Syllabus for the 2023 Philippine Bar Exams. Official Syllabus will be released by the Supreme Court.
NOTE: All Bar candidates should be guided that only laws, rules, issuances, and jurisprudence pertinent to the topics in this syllabus as of June 30, 2022 are examinable materials within the coverage of the 2023 Bar Examinations.
One hundred and fifty-six out of 532 examinees (29.66%) passed the 2022 Special Shari’ah Bar Examinations held last March 20 and 22 at the University of the Philippines in Diliman, the Supreme Court, through the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC), announced on July 26, 2022.
According to 2022 Special Shari’ah Bar Examinations Chairperson Macrina A. Morados, Dean of the University of the Philippines Institute of Islamic Studies, the Supreme Court En Banc approved the Shari’ah Bar Committee’s petition to lower the passing percentage to 70%, taking into consideration the challenges and circumstances encountered by the examinees under extra-ordinary condition brought about by the pandemic.
The high court said among the ten passers in the 17th Special Shari’ah Bar Examinations are the following:
Ambung, Maniri, Cayasalam C. (85.6250%)
Curo, Norhasima S. (85.5250%)
Laguindab, Aina L. (84.9000%)
Mortaba, Nur-aima B. (83.9000%)
Lantud, Norajannah D. (83.4500%)
Barambangan, Hasmin M. (83.2750%)
Ameril, Shaibani S. (83.0750%)
Tawano, Abdul Raheem R. (82.9750%)
Domadalug-Abdullah, Moumina Sheryne L. (82.4000%)
Alioden, Mohammad Muzahim A. (82.1750%)
Dean Morados disclosed that the members of the Board of Examiners for the 2022 Special Shari’ah Bar Examinations are the following: Atty. Sha Elijah B. Dumama-Alba (Persons, Family Relations and Property), Counselor Sheikh Luqman Bin Usman Imam (Jurisprudence [Fiqh] and Customary Laws [Adat]), Atty. Mehol K. Sadain (Procedure in Shari’ah Courts), and Dean Abdulcader Ayo (Succession, Wills/Adjudication and Settlement of Estates).
Dean Morados expressed her gratitude to the Supreme Court for its trust and confidence on her and the Board of Examiners in the successful conduct of the latest Shari’ah Bar Exams.
She also thanked Supreme Court Justice Japar B. Dimaampao “for his unwavering support and guidance all throughout the conduct of the examinations.” Justice Dimaampao served as the Chairperson of the 2020 Special Shari’ah Bar Examinations when he was still an Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals.
Dean Morados likewise expressed gratitude to OBC Officer-in-Charge and Assistant Bar Confidant Atty. Amor P. Entila, to the OBC-Shari’ah Bar Task force, as well as to UP Chancellor Dr. Fidel Nemenzo for allowing the conduct of the Shari’ah Bar at the UP Diliman Testing Center free of charge and with the support of the deans of the various UP Colleges. The 17th Special Shari’ah Bar Examinations were simultaneously held at the College of Engineering, the College of Arts and Letters, the College of Social Sciences and Philosophy, and the School of Economics of UP Diliman. The examinations were previously conducted at the Court of Appeals in Manila.
Following is the list of examinees who passed the 2022 Shari’ah Bar Examinations.
1. ABAS, Princess Fahanna Azzisah G.
2. ABDUL, Junada D.
3. ABDULIAH, Asliah T.
4. ABDULLAR, Asmin P.
5. ABDULLAH, Einel Amarah M.
6. ABDULLAR, Jehan D.
7. ABDULLAR, Mohammad Yasin D
8. ABDULMALIK, Rofaidah. D.
9. ABDULRAHMAN, Rasad A.
10. ABINAL, Hafsa M.
11. ABUBACAR, Isnihaya I.
12. AGUAM, Sittie Aisah M.
13. ARAMAD, Putchoy S.
14. ALAMA-SALIWATO, Rosemia R.
15. ALAWI, Sahani A.
16. ALI, Abdul Hamid D.
17. ALI, Majeeda B.
18. ALI, Rohina P.
19. ALIBASIR, Najerah M.
20. ALIODEN, Mohammad Muzahim A.
21. ALO, Amania Janeena B.
22. ALONTO, Sonora M.
23. AMBUNG-MANIRI, Cayasalam C
24. AMERIL, Jasima M.
25. AMERIL, Shaibani S.
26. AMEROL, Anida B.
27. ANDIG, Mohammad Aladdin B.
28. ANGIN, Akimah H.
29. ANTAS, Mayrah D.
30. ARIMAO, Nashiba P.
31. ASHARY, Alaysa B.
32. ATI, Abdul Mahid M.
33. AYUNAN, Anisa Kim G.
34. BANGCOLA, Ashyanna Alexine Adia Amira-labi A.
35. BANSUAN, Jibril Ressan U,
36. BARAMBANGAN, Hasmin M.
37. BARAOCOR, Faridah C.
38. BATALO, Ryan M.
39. BATUGAN, Rasliah D.
10. BENASING, Sowaib M.
41. BENITO, Ashleya Princess B.
42. BENITO, Fatimah Khadejah M.
43. BENITO, Hanipa A.
44. BILANGATAO, Farhana P.
45. BISTON, Norodsan A.
46. BOTAWAN, Alaisah B.
47. CALACA, Shaliha Andierah R.
48. CAMAMA, Mohammad Emeer M.
49. CAMIM, Hamimah A,
50. CARIM, Rahma S.
51. CURO, Norhasima S
52. DALIDIG, Jaliah D.
53. DAYAAN, Norodin I.
54. DIMA-AMPAO, Aisah S
55. DIMAALI, Hainie A.
56. DIMAAMPAO, Jacharah M.
57. DIMALUTANG, Ameroden M.
58. DIMAPORO, Janifa M.
59. DIPANGAMPONG, Cairoden T.
60. DIRAMPATAN-SARIP, Shahani M.
61. DOMADALUG-ABDULLAk, Moumina Sheryne L.
62. GOPUNTAO, Haydami I
63. GUERRERO, Lorna A.
64. GURO, Sittie Hasmin G.
65. H. AMRANIE, Negrizah B.
66. HADJI, Ismael Johaira H.
67. HADJI SALIH, Zahiya B.
68. HADJI RASUL, Namerah B.
69. HADJI SATAR, Rawiah M.
70. HAJIRON, Fatima Nneka N.
71. HALID, Haimah A.
72. HASAN, Abdullah U,
73. HASSAN, Radiya I.
74. HASSAN-TAHIL, Normalynne J.
75. IBRAHIM, Isa L.
76. IBRAHIM, Naguie G.
77. IBRAHIM, Rasmodden M.
78. ISMAEL, Angcabae B.
79. JAUDDIN, Maryam Amina T.
80. KADU, Nadiah L.
81. KARON, Bai Febraidah S.
82. KASIM, Nidznalin I.
83. LAGUINDAB, Aina L.
84. LANTUD, Norajannah D.
85. LIM, Nur-ainee T.
86. LOMONDOT, Norlailah M.
87. MABANING, Norhaina M.
88. MACABANDO, Katrina S.
89- MACACUNA, Norol-ain S.
90. MACARAMBON, Sittyhaima K.
91. MACASAYON, Abdul Qyzr P.
92. MACASIMBAR, Hosnie M.
93. MACASINDIL, Alimar G.
94. MACOTE, Shahanie M.
95. MADUM, Raihana M.
96. MAGAPISA, Sittie Farisha D.
97. MAGONDACAN, Shariefia D.
98. MALAWI, Jamalodin P.
99. MAMA, Khamila M.
100. MAMALO, Sittie Almerah B.
101. MANALOCON, Rahima U.
102. MANGODA, Mohammad Ryan M.
103. MANGOMPIA-SAID, Hedjarah B
104. MANGORSI, Sittie Aisah T.
105. MAPANDI, Asliah G.
106. MAPANDI-PACASUM, Juhana A.
107. MASACAL, Laila P.
108. MASDAL, Alejar A.
109. MASTURA, Ashya S.
110. MAULANA, Umairah A.
111. MAUNTING, Salamat L.
112. MAUNTOL, Norhidaya G.
113. MORTABA, Nur-aima B.
114. MORTABA, JR., Tingcap S.
115. MUHAMMAD, Sha Aira G.
116. MUNDIG, Rofaidah E.
117. MURAKI, Omar L.
118. MUSA, Guizali S.
119. MUTIA, Abdul Azis A.
120. NOSKA, Pahmia P.
121. OMAR, Ansary A.
122. ONG, Chazee A.
123. PACA, Naizeyah G.
124. PALAWAN, Moh’d Sidic B.
125. PANDAPATAN, Sittie Hayamera C.
126. PANGANDAMAN, Noraleah R.
127. PANGGAGA, Sittie Apepah B
128, PIALAN, Alexander B.
129. POLANGI, Shalima A.
130. PUMBAYA, Jalina B.
131. PUMBAYA, Jamina B.
132. PUMBAYA, Nashiba A.
133. PUNO, Jalanie A.
134. RADIALAOT, Norminah D.
135. RADIAMODA, Nafisah HS.
136. RANGIRIS JR., Salem A.
137. ROMINIMBANG, Rayhanah M.
138. SADIC, Nadra B.
139. SAIPODEN, Albaida S.
140. SALEM, Aisah D.
141. SALIC, Saliha M.
142. SALIH, Yusop A.
143. SALIK, Hamsah A.
144. SAMPACO, Johara D.
145. SHARIEF JR., Salic A.
146. SOMERADO, Asliah S.
147. SUCOD, Norhana M.
148. SUMENSIL, Anwar T.
149. TABAO, Sittie Jehan A.
150. TAHA, Abdul Jabbar Y.
151. TANGCOR, Nahida T.
152. TAWANO, Abdul Raheem R.
153. TOCALO, Sittie Hedaya M.
154. TORRES, Rohaina D.
155. TUAN, Jihan D.
156. WEE, Fatima A,
Courtesy of the Supreme Court Public Information Office.
The 2023 Philippine Bar Exams will be held sometime in September 2023, compressed in 3 days, reduced coverage, and lesser testing sites.
This was disclosed by Supreme Court Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, Chairperson of the 2023 Bar Examinations and Chairperson of the Court’s Committee on Bar Reforms, in his message during a meeting with Philippine Association of Law Schools (PALS) on June 23, 2022 via zoom.
The 3-Day Exams will have the following schedule:
Morning: Political Law and Public International Law Afternoon: Labor Law and Social Legislation
Morning: Civil Law with Land Titles
Afternoon: Commercial Law with Taxation
Morning: Remedial Law with Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
Afternoon: Criminal Law
There will be 20 essay questions, without sub-questions, for each Bar subject. There will be four examiners per Bar subject. Justice Hernando said that “entry level questions” will compose the examinations.
Commercial Law with Taxation will include basic taxation without computation of income tax. Tariff and Customs law are likewise excluded. Commercial Law will include Corporation Law, Insurance Law, Intellectual Property, General Banking Laws/BSP Charter and Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA), Foreign Investments Act and Amended Public Service Act. Negotiable Instruments Law is still excluded.
The entire syllabus for the 2023 Bar Examinations will be released on August 8, 2022.
Exact examination dates and intervals are yet to be determined when 2023 Bar Bulletins are released later this year.
With the early schedule of the 2023 Bar Exams, the bar result is projected to be released in November 2023. The Bar Oath-taking and Signing of the Roll of Attorneys will be done at the same time in December 2023.
The 2023 Bar Exams will still be digitized but with lesser testing sites compared to 2020-2021 Bar Exams. Testing centers in NCR, Baguio, Cebu, and Davao will be maintained, while other locations will still be determined.
Justice Hernando emphasized that Fourth Year in law school is catered mostly to review subjects and should already be a preparation for the Bar Exam itself. Accordingly, review centers should only be supplementary.
As early as January 2023, the candidates taking the Bar Exams for the first time may file their application to take the Bar Exams. The other documentary requirements available after graduation such as the official Transcript of Records (TOR) and Certificate of Good Moral Character will have a later date for submission. The date of application for repeater examinees will be determined on a later date, most likely after the 2022 Bar Exams result is released.
Law School Buddy would like to acknowledge Dean Cecilio Duka, LEXplore, and Mich Lopez for this collective information. Thank you!
Get ready to be inspired as we learn the 7 Things Revealed by Bar Topnotchers on their way to the bar, including law school tips that can help everyone aspiring to be lawyers.
1. Finding out the bar exams result 2. Dreaming of becoming bar topnotchers 3. Destined to become lawyers 4. Daily schedule during bar review 5. Social life during bar review 6. Journey of a working law student 7. Law school tips to aspiring lawyers and bar takers
What is the best pre-law course? Is there such a thing as the best pre-law course?
For a future lawyer to be admitted in law school, two of the sine qua non conditions to the admission at the college of Law are:
(1) One must be a graduate of a four year Bachelor’s Degree course from a recognized university; and
(2) One must have 18 units in English, 18 units Social Sciences, and 6 units in Mathematics in the undergraduate course. Some colleges allow students to enroll even if there are deficiencies in the required units. As long as the deficiency will be completed during your stay at the college of law. Talk to your prospect college of law for their specific policy.
Always remember that there is no such thing as the best pre-law course.
The study of the law is a great equalizer. Everybody starts from zero in their hope to surpass the college of law, and eventually pass the BAR and become Attorneys.
BAR Exams Frequently Asked Questions Q&A – Criminal Law – Audiobook Review Part 2
BAR FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS CRIMINAL LAW PART 2 Concepts
QUESTION: What is the doctrine of implied conspiracy? (1998; 2003)
ANSWER: The doctrine of implied conspiracy holds two or more persons participating in the commission of a crime collectively responsible and liable as co-conspirators although absent any agreement to that effect, when they act in concert, demonstrating unity of criminal intent and a common purpose or objective. The existence of a conspiracy shall be inferred or deduced from their criminal participation in pursuing the crime and thus the act of one shall be the act of all.
QUESTION: Are reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment the same? Can they be imposed interchangeably? (1991; 1994; 2001)
ANSWER: NO. Reclusion perpetua is a penalty prescribed by the RPC, with a fixed duration of imprisonment from 20 years and 1 day to 40 years, and carries with it accessory penalties.
Life imprisonment, on the other hand, is a penalty prescribed by special laws, with no fixed duration of imprisonment and without any accessory penalty.
QUESTION: What is a memorandum check? Is a person who issues a memorandum check without sufficient funds guilty of violating B.P Blg. 22? (1994;1995)
ANSWER: A memorandum check is an ordinary check with the word “Memorandum,” “Memo,” or “Mem” written across the check, signifying that the maker or drawer engages to pay its holder absolutely, thus partaking the nature of a promissory note. It is drawn on a bank and is a bill of exchange within the purview of Sec. 185 of the Negotiable Instruments Law.
A person who issued a memorandum check without sufficient funds is guilty of violating B.P. Blg. 22 as said law covers all checks whether it is an evidence of indebtedness, or in payment of a pre-existing obligation, or as deposit or guarantee.
QUESTION: Distinguish clearly but briefly between rebellion and coup d’etat based on their constitutive elements as criminal offenses.
ANSWER: Rebellion is committed by a public uprising and taking arms against the government while coup d’ etat is committed by means of swift attack accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy, and stealth.
The purpose of rebellion is either to remove from the allegiance to the Philippine Government or its laws the territory of the Philippines or any part thereof or any body of land, naval or other armed forces; or to deprive the Chief Executive or Congress wholly or partially of any of their powers or prerogatives.
On the other hand, the purpose of a coup d’ etat is to seize or diminish state power from the duly constituted authorities of the government or any military camp or the installation communication networks, public utilities and other facilities needed for the exercise of continued possession of powers.
Rebellion may be committed by any group of persons while coup d ‘etat is committed by a person or persons belonging to the military or police, or holding any public office or employment. Rebellion is committed by more than 1 person as it involves a public uprising, while coup d ‘etat may be committed by only one person.
QUESTION: Distinguish clearly but briefly between compound and complex crimes as concepts in the Penal Code.
ANSWER: Compound crime is when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies while a complex crime is when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other.
QUESTION: Distinguish clearly but briefly between justifying and exempting circumstances in criminal law.
ANSWER: Justifying circumstances are those when the act of a person is said to be in accordance with law, so that such person is deemed not to have transgressed the law and is free from both criminal and civil liability.
On the other hand, exempting circumstances are those grounds for exemption from punishment because there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the conditions which makes the act voluntary or negligent.
QUESTION: Distinguish clearly but briefly between intent and motive in the commission of an offense.
ANSWER: Intent is the purpose to use a particular means to effect a definite result while motive is the moving power which impels one to action for such result.
QUESTION: Distinguish clearly but briefly between oral defamation and criminal conversation.
ANSWER: Oral defamation, known as slander, is a malicious imputation of any act, omission or circumstance against a person, done orally in public, tending to cause dishonor, discredit, contempt, embarrassment or ridicule to the latter. This is a crime against honor penalized in Art. 358 of the Revised Penal Code.
Criminal conversation is a term used in making a polite reference to sexual intercourse as in certain crimes, like rape, seduction and adultery. It has no definite concept as a crime.
Philippine Bar Exams Frequently Asked Questions Criminal Law Part 1
(1) Distinguish motive from intent. (1996; 1999)
Motive is the reason which impels one to commit an act for a definite result, while intent is the purpose to use a particular means to effect such result. Intent is an element of the crime (except in unintentional felonies), whereas motive is not.
( 2 ) W h a t d o y o u u n d e r s t a n d b y a b e r r a t i o i c t u s , e r r o r i n p e r s o n a e a n d p r a e t e r i n t e n t i o n e m ? Do they alter the criminal liability of the accused? (1989; 1993; 1994; 1999) ANSWER:
Aberratio ictus o r mistake in the blow occurs when the offender delivered the blow at his intended victim but missed, and instead such blow landed on an unintended victim. The situation generally brings about complex crimes where from a single act, two or more grave or less grave felonies resulted, namely the attempt against the intended victim and the consequences on the unintended victim. As complex crimes, the penalty for the more serious crime shall be the one imposed and in the maximum period. It is only when the resulting felonies are only light that complex crimes do not result and the penalties are to be imposed distinctly for each resulting crime.
Error in personae or mistake in identity occurs when the offender actually hit the person to whom the blow was directed but turned out to be different from and not the victim intended. The criminal liability of the offender is not affected, unless the mistake in identity resulted to a crime different from what the offender intended to commit, in which case the lesser penalty between the crime intended and the crime committed shall be imposed but in the maximum period (Art. 49, RPC).
Praeter intentionem o r where the consequence went beyond that intended or expected. This is a mitigating circumstance (Art. 13, par. 3, RPC) when there is a notorious disparity between the act or means employed by the offender and the resulting felony, i.e., the resulting felony could not be reasonably anticipated or foreseen by the offender from the act or means employed by him.
(3) Distinguish mala in se from mala prohibita. (1988; 1997; 1998; 2001; 2003)
Mala in se is wrong from its very nature, as most of those punished in the RPC. Hence, in its commission, intent is an element and good faith is a defense. The test to determine whether an offense is mala in se is not the law punishing it but the very nature of the act itself.
On the other hand, an act mala prohibita i s wrong because it is prohibited by law. Without the law punishing the act, it cannot be considered a wrong. Hence, the mere commission of that act is what constitutes the offense punished and criminal intent will be immaterial for reason of public policy.
(4) What are heinous crimes? Name ten specific heinous crimes. (1994; 1995; 1997)
Heinous crimes are those grievous, odious, and hateful offenses and which by reason of their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity, and perversity, are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and norms of decency and morality in a just, civilized and ordered society. They are punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. (WHEREAS CLAUSE, R.A. 7659)
The ten specific heinous crimes are:
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention
Robbery with Homicide
Rape committed by two or more persons, or with a deadly weapon or with homicide
(5) What are the instances when the death penalty could not be imposed, although it should otherwise be meted out? (1997; 1998)
Under Art. 47 of the RPC, the death penalty shall not be imposed when:
1. The guilty person is below 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime, oR
2. Is more than 70 years of age, or
3. When upon appeal of the case by the SC, the required majority vote is not obtained for the imposition of the death penalty.
(6) When is the benefit of the Indeterminate Sentence Law not applicable? (1999; 2003)
The Indeterminate Sentence Law does not apply to: 1. Persons convicted of offenses punishable with death penalty or life imprisonment;
2. Those convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason; 3. Those convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage; 4. Those convicted of piracy; 5. Those who are habitual delinquents; 6. Those who shall have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence; 7. Those who violated the terms of conditional pardon granted to them by the Chief Executive; 8. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year; 9. Those who, upon the approval of the law (December 5, 1933), had been sentenced by final judgment; 10. Those sentenced to the penalty of destierro or suspension.
(7) What is an impossible crime? (1993; 2003)
It is an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment, or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. (Art. 4, par. 2)
But where the acts performed which would have resulted in an impossible crime also 1) constitute an offense under the RPC, or
(2) would subject the accused to criminal liability although of a different category, the penalty to be imposed should be that for the latter and not that for an impossible crime.
(8) Distinguish instigation from entrapment. (1990; 1995; 2003)
Instigation takes place when a peace officer induces a person to commit a crime. Without the inducement, the crime would not be committed. Hence, it is exempting by reason of public policy. Otherwise, the peace officer would be a co-principal.
On the other hand, entrapment signifies the ways and means devised by a peace officer to entrap or apprehend a person who has committed a crime. With or without the entrapment, the crime has been committed already. Hence, entrapment is not mitigating.
(9) What is the purpose of the Probation Law? (1986; 1989)
The purposes of the Probation Law are:
To promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing him with individualized treatment;
To provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent offender which might be less probable if he were to serve a prison sentence; and
To prevent the commission of offenses.
(10) What is the doctrine of implied conspiracy?(1998; 2003)
The doctrine of implied conspiracy holds two or more persons participating in the commission of a crime collectively responsible and liable as co-conspirators although absent any agreement to that effect, when they act in concert, demonstrating unity of criminal intent and a common purpose or objective. The existence of a conspiracy shall be inferred or deduced from their criminal participation in pursuing the crime and thus the act of one shall be the act of all.
The Supreme Court of the Philippines sets new record as it holds the first-ever online oath-taking ceremonies for the successful 2019 Bar passers.
The Supreme Court has earlier announced a resolution allowing the conduct of the oath-taking ceremony of the 2019 BAR examination passers on 25 June 2020 via online video conference and linked to a government television network for broadcast.
The oath-taking will be televised exclusively on PTV on June 25, 2020, Thursday, 2:00 pm. Netizens may join the ceremonies through PTV’s YouTube Channel.