Ma.L.A.S. ba maging Abogado?: An analysis on the legal merits of the prevailing objections against the rule on mandatory legal aid service (Bar Matter No. 2012)

• Main Authors: Esguerra, Rafael Rodrigo S., Lagundino, Maria Victoria A.
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Animo Repository 2009
• Subjects: Commercial Law
• Online Access: https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_bachelors/17749
• Institution: De La Salle University

The Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid Service has caused controversy in the legal profession because of mixed sentiments. Some lawyers welcome the requirement of rendering free legal aid while others resent the Rule. Although the Rule has been approved, the Supreme Court, in subsequently deferring the implementation of the Rule, recognizes the objections raised by the lawyers who oppose it. This study makes an inquiry into these objections to determine their legal merits. Out of all the objections raised, the researchers weeded out two prevailing issues against the Rule that would question its lawfulness. The first objection claims that the requirement is unreasonable and arbitrary. To assess this issue, the researchers will base the discussion on constitutional grounds. The second objection concerns the impairment on the fiduciary nature of the attorney-client contract. Addressing this issue, the researchers consider the legal ethical principles. At the end of this study, the researchers would have weighed the established objections on its legal merits.