Legal Implications of ASEAN Integration towards the Practice of Law in the Philippines

Practice of Law in the Philippines

In the Philippine context, the practice of law is not a trade nor craft but a profession
(Bialno, 2015, May 11). As conveyed by Bialno, the essence of the legal profession is the
rendering of public service and the attainment of justice for those who seek its aid (2015, May
11). Since the practice of law is coupled with public interest, it is both a right and a duty of the
state to regulate the legal profession in order to constantly uphold public welfare (Bialno,
2015, May 11). This is enshrined in the 1987 Constitution whereby the Supreme Court is
vested with the power to control and regulate the legal profession:
Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:
(5) Promulgate 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, and legal assistance to the underprivileged.
Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy
disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall
not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special
courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the
Supreme Court (Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution).

Among the primary regulation of the state towards the legal profession is the admission
process it imposed towards persons who seek to become lawyers in the country. In the
Philippines, engaging in the practice of law is only limited to persons who had passed the bar
upon complying with the two fundamental statutory requirements. The first, as stated by
Bialno, is admission to the bar (2015, May 11).

To be admitted in the Philippine bar, one must: (a) produce satisfactory proof of
education and moral qualification, (b) pass the bar examinations, (c) took the lawyers oath,
(d) and sign the roll of attorneys (Bialno, 2015, May 11). In addition, there is also a statutory
requirement whereby the applicant must be: (a) a citizen of the Philippines, (b) a resident

thereof, (c) at least twenty-one years of age, and (d) of good moral character.
The second requirement for one to be entitled to engage in the legal profession is the
possession of good moral character. It is a continuing requirement that a newly-admitted
lawyer must remain in good standing in order for him or her to engage in the practice of law.
This is illustrated when one must (a) remain a member of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines, (b) regularly pay all IBP membership dues and other lawful assessments, (c)
faithfully observe the rules and ethics of the legal profession, and (d) be continually subject to
judicial disciplinary control (Bialno, 2015, May 11).

Legal Implications of ASEAN Integration towards the Practice of Law

It was recognised that along with the integration of ASEAN member-countries is the
underlying change it shall interpose towards the legal profession. As conveyed by Bialno, she
recognised the impending effect of such integration towards the practice of law when it will
finally materialise (2015, May 11). Yet, the question of the nature and extent of its effect
remains to be defined by the ASEAN member-states.

In the domestic level, the Philippine Congress is yet to pass a legislative enactment with
regard to the changes that ASEAN Integration may brought towards the legal profession. At
present, the current system of the practice of law is still not affected. Engaging in the legal
profession is currently exclusive towards Filipino citizens who have qualified with the countrys
statutory requirements (Bialno, 2015, May 11).

However, for Senator Franklin Drilon, he had expressed the need to liberalise the legal
profession in the Philippines if the objective is to genuinely adapt and actualise the vision of

ASEAN Integration (2015, March 1). According to the Senator, primary stakeholders must
learn to grasp the essence and effect of the envisioned economic integration towards the
legal profession. For him, this entails the freedom of foreign lawyers to practice law in the
country as well as Filipino lawyers to other member-states for ASEAN Integration anchors on
the belief that the ASEAN lawyer must learn to navigate in multiple legal jurisdictions. This is
in connection with the kind of economic integration that ASEAN member-states seek to attain
whereby free exchanges of resources among ASEAN members is envisioned.

As revealed by the Senator on his speech, ASEAN is predicted to become the fourth
largest market by 2030 next to EU, United States, and China (2015, March 1). Therefore,
ASEAN seeks to strengthen the integration of its member-countries. Yet, according to the
Senator, there are still legal and institutional barriers as to the actualisation of full ASEAN
Integration both in the national and intergovernmental spheres. For the Philippines, one of
which is the restriction of foreign lawyers to practice law in the country as enshrined by the
Philippine Constitution. However, as emphasised by the Senator, liberalisation of the legal
profession is a must for ASEAN Integration to fully materialise. This will not only consolidate
the practice of law in the country but will also help in addressing the challenges faced by the
country on the political and economic arena. In the end, Senator Drilon expresses his hope
that the countrys legal sector and legislators will recognize the significance of adapting
measures and mechanisms in liberalising the practice of law in the Philippines. He had also
hope that the Philippines shall be the pioneer and predecessor among other ASEAN
members in improving the legal profession.

Another perspective regarding the implications of ASEAN Integration towards the legal
profession was conveyed by Supreme Court Justice Arturo D. Brion in his speech addressed

towards officers and members of the Philippine Association of Law Schools (as cited in Cruz,
2014, December 14). This time, Justice Brion provided a background on the action that the
country shall undertake if liberalisation of the legal profession is what the country seeks.
According to Justice Brion, the discretion remains on the policy-makers and key stakeholders.
But, Justice Brion emphasised that the critical part of liberalising the practice of law is the
capacity of the Philippine legal profession to adapt with the changes brought by ASEAN
Integration. He raised the issue of whether the former shall be prepared to cooperate,
collaborate, and compete with the peers in the ASEAN region. Justice Brion concluded the
speech with the idea that the Philippine legal profession must ready itself towards the
impending changes that ASEAN Integration shall entail since it will not only require the
accumulation of new knowledge and awareness but also the acquisition of new set of skills for
a Filipino lawyer.

References:

http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2014/12/14/1402477/changing-how-lawyers-are-educated
https://www.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2015/0301_drilon1.asp

https://dailybrewedcoffee.wordpress.com/2015/05/11/the-practice-of-law-in-the-philippinesvis-a-vis-asean-integration/