RP V.

DESIERTO
FACTS: This resolves the motions for reconsideration filed by private respondent Eduardo M.
Cojuangco, Jr. and petitioner Republic of the Philippines.
The Courts decision dated September 23, 2002, granted the petition for certiorari filed by
the Republic of the Philippines, setting aside the resolution of the Ombudsman in OMB-0-902811 dismissing the Republics complaint, and ordered the Ombudsman to proceed with the
preliminary investigation in said case.
For its part, petitioner Republic of the Philippines assails the ruling of the Court ordering the
exclusion of respondents Teodoro D. Regala and Jose C. Concepcion as defendants in OMB-090-2811.
According to petitioner, respondents Regala and Concepcion should not be excluded as
respondents because they are being charged for illegal acts committed in their official
capacity as members of the Board of Directors of UNICOM and UCPB, in conspiracy with the
other private respondents.
Petitioners argument is that the invocation by Regala and Concepcion of the privilege of
attorney-client confidentiality during the onset of the proceedings was premature and that
they should have waited until they were called to testify and examine as witnesses as to
matters learned in confidence before they raised their objection.
ISSUE: Whether or not respondents Regala and Concepcion invoking the privilege of
attorney-client confidentiality valid to prevent them from testifying in court.
HELD: Yes. The acts complained of were done by the respondents in connection with the
legal services they rendered to the other respondents. Further, petitioners are not mere
witnesses, they are co-principals in the case for recovery of alleged ill-gotten wealth. Hence,
they cannot be compelled to testify because to do so would violate their constitutional right
against self-incrimination and their fundamental legal right to maintain inviolate the
privilege of attorney-client confidentiality.