TodayisMonday,October26,2015

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
ENBANC
B.M.No.1036June10,2003
DONNAMARIES.AGUIRRE,Complainant,
vs.
EDWINL.RANA,Respondent.
DECISION
CARPIO,J.:
TheCase
Before one is admitted to the Philippine Bar, he must possess the requisite moral integrity for membership in the
legal profession. Possession of moral integrity is of greater importance than possession of legal learning. The
practiceoflawisaprivilegebestowedonlyonthemorallyfit.Abarcandidatewhoismorallyunfitcannotpractice
lawevenifhepassesthebarexaminations.
TheFacts
RespondentEdwinL.Rana("respondent")wasamongthosewhopassedthe2000BarExaminations.
On21May2001,onedaybeforethescheduledmassoathtakingofsuccessfulbarexamineesasmembersofthe
Philippine Bar, complainant Donna Marie Aguirre ("complainant") filed against respondent a Petition for Denial of
Admission to the Bar. Complainant charged respondent with unauthorized practice of law, grave misconduct,
violationoflaw,andgravemisrepresentation.
TheCourtallowedrespondenttotakehisoathasamemberoftheBarduringthescheduledoathtakingon22May
2001atthePhilippineInternationalConventionCenter.However,theCourtruledthatrespondentcouldnotsignthe
RollofAttorneyspendingtheresolutionofthechargeagainsthim.Thus,respondenttookthelawyersoathonthe
scheduleddatebuthasnotsignedtheRollofAttorneysuptonow.
Complainantchargesrespondentforunauthorizedpracticeoflawandgravemisconduct.Complainantallegesthat
respondent, while not yet a lawyer, appeared as counsel for a candidate in the May 2001 elections before the
Municipal Board of Election Canvassers ("MBEC") of Mandaon, Masbate. Complainant further alleges that
respondent filed with the MBEC a pleading dated 19 May 2001 entitled Formal Objection to the Inclusion in the
Canvassing of Votes in Some Precincts for the Office of ViceMayor. In this pleading, respondent represented
himself as "counsel for and in behalf of Vice Mayoralty Candidate, George Bunan," and signed the pleading as
counselforGeorgeBunan("Bunan").
Onthechargeofviolationoflaw,complainantclaimsthatrespondentisamunicipalgovernmentemployee,beinga
secretary of the Sangguniang Bayan of Mandaon, Masbate. As such, respondent is not allowed by law to act as
counselforaclientinanycourtoradministrativebody.
Onthechargeofgravemisconductandmisrepresentation,complainantaccusesrespondentofactingascounsel
for vice mayoralty candidate George Bunan ("Bunan") without the latter engaging respondents services.
Complainant claims that respondent filed the pleading as a ploy to prevent the proclamation of the winning vice
mayoraltycandidate.
On 22 May 2001, the Court issued a resolution allowing respondent to take the lawyers oath but disallowed him
fromsigningtheRollofAttorneysuntilheisclearedofthechargesagainsthim.Inthesameresolution,theCourt
requiredrespondenttocommentonthecomplaintagainsthim.
InhisComment,respondentadmitsthatBunansoughthis"specificassistance"torepresenthimbeforetheMBEC.
Respondentclaimsthat"hedecidedtoassistandadviceBunan,notasalawyerbutasapersonwhoknowsthe

law." Respondent admits signing the 19 May 2001 pleading that objected to the inclusion of certain votes in the
canvassing. He explains, however, that he did not sign the pleading as a lawyer or represented himself as an
"attorney"inthepleading.
OnhisemploymentassecretaryoftheSangguniangBayan,respondentclaimsthathesubmittedhisresignationon
11May2001whichwasallegedlyacceptedonthesamedate.HesubmittedacopyoftheCertificationofReceiptof
RevocableResignationdated28May2001signedbyViceMayorNapoleonRelox.Respondentfurtherclaimsthat
the complaint is politically motivated considering that complainant is the daughter of Silvestre Aguirre, the losing
candidateformayorofMandaon,Masbate.Respondentpraysthatthecomplaintbedismissedforlackofmeritand
thathebeallowedtosigntheRollofAttorneys.
On22June2001,complainantfiledherReplytorespondentsCommentandrefutedtheclaimofrespondentthat
hisappearancebeforetheMBECwasonlytoextendspecificassistancetoBunan.Complainantallegesthaton19
May2001EmilyEstiponaHao("EstiponaHao")filedapetitionforproclamationasthewinningcandidateformayor.
RespondentsignedascounselforEstiponaHaointhispetition.Whenrespondentappearedascounselbeforethe
MBEC,complainantquestionedhisappearanceontwogrounds:(1)respondenthadnottakenhisoathasalawyer
and(2)hewasanemployeeofthegovernment.
RespondentfiledaReply(Re:ReplytoRespondentsComment)reiteratinghisclaimthattheinstantadministrative
caseis"motivatedmainlybypoliticalvendetta."
On17July2001,theCourtreferredthecasetotheOfficeoftheBarConfidant("OBC")forevaluation,reportand
recommendation.
OBCsReportandRecommendation
The OBC found that respondent indeed appeared before the MBEC as counsel for Bunan in the May 2001
elections.TheminutesoftheMBECproceedingsshowthatrespondentactivelyparticipatedintheproceedings.The
OBClikewisefoundthatrespondentappearedintheMBECproceedingsevenbeforehetookthelawyersoathon
22May2001.TheOBCbelievesthatrespondentsmisconductcastsaseriousdoubtonhismoralfitnesstobea
memberoftheBar.TheOBCalsobelievesthatrespondentsunauthorizedpracticeoflawisagroundtodenyhis
admission to the practice of law. The OBC therefore recommends that respondent be denied admission to the
PhilippineBar.
Ontheothercharges,OBCstatedthatcomplainantfailedtocitealawwhichrespondentallegedlyviolatedwhenhe
appearedascounselforBunanwhilehewasagovernmentemployee.Respondentresignedassecretaryandhis
resignationwasaccepted.Likewise,respondentwasauthorizedbyBunantorepresenthimbeforetheMBEC.
TheCourtsRuling
WeagreewiththefindingsandconclusionsoftheOBCthatrespondentengagedintheunauthorizedpracticeoflaw
andthusdoesnotdeserveadmissiontothePhilippineBar.
Respondent took his oath as lawyer on 22 May 2001. However, the records show that respondent appeared as
counselforBunanpriorto22May2001,beforerespondenttookthelawyersoath.InthepleadingentitledFormal
ObjectiontotheInclusionintheCanvassingofVotesinSomePrecinctsfortheOfficeofViceMayordated19May
2001, respondent signed as "counsel for George Bunan." In the first paragraph of the same pleading respondent
stated that he was the "(U)ndersigned Counsel for, and in behalf of Vice Mayoralty Candidate, GEORGE T.
BUNAN." Bunan himself wrote the MBEC on 14 May 2001 that he had "authorized Atty. Edwin L. Rana as his
counseltorepresenthim"beforetheMBECandsimilarbodies.
On14May2001,mayoraltycandidateEmilyEstiponaHaoalso"retained"respondentashercounsel.Onthesame
date,14May2001,ErlyD.HaoinformedtheMBECthat"Atty.EdwinL.RanahasbeenauthorizedbyREFORMA
LMPPCasthelegalcounselofthepartyandthecandidateofthesaidparty."RespondenthimselfwrotetheMBEC
on14May2001thathewasenteringhis"appearanceascounselforMayoraltyCandidateEmilyEstiponaHaoand
fortheREFORMALMPPC."On19May2001,respondentsignedascounselforEstiponaHaointhepetitionfiled
before the MBEC praying for the proclamation of EstiponaHao as the winning candidate for mayor of Mandaon,
Masbate.
Allthesehappenedevenbeforerespondenttookthelawyersoath.Clearly,respondentengagedinthepracticeof
lawwithoutbeingamemberofthePhilippineBar.
InPhilippineLawyersAssociationv.Agrava,1theCourtelucidatedthat:
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
proceedingsonbehalfofclientsbeforejudgesandcourts,andinaddition,conveyancing.Ingeneral,alladvice 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
preparationanddraftingoflegalinstruments,wheretheworkdoneinvolvesthedeterminationbythetrainedlegal
mindofthelegaleffectoffactsandconditions.(5Am.Jur.p.262,263).(Italicssupplied)xxx
InCayetanov.Monsod,2theCourtheldthat"practiceoflaw"meansanyactivity,inoroutofcourt,whichrequires
theapplicationoflaw,legalprocedure,knowledge,trainingandexperience.Toengageinthepracticeoflawisto
performactswhichareusuallyperformedbymembersofthelegalprofession.Generally,topracticelawistorender
anykindofservicewhichrequirestheuseoflegalknowledgeorskill.
Verily,respondentwasengagedinthepracticeoflawwhenheappearedintheproceedingsbeforetheMBECand
filedvariouspleadings,withoutlicensetodoso.Evidenceclearlysupportsthechargeofunauthorizedpracticeof
law. Respondent called himself "counsel" knowing fully well that he was not a member of the Bar. Having held
himselfoutas"counsel"knowingthathehadnoauthoritytopracticelaw,respondenthasshownmoralunfitnessto
beamemberofthePhilippineBar.3
Therighttopracticelawisnotanaturalorconstitutionalrightbutisaprivilege.Itislimitedtopersonsofgoodmoral
character with special qualifications duly ascertained and certified. The exercise of this privilege presupposes
possessionofintegrity,legalknowledge,educationalattainment,andevenpublictrust4sincealawyerisanofficer
ofthecourt.Abarcandidatedoesnotacquiretherighttopracticelawsimplybypassingthebarexaminations.The
practiceoflawisaprivilegethatcanbewithheldevenfromonewhohaspassedthebarexaminations,iftheperson
seekingadmissionhadpracticedlawwithoutalicense.5
Theregulationofthepracticeoflawisunquestionablystrict.InBeltran,Jr.v.Abad,6acandidatepassedthebar
examinations but had not taken his oath and signed the Roll of Attorneys. He was held in contempt of court for
practicinglawevenbeforehisadmissiontotheBar.UnderSection3(e)ofRule71oftheRulesofCourt,aperson
whoengagesintheunauthorizedpracticeoflawisliableforindirectcontemptofcourt.7
True,respondentherepassedthe2000BarExaminationsandtookthelawyersoath. However,itisthesigningin
the Roll of Attorneys that finally makes one a fullfledged lawyer. The fact that respondent passed the bar
examinationsisimmaterial.Passingthebarisnottheonlyqualificationtobecomeanattorneyatlaw.8Respondent
shouldknowthattwoessentialrequisitesforbecomingalawyerstillhadtobeperformed,namely:hislawyersoath
tobeadministeredbythisCourtandhissignatureintheRollofAttorneys.9
1wphi1

Onthechargeofviolationoflaw,complainantcontendsthatthelawdoesnotallowrespondenttoactascounselfor
aprivateclientinanycourtoradministrativebodysincerespondentisthesecretaryoftheSangguniangBayan.
Respondent tendered his resignation as secretary of the Sangguniang Bayan prior to the acts complained of as
constitutingunauthorizedpracticeoflaw.Inhisletterdated11May2001addressedtoNapoleonRelox,vicemayor
and presiding officer of the Sangguniang Bayan, respondent stated that he was resigning "effective upon your
acceptance."10ViceMayorReloxacceptedrespondentsresignationeffective11May2001.11Thus,theevidence
does not support the charge that respondent acted as counsel for a client while serving as secretary of the
SangguniangBayan.
On the charge of grave misconduct and misrepresentation, evidence shows that Bunan indeed authorized
respondent to represent him as his counsel before the MBEC and similar bodies. While there was no
misrepresentation,respondentnonethelesshadnoauthoritytopracticelaw.
WHEREFORE,respondentEdwinL.RanaisDENIEDadmissiontothePhilippineBar.
SOORDERED.
Davide,Jr.,C.J.,Bellosillo,Puno,Vitug,Panganiban,Quisumbing,YnaresSantiago,SandovalGutierrez,Austria
Martinez,Corona,CarpioMorales,Callejo,Sr.,andAzcuna,JJ.,concur.

Footnotes
1105Phil.173(1959).
2G.R.No.100113,3September1991,201SCRA210.

3YapTanv.Sabandal,211Phil.252(1983).
4IntheMatterofthePetitionforAuthoritytoContinueUseoftheFirmNameOzaeta,Romulo,etc.,30July

1979,92SCRA1.
5Uiv.Bonifacio,AdministrativeCaseNo.3319,8June2000,333SCRA38.
6BarMatterNo.139,28March1983,121SCRA217.
7Peoplev.Santocildes,Jr.,G.R.No.109149,21December1999,321SCRA310.
8Diaov.Martinez,AdministrativeCaseNo.244,29March1963,7SCRA475.
9Beltran,Jr.v.Abad,B.M.No.139,28March1983,121SCRA217.
10RespondentsComment,Annex"A".
11Ibid.,Annex"B".
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation