2. Admission to the Bar (Rule 138, as amended by AM 24- 10-05-SC)

Who may practice law?

Any person heretofore duly admitted as a member of the bar, or hereafter admitted as such in accordance with the provisions of the rule, and who is in good and regular standing, is entiled to practice law. (Sec. 1, Rule 138, Rules of Court)

Requirements for admission to the Bar

Under Sections 2, 5 and 6 of Rule 138, the applicant must be

• Citizen of the Philippines;
• At least 21 years of age;
• Of Good moral character;
• A resident of the Philippines;
• Must produce before the SC satisfactory evidence of good moral character;
• No charges against him, involving mora turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any court of the Philippines (Sec. 2, Rule 138, RRC)
• Must have complied with the Academic requirements: Pre-Law - 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. (Sec. 6, Rule 138, RRC) Note: Pursuant to the power of the Legal Education Board (LEB) to prescribe the minimum standards for law admission under Section 7 (e) of Republic Act No. 7662, titled “Legal Education Reform Act of 1993,” the LEB required the PhiLSAT as a prerequisite for admission to the basic law course leading to either a Bachelor of Law or Juris Doctor degree beginning school year of 2017-2018. However, in Pimentel v. LEB, LEBMC No. 18-2018 which prescribes the passing of PhiLSAT as a prerequisite for admission to law schools has been permanently enjoined by the Supreme Court. The regular admission of students who were conditionally admitted and enrolled is left to the discretion of the law schools in the exercise of their academic freedom. (2019) Law proper - satisfactorily completed the following courses 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;
• Legal ethics; and
• Clinical legal education program (Sec. 5, Rule 138, RRC)
• Pass the bar examinations;
• Take the lawyer’s oath; and
• Sign the Roll of Attorneys.

The 5-Strike Rule is LIFTED

Under the 5-strike rule, a bar candidate shall be disqualified after failing thrice; provided that the candidate may take a fourth or fifth examination if he successfully complete a one-year refresher course for each examination.

On September 3, 2013, the Supreme Court resolved to LIFT the five-strike rule on bar repeaters, provided the candidates have enrolled in and passed in regular fourth-year review classes and attended a pre-bar review course every time they the Bar Examinations after failing for the third time, under a curriculum prepared by the LEB and in law schools accredited by it for that purpose. This took effect during the 2014 Bar Examinations.

Requirements for admission of a Filipino citizen who graduated from a foreign law school

He may be admitted to the bar only upon submission to the Supreme Court certifications showing:

• Completion of all courses leading to the degree of Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent degree;
• Recognition or accreditation of the law school by the proper authority;
• Completion of all fourth-year subjects in the Bachelor of Laws academic program in a law school duly recognized by the Philippine Government; and
• Present proof of completing a separate bachelor’s degree

A Filipino citizen who completed and obtained his or her degree in Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent in a foreign law school must also present proof of completion of a separate bachelor’s degree.

Q: Ching was born in April 1964 to a Filipino mother and a Chinese father. Because of questions concerning his citizenship, he was only conditionally allowed to take the Bar Examinations. Upon passing the bar, he was required to present further proof of citizenship and was not allowed to take the Oath. Can he elect Philippine citizenship, 14 years after reaching the age of majority (required under the 1935 Constitution), and thereafter be qualified to become a lawyer?

A: NO. Ching is not qualified to be a lawyer for having elected Philippine citizenship 14 years after reaching the age of majority. Ching offered no reason why he delayed the election of Philippine citizenship. The procedure is not a tedious process. All that is required is to execute an affidavit and file the same in the nearest registry.

Q: Atty. Melendrez filed a petition to disqualify Meling from taking the bar exams and to impose disciplinary penalty as a member of the Sharia’a Bar. He alleged that in his application to take the bar, Meling failed to disclose that he has 3 pending criminal cases. Also, Meling has been using the title “Attorney” in his communications as secretary to the Mayor. Should Meling be disqualified from being admitted to the Bar?

A: YES. Meling’s deliberate silence and non-revelation of his pending criminal cases constitute concealment. The disclosure requirement is imposed to determine whether there is satisfactory evidence of good moral character of the applicant. By concealing the existence of such cases, the applicant flunks the test of fitness if the cases are ultimately proven unwarranted or insufficient to impugn or affect the good moral character of the applicant. Further, it was highly improper for Meling, as member of the Shari’a Bar, to use the title “Attorney”. Only the members of the Philippine Bar, who have obtained the necessary degree in the study of law and successfully passed the bar exams, been admitted to the IBP and remain members in good standing are authorized to practice law and thus use the title. (In Re: Disqualification of Bar Examinee Haron S. Meling, BM. . No. 1154, June 8, 2004)

Q: Argosino passed the bar examinations in 1993. The Court, however, deferred his oath taking due to his previous conviction for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide. case, which resulted in Argosino's conviction, arose from the death of a neophyte during fraternity initiation rites. Various certifications showed that he is a devout Catholic with a genuine concern for civic duties and public service. Also, it has been proven that Mr. Argosino has exerted all efforts to atone for the death of Raul. Should Argosino be allowed to take his lawyer's oath?

A: YES. 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. The Supreme Court recognizes that Argosino is not inherently of bad moral fiber given the various certifications that he is a devout Catholic with a genuine concern for civic duties and public service and that it has been proved that he has exerted all efforts to atone for the death of Raul, and the court gave him the benefit of the doubt, taking judicial notice of the general tendency of youth to be rash, temerarious and uncalculating. (Re: Petition of Al Argosino to Take the Lawyer's Oath, BM. . No. 712, March 19, 1997)