I am facing the judge without assistance of counsel. He asked: “Are you a lawyer?
“I am not a lawyer, your honor, but I know the law.”
Then the judge asked: “Are you the one who wrote the pleadings?
“Yes, your honor.”
The Revised Rules of Procedure, Rule 138 provides for a non-lawyer a chance to defend himself. in fact, in the Philippine Supreme Court’s decision, Arcely Y. Santos vs. Judge Ubaldino A. Lacurom, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1823, Aug. 28, 2006, states:
“The Rules recognize the right of an individual to represent himself in any case in which he is a party. The Rules state that a party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of an attorney, and that his appearance must be either personal or by a duly authorized member of the Bar.27 The individual litigant may personally do everything in the progress of the action from commencement to the termination of the litigation.28 A party’s representation on his own behalf is not considered to be a practice of law as “one does not practice law by acting for himself, any more than he practices medicine by rendering first aid to himself.”29
“Therefore, Santos can conduct the litigation of the cases personally. Santos is not engaged in the practice of law if he represents himself in cases in which he is a party. By conducting the litigation of his own cases, Santos acts not as a counsel or lawyer but as a party exercising his right to represent himself. Certainly, Santos does not become a counsel or lawyer by exercising such right.”
The private prosecutor commented that my Motion for Reconsideration is a prohibited pleading in Rules on Summary Procedure. I gave him the Supreme Court’s ruling that the prohibition is only after trial on the merit and upon judgment. I do not how he become a lawyer, without knowing the elementary rules.
Some judges in the Philippines know the Rule, they ignore it, because of bias to litigant. It is the sad fact, not only in this country, but anywhere in the world. At age 78, I have seen the nearness of the end of the present wicked system, thus, I do not mind to meet judges that are ignorant.
27 Rules of Court, Section 34, Rule 138.
28 Cortes v. Agcaoili, 355 Phil. 848 (1998).
29 Maderada v. Mediodea, 459 Phil. 701 (2003) citing Nelson v. Smith, 151 ALR 512, 516, 18 December 1944.