This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
, laws and legal orders of duly constituted authorities Constitutional provisions on due process and the right to counsel (basis for Canon 14) Art. III, sec.1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of laws _____, sec.11. Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty. ____, sec.12(1). Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel. Cf Rules of Court, Rule 138, sec.31 – appointment of attorneys for destitute clients. Distinguish from Rule 116 and 124 – appointment of counsels de oficio. o Rule 138 is under Part V of the Rules of Court – Legal Ethics; Rule 116 is in Part III, Criminal Procedure. o Therefore, Rule 138 is general in nature – an attorney may be assigned by the court to render professional service free of charge to any party in any case. o The rule is stricter and more mandatory in criminal cases. Thus, Under Rule 116, sec.6, before arraignment, the court shall inform the accused of his right to counsel and shall ask him if he desires to have one. If accused has no counsel and is not allowed to defend himself in person (i.e., in courts higher than MTC) the court must assign counsel de oficio. A counsel de oficio is a counsel appointed or assigned by the court, from among the members of the bar in good standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, may adequately defend the accused (Moreno) For criminal cases on appeal to the Court of Appeals, Rule 124, sec.2 provides: If accused is in prison, the Clerk of Court of the CA shall designate a counsel de oficio if there is no counsel of record (counsel de parte) on appeal and the accused signed the notice of appeal himself. No affidavit of indigency is required as this is presume. If accused is not detained, the appointment of a counsel de oficio is not automatic. It must be requested by accused within 10 days from notice to file brief. Further, the right to counsel de oficio must be established [by an affidavit]. No presumption of indigency. Laws and legal orders of duly constituted authorities Notwithstanding absence of specific provision in CPR re purchase of client’s property in litigation, lawyer may be charged under the Code for violation of art. 1491 par.(5) of the Civil 1
without the consent of his first client.02 and Canon 21 in relation to RPC. Code because Canon 1 says that “a lawyer shall uphold the Constitution. 41 Phil 275 (1920) o Violation of BP 22 (Bouncing Checks) – People v. Villaluz. AC No. reconciliation between complainant and respondent will not be a bar to the proceedings because it does not wipe away the misconduct (Cordova v.Betrayal of Trust by an Attorney or Solicitor — Revelation of Secrets.) o Even if complainant entered into adulterous relationship with respondent lawyer knowing full well his marital status. 1997. AC No. 43 Phil. Feb 12. June 19. the penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum period.000 pesos. The same penalty shall be imposed upon an attorney-at-law or solicitor (procurador judicial) who. AC No. by any malicious breach of professional duty or inexcusable negligence or ignorance. or reveal any of the secrets of the latter learned by him in his professional capacity. 126. or a fine ranging from 200 to 1. AC No. to wit: ARTICLE 209. shall prejudice his client. Mar 6. 209. Gonzales. Apr 30. bigamy violations of RPC o A lawyer who makes a mockery of marriage by contracting a second before the judicial declaration of nullity of the first is guilty of deceit and grossly immoral conduct (Castillo vda. 1980 o Participation in fatal hazing – In re Al Argosino. 4431. 1989) Committing and conviction of crime involving moral turpitude o Abduction with consent (of a minor) – In re Basa. 1962 o Falsification of public documents – In re Vailoces. 4921. Chua. shall undertake the defense of the opposing party in the same case. or both. Dec 29. 1625. Viray.) o Therefore. 3360. July 13. 1995 Violation of Notarial law o A notary public cannot plead good faith in notarizing documents without the presence of signatories thereto as this would be a mockery of what the Jurat or Acknowledgment requires (Flores v. 1999) o When notarization is done by a lawyer at a time when he has no authorization or commission to do so violates the lawyer’s oath to obey the laws (Nunga v. Art. L-363. AC No. 1982 o Smuggling – In re Rovero. this cannot excuse lawyer from liability under the CPR because what is in question is his fitness to be a member of the legal profession (Zaguirre v. Tuanda. 2003) o It is immaterial that the complainant is in pari delicto because disbarment proceedings is not a proceeding to give relief to complainant but to purge the legal profession of unworthy members (Zaguirre v. Castillo. Apr 30. obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and legal processes” (Bautista v. 439. 4500. AC No. AC No. Jan 30. 1990) Adultery. AC No. having undertaken the defense of a client or having received confidential information from said client in a case. Sept 30. de Mijares v. 1989 o Bigamy – In re Lontok. Castillo. — In addition to the proper administrative action. Nov 29. 1999) Violation of RPC on Betrayal of Trust o Rule 15. supra. 712. July 31. 293 (1922) o Murder – In re Gutierrez. concubinage. shall be imposed upon any attorneyat-law or solicitor (procurador judicial) who. Cordova. BM No. AM No. AC No. 2 . 3249. 4758.
) o “Conduct” as used in Rule 1. Procurement of personal loans thru insinuations of power as influence peddler in a government office (Co v. 3701. see Hilado v. supra.. Issuance of bad checks (Co v.02 speaks about “prospective clients”. AC No. o Further.). Pilla. 29 Phil. this prohibition applies even if the lawyer did not take the employment because a contract of employment or retainer is not an essential element of an attorney-client relationship (Rule 15. 5118. Sep 9. Bernardino. Cedo (AC No. June 3.01): When authorized by client after acquainting him of consequences of disclosure When required by law When necessary to collect fees or to defend lawyer. For this reason. Presenting a forged SPA to obtain a bank loan (Rural Bank of Silay v. 1995). such is not covered by the privilege as it is essentially inconsistent with the confidential relation between attorney and client (Uy Chico v. such as: Failure to account for money given him by complainant for investment purposes (Lizaso v. Calis. AC No. 3919.g. such as sharing office and personnel with other lawyers not his partners. 1999). Union Life. Amante. accepting employment from an opponent of a former client in a similar case puts the mandate of Canon 21 into “possible jeopardy” (Salonga v. Civil Code on torts and damages. etc. Also. David. Jan 24. Bernardino. Sandiganbayan (GR 105938. 2019. when communication by the client to the attorney is clearly intended for the purpose of being communicated to a third person. Hildawa. 1998). Jan 28. 569 ) o Thus. Other forms of misconduct which can fall under violations of precepts of law (e. 1999) o Exceptions: (see Rule 21.01 is not limited to conduct exhibited in connection with performance of professional duties but also for misconduct that shows the lawyer to be unfit for the office. 1991). 5105. Sep 20. 84 Phil. the Court upheld the IBP opinion that such a set up exposes the client’s secrets and confidential records and information to other lawyers and staff members at all times. even if there was no promise of job placement (Sebastian v. a lawyer must avoid any arrangement that can lead to a violation of this privilege. 1996) re identity of client as privileged communication. AC No. In PNB v. AC No. AC No. 2001) o 3 . his employees or associates o Other exceptions: When the client discloses intention to commit a crime or unlawful act Also. August 12. 163 (1915) o See also Regala v. March 28. Arranging for the travel abroad of complainant under an assumed name. fraud under the Civil Code and RPC. 3637.
Violation of Rules 7. including: (c) to counsel or maintain such actions or proceedings only as appear to him to be just. Feb 21. adequate service 4 . a declaration in the application to take the bar that the applicant is “single” when. such means only as are consistent with truth and honor. 6.. 2 Phil 266 ) Violation of legal processes Respondent’s disobedience to order of the Supreme Court prohibiting his reappointment to any branch. 1992) Lawyers in Government Service If the misconduct of a lawyer also constitutes a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility or the lawyer’s oath. Justness and sincerity. s/he may be disciplined as a member of the bar for such misconduct (Pimentel v. sec. for purposes of maintaining the causes confided to him. 6713 on Norms of conduct public officers – CPR applies to lawyers in government service. Ago. GR L-22320. instrumentality. of the Constitution which provides that the Supreme Court has the power to promulgate rules concerning admission to the practice of law and the integrated bar. Prompt. sec. Promoting organizations with purposes contrary to law or otherwise assisting clients in a scheme which attorney knows to be dishonest. the Executive Branch and Constitutional Commissions . Political neutrality 5.13. Commitment to public interest over personal interest 2.14. o Thus.9. and such defences only as he believes to be honestly debatable under the law. Rule 138. in the belief of the applicant. and never seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or law. GR 104599. Sec. Jr. Moreover. it undermines Art VIII.01 even if the marriage.01 and 7. Jr. AC No.03 states that “A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and shall not misuse them to defeat the ends of justice. sec. Rule 10. GR L-28546. according to Canon 6.02 of the CPR are also violations of the Rules of Court on admission to the practice of the profession. or is of such character as to affect his qualification as a lawyer or shows moral delinquency on his part. Mar 11. and Art. Llorente. 2505. 20 of the Rules of Court enumerates the duties of attorneys. 1994) o A lawyer’s oath to uphold the cause of justice is superior to his duty to his client (Cobb-Perez v. including GOCCs violates Attorney’s oath to obey laws and legal orders of duly constituted authorities (Brion. he had contracted marriage prior to the application violates Rule 7. NLRC.prohibitions and exceptions to other employments or holding of other positions during tenure. not discriminate 4.” o Likewise. July 30. Tabang. courteous. Act No. AC No. 2000) Cf Rule 3. AC No. 4680. or conniving at violation of the law (In re Terrell. Norms of conduct include (sec. July 29. Aug 29. 5305. De Ysasi III v. 1968). 1975. Cf Rep. in fact.5.03 in relation to Art. sec. Highest degree of excellence and professionalism 3. o Thus. v. Lantin. is void ab initio and is awaiting judicial declaration of nullity (Leda v. or agency of government. Art 7. and (d) to employ.2 referring to members of Congress. 2003) Misusing court rules (Castañeda v. Mar 17.4) 1. Brillantes.
If he had intervened therein. Quoting J.C. prohibition has no time frame under Rule 6. Simple living The Court. No. the two-fold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. and may strike hard blows. Commitment to democracy 8. Hence. which constitutes misconduct as a public official. Re lawyers who have left government service. Sandiganbayan. 2005. Feb 15. 1991) relates Rule 1. 556 ): It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.03 of CPR (see PCGG v. 6.03 (not to delay any man’s cause for any corrupt motive or interest) with provisions of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officers (RA 6713). in the case of Collantes v. subject to the following 1. Renomeron (AC No. 2012). the Court said in Suarez v. for Court’s interpretation of “intervention” that will make this rule applicable) 5 . Therefore. Apr 12. a labor arbiter who issues a preliminary injunction when he is not authorized to do so by the NLRC rules. to wit: o To process documents and papers expeditiously o Not have financial or material interest in any transaction requiring approval of their office o Not to solicit gifts or anything of monetary value in the course of any transaction which may be affected by the functions of their office And so. Aug 16. Platon (69 Phil.7(b) of RA 6713: o General rule: Practice of profession allowed even immediately after leaving government service o Except in connection with any matter before the office the lawyer used to be with. he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. dishonest. extortion. or immoral conduct) and Rule 1. Sutherland. while s/he may prosecute with earnestness and vigor. Mayor. 3056. one year prohibition under RA 6713 applies 2. also constitutes a violation of the lawyer’s oath. was suspended from the practice of law for 6 months because the Court found that his action of non-compliance with NLRC rules reflected on his qualifications as a lawyer (Lahm v. GR 151809-12. 7430.03 in relation to Sec. A lawyer-public officer who acts beyond his authority violates the law. Nationalism & patriotism 7. A. see Rule 6. A prosecutor must always remember that s/he is a servant of the law.01 (not to engage in unlawful. If he had not intervened therein.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.