COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSION ON NON-LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO APPEAR IN COURTS, QUASI-JUDICIAL AGENCIES, OR ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS (PHILIPPINES)

Below is an exhaustive discussion of the legal framework, rules, and jurisprudence governing the representation of parties by non-lawyers in Philippine courts, quasi-judicial bodies, and arbitral tribunals. This overview covers constitutional provisions, laws, Supreme Court rules, and recognized exceptions, including relevant commentary on ethical considerations.

I. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY FRAMEWORK

Exclusive Authority of the Supreme Court over Admission to the Practice of Law
- Article VIII, Section 5(5) of the 1987 Constitution gives the Supreme Court the power to promulgate rules concerning the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged.
- Section 1, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court declares that only those admitted as members of the Philippine Bar and in good standing may generally engage in the practice of law.
Definition of the Practice of Law
- The Supreme Court, in various cases (e.g., Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113, September 3, 1991), has described the “practice of law” as any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of legal knowledge, training, and experience.
- Strictly, any regular performance of an act by a non-lawyer that falls within this definition is considered unauthorized practice of law and is subject to sanctions.

Despite the general rule that only lawyers can appear and practice in courts or quasi-judicial agencies, there are specific exceptions carved out by law, administrative rules, or Supreme Court issuances.

II. GENERAL RULE: ONLY MEMBERS OF THE BAR MAY REPRESENT OTHERS

Individual Litigants
- A natural person (an individual) has the inherent right to represent himself or herself (i.e., pro se representation). This right does not extend to representation of others, which would be unauthorized practice of law.
Juridical Persons (Corporations, Partnerships, Associations)
- Generally, juridical entities must appear by counsel (a duly licensed lawyer) in all courts and quasi-judicial agencies. The Supreme Court has consistently held that corporations cannot be represented by their officers or other non-lawyers (with narrow exceptions in small claims cases, discussed below).

III. EXCEPTIONS ALLOWING NON-LAWYERS TO APPEAR

Notwithstanding the general prohibition, there are specific and limited situations where non-lawyers are permitted to represent parties in courts, quasi-judicial bodies, or arbitral proceedings. These exceptions are designed to promote access to justice, expedite proceedings, or accommodate specialized forums. Below are the recognized exceptions:

A. Appearance in One’s Own Behalf

Rule on Self-Representation
A party may always represent his or her own cause in any court, tribunal, or administrative body. This is not, strictly speaking, an “exception,” since it is not “representing another person” and thus not the practice of law. However, it is often discussed in tandem with the general rule to emphasize that individuals can proceed pro se without violating the prohibition against unauthorized practice.

B. Representation by Law Students Under Supervised Practice (Rule 138-A)

Law Student Practice Rule
Previously governed by Rule 138, Section 27 (the old Law Student Practice Rule), but now superseded by the Clinical Legal Education Program (CLEP) under Rule 138-A (A.M. No. 19-03-24-SC).
- Qualified law students who have complied with the academic requirements and are enrolled in a law clinic recognized by their law school and accredited by the Supreme Court may, under the strict supervision of a supervising lawyer, appear in courts, tribunals, or agencies on behalf of qualified indigent clients or in certain designated legal aid cases.
- This practice is strictly regulated; law students must carry proper identification and submit a certification from their supervising lawyer.

C. Representation Before the Labor Arbiters and the NLRC

Labor Code Provisions
- Under Article 222 (previous numbering) of the Labor Code (and the Rules of Procedure of the National Labor Relations Commission [NLRC]), non-lawyers may represent parties in labor proceedings under certain conditions.
- Typically, labor union officers, company HR officers, or duly accredited representatives may appear on behalf of a party.
- The rationale is to promote speedy labor justice and to avoid excessive legal technicalities in labor disputes.
Accredited Voluntary Arbitrators
- Cases referred to voluntary arbitration under the Labor Code also allow representation by union officers or company representatives if the parties so consent.

D. Representation Before the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB)

The DARAB Rules of Procedure explicitly allow non-lawyers to represent agrarian reform beneficiaries, farmworkers, tenants, or landowners in agrarian cases, provided such representatives are:
1. Authorized in writing; and
2. Allowed by the DARAB under its own procedural rules.
Often, these are paralegals, farmers’ or peasants’ organizations officers, or union representatives familiar with agrarian disputes.

E. Representation in Small Claims Cases

Rules on Small Claims (A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC, as amended)
- In the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, or Municipal Trial Courts dealing with small claims (where the amount claimed does not exceed a certain threshold set by the Supreme Court—currently PHP 1,000,000.00), lawyers are not allowed to appear for parties unless they are the plaintiff or defendant themselves.
- This rule effectively places both parties on the same footing without representation, except if the litigant is a lawyer appearing for himself/herself.
- A non-lawyer cannot represent the plaintiff or defendant either, because each party must appear on his or her own behalf—thus, the typical “appearance by non-lawyer” is not an option. The small claims rule simply disallows representation by counsel (or non-counsel) to streamline and expedite the proceedings.

F. Representation in Barangay Conciliation Proceedings (Katarungang Pambarangay)

Under the Local Government Code (R.A. 7160) and the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, the parties themselves must appear during the conciliation and mediation proceedings at the barangay level. Lawyers and non-lawyers are generally not allowed to represent parties at this stage, except when they themselves are direct parties.
This is not truly an “appearance by a non-lawyer” to represent another, but rather a prohibition that focuses on personal participation of the parties.

G. Administrative and Quasi-Judicial Tribunals with Special Rules

Social Security Commission (SSC)
- The SSC sometimes allows representation by accountants or claimants’ representatives with special authority, but typically in minor issues like filing claims, not full-blown litigation.
- For formal hearings, a lawyer is still usually required unless the rules specifically allow other representation.
Professional Regulation Commission (PRC)
- Disciplinary or administrative proceedings before the PRC can permit the respondent or complainant to appear pro se, but representation by a non-lawyer is not typically recognized unless specially authorized (e.g., an association representative in some contexts).
Other Regulatory Agencies
- Some agencies (e.g., National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, HLURB/HLURB’s successor agencies, etc.) have specialized rules that may allow non-lawyers such as tribal leaders or accredited agents to assist or speak in a representative capacity, subject to agency discretion and formal authorization.

H. Representation in Arbitration Under the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Act

Republic Act No. 9285, or the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004, fosters arbitration and mediation. In many arbitration proceedings (domestic or international commercial arbitration), the parties can agree on the form of representation.
The ADR Act does not strictly require counsel to appear in arbitration; parties may agree to be represented by non-lawyers, especially in commercial arbitration, provided it does not run afoul of public policy and the rules of the arbitral institution.
However, once an arbitral award is challenged or enforced in the regular courts, a licensed attorney must typically handle the court proceedings.

IV. ETHICAL AND DISCIPLINARY RULES

Unauthorized Practice of Law
- Canon 9, Rule 9.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) states that a lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified person the performance of any task which by law may only be performed by a duly licensed attorney.
- Lawyers who aid non-lawyers in unauthorized practice (e.g., by lending their name or allowing non-lawyers to appear and sign pleadings on their behalf) may be subjected to disciplinary action.
Lawyers’ Responsibility over Non-Lawyers in their Employ
- A lawyer who employs a paralegal or other non-lawyer staff must ensure that the staff’s duties do not constitute practicing law, i.e., they must be confined to secretarial, administrative, or research tasks. The lawyer must never allow non-lawyers to render legal opinions, appear in court, or file pleadings without the required supervision.
Prohibition Against Ghostwriting
- Similarly, lawyers cannot prepare pleadings for a non-lawyer to file as if the non-lawyer himself wrote it (a form of “ghostwriting”). The Supreme Court has condemned such acts as unethical and violative of the rule against unauthorized practice of law.

V. KEY JURISPRUDENCE AND REFERENCES

Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113 (1991) – Comprehensive discussion on what constitutes practice of law.
Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc., Bar Matter No. 553 (1993) – Clarifies unauthorized practice of law in non-legal organizations.
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) v. Atienza, A.C. No. 8339 (2011) – Emphasizes that only lawyers in good standing can practice or appear for another in judicial or quasi-judicial fora.
Rules of Court, particularly Rule 138 (Admission to the Bar) and Rule 138-A (Law Student Practice).
Labor Code and NLRC Rules of Procedure – Authorizing representation by union or employer representatives.
DARAB Rules of Procedure – Allowing non-lawyer representatives for agrarian reform disputes.
ADR Act of 2004 (R.A. 9285) – Allowing flexible representation in arbitration.

VI. SUMMARY OF PRINCIPLES

General Rule: Only duly admitted members of the Philippine Bar in good standing can practice law or represent others in litigation, quasi-judicial, or administrative proceedings.
Self-Representation: Any individual party may appear in his/her own behalf (pro se).
Exceptions: Limited statutory or rule-based exceptions exist, such as:
- Law student practice under the Clinical Legal Education Program (Rule 138-A);
- Representation by labor union officers or duly authorized company representatives in labor cases (NLRC, labor arbiters, voluntary arbitration);
- Representation by non-lawyers in certain agrarian disputes (DARAB);
- Non-appearance of lawyers in small claims cases;
- Special rules in other administrative agencies or specialized tribunals (e.g., PRC, HLURB, SSS, NCIP), subject to express authorization;
- Arbitration proceedings, where parties may consent to non-lawyer representatives.
Ethical Constraints: Lawyers must avoid assisting or enabling the unauthorized practice of law and must supervise any non-lawyer staff or law students carefully to remain within legal and ethical boundaries.

FINAL NOTE

While the scope for non-lawyer representation is tightly regulated, these exceptions aim to balance access to justice with the need to maintain professional standards in legal proceedings. The Supreme Court consistently guards against the unauthorized practice of law to protect public interest and ensure the proper administration of justice. Any non-lawyer who steps beyond the permitted boundaries or a lawyer who facilitates an unauthorized practice risks disciplinary or criminal sanctions.

This completes the comprehensive outline of non-lawyer authorization to appear in Philippine courts, quasi-judicial agencies, and arbitral tribunals, reflecting all major statutory rules, jurisprudential guidelines, and ethical principles on the matter.