In The Matter Of Disqualification Of Haron S. Meling

5.2 Rule 138, Section 7-16, Rules of Court. SEC. 7. Time for filing proof of qualifications.—All applicants for admission shall file with the clerk of the Supreme Court the evidence required by section 2 of this rule at least fifteen (15) days before the beginning of the examination. If not embraced within sections 3 and 4 of this rule they shall also file within the same period the affidavit and certificate required by section 5, and if embraced within sections 3 and 4 they shall exhibit a license evidencing the fact of their admission to practice, satisfactory evidence that the same has not been revoked, and certificates as to their professional standing. Applicants shall also file at the same time their own affidavits as to their age, residence, and citizenship. SEC. 8. Notice of applications.—Notice of applications for admission shall be published by the clerk of the Supreme Court in newspapers published in Filipino, English and Spanish, for at least ten (10) days before the beginning of the examination. SEC. 9. Examination; subjects.—Applicants, not otherwise provided for in sections 3 and 4 of this rule, shall be subjected to examinations in the following subjects: Civil Law; Labor and Social Legislation; Mercantile Law; Criminal Law; Political Law (Constitutional Law, Public Corporations, and Public Officers); International Law (Private and Public); Taxation: Remedial Law (Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure, and Evidence); Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises (in Pleading and Conveyance). SEC. 10. Bar examination, by questions and answers, and in writing.—Persons taking the examination shall not bring papers, books or notes into the examination rooms. The questions shall be the same for all examinees and a copy thereof, in English or Spanish, shall be given to each examinee. Examinees shall answer the questions personally without help from anyone. Upon verified application made by an examinee stating that his penmanship is so poor that it will be difficult to read his answers without much loss of time, the Supreme Court may allow such examinee to use a typewriter in answering the questions. Only noiseless typewriters shall be allowed to be used. The committee of bar examiners shall take such precautions as are necessary to prevent the substitution of papers or commission of other frauds. Examinees shall not place their names on the examination papers. No oral examination shall be given. SEC. 11. Annual examination.—Examinations for admission to the bar of the Philippines shall take place annually in the City of Manila. They shall be held in four days to be designated by the chairman of the committee on bar examiners. The subject shall be distributed as follows: First day: Political and International Law (morning) and Labor and Social Legislation (afternoon); Second day: Civil Law (morning) and Taxation (afternoon); Third day: Mercantile Law (morning) and Criminal Law (afternoon); Fourth day: Remedial Law (morning) and Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises (afternoon). SEC. 12. Committee of examiners.—Examinations shall be conducted by a committee of bar examiners to be appointed by the Supreme Court. This committee shall be composed of a Justice of the Supreme Court, who shall act as chairman, and who shall be designated by the court to serve for one year, and eight members of the bar of the Philippines, who shall hold office for a period of one year. The names of the members of this committee shall be published in each volume of the official reports. SEC. 13. Disciplinary measures.—No candidate shall endeavor to influence any member of the committee, and during examination the candidates shall not communicate with each other nor shall they give or receive any assistance. The candidate, who violates this provision, or any other provision of this rule, shall be barred from the examination, and the same to count as a failure against him, and further disciplinary action, including permanent disqualification, may be taken in the discretion of the court. SEC. 14. Passing average.—In order that a candidate may be deemed to have passed his examinations successfully, he must have obtained a general average of 75 per cent in all subjects, without falling below 50 per cent in any subject. In determining the average, the subjects in the examination shall be given the following relative weights: Civil Law, 15 per cent; Labor and Social Legislation, 10 per cent; Mercantile Law, 15 per cent; Criminal Law, 10 per cent: Political and International Law, 15 per cent; Taxation, 10 per cent; Remedial Law, 20 per cent; Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises, 5 per cent. SEC. 15. Report of the committee; filing of examination papers.—Not later than February 15th after the examination, or as soon thereafter as may be practicable, the committee shall file its report on the result of such examination. The examination papers and notes of the committee shall be filed with the clerk and may there be examined by the parties in interest, after the court has approved the report. SEC. 16. Failing candidates to take review course.—Candidates who have failed the bar examinations for three times shall be disqualified from taking another examination unless they show to the satisfaction of

the court that they have enrolled in and passed regular fourth year review classes as well as attended a pre-bar review course in a recognized law school. The professors of the individual review subjects attended by the candidates under this rule certify under oath that the candidates have regularly attended classes and passed the subjects under the same conditions as ordinary students and the ratings obtained by them in the particular subject.

In the Matter of Disqualification of Bar Examinee by Haron S. Meling 431 SCRA 146 FACTS: Atty. Froilan R. Melendrez filed a petition with the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) to disqualify Haron S. Meling from taking the 2002 Bar Examinations. Melendrez avers that Meling did not disclose that he has three (3) pending criminal cases before the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC). Melendrez also alleges that Meling has been using the title Attorney in his communications, despite the fact that he is not a member of the Bar. Meling explains that he did not disclose the criminal cases filed against him because retired Judge Corocoy Moson, their former professor, advised him to settle his misunderstanding with Melendrez. Believing in good faith that the case would be settled because the said Judge has moral ascendancy over them, Meling considered the three cases as closed and terminated. Moreover, Meling denies the charges and claims that such acts do not involve moral turpitude. Meling admits that some of his communications really contained the word Attorney but he claims that they were typed by the office clerk. The OBC claims that his non-disclosure of those cases constitute dishonesty and therefore he must not be allowed to take the Lawyers Oath and sign the Roll of Attorneys in the event that he passes the Bar Examinations. ISSUE: Does the non-disclosure of Meling of the criminal cases filed against him constitute dishonesty? DECISION: YES. The non-disclosure of Meling of the criminal cases filed against him constitutes dishonesty because it speaks of his lack of the requisite good moral character. Good moral character includes at least common honesty. The non-disclosure of Meling of the criminal cases filed against him makes him also answerable under Rule 7.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which states that a lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making a false statement or suppressing a material fact in connection with his application for admission to the bar. Anent the issue of the use of the appellation Attorney in his letters, the explanation of Meling is not acceptable. Aware that he is not a member of the Bar, there was no valid reason why he signed as attorney whoever may have typed the letters. The requirement of good moral character is not only a condition precedent to admission to the practice of law, its continued possession is also essential for remaining in the practice of law. Hence, the Court found him grossly unfit and unworthy to continue in the practice of Sharia law and suspended him therefrom until further orders from the Court.

In the Matter of Pedro A. Amparo (1974 Bar Candidate) 65 SCRA 120 FACTS:

While the 1974 Bar examination in Criminal Law was in progress, the head watcher Lilian Mendigorin, reported that examinee Amparo was found reading a piece of paper containing notes in Criminal Law. He at first refused to surrender the paper, but later gave it to Mendigorin with a smile when she threatened to report the matter to the authorities. Amparo was permitted to continue answering the questions. At the end of the examination period, Amparo submitted his examination note book; he told her that he really had intended to cheat. Headwatcher Mendigorin thereafter submitted a special report on the incident.

Amparo admitted having the piece of paper in his possession during the examination. He claims that the paper fell to the floor when he took his handkerchief from his pocket to wipe his perspiration. When he picked it up and read it, the headwatcher caught him in the act. He further admitted that he knew it is contrary to the rules to bring notes and books inside the examination room.

ISSUE:

Is Amparo guilty of bringing notes in the examination room and attempted cheating?

DECISION:

YES. Amparo is guilty of bringing notes in the examination room and attempted cheating because it is clear that Amparo had possession of the piece of paper containing notes and that he knew that it is contrary to the rules to bring notes inside the examination room. In effect, he violated Section 10, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, which provides that "Persons taking the examination shall not bring papers, books or notes into the examination rooms." His explanation that he merely read the notes to find out what they were as he had forgotten them is untenable because the notes pertained to Criminal Law. As a result, he committed an overt act indicative of an attempt to cheat by reading the notes.