LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS FOR THE 2013 BAR EXAMINATIONS: Brilliancy Notes: In the Philippines, admission to the legal profession is a function solely vested in the Supreme Court. Paragraph 5, Section 5 of Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution provides that the Supreme Court shall have the power to – [p]romulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar… (Emphasis supplied.) In the judicial system from which ours has been evolved, the admission, suspension, disbarment and reinstatement of attorneys at law in the practice of the profession and their supervision have been disputably a judicial function and responsibility. Because of this attribute, its continuous and zealous possession and exercise by the judicial power have been demonstrated during more than six centuries, which certainly constitutes the most solid of titles. Bar examinations therefore are supervised and administered by the Supreme Court to determine whether an applicant for admission has the requisite legal learning or intellectual qualification to become a member of the Bar. Every applicant for admission as a member of the bar must be a citizen of the Philippines, at least twenty-one years of age, of good moral character, and resident of the Philippines; and must produce before the Supreme Court satisfactory evidence of good moral character, and that no charges against him, involving moral turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any court in the Philippines. The power to exclude persons from the practice of law is but a necessary incident of the power to admit persons to said practice. By constitutional precept, this power is vested exclusively in this Court. This duty it cannot abdicate just as much as it cannot unilaterally renounce jurisdiction legally invested upon it. The power of the courts to exclude unfit and unworthy members of the profession is inherent; it is a necessary incident to the proper administration of justice; it may be exercised without any special statutory authority, and in all proper cases unless positively prohibited by statute; and the power may be exercised in any manner that will give the party be disbarred a fair trial and a fair opportunity to be heard. Although it is a well settled rule that the legislature or the Supreme Court by virtue of its rule-making power may provide that certain acts or conduct shall require disbarment, the accepted doctrine is that statutes and rules merely regulate the power to disbar instead of creating it, and that such statutes (or rules) do not restrict the general powers of the court over attorneys, who are its officers, and that they may be removed for other than statutory grounds. (Citations Omitted Supreme Court Rulings) (2013 TACORDA BIDO BERNABE DE LA VEGA & NAPAY - LITUSQUEN NOTES 7825 LEGET)
Posted on: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:02:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015