B.M. No. 2112; July 24, 2012
IN RE: PETITION TO RE-ACQUIRE THE PRIVILEGE TO PRACTICE LAW IN THE PHILIPPINES, EPIFANIO B. MUNESES, Petitioner.

FACTS

Epifanio B. Muneses, admitted to the Philippine Bar in 1966, lost his privilege to practice law when he became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1981. On September 15, 2006, he re-acquired his Philippine citizenship by taking the oath of allegiance under Republic Act No. 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-Acquisition Act of 2003) before the Philippine Consulate General in Washington, D.C. He subsequently filed a petition to resume his law practice in the Philippines, attaching supporting documents including his oath, proof of IBP membership dues payment, and Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) attendance forms.
The Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) required Muneses to submit original or certified true copies of specific documents to verify his qualifications. These included his re-acquisition documents, a Bureau of Immigration Identification Certificate, IBP good standing and dues certifications, proof of professional tax payment, and an MCLE Certificate of Compliance. Muneses complied, submitting the required petitions, orders, oath, a Certificate of Re-acquisition, IBP-Surigao Chapter certifications, a 2010 Professional Tax Receipt, and MCLE compliance certificates for the relevant periods.

ISSUE

Whether Epifanio B. Muneses, having re-acquired his Philippine citizenship under R.A. No. 9225, is entitled to resume the practice of law in the Philippines.

RULING

Yes, subject to fulfilling specific conditions precedent. The Court granted the petition, allowing Muneses to resume practice after re-taking the Lawyer’s Oath and paying appropriate fees. The legal logic proceeds from the foundational principle that Philippine citizenship is a continuing requirement for the practice of law. Loss of citizenship terminates bar membership and the privilege to practice ipso jure. R.A. No. 9225 provides that natural-born citizens who lost citizenship through foreign naturalization are deemed to have re-acquired it upon taking the oath of allegiance. Consequently, a lawyer in this situation remains a member of the Philippine Bar.
However, the right to resume practice is not automatic under the statute, which requires an application for a license or permit to practice a profession. The Court, exercising its constitutional power to regulate the legal profession, imposes additional conditions to protect public welfare. Following the precedent in Bar Matter No. 1678 (In re: Dacanay), the Court requires the petitioner to demonstrate not only the valid re-acquisition of citizenship but also current compliance with all other enduring requisites for law practice. These include good moral character, updated payment of IBP membership dues, payment of the professional tax, and compliance with MCLE requirements. The OBC’s verification process ensures these standards are met before a favorable recommendation. Since Muneses satisfactorily submitted all documents proving his re-acquired citizenship and his current compliance with these ancillary mandates, the Court found no impediment to allowing his return to practice, thereby conditioning the privilege on the reaffirmation of his professional vows through a new Lawyer’s Oath.