"x x x.
THE PRACTICE OF LAW in the Philippines is strictly exclusive to Filipinos. Article XII, Section 14 of the Constitution provides that the practice of any profession is limited to Filipino citizens and, in the implementation of this restriction, the Supreme Court requires that any applicant to the Bar must possess Filipino citizenship. This restriction applies to a wide array of activities, and is not only limited to appearance in court and preparation of pleadings, as the practice of law has been defined to include “any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience.”
 Amicus Curiae -- Danielle Sigfreid R. Corpuz: "Is pregnancy out of wedlock ground for firing a worker?" Amicus Curiae -- Genie Celini D. Nuevo:"Arbitration and the ADR Act of 2004: An alternative method of settling disputes" Amicus Curiae -- Kurt T. Yeung: "Branding a name" Amicus Curiae -- Candice Christine O. Tongco:"Grandfather rule still useful in nationality test" Amicus Curiae -- Catherine Anne L. Diño: "PPPs crucial to our being globally competitive" |
The proposal to allow foreign lawyers to render certain legal services under a limited license is pending before the Supreme Court. In the proposal, registered foreign lawyers (referred to as foreign legal consultants) and foreign legal consultant firms, which possess the necessary qualifications, will not be admitted to the Philippine Bar but may render certain legal services in the Philippines. Such legal services would be limited to the application of their home country law, third-country law, public international law and international components of cross-border transactions. Practice of domestic law will remain limited to Filipino lawyers.
It is undeniable that lawyers have become central to the way business is done. Addressing issues, which require the application of the law and prevailing regulations, is part of making any business decision, from the simplest transaction to the more sophisticated and complex ones. In this age of globalization where markets are converging and integrating, there is a demand from the business sector for lawyers who can give legal advice not only in domestic law, but also in foreign law. For instance, preliminary to engaging in business and investing in the Philippines, it is imperative for foreign investors to seek legal advice to ensure compliance not only with Philippine law but, in cross-border transactions, also with their home country law, and sometimes compliance with a third-country law. Thus, readily, a single transaction can require legal advice on domestic and foreign law.
Considering the restrictions on the practice of law in the Philippines, foreign investors are required to consult separately with a Filipino lawyer and a foreign lawyer. It would be ideal if all of these legal services were readily available to the client in one local law firm. However, this would only be possible if the restriction on Filipino citizenship is relaxed. Proponents also submit, as another practical benefit, that allowing foreign lawyers (who are experts in their home country law) to render legal consultancy services in the Philippines will necessarily produce transfer of knowledge and experience that will better equip local lawyers to address similar issues which they may be confronted with in future transactions.
It may also be said that allowing foreign lawyers to render foreign legal consultancy service in the Philippines is consistent with our obligations to the international community. In particular, the Philippines, as a member of the ASEAN, committed to an ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), which envisions the ASEAN as a region where there is free movement of goods, investments and capital, as well as free movement of services and skilled labor. Based on the AEC, substantially all restrictions on trade in legal services should be removed by 2015 but, to the contrary, restrictions remain in the Philippines. While the Philippines is not the only member of the ASEAN which has not yet fully opened up its legal services market, the Philippines has been cited as being at the bottom of the liberalization spectrum (as opposed to Singapore which has fully liberalized).
Jo Blanca P.B. Labay is an Associate of ACCRALAW Office.
x xx."
