Christian Monsod

7/27/2019 Christian Monsod

1/35

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

Manila

SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. 100113 September 3, 1991

RENATO CAYETANO, petitioner,vs.CHRISTIAN MONSOD, HON. JOITO R. SA!ONGA, COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENT,"#$ HON. GUI!!ERMO CARAGUE, %# &%' ("p"(%t) "' Se(ret"r) o* +$-et "#$M"#"-eme#t, 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

e are faced here !ith a controvers" of far#reachin$ proportions. hile ostensibl" onl" le$alissues are involved, the Court%s decision in this case !ould indubitabl" have a profoundeffect on the political aspect of our national e&istence.

'he ()*+ Constitution provides in Section ( (-, rticle I/#C0

'here shall be a Co11ission on Elections co1posed of a Chair1an and si&Co11issioners !ho shall be natural#born citi2ens of the Philippines and, at

the ti1e of their appoint1ent, at least thirt"#five "ears of a$e, holders of acolle$e de$ree, and 1ust not have been candidates for an" elective positionin the i11ediatel" precedin$ #elections. 3o!ever, a 1a4orit" thereof,includin$ the Chair1an, shall be 1e1bers of the Philippine 5ar !ho havebeen en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. E1phasissupplied-

'he afore6uoted provision is patterned after Section ll-, rticle /II#C of the ()+7 Constitution!hich si1ilarl" provides0

'here shall be an independent Co11ission on Elections co1posed of a Chair1an and ei$htCo11issioners !ho shall be natural#born citi2ens of the Philippines and, at the ti1e of their

appoint1ent, at least thirt"#five "ears of a$e and holders of a colle$e de$ree. 3o!ever, a1a4orit" thereof, includin$ the Chair1an, shall be 1e1bers of the Philippine 5ar who haebeen en!a!ed in the practice of law for at least ten years.% E1phasis supplied-

Re$rettabl", ho!ever, there see1s to be no 4urisprudence as to !hat constitutes practice ofla! as a le$al 6ualification to an appointive office.

5lac8 defines 9practice of la!9 as0


2/35

'he rendition of services re6uirin$ the 8no!led$e and the application of le$alprinciples and techni6ue to serve the interest of another !ith his consent. It isnot li1ited to appearin$ in court, or advisin$ and assistin$ in the conduct ofliti$ation, but e1braces the preparation of pleadin$s, and other papersincident to actions and special proceedin$s, conve"ancin$, the preparation ofle$al instru1ents of all 8inds, and the $ivin$ of all le$al advice to clients. It

e1braces all advice to clients and all actions ta8en for the1 in 1attersconnected !ith the la!. n attorne" en$a$es in the practice of la! b"1aintainin$ an office !here he is held out to be#an attorne", usin$ aletterhead describin$ hi1self as an attorne", counselin$ clients in le$al1atters, ne$otiatin$ !ith opposin$ counsel about pendin$ liti$ation, andfi&in$ and collectin$ fees for services rendered b" his associate. "lac#$s Law%ictionary, 7rd ed.-

'he practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases in court. Land &itle Abstract and&rust Co. . %wor#en,(:) Ohio St. :7, ()7 N.E. ;


3/35

instru1ents coverin$ an e&tensive field of business and trust relations andother affairs.Althou!h these transactions )ay hae no direct connection withcourt proceedin!s, they are always sub*ect to beco)e inoled in liti!ation.'he" re6uire in 1an" aspects a hi$h de$ree of le$al s8ill, a !ide e&perience!ith 1en and affairs, and $reat capacit" for adaptation to difficult andco1ple& situations. 'hese custo1ar" functions of an attorne" or counselor at

la! bear an inti1ate relation to the ad1inistration of 4ustice b" the courts. Novalid distinction, so far as concerns the 6uestion set forth in the order, can bedra!n bet!een that part of the !or8 of the la!"er !hich involves appearancein court and that part !hich involves advice and draftin$ of instru1ents in hisoffice. It is of i1portance to the !elfare of the public that these 1anifoldcusto1ar" functions be perfor1ed b" persons possessed of ade6uatelearnin$ and s8ill, of sound 1oral character, and actin$ at all ti1es under theheav" trust obli$ations to clients !hich rests upon all attorne"s.Moran, Co))ents on the Rules of Court, Vol. 7 A()


4/35

proision / who hae been en!a!ed in the practice of lawfor at least ten years.

'o avoid an" 1isunderstandin$ !hich !ould result in e&cludin$ 1e1bers ofthe 5ar !ho are no! e1plo"ed in the CO or Co11ission on udit, wewould li#e to )a#e the clarification that this proision on ualifications

re!ardin! )e)bers of the "ar does not necessarily refer or inole actualpractice of law outside the CA 0e hae to interpret this to )ean that aslon! as the lawyers who are e)ployed in the CA are usin! their le!al#nowled!e or le!al talent in their respectie wor# within CA, then they areualified to be considered for appoint)ent as )e)bers or co))issioners,een chair)an, of the Co))ission on Audit.

'his has been discussed b" the Co11ittee on Constitutional Co11issionsand $encies and !e dee1 it i1portant to ta8e it up on the floor so that thisinterpretation 1a" be 1ade available !henever this provision on the6ualifications as re$ards 1e1bers of the Philippine 5ar en$a$in$ in thepractice of la! for at least ten "ears is ta8en up.

MR. OPE. ill Co11issioner Fo2 "ield to 4ust one 6uestion.

MR. FOG. es, Mr. Presidin$ Officer.

MR. OPE. +s he, in effect, sayin! that serice in the CA bya lawyer is euialent to the reuire)ent of a law practicethat is set forth in the Article on the Co))ission on Audit1

MR. FOG. 0e )ust consider the fact that the wor# of CA,althou!h it is auditin!, will necessarily inole le!al wor#2 itwill inole le!al wor#. And, therefore, lawyers who are

e)ployed in CA now would hae the necessaryualifications in accordance with the (roision onualifications under our proisions on the Co))ission on

Audit. And, therefore, the answer is yes.

MR. OPE. es. So that the construction $iven to this is thatthis is e6uivalent to the practice of la!.

MR. FOG. 3es, Mr. (residin! fficer.

MR. OPE.&han# you.

... E1phasis supplied-

Section ((-, rticle I/#D of the ()*+ Constitution, provides, a1on$ others, that theChair1an and t!o Co11issioners of the Co11ission on udit CO- should either becertified public accountants !ith not less than ten "ears of auditin$ practice, or 1e1bers ofthe Philippine 5ar !ho have been en$a$ed in thepractice of lawfor at least ten "ears.e1phasis supplied-


5/35

Corollar" to this is the ter1 9private practitioner9 and !hich is in 1an" !a"s s"non"1ous!ith the !ord 9la!"er.9 'oda", althou$h 1an" la!"ers do not en$a$e in private practice, it isstill a fact that the 1a4orit" of la!"ers are private practitioners. ar" Munne8e, pportunitiesin Law CareersAVM Career 3ori2ons0 IllinoisB, A()*;B, p. (-.

In the course of a !or8in$ da" the avera$e $eneral practitioner !i$ en$a$e in a nu1ber ofle$al tas8s, each involvin$ different le$al doctrines, le$al s8ills, le$al processes, le$alinstitutions, clients, and other interested parties. Even the increasin$ nu1bers of la!"ers inspeciali2ed practice !i$ usuall" perfor1 at least so1e le$al services outside their specialt".

nd even !ithin a narro! specialt" such as ta& practice, a la!"er !ill shift fro1 one le$altas8 or role such as advice#$ivin$ to an i1portantl" different one such as representin$ aclient before an ad1inistrative a$enc". olfra1, supra, p. ;*+-.


6/35

5" no 1eans !ill 1ost of this !or8 involve liti$ation, unless the la!"er is one of the relativel"rare t"pes J a liti$ator !ho speciali2es in this !or8 to the e&clusion of 1uch else. Instead,the !or8 !ill re6uire the la!"er to have 1astered the full ran$e of traditional la!"er s8ills ofclient counsellin$, advice#$ivin$, docu1ent draftin$, and ne$otiation. nd increasin$l"la!"ers find that the ne! s8ills of evaluation and 1ediation are both effective for 1an"clients and a source of e1plo"1ent. +bid.-.

Most la!"ers !ill en$a$e in non#liti$ation le$al !or8 or in liti$ation !or8 that is constrained inver" i1portant !a"s, at least theoreticall", so as to re1ove fro1 it so1e of the salientfeatures of adversarial liti$ation. Of these special roles, the 1ost pro1inent is that ofprosecutor. In so1e la!"ers% !or8 the constraints are i1posed both b" the nature of theclient and b" the !a" in !hich the la!"er is or$ani2ed into a social unit to perfor1 that !or8.'he 1ost co11on of these roles are those of corporate practice and $overn1ent le$alservice. +bid.-.

In several issues of the "usiness Star, a business dail", herein belo! 6uoted are e1er$in$trends in corporate la! practice, a departure fro1 the traditional concept of practice of la!.

e are e&periencin$ toda" !hat trul" 1a" be called a revolutionar"transfor1ation in corporate la! practice. a!"ers and other professional$roups, in particular those 1e1bers participatin$ in various le$al#polic"decisional conte&ts, are findin$ that understandin$ the 1a4or e1er$in$ trendsin corporation la! is indispensable to intelli$ent decision#1a8in$.

Constructive ad4ust1ent to 1a4or corporate proble1s of toda" re6uires anaccurate understandin$ of the nature and i1plications of the corporate la!research function acco1panied b" an acceleratin$ rate of infor1ationaccu1ulation. 'he reco$nition of the need for such i1proved corporate le$alpolic" for1ulation, particularl" 91odel#1a8in$9 and 9contin$enc" plannin$,9has i1pressed upon us the inade6uac" of traditional procedures in 1an"decisional conte&ts.

In a co1ple& le$al proble1 the 1ass of infor1ation to be processed, thesortin$ and !ei$hin$ of si$nificant conditional factors, the appraisal of 1a4ortrends, the necessit" of esti1atin$ the conse6uences of $iven courses ofaction, and the need for fast decision and response in situations of acutedan$er have pro1pted the use of sophisticated concepts of infor1ation flo!theor", operational anal"sis, auto1atic data processin$, and electronicco1putin$ e6uip1ent. nderstandabl", an i1proved decisional structure1ust stress the predictive co1ponent of the polic"#1a8in$ process, !hereina 91odel9, of the decisional conte&t or a se$1ent thereof is developed to testpro4ected alternative courses of action in ter1s of futuristic effects flo!in$therefro1.

lthou$h 1e1bers of the le$al profession are re$ularl" en$a$ed in predictin$and pro4ectin$ the trends of the la!, the sub4ect of corporate finance la! hasreceived relativel" little or$ani2ed and for1ali2ed attention in the philosoph"of advancin$ corporate le$al education. Nonetheless, a cross#disciplinar"approach to le$al research has beco1e a vital necessit".

Certainl", the $eneral orientation for productive contributions b" those trainedpri1aril" in the la! can be i1proved throu$h an earl" introduction to 1ulti#


7/35

variable decisional conte&t and the various approaches for handlin$ suchproble1s. a!"ers, particularl" !ith either a 1aster%s or doctorate de$ree inbusiness ad1inistration or 1ana$e1ent, functionin$ at the le$al polic" levelof decision#1a8in$ no! have so1e appreciation for the concepts andanal"tical techni6ues of other professions !hich are currentl" en$a$ed insi1ilar t"pes of co1ple& decision#1a8in$.

'ruth to tell, 1an" situations involvin$ corporate finance proble1s !ouldre6uire the services of an astute attorne" because of the co1ple& le$ali1plications that arise fro1 each and ever" necessar" step in securin$ and1aintainin$ the business issue raised. "usiness Star, 9Corporate Financea!,9 @an. ((, ()*), p. >-.

In our liti$ation#prone countr", a corporate la!"er is assiduousl" referred toas the 9abo$ado de ca1panilla.9 3e is the 9bi$#ti1e9 la!"er, earnin$ bi$1one" and !ith a clientele co1posed of the t"coons and 1a$nates ofbusiness and industr".

Despite the $ro!in$ nu1ber of corporate la!"ers, 1an" people could note&plain !hat it is that a corporate la!"er does. For one, the nu1ber ofattorne"s e1plo"ed b" a sin$le corporation !ill var" !ith the si2e and t"pe ofthe corporation. Man" s1aller and so1e lar$e corporations far1 out all theirle$al proble1s to private la! fir1s. Man" others have in#house counsel onl"for certain 1atters. Other corporation have a staff lar$e enou$h to handle1ost le$al proble1s in#house.

corporate la!"er, for all intents and purposes, is a la!"er !ho handles thele$al affairs of a corporation. 3is areas of concern or 4urisdiction 1a"include, inter alia0 corporate le$al research, ta& la!s research, actin$ out ascorporate secretar" in board 1eetin$s-, appearances in both courts andother ad4udicator" a$encies includin$ the Securities and E&chan$e

Co11ission-, and in other capacities !hich re6uire an abilit" to deal !ith thela!.

t an" rate, a corporate la!"er 1a" assu1e responsibilities other than thele$al affairs of the business of the corporation he is representin$. &heseinclude such )atters as deter)inin! policy and beco)in! inoled in)ana!e)ent. E1phasis supplied.-

In a bi$ co1pan", for e&a1ple, one 1a" have a feelin$ of bein$ isolated fro1the action, or not understandin$ ho! one%s !or8 actuall" fits into the !or8 ofthe or$arni2ation. 'his can be frustratin$ to so1eone !ho needs to see theresults of his !or8 first hand. In short, a corporate la!"er is so1eti1es

offered this fortune to be 1ore closel" involved in the runnin$ of thebusiness.

Moreover, a corporate la!"er%s services 1a" so1eti1es be en$a$ed b" a1ultinational corporation MNC-. So1e lar$e MNCs provide one of the fe!opportunities available to corporate la!"ers to enter the international la!field. fter all, international la! is practiced in a relativel" s1all nu1ber ofco1panies and la! fir1s. 5ecause !or8in$ in a forei$n countr" is perceivedb" 1an" as $la1orous, tills is an area coveted b" corporate la!"ers. In 1ost


8/35

cases, ho!ever, the overseas 4obs $o to e&perienced attorne"s !hile the"oun$er attorne"s do their 9international practice9 in la! libraries. "usinessStar, 9Corporate a! Practice,9 Ma" :-.

'his brin$s us to the inevitable, i.e., the role of the la!"er in the real1 offinance. 'o borro! the lines of 3arvard#educated la!"er 5ruce assertein,

to !it0 9 bad la!"er is one !ho fails to spot proble1s, a $ood la!"er is one!ho perceives the difficulties, and the e&cellent la!"er is one !ho sur1ountsthe1.9 "usiness Star, 9Corporate Finance a!,9 @an. ((, ()*), p. >-.

'oda", the stud" of corporate la! practice direl" needs a 9shot in the ar1,9so to spea8. No lon$er are !e tal8in$ of the traditional la! teachin$ 1ethodof confinin$ the sub4ect stud" to the Corporation Code and the SecuritiesCode but an incursion as !ell into the intert!inin$ 1odern 1ana$e1entissues.

Such corporate le$al 1ana$e1ent issues deal pri1aril" !ith three 7- t"pesof learnin$0 (- ac6uisition of insi$hts into current advances !hich are of

particular si$nificance to the corporate counsel? :- an introduction to usabledisciplinar" s8ins applicable to a corporate counsel%s 1ana$e1entresponsibilities? and 7- a devotion to the or$ani2ation and 1ana$e1ent ofthe le$al function itself.

'hese three sub4ect areas 1a" be thou$ht of as intersectin$ circles, !ith ashared area lin8in$ the1. Other!ise 8no!n as 9intersectin$ 1ana$erial

4urisprudence,9 it for1s a unif"in$ the1e for the corporate counsel%s totallearnin$.

So1e current advances in behavior and polic" sciences affect the counsel%srole. For that 1atter, the corporate la!"er revie!s the $lobali2ation process,includin$ the resultin$ strate$ic repositionin$ that the fir1s he providescounsel for are re6uired to 1a8e, and the need to thin8 about a corporation%s?strate$" at 1ultiple levels. 'he salience of the nation#state is bein$ reducedas fir1s deal both !ith $lobal 1ultinational entities and si1ultaneousl" !ithsub#national $overn1ental units. Fir1s increasin$l" collaborate not onl" !ithpublic entities but !ith each other J often !ith those !ho are co1petitors inother arenas.

Also, the nature of the lawyer$s participation in decision-)a#in! within thecorporation is rapidly chan!in!. &he )ode) corporate lawyer has !ained anew role as a sta#eholder / in so)e cases participatin! in the or!ani5ationand operations of !oernance throu!h participation on boards and otherdecision-)a#in! roles. Often these ne! patterns develop alon$side e&istin$

le$al institutions and la!s are perceived as barriers. 'hese trends areco1plicated as corporations or$ani2e for $lobal operations. E1phasissupplied-

&he practisin! lawyer of today is fa)iliar as well with !oern)ental policiestoward the pro)otion and )ana!e)ent of technolo!y. 6ew collaboratiearran!e)ents for pro)otin! specific technolo!ies or co)petitieness )ore!enerally reuire approaches fro) industry that differ fro) older, )oreadersarial relationships and traditional for)s of see#in! to influence


9/35

!oern)ental policies. nd there are lessons to be learned fro1 othercountries. In Europe, Esprit, Eure#aand Raceare e&a1ples of collaborativeefforts bet!een $overn1ental and business @apan%s M+&+is !orld fa1ous.E1phasis supplied-

Follo!in$ the concept of boundar" spannin$, the office of the Corporate

Counsel co1prises a distinct $roup !ithin the 1ana$erial structure of all8inds of or$ani2ations. Effectiveness of both lon$#ter1 and te1porar" $roups!ithin or$ani2ations has been found to be related to indentifiable factors inthe $roup#conte&t interaction such as the $roups activel" revisin$ their8no!led$e of the environ1ent coordinatin$ !or8 !ith outsiders, pro1otin$tea1 achieve1ents !ithin the or$ani2ation. In $eneral, such e&ternalactivities are better predictors of tea1 perfor1ance than internal $roupprocesses.

+n a crisis situation, the le!al )ana!erial capabilities of the corporate lawyeris-a-is the )ana!erial )ettle of corporations are challen!ed. Currentresearch is see8in$ !a"s both to anticipate effective 1ana$erial procedures

and to understand relationships of financial liabilit" and insuranceconsiderations. E1phasis supplied-

Re$ardin$ the s8ills to appl" b" the corporate counsel, three factorsare apropos0

7irst Syste) %yna)ics. 'he field of s"ste1s d"na1ics has been found aneffective tool for ne! 1ana$erial thin8in$ re$ardin$ both plannin$ andpressin$ i11ediate proble1s. n understandin$ of the role of feedbac8loops, inventor" levels, and rates of flo!, enable users to si1ulate all sorts ofs"ste1atic proble1s J ph"sical, econo1ic, 1ana$erial, social, andps"cholo$ical. 6ew pro!ra))in! techniues now )a#e the syste)dyna)ics principles )ore accessible to )ana!ers / includin! corporate

counsels. E1phasis supplied-

Second %ecision Analysis. &his enables users to )a#e better decisionsinolin! co)ple'ity and uncertainty. +n the conte't of a law depart)ent, itcan be used to appraise the settle)ent alue of liti!ation, aid in ne!otiationsettle)ent, and )ini)i5e the cost and ris# inoled in )ana!in! a portfolio ofcases. E1phasis supplied-

&hird Modelin! for 6e!otiation Mana!e)ent. Co1puter#based 1odels canbe used directl" b" parties and 1ediators in all lands of ne$otiations. llinte$rated set of such tools provide coherent and effective ne$otiationsupport, includin$ hands#on on instruction in these techni6ues. si1ulation

case of an international 4oint venture 1a" be used to illustrate the point.

A5e this as it 1a",B the or$ani2ation and 1ana$e1ent of the le$al function,concern three pointed areas of consideration, thus0

(reentie Lawyerin!. Plannin$ b" la!"ers re6uires special s8ills thatco1prise a 1a4or part of the $eneral counsel%s responsibilities. 'he" differfro1 those of re1edial la!. Preventive la!"erin$ is concerned !ith1ini1i2in$ the ris8s of le$al trouble and 1a&i1i2in$ le$al ri$hts for such le$al


10/35

entities at that ti1e !hen transactional or si1ilar facts are bein$ consideredand 1ade.

Mana!erial Jurisprudence. 'his is the fra1e!or8 !ithin !hich are underta8enthose activities of the fir1 to !hich le$al conse6uences attach. It needs to bedirectl" supportive of this nation%s evolvin$ econo1ic and or$ani2ational

fabric as fir1s chan$e to sta" co1petitive in a $lobal, interdependentenviron1ent. 'he practice and theor" of 9la!9 is not ade6uate toda" tofacilitate the relationships needed in tr"in$ to 1a8e a $lobal econo1" !or8.

r!ani5ation and 7unctionin! of the Corporate Counsel$s ffice. 'he $eneralcounsel has e1er$ed in the last decade as one of the 1ost vibrant subsetsof the le$al profession. 'he corporate counsel hear responsibilit" for 8e"aspects of the fir1%s strate$ic issues, includin$ structurin$ its $lobaloperations, 1ana$in$ i1proved relationships !ith an increasin$l" diversifiedbod" of e1plo"ees, 1ana$in$ e&panded liabilit" e&posure, creatin$ ne! andvaried interactions !ith public decision#1a8ers, copin$ internall" !ith 1oreco1ple& 1a8e or b" decisions.

'his !hole e&ercise drives ho1e the thesis that 8no!in$ corporate la! is notenou$h to 1a8e one a $ood $eneral corporate counsel nor to $ive hi1 a fullsense of ho! the le$al s"ste1 shapes corporate activities. nd even if thecorporate la!"er%s ai1 is not the understand all of the la!%s effects oncorporate activities, he 1ust, at the ver" least, also $ain a !or8in$ 8no!led$eof the 1ana$e1ent issues if onl" to be able to $rasp not onl" the basic le$al9constitution% or 1a8eup of the 1ode1 corporation. 9"usiness Star9, 9'heCorporate Counsel,9 pril (=, ())(, p. >-.

'he challen$e for la!"ers both of the bar and the bench- is to have 1orethan a passin$ 8no!led$e of financial la! affectin$ each aspect of their !or8.et, 1an" !ould ad1it to i$norance of vast tracts of the financial la!

territor". hat transpires ne&t is a dile11a of professional securit"0 ill thela!"er ad1it i$norance and ris8 opprobriu1H? or !ill he fei$n understandin$and ris8 e&posureH "usiness Star, 9Corporate Finance la!,9 @an. ((, ()*),p. >-.

Respondent Christian Monsod !as no1inated b" President Cora2on C. 6uino to theposition of Chair1an of the COMEEC in a letter received b" the Secretariat of theCo11ission on ppoint1ents on pril :


11/35

tt". Christian Monsod is a 1e1ber of the Philippine 5ar, havin$ passed the bare&a1inations of ();= !ith a $rade of *;#


12/35

International Develop1ent, durin$ the Session on a! for the Develop1entof Nations at the bid4an orld Conference in Ivor" Coast, sponsored b" theorld Peace 'hrou$h a! Center on u$ust :;#7(, ()+7-. E1phasissupplied-

Loan concessions and co)pro)ises, perhaps een )ore so than purely

rene!otiation policies, de)and e'pertise in the law of contracts, in le!islationand a!ree)ent draftin! and in rene!otiation. Necessaril", a soverei$n la!"er1a" !or8 !ith an international business specialist or an econo1ist in thefor1ulation of a 1odel loan a$ree1ent. Debt restructurin$ contracta$ree1ents contain such a 1i&ture of technical lan$ua$e that the" should becarefull" drafted and si$ned onl" !ith the advise of co1petent counsel incon4unction !ith the $uidance of ade6uate technical support personnel. See+nternational Law Aspects of the (hilippine E'ternal %ebts, an unpublisheddissertation, .S.'. raduate School of a!, ()*+, p. 7:(-. E1phasissupplied-

critical aspect of soverei$n debt restructurin$Lcontract construction is the

set of ter1s and conditions !hich deter1ines the contractual re1edies for afailure to perfor1 one or 1ore ele1ents of the contract. $ood a$ree1ent1ust not onl" define the responsibilities of both parties, but 1ust also statethe recourse open to either part" !hen the other fails to dischar$e anobli$ation. For a co1pleat debt restructurin$ represents a devotion to thatprinciple !hich in the ulti1ate anal"sis is sine ua nonfor forei$n loana$ree1ents#an adherence to the rule of la! in do1estic and internationalaffairs of !hose 8ind .S. Supre1e Court @ustice Oliver endell 3ol1es, @r.once said0 9'he" carr" no banners, the" beat no dru1s? but !here the" are,1en learn that bustle and bush are not the e6ual of 6uiet $enius and serene1aster".9 See Ricardo @. Ro1ulo, 9'he Role of a!"ers in Forei$nInvest1ents,9 Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippine @ournal, Vol. (,'hird and Fourth uarters, ()++, p. :;


13/35

No less e1phatic !as the Court in the case of Central "an# . Ciil Serice Co))ission,(+( SCR +>>- !here it stated0

It is !ell#settled that !hen the appointee is 6ualified, as in this case, and allthe other le$al re6uire1ents are satisfied, the Co11ission has no alternativebut to attest to the appoint1ent in accordance !ith the Civil Service a!. 'he

Co11ission has no authorit" to revo8e an appoint1ent on the $round thatanother person is 1ore 6ualified for a particular position. It also has noauthorit" to direct the appoint1ent of a substitute of its choice. 'o do so!ould be an encroach)ent on the discretion ested upon the appointin!authority. An appoint)ent is essentially within the discretionary power ofwho)soeer it is ested, sub*ect to the only condition that the appointeeshould possess the ualifications reuired by law. E1phasis supplied-

'he appointin$ process in a re$ular appoint1ent as in the case at bar, consists of four >-sta$es0 (- no1ination? :- confir1ation b" the Co11ission on ppoint1ents? 7- issuance ofa co11ission in the Philippines, upon sub1ission b" the Co11ission on ppoint1ents ofits certificate of confir1ation, the President issues the per1anent appoint1ent? and >-

acceptance e.$., oath#ta8in$, postin$ of bond, etc. . . . Lacson . Ro)ero, No. #7=*(,October (>, ()>)? on2ales, a! on Public Officers, p. :==-

'he po!er of the Co11ission on ppoint1ents to $ive its consent to the no1ination ofMonsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections is 1andated b" Section (:- Sub#

rticle C, rticle I/ of the Constitution !hich provides0

'he Chair1an and the Co11isioners shall be appointed b" the President!ith the consent of the Co11ission on ppoint1ents for a ter1 of seven"ears !ithout reappoint1ent. Of those first appointed, three Me1bers shallhold office for seven "ears, t!o Me1bers for five "ears, and the lastMe1bers for three "ears, !ithout reappoint1ent. ppoint1ent to an"vacanc" shall be onl" for the une&pired ter1 of the predecessor. In no case

shall an" Me1ber be appointed or desi$nated in a te1porar" or actin$capacit".

nent @ustice 'eodoro Padilla%s separate opinion, suffice it to sa" that hisdefinition of the practice of la! is the traditional or stereot"ped notion of la!practice, as distin$uished fro1 the )odern concept of the practice of law,!hich 1odern connotation is e'actly what was intended by the e)inentfra)ers of the 9:=; Constitution.Moreover, @ustice Padilla%s definition !ouldre6uire $enerall" a habitual la! practice, perhaps practised t!o or threeti1es a !ee8 and would outlawsa", la! practice once or t!ice a "ear for tenconsecutive "ears. Clearl", this is far fro1 the constitutional intent.

pon the other hand, the separate opinion of @ustice Isa$ani Cru2 states that in 1" !rittenopinion, I 1ade use of a definition of la! practice !hich reall" 1eans nothin$ because thedefinition sa"s that la! practice 9 . . . is !hat people ordinaril" 1ean b" the practice of la!.9'rue I cited the definition but onl" b" !a" of sarcas1 as evident fro1 1" state1ent that thedefinition of la! practice b" 9traditional areas of la! practice is essentiall" tautolo!ous9 ordefinin$ a phrase b" 1eans of the phrase itself that is bein$ defined.

@ustice Cru2 $oes on to sa" in substance that since the la! covers al1ost all situations, 1ostindividuals, in 1a8in$ use of the la!, or in advisin$ others on !hat the la! 1eans, are


14/35

actuall" practicin$ la!. In that sense, perhaps, but !e should not lose si$ht of the fact thatMr. Monsod is a lawyer, a )e)ber of the (hilippine "ar, !ho has been practisin$ la! forover ten "ears. 'his is different fro1 the acts of persons practisin$ la!, without firstbeco)in! lawyers.

@ustice Cru2 also sa"s that the Supre1e Court can even dis6ualif" an elected President of

the Philippines, sa", on the $round that he lac8s one or 1ore 6ualifications. 'his 1atter, I$reatl" doubt. For one thin$, ho! can an action or petition be brou$ht a$ainst the PresidentH

nd even assu1in$ that he is indeed dis6ualified, ho! can the action be entertained sincehe is the incu1bent PresidentH

e no! proceed0

'he Co11ission on the basis of evidence sub1itted dolin$ the public hearin$s on Monsod%sconfir1ation, i1plicitl" deter1ined that he possessed the necessar" 6ualifications asre6uired b" la!. 'he 4ud$1ent rendered b" the Co11ission in the e&ercise of such anac8no!led$ed po!er is be"ond 4udicial interference e&cept onl" upon a clear sho!in$ of a$rave abuse of discretion a1ountin$ to lac8 or e&cess of 4urisdiction. rt. VIII, Sec. (

Constitution-. 'hus, onl" !here such $rave abuse of discretion is clearl" sho!n shall theCourt interfere !ith the Co11ission%s 4ud$1ent. In the instant case, there is no occasion forthe e&ercise of the Court%s corrective po!er, since no abuse, 1uch less a $rave abuse ofdiscretion, that !ould a1ount to lac8 or e&cess of 4urisdiction and !ould !arrant theissuance of the !rits pra"ed, for has been clearl" sho!n.

dditionall", consider the follo!in$0

(- If the Co11ission on ppoint1ents re*ectsa no1inee b" the President,1a" the Supre1e Court reverse the Co11ission, and thus ineffect confir)the appoint1entH Clearl", the ans!er is in the ne$ative.

:- In the sa1e vein, 1a" the Court re*ectthe no1inee, !ho1 theCo11ission has confir)edH 'he ans!er is li8e!ise clear.

7- If the nited States Senate !hich is the confir1in$ bod" in the .S.Con$ress- decides to confir)a Presidential no1inee, it !ould be incrediblethat the .S. Supre1e Court !ould still reersethe .S. Senate.

Finall", one si$nificant le$al 1a&i1 is0

e 1ust interpret not b" the letter that 8illeth, but b" the spirit that $iveth life.

'a8e this h"pothetical case of Sa1son and Delilah. Once, the procurator of @udea as8ed

Delilah !ho !as Sa1son%s beloved- for help in capturin$ Sa1son. Delilah a$reed oncondition that J

No blade shall touch his s8in?

No blood shall flo! fro1 his veins.

hen Sa1son his lon$ hair cut b" Delilah- !as captured, the procurator placed an iron rodburnin$ !hite#hot t!o or three inches a!a" fro1 in front of Sa1son%s e"es. 'his blinded the


15/35

1an. pon hearin$ of !hat had happened to her beloved, Delilah !as beside herself !ithan$er, and fu1in$ !ith ri$hteous fur", accused the procurator of rene$in$ on his !ord. 'heprocurator cal1l" replied0 9Did an" blade touch his s8inH Did an" blood flo! fro1 his veinsH9'he procurator !as clearl" rel"in$ on the letter, not the spirit of the a$ree1ent.

In vie! of the fore$oin$, this petition is hereb" DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

7ernan, C.J., GriBo-Auino and Medialdea, JJ., concur.

7eliciano, J., + certify that he oted to dis)iss the petition. ?7ernan, C.J.@

Sar)iento, J., is on leae.

Re!alado, and %aide, Jr., J., too# no part.

Sep"r"te Op%#%o#'

NARASA, J., concurrin$0

I concur !ith the decision of the 1a4orit" !ritten b" Mr. @ustice Paras, albeit onl" in the result?it does not appear to 1e that there has been an ade6uate sho!in$ that the challen$eddeter1ination b" the Co11ission on ppoint1ents#that the appoint1ent of respondentMonsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections should, on the basis of his stated6ualifications and after due assess1ent thereof, be confir1ed#!as attended b" error so$ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse of discretion and conse6uentl" 1erits nullification b" thisCourt in accordance !ith the second para$raph of Section (, rticle VIII of the Constitution. Itherefore vote to DEN the petition.

PADI!!A, J., dissentin$0

'he records of this case !ill sho! that !hen the Court first deliberated on the Petition at bar,I voted not onl" to re6uire the respondents to co11ent on the Petition, but I !as the solevote for the issuance of a te1porar" restrainin$ order to en4oin respondent Monsod fro1assu1in$ the position of COMEEC Chair1an, !hile the Court deliberated on hisconstitutional 6ualification for the office. M" purpose in votin$ for a 'RO !as to prevent theinconvenience and even e1barrass1ent to all parties concerned !ere the Court to finall"decide for respondent Monsod%s dis6ualification. Moreover, a readin$ of the Petition then inrelation to established 4urisprudence alread" sho!edpri)a faciethat respondent Monsod


16/35

did not possess the needed 6ualification, that is, he had not en$a$ed in the practice of la!for at least ten (=- "ears prior to his appoint1ent as COMEEC Chair1an.

fter considerin$ carefull" respondent Monsod%s co11ent, I a1 even 1ore convinced thatthe constitutional re6uire1ent of 9practice of law for at least ten ?9, >: R,M.S. +;*-. Practice of la! to fall !ithin the prohibition of statute has beeninterpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public asa la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services State vs. 5r"an, > S.E.

>,;>+.- ... e1phasis supplied-.

It is !orth 1entionin$ that the respondent Co11ission on ppoint1ents in a Me1orandu1 itprepared, enu1erated several factors deter1inative of !hether a particular activit"constitutes 9practice of la!.9 It states0

(. abituality. 'he ter1 9practice of la!9 i1plies custo1aril" or habituall"holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er People vs. Villanueva, (>SCR (=) citin$ State v. 5o"en, > S.E. >- such as !hen one


17/35

sends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneralpractice of la! .S. v. Ne" 5os6ue, * Phil. (>;-, or !hen one ta8es the oathof office as a la!"er before a notar" public, and files a 1anifestation !ith theSupre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in thecountr" People v. De una, (=: Phil. );*-.

Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre6uent orcusto1ar" action, a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. In other !ords, it isa habitual e&ercise People v. Villanueva, (> SCR (=) citin$ State v.Cotner, (:+, p. (, *+ an, *;>-.

:. Co)pensation. Practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust have presentedhi1self to be in the active and continued practice of the le$al profession andthat his professional services are available to the public for co1pensation, asa service of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. People v.Villanueva, supra-. 3ence, char$in$ for services such as preparation ofdocu1ents involvin$ the use of le$al 8no!led$e and s8ill is !ithin the ter19practice of la!9 Ernani Pao, 5ar Revie!er in e$al and @udicial Ethics,

()** ed., p. * citin$ People v. People%s Stoc8"ards State 5an8, (+; N.5.)=(- and, one !ho renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of astatute, and receives pa" for it, is to that e&tent, practicin$ la! Martin, supra,p. *=; citin$ Mendelaun v. ilbert and 5ar8et Mf$. Co., :)= N..S. >;:- Ifco1pensation is e&pected, all advice to clients and all action ta8en for the1in 1atters connected !ith the la!? are practicin$ la!. El!ood Fitchette et al.,v. rthur C. 'a"lor, )>#.R. 7


18/35

la!, he did not do so A"+&8ALL3 for at least ten ?9


19/35

ho!ever peripherall". 'he stoc8 bro8er and the insurance ad4uster and the realtor couldco1e under the definition as the" deal !ith or $ive advice on 1atters that are li8el" 9tobeco1e involved in liti$ation.9

'he la!"er is considered en$a$ed in the practice of la! even if his 1ain occupation isanother business and he interprets and applies so1e la! onl" as an incident of such

business. 'hat covers ever" co1pan" or$ani2ed under the Corporation Code and re$ulatedb" the SEC under P.D. )=:#. Considerin$ the ra1ifications of the 1odern societ", there ishardl" an" activit" that is not affected b" so1e la! or $overn1ent re$ulation thebusiness1an 1ust 8no! about and observe. In fact, a$ain $oin$ b" the definition, a la!"erdoes not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner. 3e canbe so dee1ed !hen, on his o!n, he rents a house or bu"s a car or consults a doctor asthese acts involve his 8no!led$e and application of the la!s re$ulatin$ such transactions. Ifhe operates a public utilit" vehicle as his 1ain source of livelihood, he !ould still be dee1eden$a$ed in the practice of la! because he 1ust obe" the Public Service ct and the rulesand re$ulations of the Ener$" Re$ulator" 5oard.

'heponencia6uotes an 1erican decision definin$ the practice of la! as the 9perfor1ance

of an" acts ... in or out of court, co11onl" understood to be the practice of la!,9 !hich tellsus absolutel" nothin$. 'he decision $oes on to sa" that 9because la!"ers perfor1 al1ostever" function 8no!n in the co11ercial and $overn1ental real1, such a definition !ouldobviousl" be too $lobal to be !or8able.9

'he effect of the definition $iven in theponenciais to consider virtuall" ever" la!"er to been$a$ed in the practice of la! even if he does not earn his livin$, or at least part of it, as ala!"er. It is enou$h that his activities are incidentall" even if onl" re1otel"- connected !ithso1e la!, ordinance, or re$ulation. 'he possible e&ception is the la!"er !hose inco1e isderived fro1 teachin$ ballroo1 dancin$ or escortin$ !rin8led ladies !ith pubescentpretensions.

'he respondent%s credentials are i1pressive, to be sure, but the" do not persuade 1e that

he has been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for ten "ears as re6uired b" the Constitution. It isconceded that he has been en$a$ed in business and finance, in !hich areas he hasdistin$uished hi1self, but as an e&ecutive and econo1ist and not as a practicin$ la!"er. 'heplain fact is that he has occupied the various positions listed in his resu1e b" virtue of hise&perience and presti$e as a business1an and not as an attorne"#at#la! !hose principalattention is focused on the la!. Even if it be ar$ued that he !as actin$ as a la!"er !hen helobbied in Con$ress for a$rarian and urban refor1, served in the NMFRE and theConstitutional Co11ission to$ether !ith non#la!"ers li8e far1ers and priests- and !as a1e1ber of the Davide Co11ission, he has not proved that his activities in these capacitiese&tended over the prescribed (=#"ear period of actual practice of the la!. 3e is doubtlesse1inentl" 6ualified for 1an" other positions !orth" of his abundant talents but not asChair1an of the Co11ission on Elections.

I have 1uch ad1iration for respondent Monsod, no less than for Mr. @ustice Paras, but I1ust re$retfull" vote to $rant the petition.

GUTIERRE, JR., J., dissentin$0

hen this petition !as filed, there !as hope that en$a$in$ in the practice of la! as a6ualification for public office !ould be settled one !a" or another in fairl" definitive ter1s.nfortunatel", this !as not the result.


20/35

Of the fourteen (>- 1e1ber Court, < are of the vie! that Mr. Christian Monsod en$a$ed inthe practice of la! !ith one of these < leavin$ his vote behind !hile on official leave but note&pressin$ his clear stand on the 1atter-? > cate$oricall" statin$ that he did not practice la!?: votin$ in the result because there !as no error so $ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse ofdiscretion? one of official leave !ith no instructions left behind on ho! he vie!ed the issue?and : not ta8in$ part in the deliberations and the decision.

'here are t!o 8e" factors that 1a8e our tas8 difficult. First is our revie!in$ the !or8 of aconstitutional Co11ission on ppoint1ents !hose dut" is precisel" to loo8 into the6ualifications of persons appointed to hi$h office. Even if the Co11ission errs, !e have nopo!er to set aside error. e can loo8 onl" into $rave abuse of discretion or !hi1sicall" andarbitrariness. Second is our belief that Mr. Monsod possesses superior 6ualifications in ter1sof e&ecutive abilit", proficienc" in 1ana$e1ent, educational bac8$round, e&perience ininternational ban8in$ and finance, and instant reco$nition b" the public. 3is inte$rit" andco1petence are not 6uestioned b" the petitioner. hat is before us is co1pliance !ith aspecific re6uire1ent !ritten into the Constitution.

Inspite of 1" hi$h re$ard for Mr. Monsod, I cannot shir8 1" constitutional dut". 3e has never

en$a$ed in the practice of la! for even one "ear. 3e is a 1e1ber of the bar but to sa" thathe has practiced la! is stretchin$ the ter1 be"ond rational li1its.

person 1a" have passed the bar e&a1inations. "ut if he has not dedicated his life to thelaw, if he has not en!a!ed in an actiity where )e)bership in the bar is a reuire)entI failto see ho! he can clai1 to have been en$a$ed in the practice of la!.

En$a$in$ in the practice of la! is a 6ualification not onl" for COMEEC chair1an but also forappoint1ent to the Supre1e Court and all lo!er courts. hat 8ind of @ud$es or @ustices !ill!e have if there 1ain occupation is sellin$ real estate, 1ana$in$ a business corporation,servin$ in fact#findin$ co11ittee, !or8in$ in 1edia, or operatin$ a far1 !ith no activeinvolve1ent in the la!, !hether in overn1ent or private practice, e&cept that in one 4o"ful1o1ent in the distant past, the" happened to pass the bar e&a1inationsH

'he Constitution uses the phrase 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears.9 'hedeliberate choice of !ords sho!s that the practice envisioned is active and re$ular, notisolated, occasional, accidental, inter1ittent, incidental, seasonal, or e&te1poraneous. 'o be9en$a$ed9 in an activit" for ten "ears re6uires co11itted participation in so1ethin$ !hich isthe result of one%s decisive choice. It 1eans that one is occupied and involved in theenterprise? one is obli$ed or pled$ed to carr" it out !ith intent and attention durin$ the ten#"ear period.

I a$ree !ith the petitioner that based on the bio#data sub1itted b" respondent Monsod to theCo11ission on ppoint1ents, the latter has not been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for atleast ten "ears. In fact, if appears that Mr. Monsod has never practiced la! e&cept for an

alle$ed one "ear period after passin$ the bar e&a1inations !hen he !or8ed in his father%sla! fir1. Even then his la! practice 1ust have been e&tre1el" li1ited because he !as also!or8in$ for M.. and Ph. D. de$rees in Econo1ics at the niversit" of Penns"lvania durin$that period. 3o! could he practice la! in the nited States !hile not a 1e1ber of the 5arthereH

'he professional life of the respondent follo!s0


21/35

(.(


22/35

f. Manila Electric Co1pan"

$. Philippine Co11ercial Capital, Inc.

h. Philippine Electric Corporation

i. 'arlac Reforestation and Environ1ent Enterprises

4. 'olon$ 6uaculture Corporation

8. Visa"an 6uaculture Corporation

l. ui1aras 6uaculture Corporation Rollo, pp. :(#::-

'here is nothin$ in the above bio#data !hich even re1otel" indicates that respondentMonsod has $iven the lawenou$h attention or a certain de$ree of co11it1ent andparticipation as !ould support in all sincerit" and candor the clai1 of havin$ en$a$ed in itspractice for at least ten "ears. Instead of !or8in$ as a la!"er, he has la!"ers !or8in$ forhi1. Instead of $ivin$ receivin$ that le$al advice of le$al services, he !as the oneadvice andthose services as an e&ecutive but not as a la!"er.

'he deliberations before the Co11ission on ppoint1ents sho! an effort to e6uate9en$a$ed in the practice of la!9 !ith the use of le$al 8no!led$e in various fields of endeavorsuch as co11erce, industr", civic !or8, blue ribbon investi$ations, a$rarian refor1, etc.!here such 8no!led$e !ould be helpful.

I re$ret that I cannot 4oin in pla"in$ fast and loose !ith a ter1, !hich even an ordinar"la"1an accepts as havin$ a fa1iliar and custo1ar" !ell#defined 1eanin$. Ever" resident ofthis countr" !ho has reached the a$e of discern1ent has to 8no!, follo!, or appl" the la! atvarious ti1es in his life. e$al 8no!led$e is useful if not necessar" for the business

e&ecutive, le$islator, 1a"or, baran$a" captain, teacher, police1an, far1er, fisher1an,1ar8et vendor, and student to na1e onl" a fe!. nd "et, can these people honestl" assertthat as such, the" are en$a$ed in the practice of la!H

'he Constitution re6uires havin$ been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears.9It is not satisfied !ith havin$ been 9a 1e1ber of the Philippine bar for at least ten "ears.9

So1e 1erican courts have defined the practice of la!, as follo!s0

'he practice of la! involves not onl" appearance in court in connection !ithliti$ation but also services rendered out of court, and it includes the $ivin$ ofadvice or the renderin$ of an" services re6uirin$ the use of le$al s8ill or

8no!led$e, such as preparin$ a !ill, contract or other instru1ent, the le$aleffect of !hich, under the facts and conditions involved, 1ust be carefull"deter1ined. (eople e' rel. Chica!o "ar Ass$n . &in#off, 7)) Ill. :*:, ++N.E.:d ;)7? (eople e' rel. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . (eople$s Stoc# 3ardsState "an#, 7>> Ill. >;:,(+; N.E. )=(, and cases cited.

It !ould be difficult, if not i1possible to la" do!n a for1ula or definition of!hat constitutes the practice of la!. 9Practicin$ la!9 has been defined as9Practicin$ as an attorne" or counselor at la! accordin$ to the la!s and


23/35

custo1s of our courts, is the $ivin$ of advice or rendition of an" sort ofservice b" an" person, fir1 or corporation !hen the $ivin$ of such advice orrendition of such service re6uires the use of an" de$ree of le$al 8no!led$eor s8ill.9 ithout adoptin$ that definition, !e referred to it as bein$substantiall" correct in (eople e' rel. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . (eople$sStoc# 3ards State "an#, 7>> Ill. >;:,(+; N.E. )=(. People v. Schafer, *+

N.E. :d ++7, ++;-

For one%s actions to co1e !ithin the purvie! ofpractice of lawthe" should not onl" beactivities peculiar to the !or8 of a la!"er, the" should also be perfor1ed, habituall",fre6uentl" or custo1aril", to !it0

&&& &&& &&&

Respondent%s ans!ers to 6uestions propounded to hi1 !ere rather evasive.3e !as as8ed !hether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties inreal#estate transactions !here he !as not the procurin$ a$ent. 3e ans!ered09Ver" seldo1.9 In ans!er to the 6uestion as to ho! 1an" ti1es he had

prepared contracts for the parties durin$ the t!ent"#one "ears of hisbusiness, he said0 9I have no Idea.9 hen as8ed if it !ould be 1ore than halfa do2en ti1es his ans!er !as I suppose. s8ed if he did not recall 1a8in$the state1ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a lar$enu1ber of instances, he ans!ered0 9I don%t recall e&actl" !hat !as said.9hen as8ed if he did not re1e1ber sa"in$ that he had 1ade a practice ofpreparin$ deeds, 1ort$a$es and contracts and char$in$ a fee to the partiestherefor in instances !here he !as not the bro8er in the deal, he ans!ered09ell, I don%t believe so, that is not a practice.9 Pressed further for an ans!eras to his practice in preparin$ contracts and deeds for parties !here he !asnot the bro8er, he finall" ans!ered0 9I have done about ever"thin$ that is onthe boo8s as far as real estate is concerned.9

&&& &&& &&&

Respondent ta8es the position that because he is a real#estate bro8er he hasa la!ful ri$ht to do an" le$al !or8 in connection !ith real#estate transactions,especiall" in dra!in$ of real#estate contracts, deeds, 1ort$a$es, notes andthe li8e. 'here is no doubt but that he has en$a$ed in these practices overthe "ears and has char$ed for his services in that connection. ... People v.Schafer, *+ N.E. :d ++7-

&&& &&& &&&

... n attorne", in the 1ost $eneral sense, is a person desi$nated or

e1plo"ed b" another to act in his stead? an a$ent? 1ore especiall", one of aclass of persons authori2ed to appear and act for suitors or defendants inle$al proceedin$s. Strictl", these professional persons are attorne"s at la!,and non#professional a$ents are properl" st"led 9attorne"%s in fact?9 but thesin$le !ord is 1uch used as 1eanin$ an attorne" at la!. person 1a" bean attorne" in facto for another, !ithout bein$ an attorne" at la!. bb. a!Dict. 9ttorne".9 public attorne", or attorne" at la!, sa"s ebster, is anofficer of a court of la!, le$all" 6ualified to prosecute and defend actions insuch court on the retainerof clients. 9'he principal duties of an attorne" are


24/35

(- to be true to the court and to his client? :- to 1ana$e the business of hisclient !ith care, s8ill, and inte$rit"? 7- to 8eep his client infor1ed as to thestate of his business? >- to 8eep his secrets confided to hi1 as such. ... 3isri$hts are to be 4ustl" co1pensated for his services.9 5ouv. a! Dict. tit.9ttorne".9 &he transitie erb practice, as defined by 0ebster, )eans $todo or perfor) freuently, custo)arily, or habitually2 to perfor) by a

succession of acts, as, to practice !a)in!, ... to carry on in practice, orrepeated action2 to apply, as a theory, to real life2 to e'ercise, as a

profession, trade, art. etc.2 as, to practice lawor 1edicine,% etc....9 State v.5r"an, S.E. , >: R, M.S. +;*-. Practice of la! to fall !ithin theprohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self outto the public, as a la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services. ... . at p. ((:-

It is to be noted that the Co11ission on ppoint1ent itself reco$ni2es habitualityas are6uired co1ponent of the 1eanin$ of practice of la! in a Me1orandu1 prepared andissued b" it, to !it0

l. abituality. 'he ter1 %practice of la!% i1plies custo1aril"or habituall"holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er People v. Villanueva, (>SCR (=) citin$ State v. 5r"an, > S.E. >- such as !hen onesends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneralpractice of la! .S. v. No" 5os6ue, * Phil. (>;-, or !hen one ta8es the oathof office as a la!"er before a notar" public, and files a 1anifestation !ith theSupre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in thecountr" People v. De una, (=: Phil. );*-.

Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance, for it consists in fre6uent orcusto1ar" action, a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. In other !ords, it isa habitual e&ercise People v. Villanueva, (> SCR ( =) citin$ State v.Cotner, ( :+, p. (, *+ an, *;>-.9 Rollo, p. ((


25/35

transactions are not !ithin the conte&t of doin$ business. 'his !as our rulin$ in the caseofAnta) Consolidated, +nc. . Court of appeals,(>7 SCR :** A()*;B-.

Respondent Monsod, corporate e&ecutive, civic leader, and 1e1ber of the ConstitutionalCo11ission 1a" possess the bac8$round, co1petence, inte$rit", and dedication, to 6ualif"for such hi$h offices as President, Vice#President, Senator, Con$ress1an or overnor but

the Constitution in prescribin$ the specific 6ualification of havin$ en$a$ed in the practice ofla! for at least ten (=- "ears for the position of COMEEC Chair1an has ordered that he1a" not be confir1ed for that office. 'he Constitution char$es the public respondents noless than this Court to obe" its 1andate.

I, therefore, believe that the Co11ission on ppoint1ents co11itted $rave abuse ofdiscretion in confir1in$ the no1ination of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of theCOMEEC.

I vote to RN' the petition.

"idin, J., dissent

Sep"r"te Op%#%o#'

NARASA, J., concurrin$0

I concur !ith the decision of the 1a4orit" !ritten b" Mr. @ustice Paras, albeit onl" in the result?it does not appear to 1e that there has been an ade6uate sho!in$ that the challen$eddeter1ination b" the Co11ission on ppoint1ents#that the appoint1ent of respondentMonsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections should, on the basis of his stated6ualifications and after due assess1ent thereof, be confir1ed#!as attended b" error so

$ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse of discretion and conse6uentl" 1erits nullification b" thisCourt in accordance !ith the second para$raph of Section (, rticle VIII of the Constitution. Itherefore vote to DEN the petition.

Melencio-errera, J., concur.

PADI!!A, J., dissentin$0

'he records of this case !ill sho! that !hen the Court first deliberated on the Petition at bar,I voted not onl" to re6uire the respondents to co11ent on the Petition, but I !as the solevote for the issuance of a te1porar" restrainin$ order to en4oin respondent Monsod fro1assu1in$ the position of COMEEC Chair1an, !hile the Court deliberated on his

constitutional 6ualification for the office. M" purpose in votin$ for a 'RO !as to prevent theinconvenience and even e1barrass1ent to all parties concerned !ere the Court to finall"decide for respondent Monsod%s dis6ualification. Moreover, a readin$ of the Petition then inrelation to established 4urisprudence alread" sho!edpri)a faciethat respondent Monsoddid not possess the needed 6ualification, that is, he had not en$a$ed in the practice of la!for at least ten (=- "ears prior to his appoint1ent as COMEEC Chair1an.


26/35

fter considerin$ carefull" respondent Monsod%s co11ent, I a1 even 1ore convinced thatthe constitutional re6uire1ent of 9practice of law for at least ten ?9, >: R,M.S. +;*-. Practice of la! to fall !ithin the prohibition of statute has beeninterpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public asa la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services State vs. 5r"an, > S.E.>,;>+.- ... e1phasis supplied-.

It is !orth 1entionin$ that the respondent Co11ission on ppoint1ents in a Me1orandu1 it

prepared, enu1erated several factors deter1inative of !hether a particular activit"constitutes 9practice of la!.9 It states0

(. abituality. 'he ter1 9practice of la!9 i1plies custo1aril" or habituall"holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er People vs. Villanueva, (>SCR (=) citin$ State v. 5o"en, > S.E. >- such as !hen onesends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneralpractice of la! .S. v. Ne" 5os6ue, * Phil. (>;-, or !hen one ta8es the oathof office as a la!"er before a notar" public, and files a 1anifestation !ith the


27/35

Supre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in thecountr" People v. De una, (=: Phil. );*-.

Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre6uent orcusto1ar" action, a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. In other !ords, it isa habitual e&ercise People v. Villanueva, (> SCR (=) citin$ State v.

Cotner, (:+, p. (, *+ an, *;>-.

:. Co)pensation. Practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust have presentedhi1self to be in the active and continued practice of the le$al profession andthat his professional services are available to the public for co1pensation, asa service of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. People v.Villanueva, supra-. 3ence, char$in$ for services such as preparation ofdocu1ents involvin$ the use of le$al 8no!led$e and s8ill is !ithin the ter19practice of la!9 Ernani Pao, 5ar Revie!er in e$al and @udicial Ethics,()** ed., p. * citin$ People v. People%s Stoc8"ards State 5an8, (+; N.5.)=(- and, one !ho renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of astatute, and receives pa" for it, is to that e&tent, practicin$ la! Martin, supra,

p. *=; citin$ Mendelaun v. ilbert and 5ar8et Mf$. Co., :)= N..S. >;:- Ifco1pensation is e&pected, all advice to clients and all action ta8en for the1in 1atters connected !ith the la!? are practicin$ la!. El!ood Fitchette et al.,v. rthur C. 'a"lor, )>#.R. 7


28/35

hile it 1a" be $ranted that he perfor1ed tas8s and activities !hich could be latitudinarianl"considered activities peculiar to the practice of la!, li8e the draftin$ of le$al docu1ents andthe renderin$ of le$al opinion or advice, such !ere isolated transactions or activities !hichdo not 6ualif" his past endeavors as 9practice of la!.9 'o beco1e en$a$ed in the practice ofla!, there 1ust be a continuity, or a succession of acts. s observed b" the Solicitor eneralin (eople s. Dillanuea0 /

Essentiall", the !ord private practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust havepresented hi1self to be in theactieand continued practice of the le!al

professionand that his professional services are available to the public for aco1pensation, as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his saidservices.

CCORDIN, 1" vote is to RN' the petition and to declare respondent Monsod asnot 6ualified for the position of COMEEC Chair1an for not havin$ en$a$ed in the practiceof la! for at least ten (=- "ears prior to his appoint1ent to such position.

CRU, J., dissentin$0

I a1 sincerel" i1pressed b" theponenciaof 1" brother Paras but find I 1ust dissent 4ust thesa1e. 'here are certain points on !hich I 1ust differ !ith hi1 !hile of course respectin$hisvie!point.

'o be$in !ith, I do not thin8 !e are inhibited fro1 e&a1inin$ the 6ualifications of therespondent si1pl" because his no1ination has been confir1ed b" the Co11ission on

ppoint1ents. In 1" vie!, this is not a political 6uestion that !e are barred fro1 resolvin$.Deter1ination of the appointee%s credentials is 1ade on the basis of the established facts,not the discretion of that bod". Even if it !ere, the e&ercise of that discretion !ould still besub4ect to our revie!.

In Lue!o, !hich is cited in theponencia, !hat !as involved !as the discretion of theappointin$ authorit" to choosebet!een t!o clai1ants to the sa1e office !ho both possessedthe re6uired 6ualifications. It !as that 8ind of discretion that !e said could not be revie!ed.

If a person elected b" no less than the soverei$n people 1a" be ousted b" this Court for lac8of the re6uired 6ualifications, I see no reason !h" !e cannot dis6ualified an appointeesi1pl" because he has passed the Co11ission on ppoint1ents.

Even the President of the Philippines 1a" be declared ineli$ible b" this Court in anappropriate proceedin$ not!ithstandin$ that he has been found acceptable b" no less thanthe enfranchised citi2enr". 'he reason is that !hat !e !ould be e&a1inin$ is notthe wisdo)of his election but !hether or not he !as 6ualified to be elected in the first place.

Co1in$ no! to the 6ualifications of the private respondent, I fear that theponencia1a"have been too s!eepin$ in its definition of the phrase 9practice of la!9 as to render the6ualification practicall" toothless. Fro1 the nu1erous activities accepted as e1braced in theter1, I have the unco1fortable feelin$ that one does not even have to be a la!"er to been$a$ed in the practice of la! as lon$ as his activities involve the application of so1e la!,ho!ever peripherall". 'he stoc8 bro8er and the insurance ad4uster and the realtor couldco1e under the definition as the" deal !ith or $ive advice on 1atters that are li8el" 9tobeco1e involved in liti$ation.9


29/35

'he la!"er is considered en$a$ed in the practice of la! even if his 1ain occupation isanother business and he interprets and applies so1e la! onl" as an incident of suchbusiness. 'hat covers ever" co1pan" or$ani2ed under the Corporation Code and re$ulatedb" the SEC under P.D. )=:#. Considerin$ the ra1ifications of the 1odern societ", there ishardl" an" activit" that is not affected b" so1e la! or $overn1ent re$ulation thebusiness1an 1ust 8no! about and observe. In fact, a$ain $oin$ b" the definition, a la!"er

does not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner. 3e canbe so dee1ed !hen, on his o!n, he rents a house or bu"s a car or consults a doctor asthese acts involve his 8no!led$e and application of the la!s re$ulatin$ such transactions. Ifhe operates a public utilit" vehicle as his 1ain source of livelihood, he !ould still be dee1eden$a$ed in the practice of la! because he 1ust obe" the Public Service ct and the rulesand re$ulations of the Ener$" Re$ulator" 5oard.

'heponencia6uotes an 1erican decision definin$ the practice of la! as the 9perfor1anceof an" acts . . . in or out of court, co11onl" understood to be the practice of la!,9 !hich tellsus absolutel" nothin$. 'he decision $oes on to sa" that 9because la!"ers perfor1 al1ostever" function 8no!n in the co11ercial and $overn1ental real1, such a definition !ouldobviousl" be too $lobal to be !or8able.9

'he effect of the definition $iven in theponenciais to consider virtuall" ever" la!"er to been$a$ed in the practice of la! even if he does not earn his livin$, or at least part of it, as ala!"er. It is enou$h that his activities are incidentall" even if onl" re1otel"- connected !ithso1e la!, ordinance, or re$ulation. 'he possible e&ception is the la!"er !hose inco1e isderived fro1 teachin$ ballroo1 dancin$ or escortin$ !rin8led ladies !ith pubescentpretensions.

'he respondent%s credentials are i1pressive, to be sure, but the" do not persuade 1e thathe has been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for ten "ears as re6uired b" the Constitution. It isconceded that he has been en$a$ed in business and finance, in !hich areas he hasdistin$uished hi1self, but as an e&ecutive and econo1ist and not as a practicin$ la!"er. 'heplain fact is that he has occupied the various positions listed in his resu1e b" virtue of his

e&perience and presti$e as a business1an and not as an attorne"#at#la! !hose principalattention is focused on the la!. Even if it be ar$ued that he !as actin$ as a la!"er !hen helobbied in Con$ress for a$rarian and urban refor1, served in the NMFRE and theConstitutional Co11ission to$ether !ith non#la!"ers li8e far1ers and priests- and !as a1e1ber of the Davide Co11ission, he has not proved that his activities in these capacitiese&tended over the prescribed (=#"ear period of actual practice of the la!. 3e is doubtlesse1inentl" 6ualified for 1an" other positions !orth" of his abundant talents but not asChair1an of the Co11ission on Elections.

I have 1uch ad1iration for respondent Monsod, no less than for Mr. @ustice Paras, but I1ust re$retfull" vote to $rant the petition.

GUTIERRE, JR., J., dissentin$0

hen this petition !as filed, there !as hope that en$a$in$ in the practice of la! as a6ualification for public office !ould be settled one !a" or another in fairl" definitive ter1s.nfortunatel", this !as not the result.

Of the fourteen (>- 1e1ber Court, < are of the vie! that Mr. Christian Monsod en$a$ed inthe practice of la! !ith one of these < leavin$ his vote behind !hile on official leave but note&pressin$ his clear stand on the 1atter-? > cate$oricall" statin$ that he did not practice la!?


30/35

: votin$ in the result because there !as no error so $ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse ofdiscretion? one of official leave !ith no instructions left behind on ho! he vie!ed the issue?and : not ta8in$ part in the deliberations and the decision.

'here are t!o 8e" factors that 1a8e our tas8 difficult. First is our revie!in$ the !or8 of aconstitutional Co11ission on ppoint1ents !hose dut" is precisel" to loo8 into the

6ualifications of persons appointed to hi$h office. Even if the Co11ission errs, !e have nopo!er to set aside error. e can loo8 onl" into $rave abuse of discretion or !hi1sicall" andarbitrariness. Second is our belief that Mr. Monsod possesses superior 6ualifications in ter1sof e&ecutive abilit", proficienc" in 1ana$e1ent, educational bac8$round, e&perience ininternational ban8in$ and finance, and instant reco$nition b" the public. 3is inte$rit" andco1petence are not 6uestioned b" the petitioner. hat is before us is co1pliance !ith aspecific re6uire1ent !ritten into the Constitution.

Inspite of 1" hi$h re$ard for Mr. Monsod, I cannot shir8 1" constitutional dut". 3e has neveren$a$ed in the practice of la! for even one "ear. 3e is a 1e1ber of the bar but to sa" thathe has practiced la! is stretchin$ the ter1 be"ond rational li1its.

person 1a" have passed the bar e&a1inations. "ut if he has not dedicated his life to thelaw, if he has not en!a!ed in an actiity where )e)bership in the bar is a reuire)entI failto see ho! he can clai1 to have been en$a$ed in the practice of la!.

En$a$in$ in the practice of la! is a 6ualification not onl" for COMEEC chair1an but also forappoint1ent to the Supre1e Court and all lo!er courts. hat 8ind of @ud$es or @ustices !ill!e have if there 1ain occupation is sellin$ real estate, 1ana$in$ a business corporation,servin$ in fact#findin$ co11ittee, !or8in$ in 1edia, or operatin$ a far1 !ith no activeinvolve1ent in the la!, !hether in overn1ent or private practice, e&cept that in one 4o"ful1o1ent in the distant past, the" happened to pass the bar e&a1inationsH

'he Constitution uses the phrase 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears.9 'hedeliberate choice of !ords sho!s that the practice envisioned is active and re$ular, notisolated, occasional, accidental, inter1ittent, incidental, seasonal, or e&te1poraneous. 'o be9en$a$ed9 in an activit" for ten "ears re6uires co11itted participation in so1ethin$ !hich isthe result of one%s decisive choice. It 1eans that one is occupied and involved in theenterprise? one is obli$ed or pled$ed to carr" it out !ith intent and attention durin$ the ten#"ear period.

I a$ree !ith the petitioner that based on the bio#data sub1itted b" respondent Monsod to theCo11ission on ppoint1ents, the latter has not been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for atleast ten "ears. In fact, if appears that Mr. Monsod has never practiced la! e&cept for analle$ed one "ear period after passin$ the bar e&a1inations !hen he !or8ed in his father%sla! fir1. Even then his la! practice 1ust have been e&tre1el" li1ited because he !as also!or8in$ for M.. and Ph. D. de$rees in Econo1ics at the niversit" of Penns"lvania durin$

that period. 3o! could he practice la! in the nited States !hile not a 1e1ber of the 5arthereH

'he professional life of the respondent follo!s0

(.(


31/35

(. ();(#();70 M.. in Econo1ics Ph. D. candidate-, niversit" ofPenns"lvania

:. ();7#()+=0 orld 5an8 roup J Econo1ist, Industr" Depart1ent?Operations, atin 1erican Depart1ent? Division Chief, South sia andMiddle East, International Finance Corporation

7. ()+=#()+70 Meralco roup J E&ecutive of various co1panies, i.e.,Meralco Securities Corporation, Philippine Petroleu1 Corporation, PhilippineElectric Corporation

>. ()+7#()+;0 u4uico roup J President, Fil#Capital Develop1entCorporation and affiliated co1panies


32/35

$. Philippine Co11ercial Capital, Inc.

h. Philippine Electric Corporation

i. 'arlac Reforestation and Environ1ent Enterprises

4. 'olon$ 6uaculture Corporation

8. Visa"an 6uaculture Corporation

l. ui1aras 6uaculture Corporation Rollo, pp. :(#::-

'here is nothin$ in the above bio#data !hich even re1otel" indicates that respondentMonsod has $iven the lawenou$h attention or a certain de$ree of co11it1ent andparticipation as !ould support in all sincerit" and candor the clai1 of havin$ en$a$ed in itspractice for at least ten "ears. Instead of !or8in$ as a la!"er, he has la!"ers !or8in$ forhi1. Instead of $ivin$ receivin$ that le$al advice of le$al services, he !as the oneadvice andthose services as an e&ecutive but not as a la!"er.

'he deliberations before the Co11ission on ppoint1ents sho! an effort to e6uate9en$a$ed in the practice of la!9 !ith the use of le$al 8no!led$e in various fields of endeavorsuch as co11erce, industr", civic !or8, blue ribbon investi$ations, a$rarian refor1, etc.!here such 8no!led$e !ould be helpful.

I re$ret that I cannot 4oin in pla"in$ fast and loose !ith a ter1, !hich even an ordinar"la"1an accepts as havin$ a fa1iliar and custo1ar" !ell#defined 1eanin$. Ever" resident ofthis countr" !ho has reached the a$e of discern1ent has to 8no!, follo!, or appl" the la! atvarious ti1es in his life. e$al 8no!led$e is useful if not necessar" for the businesse&ecutive, le$islator, 1a"or, baran$a" captain, teacher, police1an, far1er, fisher1an,1ar8et vendor, and student to na1e onl" a fe!. nd "et, can these people honestl" assert

that as such, the" are en$a$ed in the practice of la!H

'he Constitution re6uires havin$ been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears.9It is not satisfied !ith havin$ been 9a 1e1ber of the Philippine bar for at least ten "ears.9

So1e 1erican courts have defined the practice of la!, as follo!s0

'he practice of la! involves not onl" appearance in court in connection !ithliti$ation but also services rendered out of court, and it includes the $ivin$ ofadvice or the renderin$ of an" services re6uirin$ the use of le$al s8ill or8no!led$e, such as preparin$ a !ill, contract or other instru1ent, the le$aleffect of !hich, under the facts and conditions involved, 1ust be carefull"

deter1ined. (eople e' rel. Chica!o "ar Ass$n . &in#off, 7)) Ill. :*:, ++N.E.:d ;)7? (eople e' rel. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . (eople$s Stoc# 3ardsState "an#, 7>> Ill. >;:,(+; N.E. )=(, and cases cited.

It !ould be difficult, if not i1possible to la" do!n a for1ula or definition of!hat constitutes the practice of la!. 9Practicin$ la!9 has been defined as9Practicin$ as an attorne" or counselor at la! accordin$ to the la!s andcusto1s of our courts, is the $ivin$ of advice or rendition of an" sort ofservice b" an" person, fir1 or corporation !hen the $ivin$ of such advice or


33/35

rendition of such service re6uires the use of an" de$ree of le$al 8no!led$eor s8ill.9 ithout adoptin$ that definition, !e referred to it as bein$substantiall" correct in (eople e' rel. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . (eople$sStoc# 3ards State "an#, 7>> Ill. >;:,(+; N.E. )=(. People v. Schafer, *+N.E. :d ++7, ++;-

For one%s actions to co1e !ithin the purvie! ofpractice of lawthe" should not onl" beactivities peculiar to the !or8 of a la!"er, the" should also be perfor1ed, habituall",fre6uentl" or custo1aril", to !it0

&&& &&& &&&

Respondent%s ans!ers to 6uestions propounded to hi1 !ere rather evasive.3e !as as8ed !hether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties inreal#estate transactions !here he !as not the procurin$ a$ent. 3e ans!ered09Ver" seldo1.9 In ans!er to the 6uestion as to ho! 1an" ti1es he hadprepared contracts for the parties durin$ the t!ent"#one "ears of hisbusiness, he said0 9I have no Idea.9 hen as8ed if it !ould be 1ore than half

a do2en ti1es his ans!er !as I suppose. s8ed if he did not recall 1a8in$the state1ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a lar$enu1ber of instances, he ans!ered0 9I don%t recall e&actl" !hat !as said.9hen as8ed if he did not re1e1ber sa"in$ that he had 1ade a practice ofpreparin$ deeds, 1ort$a$es and contracts and char$in$ a fee to the partiestherefor in instances !here he !as not the bro8er in the deal, he ans!ered09ell, I don%t believe so, that is not a practice.9 Pressed further for an ans!eras to his practice in preparin$ contracts and deeds for parties !here he !asnot the bro8er, he finall" ans!ered0 9I have done about ever"thin$ that is onthe boo8s as far as real estate is concerned.9

&&& &&& &&&

Respondent ta8es the position that because he is a real#estate bro8er he hasa la!ful ri$ht to do an" le$al !or8 in connection !ith real#estate transactions,especiall" in dra!in$ of real#estate contracts, deeds, 1ort$a$es, notes andthe li8e. 'here is no doubt but that he has en$a$ed in these practices overthe "ears and has char$ed for his services in that connection. ... People v.Schafer, *+ N.E. :d ++7-

&&& &&& &&&

... n attorne", in the 1ost $eneral sense, is a person desi$nated ore1plo"ed b" another to act in his stead? an a$ent? 1ore especiall", one of aclass of persons authori2ed to appear and act for suitors or defendants in

le$al proceedin$s. Strictl", these professional persons are attorne"s at la!,and non#professional a$ents are properl" st"led 9attorne"%s in fact?9 but thesin$le !ord is 1uch used as 1eanin$ an attorne" at la!. person 1a" bean attorne" in facto for another, !ithout bein$ an attorne" at la!. bb. a!Dict. 9ttorne".9 public attorne", or attorne" at la!, sa"s ebster, is anofficer of a court of la!, le$all" 6ualified to prosecute and defend actions insuch court on the retainerof clients. 9'he principal duties of an attorne" are(- to be true to the court and to his client? :- to 1ana$e the business of hisclient !ith care, s8ill, and inte$rit"? 7- to 8eep his client infor1ed as to the


34/35

state of his business? >- to 8eep his secrets confided to hi1 as such. ... 3isri$hts are to be 4ustl" co1pensated for his services.9 5ouv. a! Dict. tit.9ttorne".9 &he transitie erb practice, as defined by 0ebster, )eans $todo or perfor) freuently, custo)arily, or habitually2 to perfor) by asuccession of acts, as, to practice !a)in!, ... to carry on in practice, orrepeated action2 to apply, as a theory, to real life2 to e'ercise, as a

profession, trade, art. etc.2 as, to practice lawor 1edicine,% etc....9 State v.5r"an, S.E. , >: R, M.S. +;*-. Practice of la! to fall !ithin theprohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out

to the public, as a la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services. ... . at p. ((:-

It is to be noted that the Co11ission on ppoint1ent itself reco$ni2es habitualityas are6uired co1ponent of the 1eanin$ of practice of la! in a Me1orandu1 prepared andissued b" it, to !it0

l. abituality. 'he ter1 %practice of la!% i1plies custo1aril"or habituall"holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er People v. Villanueva, (>SCR (=) citin$ State v. 5r"an, > S.E. >- such as !hen onesends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneralpractice of la! .S. v. No" 5os6ue, * Phil. (>;-, or !hen one ta8es the oathof office as a la!"er before a notar" public, and files a 1anifestation !ith theSupre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in thecountr" People v. De una, (=: Phil. );*-.

Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance, for it consists in fre6uent orcusto1ar" action, a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. In other !ords, it isa habitual e&ercise People v. Villanueva, (> SCR ( =) citin$ State v.Cotner, ( :+, p. (, *+ an, *;>-.9 Rollo, p. ((


35/35

Respondent Monsod, corporate e&ecutive, civic leader, and 1e1ber of the ConstitutionalCo11ission 1a" possess the bac8$round, co1petence, inte$rit", and dedication, to 6ualif"for such hi$h offices as President, Vice#President, Senator, Con$ress1an or overnor butthe Constitution in prescribin$ the specific 6ualification of havin$ en$a$ed in the practice ofla! for at least ten (=- "ears for the position of COMEEC Chair1an has ordered that he1a" not be confir1ed for that office. 'he Constitution char$es the public respondents no

less than this Court to obe" its 1andate.

I, therefore, believe that the Co11ission on ppoint1ents co11itted $rave abuse ofdiscretion in confir1in$ the no1ination of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of theCOMEEC.

I vote to RN' the petition.

"idin, J., dissent

oot#ote'

( ebster%s 7rd Ne! International Dictionar".

: (> SCR (=)

7 Co11ission on ppoint1ents% Me1orandu1 dated :< @une ())( RE03' CONS'I''ES PRC'ICE OF , pp. ;#+.

> (> SCR (=).

Christian Monsod

Documents

Transcript of Christian Monsod