Cayetano vs. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113 (September 3, 1991)
Facts
Christian Monsod was nominated by President Corazon C. Aquino as Chairman of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). The nomination was subsequently confirmed by the Commission on Appointments (CA).
Petitioner Renato L. Cayetano opposed the nomination, challenging Monsod’s qualification based on Section 1(1), Article IX-C of the 1987 Constitution, which requires that the Chairman and a majority of the Commissioners must be “members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years“.
Atty. Monsod, a member of the Philippine Bar since 1960, had a professional history that included working in a law office, serving as an Operations Officer for the World Bank Group (involving legal, economic, and project coordination), acting as chief executive officer and legal/economic consultant for various companies, performing election law advocacy and appearances for NAMFREL, serving as a member of the Davide Commission (a quasi-judicial body), and acting as a member of the 1986 Constitutional Commission.
Issues
- Whether Christian Monsod satisfied the constitutional requirement of having been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years, thereby qualifying him for the position of COMELEC Chairman.
- Whether the Supreme Court should interfere with the confirmation made by the Commission on Appointments.
Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled: “IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, this petition is hereby DISMISSED.”
The Court found that the Commission on Appointments, in confirming Monsod, implicitly determined that he possessed the necessary qualifications as required by law. This judgment is beyond judicial interference, except upon a clear showing of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Finding no such grave abuse of discretion, the Court upheld the appointment.
Essential Elements of Jurisprudence
Controlling Doctrine (Definition of Practice of Law):
The Supreme Court adopted a broad, liberal interpretation of the term “practice of law” for purposes of constitutional qualifications for appointive office.
Legal Principles Established:
- Scope of Practice of Law: The practice of law is not limited to courtroom litigation. It embraces legal-related activities outside of court.
- Modern Definition: Practice of law is the rendition of services requiring the knowledge and the application of legal principles and technique to serve the interest of another with his consent.
- Included Activities: Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. It generally includes:
- Counseling, advocacy, and public service.
- The giving of all legal advice to clients and all actions taken for them in matters connected with the law.
- 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.
- Non-litigation work such as conveyancing, advice-giving on various subjects, and the preparation/execution of legal instruments covering business and trust relations.
- Non-Traditional Roles: The work of a lawyer in non-traditional fields, such as being a lawyer-economist, a lawyer-manager, a lawyer-entrepreneur of industry, a lawyer-negotiator of contracts, and a lawyer-legislator, satisfies the constitutional requirement if it requires the application of legal knowledge.
- Constitutional Intent: The framers of the 1987 Constitution intended a liberal interpretation of the term “practice of law,” recognizing that service in other government capacities (like the Commission on Audit) or performing corporate legal work is equivalent to the practice of law.
- Judicial Deference to Confirmation: Absent grave abuse of discretion, the Supreme Court will not interfere with the discretionary power of the Commission on Appointments to confirm an appointee whom it finds qualified.
Sample Q&A
Question:
Atty. D is a member of the Philippine Bar for 15 years. For the last 10 years, he has served as the Chief Executive Officer of a major infrastructure conglomerate. His duties include corporate legal research, advising the board on domestic and international agreements and corporate structures, negotiating complex financial loan covenants, and drafting policies concerning regulatory compliance with the Philippine Competition Act and relevant environmental laws. Atty. D is nominated as a Commissioner of the COMELEC. The nomination is challenged on the ground that he has not met the required ten years of practice of law under Article IX-C, Section 1(1) of the 1987 Constitution, as his work was primarily managerial and business-oriented, not involving litigation. Is the challenge likely to succeed? Explain using the controlling doctrine on the practice of law.
Answer:
No, the challenge is not likely to succeed.
Under Article IX-C, Section 1(1) of the 1987 Constitution, a COMELEC Commissioner must be a member of the Philippine Bar who has been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.
Following the jurisprudence established in Cayetano vs. Monsod, the Supreme Court interprets the term “practice of law” broadly and liberally. It is not limited to litigation or appearing in court. The “practice of law” includes any activity that requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training, and experience.
Atty. D’s activities, such as advising the board on corporate legal research, negotiating complex financial loan covenants, and ensuring regulatory compliance, fall squarely within the scope of the modern practice of law, particularly the specialized field of corporate law and finance law. These functions involve the determination by a trained legal mind of the legal effect of facts and conditions. Atty. D’s role as a lawyer-manager and lawyer-negotiator satisfies the constitutional requirement. Therefore, his appointment would likely be upheld, as the constitutional qualification is met by performing professional services that require the application of legal principles, regardless of whether the setting is a law office or a corporate boardroom.
—– #CayetanoVsMonsod #PracticeOfLaw #COMELEC #PhilippineBar #ConstitutionalLaw #1987Constitution #LegalDoctrine #JudicialReview #CommissionOnAppointments #SupremeCourtPH#PhilippineLaw #LawStudentPH #BarExamsPH #LegalEducation #CaseDigestPH #RuleOfLaw #PublicServiceLaw #LegalProfessionPH #LegalEthics #PhilippineJurisprudence#LawSchoolLife #FutureLawyer #JusticeForAll #PinoyLaw #KnowYourRights #LegalCommunity #Philippines #LawAndSociety #StudyGramPH #ProfessionalGrowth
Leave a Reply