Title
IN RE: Haron S. Meling
Case
B.M. No. 1154
Decision Date
Jun 8, 2004
Atty. Melendrez sought to disqualify Haron S. Meling from the 2002 Bar Exams for failing to disclose pending criminal cases and using "Attorney" without Bar membership. The Court found Meling dishonest, suspended his Shariaa Bar membership, and ruled his unauthorized title use improper.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 174536)

Procedural History and Petition

On October 14, 2002, Melendrez filed a petition with the OBC seeking (1) disqualification of Meling from the 2002 Bar Examinations and (2) disciplinary action against him as a Shari’a Bar member. The Supreme Court referred the matter to the OBC on December 3, 2002, and Meling filed his answer shortly thereafter.

Allegations of Non-Disclosure and Misuse of Title

Melendrez alleged that Meling failed to disclose three pending criminal cases (two for grave oral defamation; one for less serious physical injuries) in his bar‐examination application. He further charged Meling with unauthorized use of the title “Atty.” in official communications despite not being a member of the Integrated Bar.

OBC Report and Recommendation

The OBC found Meling’s excuse—that a retired judge advised settlement—“ludicrous,” noting that only a court may dismiss criminal cases. His non-disclosure under oath demonstrated dishonesty and violated Rule 7.01, Code of Professional Responsibility. The OBC also held that knowingly using the appellation “Atty.”, even if typed by a clerk, could constitute indirect contempt. It recommended (a) barring Meling from taking the lawyer’s oath and signing the Roll of Attorneys should he pass, and (b) suspending his Shari’a Bar membership until further order.

Mootness of Bar Oath Relief

Meling failed the 2003 Bar Examinations. The Court deemed the prayer to prevent him from taking the lawyer’s oath moot and academic, but proceeded to resolve the discipline issue as a member of the Shari’a Bar.

Good Moral Character Requirement under the 1987 Constitution

Under the 1987 Constitution and jurisprudence, the privilege to practice law—regular or Shari’a—demands not only legal learning but continued good moral character. Bar‐examination applicants must disclose any pending criminal charges to enable the Court to assess moral fitness.

Concealment and Dishonesty in Application

Meling’s deliberate silence regarding three pending cases, despite an express declaration under oath, evidenced his lack of the honesty and integrity required of lawyers. Concealment alone suffices to impugn fitness, irrespective of the eventual merits of the criminal charges.

Unauthorized Use of “Attorney” Title

Meling’s use of “Atty.”, knowing he was not a Philippine Bar member, violated the reserved appellation doctrine. Only those admitted to the Integrated Bar after passing the Bar Examinations may use the title. Unauthorized usage undermines public trust and may constitute contempt.

Pr

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.