RENATO L. CAYETANO, PETITIONER, VS. CHRISTIAN MONSOD, HON. JOVITO R. SALONGA, COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS, AND HON. GUILLERMO CARAGUE, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF BUDGET AND …

Cayetano versus Monsod

The Case

This is a petition for prohibition and certiorari brought by Renato L. Cayetano against Christian Monsod, the Commission on Appointments, its chairman Jovito R. Salonga, and Budget Secretary Guillermo Carague. Cayetano asked the Supreme Court to stop Monsod from assuming and discharging the office of Chairman of the Commission on Elections, and to prevent the Commission on Appointments from confirming him, on the ground that Monsod did not possess the constitutional qualification of having been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years. The case matters because it is the leading Philippine authority on what "practice of law" means as a qualification for constitutional office, and it settles that the phrase is not confined to courtroom litigation.

Procedural History

The case was filed directly with the Supreme Court as an original action for prohibition and certiorari, with a prayer for a temporary restraining order. The petitioner sought to restrain Monsod from assuming the position of Chairman of the Commission on Elections and to restrain the Commission on Appointments from acting on his confirmation. The Supreme Court took up the petition and resolved the legal issues presented, including the meaning of the constitutional requirement of practice of law for at least ten years.

Facts

Christian Monsod was nominated and appointed as Chairman of the Commission on Elections. Renato L. Cayetano opposed the appointment, contending that Monsod lacked the required qualification. Under the 1987 Constitution, the Chairman and a majority of the Commissioners of the Commission on Elections must be members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.

The controversy turned on whether Monsod's professional experience satisfied that requirement. The Court observed that there was no jurisprudence defining what constitutes practice of law as a legal qualification for an appointive office, and it therefore undertook to define the term.

The Court examined the deliberations of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, which showed that the framers adopted a liberal interpretation of the phrase "practice of law." In those deliberations, it was clarified that the requirement does not necessarily refer to or involve actual practice of law outside a constitutional commission, and that lawyers who use their legal knowledge or legal talent in their work are qualified.

Issues

• Whether or not the term "practice of law" in the constitutional requirement that a majority of the Commissioners of the Commission on Elections, including the Chairman, be members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years is limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court.
• Whether or not Christian Monsod possesses the constitutional qualification of having been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.
• Whether or not the petition to restrain Monsod from assuming the office of Chairman of the Commission on Elections should be granted.

Applicable Provisions

Section 1, paragraph 1, of Article Nine-C of the 1987 Constitution provides:

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

This is the provision whose phrase "engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years" the Court had to construe in determining Monsod's qualification.

Section 1, paragraph 1, of Article Twelve-C of the 1973 Constitution provides:

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

The Court noted that the 1987 provision was patterned after this earlier provision, which used the same practice of law requirement.

Section 1, paragraph 1, of Article Nine-D of the 1987 Constitution provides, among others, that the Chairman and two Commissioners of the Commission on Audit should either be certified public accountants with not less than ten years of auditing practice, or members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years. This provision shows that the same practice of law qualification appears in the Constitution for another constitutional commission.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court ruled that the practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court. The Court quoted with approval the definition in Philippine Lawyers Association versus Agrava:

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

The Court also adopted the broader formulation that practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. It embraced the definition that to engage in the practice of law is to perform those acts which are characteristics of the profession, and generally to give notice or render any kind of service which requires the use in any degree of legal knowledge or skill.

On the second issue, the Court relied on the deliberations of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, which adopted a liberal interpretation of the term. The Court quoted the clarification made on the floor:

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

Applying this liberal interpretation, the Court held that Monsod possessed the required qualification of having been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.

On the third issue, because Monsod met the constitutional qualification, the Court denied the petition and refused to restrain him from assuming the office of Chairman of the Commission on Elections.

Doctrine

Practice of law, as a constitutional qualification for appointive office, is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court. It means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. It includes the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, conveyancing, the preparation and drafting of legal instruments, the giving of legal advice to clients, and all action taken for clients in matters connected with the law. A lawyer who uses his legal knowledge or legal talent in his work, even within a government office, is engaged in the practice of law within the meaning of the constitutional requirement. The term should be given a liberal interpretation consistent with the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission.

Disposition

The petition was denied, and the Court upheld the qualification of Christian Monsod as Chairman of the Commission on Elections.

Remember This

Memorize this line: practice of law is any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. Examiners use this case to test the definition of practice of law as a qualification for constitutional office and the liberal interpretation given to that phrase.