COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSION ON THE PROHIBITION AGAINST THE PRIVATE PRACTICE OF LAW BY GOVERNORS, CITY MAYORS, AND MUNICIPAL MAYORS UNDER R.A. NO. 7160 (LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE), SECTION 90(a)

I. OVERVIEW

One of the well-established ethical and legal principles in Philippine jurisprudence is that certain public officials are prohibited from engaging in the private practice of law during their tenure. This prohibition stems from the constitutional, statutory, and ethical imperatives designed to:

Avoid conflicts of interest;
Ensure that government officials devote their full time and attention to public service; and
Preserve the integrity and trust reposed in public office.

Under Section 90(a) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7160, also known as the Local Government Code of 1991, a specific prohibition is placed upon provincial governors, city mayors, and municipal mayors from engaging in the private practice of their profession, including the private practice of law.

II. STATUTORY BASIS

A. R.A. No. 7160, Section 90(a)

The relevant portion of Section 90 of the Local Government Code provides:

Section 90. Practice of Profession.
(a) Governors, city and municipal mayors are prohibited from practicing their profession or engaging in any occupation other than the exercise of their functions as local chief executives.

While this provision applies to any profession, the prohibition on the private practice of law is especially scrutinized because the legal profession demands undivided loyalty to the client, which can directly clash with the demands of public office.

B. Relationship with Other Laws and Ethical Rules

Constitutional Precepts
- The Constitution mandates that a public office is a public trust (Article XI, Section 1). Public officials must serve with responsibility and integrity. Accepting private legal engagements while holding a public office that requires full-time attention is perceived as contrary to this principle.
Code of Professional Responsibility
- The Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) imposes upon lawyers the duty to avoid conflicts of interest (Canon 15) and to uphold the integrity of the profession. Handling private cases while concurrently exercising governmental powers may expose the official (and lawyer) to potential ethical lapses or conflicts, undermining the impartial administration of justice.
Administrative Code and Other Applicable Regulations
- Apart from R.A. No. 7160, various issuances (e.g., Civil Service Commission Memoranda) further articulate that certain officials must devote their time exclusively to public duties. Failure to do so may expose them to administrative liability.

III. RATIONALE FOR THE PROHIBITION

Conflict of Interest
- A public official who handles private legal cases may find himself/herself appearing before the very courts or agencies that the local government regularly deals with, creating either a direct or indirect conflict of interest.
- The official’s position might unduly influence the court or administrative body in which the case is being heard.
Full-Time Public Service
- A city or municipal mayor or provincial governor is expected to be on call 24 hours a day. They are the highest executive officers in their localities, and their duties are not confined to a regular 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. work schedule.
- Engaging in private practice detracts from the time and energy that should otherwise be devoted exclusively to public affairs.
Preservation of Public Trust
- Public office is a public trust, and the dignity of the office must be safeguarded. Citizens must be assured that local chief executives are working solely in the public’s best interests, rather than for private gain.

IV. SCOPE OF THE PROHIBITION

Who are Covered
- Provincial Governors, City Mayors, and Municipal Mayors are explicitly mentioned in Section 90(a).
- Members of the sanggunian (e.g., Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panlungsod, Sangguniang Bayan) have a different set of limitations under Section 90(b), where some are allowed to practice their profession under certain conditions, provided that such practice does not conflict or hamper their legislative duties.
Nature of the Prohibited Practice
- The “practice of law” is broadly construed to include:
  - Representing clients in court or administrative agencies;
  - Preparing legal documents for clients;
  - Giving legal advice for a fee;
  - Appearing as counsel in any legal proceeding;
  - Any habitual or customary holding out of oneself as a practicing attorney.
Duration
- The prohibition subsists for the entire term of the official in question. From the moment the official assumes office (upon oath) until the expiration or termination of that term, private practice is forbidden.

V. EXCEPTIONS OR SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

Unlike some other officials (e.g., those in the legislative bodies or part-time professors in law schools, or government lawyers who can appear in court on behalf of the government), governors and mayors do not enjoy any statutory exception under Section 90(a). Their role is deemed full-time and cannot be mixed with private professional engagement.

Temporary or Incidental Legal Assistance
- Even sporadic legal work or occasional professional appearance can fall under the prohibition if it amounts to the exercise of law practice.
- The Supreme Court has emphasized that any act that even “partially and customarily” involves the practice of law runs counter to the legislative intent of Section 90(a).
Pro Bono Legal Work
- The law is silent on pro bono practice for local chief executives. Given the broad language of the prohibition, prudent guidance typically advises that such officials refrain from any legal representation, even if unpaid, to avoid potential conflicts and maintain public trust.

VI. LEGAL AND ETHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF VIOLATION

Administrative Liability
- Engaging in the unauthorized private practice of law may subject the local chief executive to disciplinary proceedings before the Office of the President, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), or the Ombudsman, depending on the nature of the misconduct.
- Possible penalties include suspension, removal, or disqualification from holding public office.
Ethical Sanctions
- As a member of the bar, the governor or mayor could face disciplinary action before the Supreme Court under its plenary power to regulate the practice of law. Sanctions can range from reprimand, suspension, or even disbarment, depending on the gravity of the infraction and the presence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
Criminal Liability
- While the Local Government Code does not explicitly provide a criminal sanction for violation of Section 90(a), the official could be held liable under other laws (e.g., anti-graft statutes) if the private practice of law is linked to graft, corruption, or any unethical dealings involving undue advantage.

VII. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE

Although the Supreme Court has not produced a large volume of decisions specifically citing Section 90(a) of the LGC in isolation, the principle that public officials with full-time responsibilities cannot engage in the private practice of law resonates in several lines of jurisprudence discussing conflict of interest, devotion to duty, and ethical standards. Some illustrative points from case law:

Conflict of Interest Doctrine
- Courts have consistently ruled that public officials must avoid situations where personal interests clash with official duties.
Strict Interpretation of Prohibitions
- The Court tends to interpret statutory prohibitions against private practice strictly to give full effect to the legislative intent of keeping public officials solely dedicated to their official tasks.
Administrative Disciplinary Cases
- In analogous circumstances involving other officials similarly prohibited from private practice, disciplinary orders have been issued by the Supreme Court or other tribunals, upholding the principle that any semblance of private practice by high-ranking government officials is unacceptable.

VIII. PRACTICAL GUIDANCE

Immediately Cease or Suspend Private Practice Upon Assumption of Office
- Lawyers elected or appointed as governors or mayors must terminate all pending private legal engagements and refrain from accepting new clients.
- They should formally withdraw from cases to avoid a violation of the prohibition.
Avoid Even “Behind-the-Scenes” Legal Work
- Drafting pleadings, giving private legal advice informally to friends or relatives for a fee, or participating in negotiations with the flavor of professional legal counsel can still be construed as practice of law.
Public Office Comes First
- Any official legal tasks must pertain exclusively to the execution of official functions, such as signing official documents, representing the local government in an official capacity, or issuing executive orders.

IX. CONCLUSION

Section 90(a) of the Local Government Code unequivocally prohibits governors, city mayors, and municipal mayors from engaging in the private practice of law. This statutory injunction is rooted in the need to:

Avoid conflicts of interest,
Ensure the official devotes undivided attention to public duties, and
Safeguard public trust in the integrity of the office.

Any infraction exposes the local chief executive to both administrative sanctions and possible disciplinary proceedings before the Supreme Court as a member of the bar. The prohibition is broad, and no exceptions are provided for part-time or pro bono engagements. Consequently, compliance entails a decisive and complete withdrawal from any form of private legal practice for the entire duration of the official’s term.

Ultimately, public service demands the utmost dedication, and the Local Government Code’s proscription fortifies the ethical and legal order by ensuring that local chief executives remain fully committed to the welfare of their constituents.