
Coast, sponsored by the World Peace Through Law Center on August 26-31, 1973). ( Emphasis
supplied)

Loan concessions and compromises, perhaps even more so than purely renegotiation policies,
demand expertise in the law of contracts, in legislation and agreement drafting and in
renegotiation. Necessarily, a sovereign lawyer may work with an international business specialist
or an economist in the formulation of a model loan agreement. Debt restructuring contract
agreements contain such a mixture of technical language that they should be carefully drafted and
signed only with the advise of competent counsel in conjunction with the guidance of adequate
technical support personnel. (See International Law Aspects of the Philippine External Debts, an
unpublished dissertation, U.S.T. Graduate School of Law, 1987, p. 321). ( Emphasis supplied)

A critical aspect of sovereign debt restructuring/contract construction is the set of terms and
conditions which determines the contractual remedies for a failure to perform one or more
elements of the contract. A good agreement must not only define the responsibilities of both
parties, but must also state the recourse open to either party when the other fails to discharge an
obligation. For a compleat debt restructuring represents a devotion to that principle which in the
ultimate analysis is sine qua non for foreign loan agreements-an adherence to the rule of law in
domestic and international affairs of whose kind U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes, Jr. once said: "They carry no banners, they beat no drums; but where they are, men learn

17
 that bustle and bush are not the equal of quiet genius and serene mastery." (See Ricardo J.
Romulo, "The Role of Lawyers in Foreign Investments," Integrated Bar of the Philippine Journal,
Vol. 15, Nos. 3 and 4, Third and Fourth Quarters, 1977, p. 265).

Interpreted in the light of the various definitions of the term Practice of law". particularly the modern
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-manager, 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.

Besides in the leading case of Luego v. Civil Service Commission, 143 SCRA 327, the Court said:

Appointment is an essentially discretionary power and must be performed by the officer in which it
is vested according to his best lights, the only condition being that the appointee should possess
the qualifications required by law. If he does, then the appointment cannot be faulted on the
ground that there are others better qualified who should have been preferred. This is a political
question involving considerations of wisdom which only the appointing authority can decide.
(emphasis supplied)

No less emphatic was the Court in the case of (Central Bank v. Civil Service Commission, 171 SCRA
744) where it stated:

It is well-settled that when the appointee is qualified, as in this case, and all the other legal
requirements are satisfied, the Commission has no alternative but to attest to the appointment in
accordance with the Civil Service Law. The Commission has no authority to revoke an
appointment on the ground that another person is more qualified for a particular position. It also
has no authority to direct the appointment of a substitute of its choice. To do so would be an
encroachment on the discretion vested upon the appointing authority. An appointment is

18
 essentially within the discretionary power of whomsoever it is vested, subject to the only condition
that the appointee should possess the qualifications required by law. ( Emphasis supplied)

The appointing process in a regular appointment as in the case at bar, consists of four (4) stages: (1)
nomination; (2) confirmation by the Commission on Appointments; (3) issuance of a commission (in the
Philippines, upon submission by the Commission on Appointments of its certificate of confirmation, the
President issues the permanent appointment; and (4) acceptance e.g., oath-taking, posting of bond, etc.
. . . (Lacson v. Romero, No. L-3081, October 14, 1949; Gonzales, Law on Public Officers, p. 200)

The power of the Commission on Appointments to give its consent to the nomination of Monsod as
Chairman of the Commission on Elections is mandated by Section 1(2) Sub-Article C, Article IX of the
Constitution which provides:

The Chairman and the Commisioners shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments for a term of seven years without reappointment. Of those first
appointed, three Members shall hold office for seven years, two Members for five years, and the
last Members for three years, without reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for
the unexpired term of the predecessor. In no case shall any Member be appointed or designated in
a temporary or acting capacity.

Anent Justice Teodoro Padilla's separate opinion, suffice it to say that his definition of the practice
of law is the traditional or stereotyped notion of law practice, as distinguished from the modern
concept of the practice of law, which modern connotation is exactly what was intended by the
eminent framers of the 1987 Constitution. Moreover, Justice Padilla's definition would require
generally a habitual law practice, perhaps practised two or three times a week and would
outlaw say, law practice once or twice a year for ten consecutive years. Clearly, this is far from the
constitutional intent.

19
Upon the other hand, the separate opinion of Justice Isagani Cruz states that in my written opinion, I
made use of a definition of law practice which really means nothing because the definition says that law
practice " . . . is what people ordinarily mean by the practice of law." True I cited the definition but only by
way of sarcasm as evident from my statement that the definition of law practice by "traditional areas of
law practice is essentially tautologous" or defining a phrase by means of the phrase itself that is being
defined.

Justice Cruz goes on to say in substance that since the law covers almost all situations, most
individuals, in making use of the law, or in advising others on what the law means, are actually practicing
law. In that sense, perhaps, but we should not lose sight of the fact that Mr. Monsod is a lawyer, a
member of the Philippine Bar, who has been practising law for over ten years. This is different from the
acts of persons practising law, without first becoming lawyers.

Justice Cruz also says that the Supreme Court can even disqualify an elected President of the
Philippines, say, on the ground that he lacks one or more qualifications. This matter, I greatly doubt. For
one thing, how can an action or petition be brought against the President? And even assuming that he is
indeed disqualified, how can the action be entertained since he is the incumbent President?

We now proceed:

The Commission on the basis of evidence submitted doling the public hearings on Monsod's
confirmation, implicitly determined that he possessed the necessary qualifications as required by law.
The judgment rendered by the Commission in the exercise of such an acknowledged power is beyond
judicial interference except only upon a clear showing of a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack
or excess of jurisdiction. (Art. VIII, Sec. 1 Constitution). Thus, only where such grave abuse of discretion
is clearly shown shall the Court interfere with the Commission's judgment. In the instant case, there is no
occasion for the exercise of the Court's corrective power, since no abuse, much less a grave abuse of
discretion, that would amount to lack or excess of jurisdiction and would warrant the issuance of the
writs prayed, for has been clearly shown.

20
Additionally, consider the following:

(1) If the Commission on Appointments rejects a nominee by the President, may the Supreme
Court reverse the Commission, and thus in effect confirm the appointment? Clearly, the answer is
in the negative.

(2) In the same vein, may the Court reject the nominee, whom the Commission has confirmed?
The answer is likewise clear.

(3) If the United States Senate (which is the confirming body in the U.S. Congress) decides
to confirm a Presidential nominee, it would be incredible that the U.S. Supreme Court would
still reverse the U.S. Senate.

Finally, one significant legal maxim is:

We must interpret not by the letter that killeth, but by the spirit that giveth life.

Take this hypothetical case of Samson and Delilah. Once, the procurator of Judea asked Delilah (who
was Samson's beloved) for help in capturing Samson. Delilah agreed on condition that

No blade shall touch his skin;

No blood shall flow from his veins.

When Samson (his long hair cut by Delilah) was captured, the procurator placed an iron rod burning
white-hot two or three inches away from in front of Samson's eyes. This blinded the man. Upon hearing
of what had happened to her beloved, Delilah was beside herself with anger, and fuming with righteous
fury, accused the procurator of reneging on his word. The procurator calmly replied: "Did any blade
touch his skin? Did any blood flow from his veins?" The procurator was clearly relying on the letter, not
the spirit of the agreement.

21
In view of the foregoing, this petition is hereby DISMISSED. SO ORDERED.

Cayetano v Monsod (DIGEST)

G.R. No. 100113
September 3, 1991

FACTS:
Monsod was nominated by President Aquino to the position of Chairman of the COMELEC on April 25,
1991. Cayetano opposed the nomination because allegedly Monsod does not possess the required
qualification of having been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years. Challenging the validity
of the confirmation by the Commission on Appointments of Monsods nomination, petitioner filed a
petition for Certiorari and Prohibition praying that said confirmation and the consequent appointment of
Monsod as Chairman of the Commission on Elections be declared null and void because Monsod did
not meet the requirement of having practiced law for the last ten years.

ISSUE:
Whether or not respondent posses the required qualifications of having engaged in the practice of law
for at least ten years.

HELD:
The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases in court. A person is also considered to be in
the practice of law when he: . . . for valuable consideration engages in the business of advising person,
firms, associations or corporations as to their rights under the law, or appears in a representative
capacity as an advocate in proceedings pending or prospective, before any court, commissioner,
referee, board, body, committee, or commission constituted by law or authorized to settle controversies.

22
Otherwise stated, one who, in a representative capacity, engages in the business of advising clients as
to their rights under the law, or while so engaged performs any act or acts either in court or outside of
court for that purpose, is engaged in the practice of law.

Atty. Christian Monsod is a member of the Philippine 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 Philippines
since its inception in 1972-73. He has also been paying his professional license fees as lawyer for more
than ten years. Atty. Monsods past work experiences as a lawyer-economist, a lawyer-manager, 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.

BAR MATTER 1153

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En Banc dated March 9, 2010

23
"B.M. No. 1153 (Re: Letter of Atty. Estelito P. Mendoza Proposing Reforms in the Bar Examinations
Through Amendments to Rule 138 of the Rules of Court). - The Court Resolved to APPROVE the
proposed amendments to Sections 5 and 6 of Rule 138, to wit:
SEC. 5.Additional Requirement for Other Applicants. All applicants for admission other than those
referred to in the two preceding sections shall, before being admitted to the examination, satisfactorily
show that they have successfully completed all the prescribed courses for the degree of Bachelor of
Laws or its equivalent degree, in a law school or university officially recognized by the Philippine
Government or by the proper authority in the foreign jurisdiction where the degree has been granted.
No applicant who obtained the Bachelor of Laws degree in this jurisdiction shall be admitted to the bar
examination unless he or she has satisfactorily completed the following course in a law school or
university duly recognized by the government: 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.
A Filipino citizen who graduated from a foreign law school shall be admitted to the bar examination only
upon submission to the Supreme Court of certifications showing: (a) completion of all courses leading to
the degree of Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent degree; (b) recognition or accreditation of the law
school by the proper authority; and (c) completion of all the fourth year subjects in the Bachelor of Laws
academic program in a law school duly recognized by the Philippine Government.
SEC. 6.Pre-Law. An applicant for admission to the bar examination shall present a certificate issued
by the proper government agency that, before commencing the study of law, he or she had pursued and
satisfactorily completed in an authorized and recognized university or college, requiring for admission
thereto the completion of a four-year high school course, the course of study prescribed therein for a
bachelor's degree in arts or sciences.
A Filipino citizen who completed and obtained his or her Bachelor of Laws degree or its equivalent in a
foreign law school must present proof of having completed a separate bachelor's degree course.

24
The Clerk of Court, through the Office of the Bar Confidant, is hereby directed to CIRCULARIZE this
resolution among all law schools in the country."

B.M. No. 1222 February 4, 2004

Re: 2003 BAR EXAMINATIONS

RESOLUTION

PER CURIAM:

On 22 September 2003, the day following the bar examination in Mercantile Law, Justice Jose C. Vitug,
Chairman of the 2003 Bar Examinations Committee, was apprised of a rumored leakage in the
examination on the subject. After making his own inquiries, Justice Vitug reported the matter to Chief
Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr., and to the other members of the Court, recommending that the bar
examination on the subject be nullified and that an investigation be conducted forthwith. On 23
September 2003, the Court adopted the recommendation of Justice Vitug, and resolved to nullify the
examination in Mercantile Law and to hold another examination on 04 October 2003 at eight oclock in
the evening (being the earliest available time and date) at the De La Salle University, Taft Avenue,
Manila. The resolution was issued without prejudice to any action that the Court would further take on
the matter.

25
Following the issuance of the resolution, the Court received numerous petitions and motions from the
Philippine Association of Law Schools and various other groups and persons, expressing agreement to
the nullification of the bar examinations in Mercantile Law but voicing strong reservations against the
holding of another examination on the subject. Several reasons were advanced by petitioners or
movants, among these reasons being the physical, emotional and financial difficulties that would be
encountered by the examinees, if another examination on the subject were to be held anew. Alternative
proposals submitted to the Court included the spreading out of the weight of Mercantile Law among the
remaining seven bar subjects, i.e., to determine and gauge the results of the examinations on the basis
only of the performance of the examinees in the seven bar subjects. In a resolution, dated 29 September
2003, the Court, finding merit in the submissions, resolved to cancel the scheduled examination in
Mercantile Law on 04 October 2003 and to allocate the fifteen percentage points among the seven bar
examination subjects. In the same resolution, the Court further resolved to create a Committee
composed of three retired members of the Court that would conduct a thorough investigation of the
incident subject of the 23 September 2003 resolution.

In a resolution, dated 07 October 2003, the Court adopted the computation in the allocation of the fifteen
percentage points for Mercantile Law among the remaining seven bar examination subjects, to wit:

Original Adjusted Adjusted

Relative
Subject Percentage Percentage Relative
Weight
Weight Weight Weight
Political and International Law 15% 17.647% 3 3.53%
Labor and Social Legislation 10% 11.765% 2 2.35%
Civil law 15% 17.647% 3 3.53%
Taxation 10% 11.765% 2 2.35%

26
 Criminal law 10% 11.765% 2 2.35%
Remedial Law 20% 23.529% 4 4.71%
Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises 5% 5.882% 1 1.18%

100% 20%

In another resolution, dated 14 October 2003, the Court designated the following retired Associate
Justices of the Supreme Court to compose the Investigating Committee:

Chairman: Justice Carolina C. Grio-Aquino

Members: Justice Jose A.R. Melo
Justice Vicente V. Mendoza

The Investigating Committee was tasked to determine and identify the source of leakage, the parties
responsible therefor or who might have benefited therefrom, recommend sanctions against all those
found to have been responsible for, or who would have benefited from, the incident in question and to
recommend measures to the Court to safeguard the integrity of the bar examinations.

On 15 January 2004, the Investigating Committee submitted its report and recommendation to the Court,
herein reproduced in full; thus -

"In the morning of September 21, 2003, the third Sunday of the 2003 bar examinations, the examination
in commercial law was held in De la Salle University on Taft Avenue, Manila, the venue of the bar
examinations since 1995. The next day, the newspapers carried news of an alleged leakage in the said
examination.1

27
"Upon hearing the news and making preliminary inquiries of his own, Justice Jose C. Vitug, chairman of
the 2003 Bar Examinations Committee, reported the matter to the Chief Justice and recommended that
the examination in mercantile law be cancelled and that a formal investigation of the leakage be
undertaken.

"Acting on the report and recommendation of Justice Vitug, the Court, in a resolution dated September
23, 2003, nullified the examination in mercantile law and resolved to hold another examination in that
subject on Saturday, October 4, 2003 at eight oclock in the evening (being the earliest available time
and date) at the same venue. However, because numerous petitions, protests, and motions for
reconsideration were filed against the retaking of the examination in mercantile law, the Court cancelled
the holding of such examination. On the recommendation of the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Court
instead decided to allocate the fifteen (15) percentage points for mercantile law among the seven (7)
other bar examination subjects (Resolution dated October 7, 2003).

"In a Resolution dated September 29, 2003, the Supreme Court created an Investigating Committee
composed of three (3) retired Members of the Court to conduct an investigation of the leakage and to
submit its findings and recommendations on or before December 15, 2003.

"The Court designated the following retired Associate Justices of the Supreme Court to compose the
Committee:

Chairman: Justice CAROLINA GRIO-AQUINO

Members: Justice JOSE A. R. MELO
Justice VICENTE V. MENDOZA

"The Investigating Committee was directed to determine and identify the source of the leakage, the
parties responsible therefor and those who benefited therefrom, and to recommend measures to
safeguard the integrity of the bar examinations.

28
"The investigation commenced on October 21, 2003 and continued up to November 7, 2003. The
following witnesses appeared and testified at the investigation:

1. Associate Justice Jose C. Vitug, chairman of the 2003 Bar Examinations Committee;
2. Atty. Marlo Magdoza-Malagar, law clerk in the office of Justice Vitug
3. Atty. Marcial O. T. Balgos, examiner in mercantile law;
4. Cheryl Palma, private secretary of Atty. Balgos;
5. Atty. Danilo De Guzman, assistant lawyer in the firm of Balgos & Perez;
6. Atty. Enrico G. Velasco, managing partner of Balgos & Perez;
7. Eduardo J. F. Abella, reviewer in commercial law at the Lex Review Center;
8. Silvestre T. Atienza, office manager of Balgos & Perez;
9. Reynita Villasis, private secretary of Atty. De Guzman;
10. Ronan Garvida, fraternity brother of Atty. De Guzman;
11. Ronald F. Collado, most illustrious brother of the Beta Sigma Lambda Fraternity;
12. Jovito M. Salonga, Asst. Division Chief of Systems Development for Judicial Application,
MlSO;

The Committee held nine (9) meetings - six times to conduct the investigation and three times to
deliberate on its report.

"ASSOCIATE JUSTICE JOSE C. VITUG, chairman of the Bar Examinations Committee, testified that on
Monday morning, September 22, 2003, the day after the Bar examination in mercantile or commercial
law, upon arriving in his office in the Supreme Court, his secretary,2 Rose Kawada, informed him that
one of the law clerks, Atty. Marlo Magdoza-Malagar, told her that a friend of hers named Ma. Cecilia
Delgado-Carbajosa, a bar examinee from Xavier University in Cagayan de Oro City, who was staying at
the Garden Plaza Hotel in Paco, confided to her that something was wrong with the examination in
mercantile law, because previous to the examination, i.e., on Saturday afternoon, the eve of the
examination, she received a copy of the test questions in that subject. She did not pay attention to the
test questions because no answers were provided, and she was hard-pressed to finish her review of that

29
subject, using other available bar review materials, of which there were plenty coming from various bar
review centers.

"However, upon perusing the questions after the examinations, Cecilia noticed that many of them were
the same questions that were asked in the just-concluded-examination.

"Justice Vitug requested Marlo to invite her friend to his office in the Supreme Court, but Carbajosa
declined the invitation. So, Justice Vitug suggested that Marlo and Rose invite Carbajosa to meet them
at Robinsons Place, Ermita. She agreed to do that.

"Cecilia Carbajosa arrived at Robinsons Place at the appointed time and showed the test questions to
Rose and Marlo. Rose obtained a xerox copy of the leaked questions and compared them with the bar
questions in mercantile law. On the back of the pages, she wrote, in her own hand, the differences she
noted between the leaked questions and the bar examination questions.

"Rose and Marlo delivered the copy of the leaked questions to Justice Vitug who compared them with
the bar examination questions in mercantile law. He found the leaked questions to be the exact same
questions which the examiner in mercantile law, Attorney Marcial O. T. Balgos, had prepared and
submitted to him as chairman of the Bar Examinations Committee. However, not all of those questions
were asked in the bar examination. According to Justice Vitug, only 75% of the final bar questions were
questions prepared by Atty. Balgos; 25% prepared by Justice Vitug himself, were included in the final
bar examination. The questions prepared by Justice Vitug were not among the leaked test questions.

"Apart from the published news stories about the leakage, Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. and
Justice Vitug received, by telephone and mail, reports of the leakage from Dean Mariano F. Magsalin, Jr.
of the Arellano Law Foundation (Exh. H) and a certain Dale Philip R. De los Reyes (Exh. B -B-3),
attaching copies of the leaked questions and the fax transmittal sheet showing that the source of the
questions was Danny De Guzman who faxed them to Ronan Garvida on September 17, 2003, four days
before the examination in mercantile law on September 21, 2003 (Exh. B-1).

30
"ATTORNEY MARLO MAGDOZA-MALAGAR was subpoenaed by the Committee. She identified the
copy of the leaked questions that came from Cecilia Carbajosa (Exh. A). She testified that, according to
Carbajosa, the latter received the test questions from one of her co-bar reviewees staying, like her, at
the Garden Plaza Hotel in Paco, and also enrolled in the review classes at the Lex Review Center at the
corner of P. Faura Street and Roxas Boulevard, Ermita. She did not pay for the hand-out because the
Lex Review Center gives them away for free to its bar reviewees.

"ATTORNEY MARCIAL O. T. BALGOS, 71 years of age, senior partner in the law firm of BALGOS AND
PEREZ with offices in Rm. 1009 West Tektite Tower, Exchange Road, Ortigas Center, Pasig City,
testified that in November 2002, Justice Jose C. Vitug, as chair of the Committee on the 2003 Bar
Examinations, invited him to be the examiner in commercial law. He accepted the assignment and
almost immediately began the preparation of test questions on the subject. Using his personal computer
in the law office, he prepared for three consecutive days, three (3) sets of test questions which covered
the entire subject of Mercantile Law (pp. 3-5, tsn, Oct. 24, 2003). As he did not know how to prepare the
questionnaire in final form, he asked his private secretary, Cheryl Palma, to format the questions (p. 13,
tsn, Oct. 24, 2003). And, as he did not know how to print the questionnaire, he likewise asked Cheryl
Palma to make a print-out (Id., pp. 14-15). All of this was done inside his office with only him and his
secretary there. His secretary printed only one copy (Id., p. 15). He then placed the printed copy of the
test questions, consisting of three sets, in an envelope which he sealed, and called up Justice Vitug to
inform him that he was bringing the questions to the latters office that afternoon. However, as Justice
Vitug was leaving his office shortly, he advised Atty. Balgos to give the sealed envelope to his
confidential assistant who had been instructed to keep it. When Atty. Balgos arrived in the office of
Justice Vitug, he was met by Justice Vitugs confidential assistant to whom he entrusted the sealed
envelope containing the test questions (pp. 19-26, tsn, Oct. 24, 2003).

"Atty. Balgos admitted that he does not know how to operate a computer except to type on it. He does
not know how to open and close his own computer which has a password for that purpose. In fact, he
did not know, as he still does, the password. It is his secretary, Cheryl Palma, who opened and closed
his computer for him (p. 45, tsn, Oct. 24, 2003).

31
"Atty. Balgos testified that he did not devise the password himself. It was Cheryl Palma who devised it
(Id., p. 71).

"His computer is exclusively for his own use. It is located inside his room which is locked when he is not
in the office. He comes to the office every other day only.

"He thought that his computer was safely insulated from third parties, and that he alone had access to it.
He was surprised to discover, when reports of the bar leakage broke out, that his computer was in fact
interconnected with the computers of his nine (9) assistant attorneys (tsn, pp. 30,45). As a matter of fact,
the employees - Jovito M. Salonga and Benjamin R. Katly - of the Courts Management Information
Systems Office (MISO) who, upon the request of Atty. Balgos, were directed by the Investigating
Committee to inspect the computer system in his office, reported that there were 16, not 9, computers
connected to each other via Local Area Network (LAN) and one (1) stand-alone computer connected to
the internet (Exh. M). Atty. Balgos law partner, former Justice Secretary Hernando Perez, also had a
computer, but Perez took it away when he became the Secretary of Justice.

"The nine (9) assistant attorneys with computers, connected to Attorney Balgos computer, are:

1. Zorayda Zosobrado (she resigned in July 2003)

2. Claravel Javier
3. Rolynne Torio
4. Mark Warner Rosal
5. Charlynne Subia
6. Danilo De Guzman (resigned on October 22, 2003 [Exh. D])
7. Enrico G. Velasco, managing partner
8. Concepcion De los Santos
9. Pamela June Jalandoni

32
"Upon learning from Justice Vitug of the leakage of the bar questions prepared by him in mercantile law,
Atty. Balgos immediately called together and questioned his office staff. He interrogated all of them
except Atty. Danilo De Guzman who was absent then. All of them professed to know nothing about the
bar leakage.

"He questioned Silvestre Atienza, the office manager, Atienza is only a second year law student at
MLQU. But he is an expert in installing and operating computers. It was he and/or his brother Gregorio
who interconnected the computers in the law office, including Attorney Balgos computer, without the
latters knowledge and permission.

"Atienza admitted to Attorney Balgos that he participated in the bar operations or bar ops of the Beta
Sigma Lambda law fraternity of which he is a member, but he clarified that his participation consisted
only of bringing food to the MLQU bar examinees (Tsn, pp. 46-47, Oct. 24, 2003).

"The next day, Attorney Balgos questioned Attorney Danilo De Guzman, also a member of the Beta
Sigma Lambda fraternity, FEU chapter. De Guzman admitted to him that he downloaded the test
questions from Attorney Balgos computer and faxed a copy to a fraternity brother. Attorney Balgos was
convinced that De Guzman was the source of the leakage of his test questions in mercantile law (Tsn, p.
52, Oct. 24, 2003).

"Attorney Balgos prepared a COMPARISON (Exh. E) of the juxtaposed final bar questions and his
proposed test questions, with marginal markings made by Justice Vicente V. Mendoza (Ret.), indicating
whether the questions are similar: (S); or different: (D), together with the percentage points
corresponding to each question. On the basis of this comparative table and Atty. Balgos indications as
to which questions were the same or different from those given in the final questionnaire, Justice
Mendoza computed the credit points contained in the proposed leaked questions. The proposed
questions constituted 82% of the final bar questions. Attached to this Report as Annex A is the
comparative table and the computation of credit points marked as Exh. E-1.

33
"CHERYL PALMA, 34 years old, private secretary of Attorney Balgos for the past six years, testified that
she did not type the test questions. She admitted, however, that it was she who formatted the questions
and printed one copy as directed by her employer. She confirmed Atty. Balgos testimony regarding her
participation in the operation of his personal computer. She disclosed that what appears in Atty. Balgos
computer can be seen in the neighborhood network if the other computers are open and not in use; that
Silvestre Atienza of the accounting section, can access Atty. Balgos computer when the latter is open
and not in use.

"ATTORNEY ENRICO VELASCO, managing partner of the firm, testified that on October 16, 2003, he
sent De Guzman a memo (Exh. C) giving him 72 hours to explain in writing why you should not be
terminated for causing the Firm an undeserved condemnation and dishonor because of the leakage
aforesaid.

"On October 22, 2003, De Guzman handed in his resignation effective immediately. He explained that:

Causing the firm, its partners and members to suffer from undeserved condemnation and humiliation is
not only farthest from, but totally out of, my mind. It is just unfortunate that the incident subject matter of
your memorandum occurred. Rest assured, though, that I have never been part of any deliberate
scheme to malign the good reputation and integrity of the firm, its partners and members. (Exh. D)

"DANILO DE GUZMAN testified that he joined Balgos & Perez in April 2000. He obtained his LLB
degree from FEU in 1998. As a student, he was an awardee for academic excellence. He passed the
1998 bar examinations with a grade of 86.4%. In FEU, he joined the Beta Sigma Lambda law fraternity
which has chapters in MLQU, UE and MSU (Mindanao State University). As a member of the fraternity,
he was active during bar examinations and participated in the fraternitys bar ops.

"He testified that sometime in May 2003, when he was exploring Atty. Balgos computer, (which he often
did without the owners knowledge or permission), to download materials which he thought might be
useful to save for future use, he found and downloaded the test questions in mercantile law consisting of

34
12 pages. He allegedly thought they were quizzers for a book that Atty. Balgos might be preparing. He
saved them in his hard disk.

"He thought of faxing the test questions to one of his fraternity brods, a certain Ronan Garvida who, De
Guzman thought, was taking the 2003 bar examinations. Garvida is also a law graduate from FEU. He
had taken the 2002 bar examinations, but did not pass.

"On September 17, 2003, four days before the mercantile law bar examination, De Guzman faxed a
copy of the 12-page-test questions (Exhs. I, I-1, I-2, I-3) to Garvida because earlier he was informed by
Garvida that he was retaking the bar examinations. He advised Garvida to share the questions with
other Betan examinees. He allegedly did not charge anything for the test questions. Later, after the
examination was over, Garvida texted (sent a text message on his cell phone) him (De Guzman), that
he did not take the bar examination.

"Besides Garvida, De Guzman faxed the mercantile law bar questions to another fraternity brother
named Arlan (surname unknown), through Reynita (Nanette) Villasis, his secretary (Tsn, pp. 20-28, Oct.
29, 2003). But he himself faxed the questions to still another brod named Erwin Tan who had helped
him during the bar ops in 1998 when he (De Guzman) took the bar examinations (Id., p. 28). He
obtained the cell phone numbers of Arlan and Erwin Tan from Gabby Tanpiengco whom he informed by
text message, that they were guide questions, not tips, in the mercantile law examination.

"When he was confronted by Attorney Velasco on Wednesday after the examination, (news of the
leakage was already in all the newspapers), De Guzman admitted to Attorney Velasco that he faxed the
questions to his fraternity brothers, but he did not reveal where he got the test questions.

"De Guzman received a text message from Erwin Tan acknowledging that he received the test
questions. However, Erwin informed him that the questions were kalat na kalat (all over the place) even
if he did not share them with others (Tsn, pp. 54-55, Oct. 29, 2003).

35
"De Guzman also contacted Garvida who informed him that he gave copies of the test questions to
Betans Randy Iigo and James Bugain.

"Arlan also texted De Guzman that almost all the questions were asked in the examination. Erwin Tan
commented that many of the leaked questions were asked in the examination, pero hindi exacto; mi
binago (they were not exactly the same; there were some changes).

"De Guzman tried to text Garvida, but he received no response.

"De Guzman disclosed that he learned how to operate a computer from Silvestre Atienza, the office
manager, and through self-study, by asking those who are knowledgeable on computers. He has been
using computers since 1997, and he bought his own computer in 2001, a Pentium 3, which he uses at
home.

"REYNITA VILLASIS, the 36-year-old legal secretary of Attorney De Guzman, submitted her affidavit
(Exh. F) and orally affirmed her participation in the reproduction and transmittal by fax of the leaked test
questions in mercantile law to Ronan Garvida and Arlan, as testified by De Guzman.

"RONAN GARVIDA, appeared before the Investigating Committee in compliance with the subpoena that
was issued to him. Garvida graduated from FEU College of Law in 2000. He is about 32 years of age.
While still a student in 1998, he was afflicted with multiple sclerosis or MS, a disease of the nervous
system that attacks the nerve sheaths of the brain and spinal cord. It is a chronic disabling disease
although it may have periods of remission. It causes its victim to walk with erratic, stiff and staggering
gait; the hands and fingers may tremble in performing simple actions; the eyesight can be impaired, and
speech may be slow and slurred (p. 737, Vol. 2, Readers Digest Medical Encyclopedia, 1971 Ed.,
compiled by Benjamin F. Miller, M.D.). All these symptoms were present when Garvida testified before
the Committee on November 6, 2003 to answer its questions regarding his involvement in the leakage of
the examiners test questions in mercantile law.

36
"Garvida testified that when he was a freshman at FEU, he became a member of the Beta Sigma
Lambda fraternity where he met and was befriended by Attorney De Guzman who was his senior by one
and a half years. Although they had been out of touch since he went home to the province on account of
the recurrence of his illness, De Guzman was able [to] get this cell phone number from his compadre,
Atty. Joseph Pajara. De Guzman told Garvida that he was faxing him possible questions in the bar
examination in mercantile law. Because the test questions had no answers, De Guzman stressed that
they were not tips but only possible test questions.

"Garvida had intended to take the 2003 bar examinations. He enrolled in the Consortium Review Center
in FEU, paying P10,000.00 as enrollment fee. However, on his way to the Supreme Court to file his
application to take the bar examination, he suffered pains in his wrist - symptoms that his MS had
recurred. His physician advised him to go to the National Orthopedic Hospital in Quezon City for
treatment. This he did.

"He gave up his plan to take the 2003 bar examinations. Nevertheless, he continued to attend the review
classes at the Consortium Review Center because he did not want to waste completely the P10,000-
enrollment fee that he paid for the review course (Nahihinayang ako). That was presumably why De
Guzman thought that Garvida was taking the bar exams and sent him a copy of the test questions in
mercantile law.

"Upon receipt of the test questions, Garvida faxed a copy to his brod Randy Iigo who was reviewing at
the Consortium Review Center. Randy photocopied them for distribution to other fraternity brods. Some
of the brods doubted the usefulness of the test questions, but Randy who has a high regard for De
Guzman, believed that the questions were tips. Garvida did not fax the questions to any other person
than Randy Iigo. He allegedly did not sell the questions to Randy. I could not do that to a brod, he
explained.

"In view of the fact that one of the copies of the leaked test questions (Exh. H) bore on the left margin a
rubber stamp composed of the Greek initials BEA-MLQU, indicating that the source of that copy was

37
the Beta Sigma Lambda chapter at MLQU, the Committee subpoenaed Ronald Collado, the Most
Illustrious Brother of the Beta Sigma Lambda fraternity of MLQU.

"RONALD COLLADO is a senior law student at the MLQU. He admitted that his fraternity conducted Bar
Ops for the 2003 bar exams. Bar Ops are the biggest activity of the fraternity every year. They start as
soon as new officers of the fraternity are elected in June, and they continue until the bar examinations
are over. The bar operations consist of soliciting funds from alumni brods and friends to be spent in
reproducing bar review materials for the use of their barristers (bar candidates) in the various review
centers, providing meals for their brod-barristers on examination days; and to rent a bar site or place
near De la Salle University where the examinees and the frat members can convene and take their
meals during the break time. The Betans bar site for the 2003 bar examinations was located on Leon
Guinto Street, Malate. On September 19 and 21, before [the] start of the examination, Collados
fraternity distributed bar review materials for the mercantile law examination to the examinees who came
to the bar site. The test questions (Exh. H) were received by Collado from a brod, Alan Guiapal, who had
received them from Randy Iigo.

"Collado caused 30 copies of the test questions to be printed with the logo and initials of the fraternity
(BEA-MLQU) for distribution to the 30 MLQU examinees taking the bar exams. Because of time
constraints, frat members were unable to answer the test questions despite the clamor for answers, so,
they were given out as is - without answers.

"DEAN EDUARDO J. F. ABELLA of the Jose Rizal University law school in Mandaluyong City, was the
reviewer in Mercantile Law and Practical Exercises at the Lex Review Center which is operated by the
Lex Review & Seminars Inc., of which Dean Abella is one of the incorporators. He learned about the
leakage of test questions in mercantile law when he was delivering the pre-week lecture on Legal Forms
at the Arellano University. The leaked questions were shown to him by his secretary, Jenylyn Domingo,
after the mercantile law exam. He missed the Saturday lecture in mercantile law because he was
suffering from a touch of flu. He gave his last lecture on the subject on Wednesday or Thursday before

38
the exam. He denied having bought or obtained and distributed the leaked test questions in Mercantile
Law to the bar reviewees in the Lex Review Center.

"F I N D I N G S

"The Committee finds that the leaked test questions in Mercantile Law were the questions which the
examiner, Attorney Marcial O. T. Balgos, had prepared and submitted to Justice Jose C. Vitug, as
chairman of the 2003 Bar Examinations Committee. The questions constituted 82% of the questions
asked in the examination in Mercantile Law in the morning of September 21, 2003, Sunday, in some
cases with slight changes which were not substantial and in other cases exactly as proposed by Atty.
Balgos. Hence, any bar examinee who was able to get hold of the leaked questions before the
mercantile law examination and answered them correctly, would have been assured of passing the
examination with at least a grade of 82%!

"The circumstance that the leaked test questions consisted entirely of test questions prepared by Atty.
Balgos, proves conclusively that the leakage originated from his office, not from the Office of Justice
Vitug, the Bar Examinations Chairman.

"Atty. Balgos claimed that the leaked test questions were prepared by him on his computer. Without any
doubt, the source of the leaked test questions was Atty. Balgos computer. The culprit who stole or
downloaded them from Atty. Balgos computer without the latters knowledge and consent, and who
faxed them to other persons, was Atty. Balgos legal assistant, Attorney Danilo De Guzman, who
voluntarily confessed the deed to the Investigating Committee. De Guzman revealed that he faxed the
test questions, with the help of his secretary Reynita Villasis, to his fraternity brods, namely, Ronan
Garvida, Arlan (whose surname he could not recall), and Erwin Tan.

"In turn, Ronan Garvida faxed the test questions to Betans Randy Iigo and James Bugain.

39
"Randy Iigo passed a copy or copies of the same questions to another Betan, Alan Guiapal, who gave
a copy to the MLQU-Beta Sigma [Lambdas] Most Illustrious Brother, Ronald F. Collado, who ordered
the printing and distribution of 30 copies to the MLQUs 30 bar candidates.

"Attorney Danilo De Guzmans act of downloading Attorney Balgos test questions in mercantile law from
the latters computer, without his knowledge and permission, was a criminal act of larceny. It was theft of
intellectual property; the test questions were intellectual property of Attorney Balgos, being the product
of his intellect and legal knowledge.

"Besides theft, De Guzman also committed an unlawful infraction of Attorney Balgos right to privacy of
communication, and to security of his papers and effects against unauthorized search and seizure -
rights zealously protected by the Bill of Rights of our Constitution (Sections 2 and 3, Article III, 1987
Constitution).

"He transgressed the very first canon of the lawyers Code of Professional Responsibility which provides
that [a] lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land, and promote respect for law and
legal processes.

"By transmitting and distributing the stolen test questions to some members of the Beta Sigma Lambda
Fraternity, possibly for pecuniary profit and to given them undue advantage over the other examiners in
the mercantile law examination, De Guzman abetted cheating or dishonesty by his fraternity brothers in
the examination, which is violative of Rule 1.01 of Canon 1, as well as Canon 7 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility for members of the Bar, which provide:

Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct

Canon 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE
LEGAL PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR.

40
"De Guzman was guilty of grave misconduct unbecoming a member of the Bar. He violated the law
instead of promoting respect for it and degraded the noble profession of law instead of upholding its
dignity and integrity. His actuations impaired public respect for the Court, and damaged the integrity of
the bar examinations as the final measure of a law graduates academic preparedness to embark upon
the practice of law.

However, the Investigating Committee does not believe that De Guzman was solely responsible for the
leakage of Atty. Balgos proposed test questions in the mercantile law examination. The Committee does
not believe that he acted alone, or did not have the assistance and cooperation of other persons, such
as:

"Cheryl Palma, Atty. Balgos private secretary, who, according to Atty. Balgos himself, was the only
person who knew the password, who could open and close his computer; and who had the key to his
office where his computer was kept. Since a computer may not be accessed or downloaded unless it is
opened, someone must have opened Atty. Balgos computer in order for De Guzman to retrieve the test
questions stored therein.

"Silvestre Atienza, also a fraternity brod of De Guzman, who was responsible for interconnecting Atty.
Balgos computer with the other computers outside Atty. Balgos room or office, and who was the only
other person, besides Cheryl Palma, who knew the password of Atty. Balgos computer.

"The following persons who received from De Guzman, and distributed copies of the leaked test
questions, appear to have conspired with him to steal and profit from the sale of the test questions. They
could not have been motivated solely by a desire to help the fraternity, for the leakage was widespread
(kalat na kalat) according to Erwin Tan. The possible co-conspirators were:

Ronan Garvida,
Arlan,
Erwin Tan,

41
 Randy Iigo,
Ronald Collado, and
Allan Guiapal

"The Committee does not believe that De Guzman recklessly broke the law and risked his job and future
as a lawyer, out of love for the Beta Sigma Lambda fraternity. There must have been an ulterior material
consideration for his breaking the law and tearing the shroud of secrecy that, he very well knows, covers
the bar examinations.

"On the other hand, the Committee finds that the theft of the test questions from Atty. Balgos computer
could have been avoided if Atty. Balgos had exercised due diligence in safeguarding the secrecy of the
test questions which he prepared. As the computer is a powerful modern machine which he admittedly is
not fairly familiar with, he should not have trusted it to deep secret the test questions that he stored in its
hard disk. He admittedly did not know the password of his computer. He relied on his secretary to use
the password to open and close his computer. He kept his computer in a room to which other persons
had access. Unfamiliar with the use of the machine whose potential for mischief he could not have been
totally unaware of, he should have avoided its use for so sensitive an undertaking as typing the
questions in the bar examination. After all he knew how to use the typewriter in the use of which he is
quite proficient. Atty. Balgos should therefore have prepared the test questions in his trusty typewriter, in
the privacy of his home, (instead of his law office), where they would have been safe from the prying
eyes of secretaries and assistant attorneys. Atty. Balgos negligence in the preparation and safekeeping
of his proposed test questions for the bar examination in mercantile law, was not the proximate cause of
the bar leakage; it was, in fact, the root cause. For, if he had taken those simple precautions to protect
the secrecy of his papers, nobody could have stolen them and copied and circulated them. The integrity
of the bar examinations would not have been sullied by the scandal. He admitted that Mali siguro ako,
but that was what happened (43 tsn, Oct. 24, 2003).

"R E C O M M E N D A T I O N

42
"This Honorable court in the case of Burbe v. Magulta, A.C. No. 5713, June 10, 2002, 383 SCRA 276,
pronounced the following reminder for lawyers: Members of the bar must do nothing that may tend to
lessen in any degree the confidence of the public in the fidelity, the honesty and integrity of the
profession. In another case, it likewise intoned: We cannot overstress the duty of a lawyer to at all times
uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession. He can do this by faithfully performing his duties
to society, to the bar, to the courts, and to his clients. (Reyes v. Javier, A.C. No. 5574, February 2,
2002, 375 SCRA 538). It goes without saying that a lawyer who violates this precept of the profession by
committing a gross misconduct which dishonors and diminishes the publics respect for the legal
profession, should be disciplined.

"After careful deliberation, the Investigating Committee recommends that:

"1. Attorney Danilo De Guzman be DISBARRED for he had shown that he is morally unfit to
continue as a member of the legal profession, for grave dishonesty, lack of integrity, and criminal
behavior. In addition, he should make a written PUBLIC APOLOGY and pay DAMAGES to the
Supreme Court for involving it in another bar scandal, causing the cancellation of the mercantile
law examination, and wreaking havoc upon the image of this institution.

"2. Attorney Marcial O. T. Balgos should be REPRIMANDED by the Court and likewise be required
to make a written APOLOGY to the Court for the public scandal he brought upon it as a result of
his negligence and lack of due care in preparing and safeguarding his proposed test questions in
mercantile law. As the Court had to cancel the Mercantile Law examination on account of the
leakage of Attorney Balgos test questions, which comprised 82% of the bar questions in that
examination, Atty. Balgos is not entitled to receive any honorarium as examiner for that subject.

"3. FURTHER INVESTIGATION of Danilo De Guzman, Cheryl Palma, Silvestre Atienza, Ronan
Garvida, Arlan, Erwin Tan, Randy Iigo, James Bugain, Ronald Collado and Allan Guiapal by the
National Bureau of Investigation and the Philippine National Police, with a view to their criminal

43
 prosecution as probable co-conspirators in the theft and leakage of the test questions in mercantile
law.

"With regard to recommending measures to safeguard the integrity of the bar examinations and prevent
a repetition of future leakage in the said examinations, inasmuch as this matter is at present under study
by the Courts Committee on Legal Education and Bar Matters, as an aspect of proposals for bar
reforms, the Investigating Committee believes it would be well-advised to refrain from including in this
report what may turn out to be duplicative, if not contrary, recommendations on the matter." 3

The Court adopts the report, including with some modifications the recommendation, of the Investigating
Committee. The Court, certainly will not countenance any act or conduct that can impair not only the
integrity of the Bar Examinations but the trust reposed on the Court.

The Court also takes note that Mr. Jovito M. Salonga and Mr. Benjamin R. Katly, two of its employees
assigned to the Management Information Systems Office (MISO), who were tasked by the Investigating
Committee to inspect the computer system in the office of Atty. Balgos, found that the Courts Computer-
Assisted Legal Research (CALR) database4 was installed in the computer used by Atty. Balgos. Mr.
Salonga and Mr. Katly reported that the system, which was developed by the MISO, was intended for
the exclusive use of the Court. The installation thereof to any external computer would be unauthorized
without the permission of the Court. Atty. Velasco informed the two Court employees that the CALR
database was installed by Atty. De Guzman on the computer being used by Atty. Balgos. The matter
would also need further investigation to determine how Atty. De Guzman was able to obtain a copy of
the Courts CALR database.

WHEREFORE, the Court, acting on the recommendations of the Investigating Committee, hereby
resolves to -

(1) DISBAR Atty. DANILO DE GUZMAN from the practice of law effective upon his receipt of this
RESOLUTION;

44
 (2) REPRIMAND Atty. MARCIAL O.T. BALGOS and DISENTITLE him from receiving
any honorarium as an Examiner in Mercantile Law;

(3) Direct the National Bureau of Investigation (a) to undertake further investigation of Danilo De
Guzman, Cheryl Palma, Silvestre Atienza, Ronan Garvida, Erwin Tan, Randy Iigo, James
Bugain, Ronald Collado and Allan Guiapal with a view to determining their participation and
respective accountabilities in the bar examination leakage and to conduct an investigation on how
Danilo De Guzman was able to secure a copy of the Supreme Courts CALR database.

Let a copy of this Resolution be made part of the records of Danilo De Guzman in the Office of the Bar
Confidant, Supreme Court of the Philippines, and copies to be furnished the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines and circulated by the Office of the Court Administrator to all courts.

SO ORDERED.

Davide, Jr., C.J., Puno, Vitug, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio,
Austria-Martinez, Corona, Carpio-Morales, and Callejo, Sr., JJ., concur.
Azcuna, J., on official leave.
Tinga, J., No part. Close to family of one of the parties involved in bar scandal.

Footnotes
1
The leakage was reported on the newspapers on Tuesday, 23 September 2003.
2
A Law clerk in his office, Atty. Rosalinda E. Beltran-Kawada.

45
3
Report of the Investigating Committee on the Leakage of the Examiners Bar Examination
Questions in Mercantile Law.
4
The CALR database contains Supreme Court decisions from May 1996 to May 2002. It also has
a proprietary search engine.

46
B.M. No. 712 March 19, 1997

RE: PETITION OF AL ARGOSINO TO TAKE THE LAWYERS OATH

PADILLA, J.:

Petitioner Al Caparros Argosino passed the bar examinations held in 1993. The Court however deferred
his oath-taking due to his previous conviction for Reckless Imprudence Resulting In Homicide.

The criminal case which resulted in petitioner's conviction, arose from the death of a neophyte during
fraternity initiation rites sometime in September 1991. Petitioner and seven (7) other accused initially
entered pleas of not guilty to homicide charges. The eight (8) accused later withdrew their initial pleas
and upon re-arraignment all pleaded guilty to reckless imprudence resulting in homicide.

On the basis of such pleas, the trial court rendered judgment dated 11 February 1993 imposing on each
of the accused a sentence of imprisonment of from two (2) years four (4) months :and one (1) day to four
(4) years.

On 18 June 1993, the trial court granted herein petitioner's application for probation.

On 11 April 1994, the trial court issued an order approving a report dated 6 April 1994 submitted by the
Probation Officer recommending petitioner's discharge from probation.

On 14 April 1994, petitioner filed before this Court a petition to be allowed to take the lawyer's oath
based on the order of his discharge from probation.

47
On 13 July 1995, the Court through then Senior Associate Justice Florentino P. Feliciano issued a
resolution requiring petitioner Al C. Argosino to submit to the Court evidence that he may now be
regarded as complying with the requirement of good moral character imposed upon those seeking
admission to the bar.

In compliance with the above resolution, petitioner submitted no less than fifteen (15)
certifications/letters executed by among others two (2) senators, five (5) trial court judges, and six (6)
members of religious orders. Petitioner likewise submitted evidence that a scholarship foundation had
been established in honor of Raul Camaligan, the hazing victim, through joint efforts of the latter's family
and the eight (8) accused in the criminal case.

On 26 September 1995, the Court required Atty. Gilbert Camaligan, father of Raul, to comment on
petitioner's prayer to be allowed to take the lawyer's oath.

In his comment dated 4 December 1995, Atty. Camaligan states that:

a. He still believes that the infliction of severe physical injuries which led to the death of his son was
deliberate rather than accidental. The offense therefore was not only homicide but murder since the
accused took advantage of the neophyte's helplessness implying abuse of confidence, taking advantage
of superior strength and treachery.

b. He consented to the accused's plea of guilt to the lesser offense of reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide only out of pity for the mothers of the accused and a pregnant wife of one of the accused who
went to their house on Christmas day 1991 and Maundy Thursday 1992, literally on their knees, crying
and begging for forgiveness and compassion. They also told him that the father of one of the accused
had died of a heart attack upon learning of his son's involvement in the incident.

48
c. As a Christian, he has forgiven petitioner and his co-accused for the death of his son. However, as a
loving father who had lost a son whom he had hoped would succeed him in his law practice, he still feels
the pain of an untimely demise and the stigma of the gruesome manner of his death.

d. He is not in a position to say whether petitioner is now morally fit for admission to the bar. He
therefore submits the matter to the sound discretion of the Court.

The practice of law is a privilege granted only to those who possess the strict intellectual and moral
qualifications required of lawyers who are instruments in the effective and efficient administration of
justice. It is the sworn duty of this Court not only to "weed out" lawyers who have become a disgrace to
the noble profession of the law but, also of equal importance, to prevent "misfits" from taking the lawyer's
oath, thereby further tarnishing the public image of lawyers which in recent years has undoubtedly
become less than irreproachable.

The resolution of the issue before us required weighing and reweighing of the reasons for allowing or
disallowing petitioner's admission to the practice of law. The senseless beatings inflicted upon Raul
Camaligan constituted evident absence of that moral fitness required for admission to the bar since they
were totally irresponsible, irrelevant and uncalled for.

In the 13 July 1995 resolution in this case we stated:

. . . participation in the prolonged and mindless physical behavior, [which] makes impossible
a finding that the participant [herein petitioner] was then possessed of good moral
character. 1

In the same resolution, however, we stated that the Court is prepared to consider de novo the question
of whether petitioner has purged himself of the obvious deficiency in moral character referred to above.

49
Before anything else, the Court understands and shares the sentiment of Atty. Gilbert Camaligan. The
death of one's child is, for a parent, a most traumatic experience. The suffering becomes even more
pronounced and profound in cases where the death is due to causes other than natural or accidental but
due to the reckless imprudence of third parties. The feeling then becomes a struggle between grief and
anger directed at the cause of death.

Atty. Camaligan's statement before the Court- manifesting his having forgiven the accused is no less
than praiseworthy and commendable. It is exceptional for a parent, given the circumstances in this case,
to find room for forgiveness.

However, Atty. Camaligan admits that he is still not in a position to state if petitioner is now morally fit to
be a lawyer.

After a very careful evaluation of this case, we resolve to allow petitioner Al Caparros Argosino to take
the lawyer's oath, sign the Roll of Attorneys and practice the legal profession with the following
admonition:

In allowing Mr. Argosino to take the lawyer's oath, the Court recognizes that Mr. Argosino is not
inherently of bad moral fiber. On the contrary, the various certifications show that he is a devout Catholic
with a genuine concern for civic duties and public service.

The Court is persuaded that Mr. Argosino has exerted all efforts to atone for the death of Raul
Camaligan. We are prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt, taking judicial notice of the general
tendency of youth to be rash, temerarious and uncalculating.

We stress to Mr. Argosino that the lawyer's oath is NOT a mere ceremony or formality for practicing law.
Every lawyer should at ALL TIMES weigh his actions according to the sworn promises he makes when
taking the lawyer's oath. If all lawyers conducted themselves strictly according to the lawyer's oath and

50
the Code of Professional Responsibility, the administration of justice will undoubtedly be faster, fairer
and easier for everyone concerned.

The Court sincerely hopes that Mr. Argosino will continue with the assistance he has been giving to his
community. As a lawyer he will now be in a better position to render legal and other services to the more
unfortunate members of society.

PREMISES CONSIDERED, petitioner Al Caparros Argosino is hereby ALLOWED to take the lawyer's
oath on a date to be set by the Court, to sign the Roll of Attorneys and, thereafter, to practice the legal
profession.

SO ORDERED.

51
52
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7662

AN ACT PROVIDING FOR REFORMS IN THE LEGAL EDUCATION, CREATING FOR THE
PURPOSE, A LEGAL EDUCATION BOARD AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

Section 1. Title. - This Act shall be known as the "Legal Education Reform Act of 1993."

Section 2. Declaration of Policies. - It is hereby declared the policy of the State to uplift the standards of
legal education in order to prepare law students for advocacy, counselling, problem-solving, and
decision-making, to infuse in them the ethics of the legal profession; to impress on them the importance,
nobility and dignity of the legal profession as an equal and indispensable partner of the Bench in the
administration of justice and to develop social competence.

Towards this end, the State shall undertake appropriate reforms in the legal education system, require
proper selection of law students, maintain quality among law schools, and require legal apprenticeship
and continuing legal education.

Section 3. General and Specific Objective of Legal Education. - (a) Legal education in the Philippines is
geared to attain the following objectives:

(1) to prepare students for the practice of law;

(2) to increase awareness among members of the legal profession of the needs of the poor,
deprived and oppressed sectors of society;

(3) to train persons for leadership;

53
 (4) to contribute towards the promotion and advancement of justice and the improvement of its
administration, the legal system and legal institutions in the light of the historical and contemporary
development of law in the Philippines and in other countries.

(b) Legal education shall aim to accomplish the following specific objectives:

(1) to impart among law students a broad knowledge of law and its various fields and of legal
institutions;

(2) to enhance their legal research abilities to enable them to analyze, articulate and apply the law
effectively, as well as to allowthem to have a holistic approach to legal problems and issues;

(3) to prepare law students for advocacy, counselling, problem-solving and decision-making, and
to develop their ability to deal with recognized legal problems of the present and the future;

(4) to develop competence in any field of law as is necessary for gainful employment or sufficient
as a foundation for future training beyond the basic professional degree, and to develop in them
the desire and capacity for continuing study and self-improvement;

(5) to inculcate in them the ethics and responsibilities of the legal profession; and

(6) to produce lawyers who conscientiously pursue the lofty goals of their profession and to fully
adhere to its ethical norms.

Section 4. Legal Education Board; Creation and Composition. - To carry out the purpose of this Act,
there is hereby created the Legal Education Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board, attached solely
for budgetary purposes and administrative support to the Department of Education, Culture and Sports.

The Board shall be composed of a Chairman, who shall preferably be a former justice of the Supreme
Court or Court of Appeals, and the following as regular members: a representative of the Integrated Bar

54
of the Philippines (IBP); a representative of the Philippine Association of Law Schools (PALS); a
representative from the ranks of active law practitioners; and, a representative from the law students'
sector. The Secretary of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports, or his representative, shall be
an ex officio member of the Board.

With the exception of the representative of the law students' sector, the Chairman and regular members
of the Board must be natural-born citizen of the Philippines and members of the Philippine Bar, who
have been engaged for at least ten (10) years in the practice of law, as well as in the teaching of law in a
duly authorized or recognized law school.

Section 5. Term of Office; Compensation. - The Chairman and regular members of the Board shall be
appointed by the President for a term of five (5) years without reappointment from a list of at least three
(3) nominees prepared, with prior authorization from the Supreme Court, by the Judicial and Bar
Council, for every position or vacancy, and no such appointment shall need confirmation by the
Commission on Appointments. Of those first appointed, the Chairman and the representative of the IBP
shall hold office for five (5) years, the representatives of the PALS and the PALP, for three (3) years; and
the representative from the ranks of active law practitioners and the representative of the law students'
sector, for one (1) year, without reappointment. Appointments to any vacancy shall be only for the
unexpire portion of the term of the predecessor.

The Chairman and regular members of the Board shall have the same salary and rank as the Chairman
and members, respectively, of the Constitutional Commissions: Provided, That their salaries shall not be
diminished during their term of office.

Section 6. Office and Staff Support. - The Department of Education, Culture and Sports shall provide
the necessary office and staff support to the Board, with a principal office to be located in Metropolitan
Manila.

55
The Board may appoint such other officers and employees it may deem necessary in the performanceof
its powers and functions.

Section 7. Powers and Functions. - For the purpose of achieving the objectives of this Act, the Board
shall havethe following powers and functions:

(a) to administer the legal education system in the country in a manner consistent with the
provisions of this Act;

(b) to supervise the law schools in the country, consistent with its powers and functions as herein
enumerated;

(c) to set the standards of accreditation for law schools taking into account, among others, the size
of enrollment, the qualifications of the members of the faculty, the library and other facilities,
without encroaching upon the academic freedom of institutions of higher learning;

(d) to accredit law schools that meet the standards of accreditation;

(e) to prescribe minimum standards for law admission and minimum qualifications and
compensation of faculty members;

(f) to prescribe the basic curricula for the course of study aligned to the requirements for admission
to the Bar, law practice and social consciousness, and such other courses of study as may be
prescribed by the law schools and colleges under the different levels of accreditation status;

(g) to establish a law practice internship as a requirement for taking the Bar which a law student
shall undergo with any duly accredited private or public law office or firm or legal assistance group
anytime during the law course for a specific period that the Board may decide, but not to exceed a
total of twelve (12) months. For this purpose, the Board shall prescribe the necessary guidelines

56
 for such accreditation and the specifications of such internship which shall include the actual work
of a new member of the Bar.

(h) to adopt a system of continuing legal education. For this purpose, the Board may provide for
the mandatory attendance of practicing lawyers in such courses and for such duration as the
Board may deem necessary; and

(i) to perform such other functions and prescribe such rules and regulations necessary for the
attainment of the policies and objectives of this Act.

Section 8. Accreditation of Law Schools. - Educational institutions may not operate a law school unless
accredited by the Board. Accreditation of law schools may be granted only to educational institutions
recognized by the Government.

Section 9. Withdrawal or Downgrading of Accreditation. - The Board may withdraw or downgrade the
accreditation status of a law school if it fails to maintain the standards set for its accreditation status.

Section 10. Effectivity of Withdrawal or Downgrading of Accreditation. - The withdrawal or downgrading

of accreditation status shall be effetive after the lapse ofthe semester or trimester following the receipt by
the school of the notice of withdrawal or downgrading unless, in the meantime, the school meets and/or
upgrades the standards or corrects the deficiencies upon which the withdrawal or downgrading of the
accreditation status is based.

Section 11. Legal Education Fund. - There is hereby created a special endowment fund, to be known as
the Legal Education Fund, which shall be under the control of the Board, and administered as a
separate fund by the Social Security System (SSS) which shall invest the same with due and prudent
regard to its solvency, safety and liquidity.

57
The Legal Education Fund shall be established out of, and maintained from, the amounts appropriated
pursuant to paragraph 2, Section 13 hereof, and from sixty percent (60%) of the privilege tax paid by
every lawyer effective Fiscal Year 1994; and from such donations, legacies, grant-in-aid and other forms
of contributions received by the Board for the purposes of this Act.

Being a special endowment fund, only the interests earned on the Legal Education Fund shall be used
exclusively for the purposes of this Act, including support for faculty development grants, professorial
chairs, library improvements and similar programs for the advancement of law teaching and education in
accredited law schools.

The Fund shall also be used for the operation of the Board. For this purpose, an amount not exceeding
ten percent (10%) of the interest on the Fund shall be utilized.

The Board, in consultation with the SSS, shall issue the necessary rules and regulations for the
collection, administration and utilization of the Fund.

Section 12. Coverage. - The provisions of this Act shall apply to all schools and colleges of law which
are presently under the supervision of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports. Hereafter, said
supervision shall be transferred to the Board. Law schools and colleges which shall be established
following the approval of this Act shall likewise be covered.

Section 13. Appropriation. - The amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) is hereby authorized to
be charged against the current year's appropriation of the Contingent Fund for the initial expenses of the
Board.

To form part of the Legal Education Fund, there shall be appropriated annually, under the budget of the
Department of Education, Culture and Sports, the amount of Ten Million Pesos (P10,000,000.00) for a
period of ten (10) years effective Fiscal Year 1994.

58
Section 14. Separability Clause. - If any provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional or the
application thereof to any person, circumstance or transaction is held invalid, the validity of the
remaining provisions of this Act and the applicability of such provisions to other persons, circumstances
and transactions shall not be affected thereby.

Section 15. Repealing Clause. - All laws, decrees, executie orders, rules and regulations, issuances or
parts thereof inconsistent with this Act is hereby repealed or amended accordingly.

Section 16. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect after fifteen (15) days following the completion of its
publication in the Official Gazette or in any two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Approved: 23 December 1993.

59