Below is a consolidated discussion of the pertinent rules, principles, and considerations under Philippine law—particularly under the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160)—that touch on authorized representation by non-lawyers in courts, quasi-judicial agencies, or arbitration tribunals. This falls under the broader topic of the Practice of Law and its recognized exceptions.

I. General Rule on the Practice of Law

Only members of the Philippine Bar may engage in the practice of law. Under the Rules of Court and jurisprudence, the appearance of non-lawyers in courts or quasi-judicial bodies is generally prohibited unless specifically allowed by law, rules, or jurisprudence.
“Practice of law” is not limited to court appearances. It also encompasses giving legal advice, preparing and signing pleadings or legal documents, and any activity customarily done by licensed lawyers in a representative capacity.
Consequences of unauthorized practice. A non-lawyer who appears without proper authority may be subject to contempt, administrative, or even criminal liability.

Because of these general restrictions, any exception allowing non-lawyers to appear in courts or quasi-judicial bodies must be explicitly provided for by statutes, Supreme Court rules, or established jurisprudence.

II. Authorized Representation by Non-Lawyers in the Local Government Code

While R.A. No. 7160 (the Local Government Code of 1991) does not directly confer a blanket authority for non-lawyers to practice law or appear as counsel in courts, it does set out various provisions granting certain local officials or bodies a representative capacity in specific contexts. Some of these may involve quasi-judicial or administrative proceedings. Below are the most relevant highlights:

A. Representation by Local Chief Executives

Powers of Local Chief Executives (Governor/City Mayor/Municipal Mayor/Punong Barangay).
- Section 444(b)(1)(vi) (Municipal Mayor);
- Section 455(b)(1)(vi) (City Mayor);
- Section 465(b)(1)(vi) (Governor);
- Section 389(b)(1) (Punong Barangay).
These provisions generally authorize the local chief executive to represent the local government unit (LGU) in its official business transactions, sign official documents and contracts on behalf of the LGU, and ensure the delivery of basic services.

Important note:
- While these provisions allow local chief executives to be the “representative” of their respective LGUs, they do not automatically authorize the local chief executive to appear as “legal counsel” (i.e., to practice law). The representation referred to here primarily concerns official functions—signing contracts, official communications, and similar non-legal activities.
- If the local chief executive is a lawyer, he or she may appear in that capacity, but still subject to limitations imposed by other laws (e.g., conflict of interest rules under legal ethics).

B. The Local Government Legal Officer

Provincial/City/Municipal Legal Officer
- Sections 481, 492, 502 of the Local Government Code set forth the qualifications, powers, and duties of the local legal officer.
- Typically, a local legal officer must be a member of the Philippine Bar. The legal officer represents the LGU in civil or administrative cases wherein the LGU is involved, renders legal advice to the local chief executive and the sanggunian, drafts legal instruments, and performs other duties requiring legal knowledge.
Key takeaway:
- The Local Government Code envisions that legal representation in formal proceedings (courts or quasi-judicial agencies) is handled by a duly appointed legal officer who is a lawyer. Non-lawyers cannot occupy the position of legal officer nor perform its core function of representing the LGU as counsel in adversarial proceedings.

C. Quasi-Judicial Functions of the Local Sanggunian

Administrative Disciplinary Cases
- The Local Government Code vests the sanggunian (e.g., Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panlungsod, or Sangguniang Bayan) with the power to hear administrative disciplinary cases against erring local officials (Sections 61–67, R.A. No. 7160).
- In these proceedings, parties may be allowed representation by counsel (i.e., a lawyer). However, because these are quasi-judicial or administrative proceedings, the technical rules of court are not strictly applied. Nonetheless, the general rule that only lawyers may act as counsel still applies unless specifically modified by the procedural rules of the sanggunian.
Can non-lawyers appear?
- Generally, only lawyers or the parties themselves can appear in a representative capacity. A non-lawyer might be allowed if the procedural rules of the sanggunian specifically allow, but such instances are rare and still subject to the Supreme Court’s authority over the practice of law.

D. Katarungang Pambarangay (Barangay Justice System)

Lupong Tagapamayapa
- R.A. No. 7160 also includes provisions for the Katarungang Pambarangay system (Sections 399 to 422). This system involves the amicable settlement of disputes at the barangay level, overseen by the Lupong Tagapamayapa.
- In these proceedings, the parties typically appear without lawyers, since the process is intended to be informal and community-based. However, non-lawyers do not “represent” parties as legal counsel in the strict sense; rather, parties represent themselves. Lawyers are generally discouraged from participating at this stage to maintain simplicity and avoid adversarial posturing.
Key distinction:
- This is not an authorization for non-lawyers to practice law; rather, the system itself is designed to function without lawyers representing the parties. The Lupong Tagapamayapa does not act as legal counsel, but rather as a mediator or conciliator.

III. Supreme Court and Other Rules Affecting Non-Lawyer Appearances

Non-Lawyer Representation in Lower Courts
- Rule 138 of the Rules of Court generally governs who can practice law. Non-lawyers (e.g., law students under a clinical program, legal interns) may appear in certain very specific circumstances authorized by Supreme Court rules (e.g., Law Student Practice Rule). These are not directly anchored on the Local Government Code.
Small Claims Cases
- In small claims proceedings (A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC), lawyers are not allowed to represent parties. Consequently, a litigant can appear on his or her own behalf. This is again a special rule of procedure from the Supreme Court, not from R.A. No. 7160.
Quasi-Judicial Agencies
- Some quasi-judicial agencies (e.g., labor tribunals) have allowances for non-lawyer representatives such as a union representative or company’s HR personnel. However, these are specific exceptions created by statutes like the Labor Code and its regulations, not by the Local Government Code.

IV. Key Points to Remember

Local Government Code ≠ Blanket License to Practice Law
The Local Government Code’s provisions empowering local officials to act on behalf of the LGU (e.g., sign documents, transact official business) do not equate to authorization to “practice law” as counsel in court proceedings.
Only the Local Government Legal Officer (who must be a Lawyer) or Other Duly Authorized Counsel
When an LGU is a party in a court or quasi-judicial proceeding, it is the local legal officer or an authorized member of the bar (special counsel) who must represent the LGU if the matter involves legal issues.
Katarungang Pambarangay is not an Exception Allowing Non-Lawyer Practice
While the barangay dispute resolution system does not require lawyers and, in fact, discourages them, it is not an instance of “non-lawyer representation.” Rather, it is designed for self-representation and mediation, thus bypassing the need for lawyers at that stage.
Exceptions Must be Expressly Provided by Law or Supreme Court Rules
Any departure from the principle that only attorneys may appear in courts or quasi-judicial bodies must be expressly stipulated by law or recognized through Supreme Court rules (e.g., labor union representation, small claims, etc.). The Local Government Code does not contain a general exception for local officials who are non-lawyers to appear as counsel.

V. Practical Illustrations

Example A: A Municipal Mayor (who is not a lawyer) signs a contract on behalf of the municipality. This is a valid exercise of the mayor’s power under Section 444. However, if that same mayor attempts to file pleadings and argue in court on behalf of the LGU, that would be unauthorized practice of law unless the mayor is himself/herself a duly admitted member of the Bar.
Example B: In an administrative disciplinary hearing before the Sangguniang Panlungsod, the respondent official (or the complainant) can be assisted by a lawyer. A non-lawyer friend or colleague cannot act as “counsel” in the strict sense, unless the body’s rules explicitly allow a non-lawyer representative for that purpose (and even then, such rules would be tested against the Supreme Court’s regulatory power over the practice of law).
Example C: Katarungang Pambarangay proceedings. The parties attempt an amicable settlement facilitated by the Lupon. Lawyers are generally not present or are discouraged. Non-lawyers (e.g., a relative or barangay official) might help the party, but only in a personal support capacity; they do not formally “practice law” or appear as legal counsel.

VI. Conclusion

Under the Local Government Code (R.A. No. 7160):

Local chief executives are empowered to represent and sign for their LGUs in official transactions—but not to practice law if they are non-lawyers.
Legal representation of the LGU in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings is vested in the local legal officer (who must be a lawyer) or in special counsel engaged for that purpose.
Barangay-level dispute resolution (Katarungang Pambarangay) is generally lawyer-free but also does not authorize any non-lawyer to engage in the practice of law.
No general exception in the Code grants non-lawyers the right to appear as counsel in courts, quasi-judicial bodies, or arbitration tribunals.

Hence, although the Local Government Code does involve roles and functions that include a degree of “representation,” it does not override the requirement that the practice of law be carried out only by licensed lawyers—except in the few narrowly tailored exceptions found in other laws or Supreme Court rules.