1

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC

A.C. No. 1512 January 29, 1993 VICTORIA BARRIENTOS, complainant, vs. TRANSFIGURACION AARO!, respondent. RES !"#$ N

PER CURIAM" $n a s%orn complaint filed %ith this Court on Au&ust '(, 1)*+, complainant ,ictoria C. Barrientos see-s the disbarment of respondent #ransfi&uracion .aarol, ## a member of the Philippine Bar, on &rounds of deceit and &rossl/ immoral conduct. After respondent filed his ans%er 0Rollo, p. 1'1, the Court Resolved to refer the case to the Solicitor 2eneral for investi&ation, report and recommendation 0Rollo, p. 131. As per recommendation of the Solicitor 2eneral and for the convenience of the parties and their %itnesses %ho %ere residin& in the province of 4amboan&a del Norte, the Provincial 5iscal of said province %as authori6ed to conduct the investi&ation and to submit a report, to&ether %ith transcripts of steno&raphic notes and e7hibits submitted b/ the parties, if an/ 0Rollo, p. '(1. n November ), 1)3*, the Recommendation, viz.8 ffice of the Solicitor 2eneral submitted its Report and

Evidence of the complainant8 . . . complainant ,ictoria Barrientos %as sin&le and a resident of Bonifacio St., .ipolo& Cit/9 that %hen she %as still a teena&er and first /ear in colle&e she came to -no% respondent #ransfi&uracion .aarol in 1):) as he used to &o to their house bein& a friend of her sister Norma9 that the/ also became friends, and she -ne% the respondent as bein& sin&le and livin& alone in 2alas, .ipolo& Cit/9 that he %as the 2eneral Mana&er of 4amboan&a del Norte Electric Cooperative, $nc. 04ANEC 1 and subse;uentl/ transferred his residence to the 4ANEC compound at !a&una Blvd. at .el Pilar St., .ipolo& Cit/ 0pp. 1()<111, tsn, September =(, 1)*:1. #hat on >une '*, 1)*=, respondent came to their house and as-ed her to be one of the usherettes in the Mason?s convention in Sica/ab, .ipolo& Cit/, from >une '3 to =(, 1)*= and, she told respondent to as- the permission of her parents, %hich respondent did, and her father consented9 that for three %hole da/s she served as usherette in the convention and respondent pic-ed her up from her residence ever/ mornin& and tooher home from the convention site at the end of each da/ 0pp. 11'<11@, tsn, id.1. #hat in the afternoon of >ul/ 1, 1)*=, respondent came to complainant?s house and invited her for a Ao/ ride %ith the permission of her mother %ho %as a former classmate of respondent9 that respondent too- her to Sica/ab in his Aeep and then the/ strolled

'
alon& the beach, and in the course of %hich respondent proposed his love to her9 that respondent told her that if she %ould accept him, he %ould marr/ her %ithin si7 0:1 months from her acceptance9 complainant told respondent that she %ould thin- it over first9 that from then on respondent used to visit her in their house almost ever/ ni&ht, and he -ept on courtin& her and pressed her to ma-e her decision on respondent?s proposal9 that on >ul/ *, 1)*=, she finall/ accepted respondent?s offer of love and respondent continued his usual visitations almost ever/ ni&ht thereafter9 the/ a&reed to &et married in .ecember 1)*= 0pp. 11+<11), tsn, id.1. #hat in the mornin& of Au&ust '(, 1)*=, respondent invited her, %ith the consent of her father, to a part/ at the !ope6 S-/room9 that at *8(( p.m. of that da/ respondent fetched her from her house and %ent to the !ope6 S-/room 0pp. 11)<1'1, tsn, id19 that at about 1(8(( p.m. of that evenin& the/ left the part/ at the !ope6 S-/room, but before ta-in& her home respondent invited her for a Ao/ ride and too- her to the airport at Sica/ab, .ipolo& Cit/9 respondent par-ed the Aeep b/ the beach %here there %ere no houses around9 that in the course of their conversation inside the Aeep, respondent reiterated his promise to marr/ her and then started caressin& her do%n%ard and his hand -ept on movin& to her pant/ and do%n to her private parts 0pp. 1'1<1'', tsn. id.19 that she then said8 BChat is this #ransDB, but he ans%ered8 B.a/, do not be afraid of me. $ %ill marr/ /ouB and reminded her also that Ban/%a/, .ecember is ver/ near, the month %e have been %aitin& forB 0EpF, 1'', tsn, id.1, then he pleaded, B.a/, Aust &ive this to me, do not be afraidB 0ibid1, and a&ain reiterated his promise and assurances, at the same time pullin& do%n her pant/9 that she told him that she %as afraid because the/ %ere not /et married, but because she loved him she finall/ a&reed to have se7ual intercourse %ith him at the bac- seat of the Aeep9 that after the intercourse she %ept and respondent a&ain reiterated his promises and assurances not to %orr/ because an/%a/ he %ould marr/ her9 and at about 1'8(( midni&ht the/ %ent home 0pp. 1''<1'@, tsn, id.1. After Au&ust '(, 1)*=, respondent continued to invite her to eat outside usuall/ at the Gone/comb Restaurant in .ipolo& Cit/ about t%ice or three times a %ee-, after %hich he %ould ta-e her to the airport %here the/ %ould have se7ual intercourse9 that the/ had this se7ual intercourse from Au&ust to ctober 1)*= at the fre;uenc/ of t%o or three times a %ee-, and she consented to all these thin&s because she loved him and believed in all his promises 0pp. 1'+<1'*, tsn, id.1. Sometime in the middle part of September, 1)*= complainant noticed that her menstruation %hich usuall/ occurred durin& the second %ee- of each month did not come9 she %aited until the end of the month and still there %as no menstruation9 she submitted to a pre&nanc/ test and the result %as positive9 she informed respondent and respondent su&&ested to have the fetus aborted but she obAected and respondent did not insist9 respondent then told her not to %orr/ because the/ %ould &et married %ithin one month and he %ould tal- to her parents about their marria&e 0pp. 1')<1=', tsn, id.1. n ctober '(, 1)*=, respondent came to complainant?s house and tal-ed to her parents about their marria&e9 it %as a&reed that the marria&e %ould be celebrated in Manila so as not to create a scandal as complainant %as alread/ pre&nant9 complainant and her mother left for Manila b/ boat on ctober '', 1)*= %hile respondent %ould follo% b/ plane9 and the/ a&reed to meet in Sin&alon&, Manila, in the house of complainant?s sister .elia %ho is married to Ernesto Serrano 0pp. 1='<1=+, tsn, id.1. n ctober ':, 1)*=, %hen respondent came to see complainant and her mother at Sin&alon&, Manila, respondent told them that he could not marr/ complainant because he %as alread/ married 0p. 1=*, tsn, id.19 complainant?s mother &ot mad and said8 B#rans, so /ou fooled m/ dau&hter and %h/ did /ou let us come here in ManilaDB 0p. 1=3, tsn, id.1. !ater on, ho%ever, respondent reassured complainant not to %orr/ because respondent had been separated from his %ife for 1: /ears and he %ould %or- for the annulment of his marria&e and, subse;uentl/ marr/ complainant 0p. 1=), tsn, id.19

=
respondent told complainant to deliver their child in Manila and assured her of a monthl/ support of P'+(.(( 0p. 1@(, tsn, id.19 respondent returned to .ipolo& Cit/ and actuall/ sent the promised support9 he came bac- to Manila in >anuar/ 1)*@ and %ent to see complainant9 %hen as-ed about the annulment of his previous marria&e, he told complainant that it %ould soon be approved 0pp. 1@1<1@', tsn, id.19 he came bac- in 5ebruar/ and in March 1)*@ and told complainant the same thin& 0p. 1@', tsn, id.19 complainant %rote her mother to come to Manila %hen she delivers the child, but her mother ans%ered her that she cannot come as nobod/ %ould be left in their house in .ipolo& and instead su&&ested that complainant &o to Cebu Cit/ %hich is nearer9 complainant %ent to Cebu Cit/ in April 1)*@ and, her sister Norma too- her to the 2ood Shepherd Convent at Bana%a Gill9 she delivered a bab/ &irl on >une 1@, 1)*@ at the Perpetual Succor Gospital in Cebu Cit/9 and the child %as re&istered as B.ure6a BarrientosB 0pp. 1@=<1@3, tsn, id.1. $n the last %ee- of >une 1)*@ complainant came to .ipolo& Cit/ and tried to contact respondent b/ phone and, thru her brother, but to no avail9 as she %as ashamed she Aust sta/ed in their house9 she &ot sic- and her father sent her to 4amboan&a Cit/ for medical treatment9 she came bac- after t%o %ee-s but still respondent did not come to see her 0tsn. @3<1+(, tsn, id.19 she consulted a la%/er and filed an administrative case a&ainst respondent %ith the National Electrification Administration9 the case %as referred to the 4amboan&a del Norte Electric Cooperative 04ANEC 1 and it %as dismissed and thus she filed the present administrative case 0pp. 1+(<1+1, tsn, id.1. Evidence for the Respondent #he evidence of the respondent consists of his sole testimon/ and one e7hibit, the birth certificate of the child 0E7h. 11. Respondent declared substantiall/ as follo%s8 that he %as born on Au&ust :, 1)=' in !ilo/, 4amboan&a del Norte9 that he married Romualda Suma/lo in !ilo/ in 1)++9 that he had a son %ho is no% '( /ears old9 that because of incompatibilit/ he had been estran&ed from his %ife for 1: /ears9 that in 1)+= he %as bapti6ed as a moslem and thereb/ embraced the $slam Reli&ion 0pp. 1*=<13( tsn, >an. 1=, 1)**19 that he came to -no% complainant?s father since 1)+' because he %as his teacher9 li-e%ise he -ne% complainant?s mother because the/ %ere former classmates in hi&h school9 that he became ac;uainted %ith complainant %hen he used to visit her sister, Norma, in their house9 the/ &raduall/ became friends and often tal-ed %ith each other, and even tal-ed about their personal problems9 that he mentioned to her his bein& estran&ed from his %ife9 that %ith the consent of her parents he invited her to be one of the usherettes in the Masonic Convention in Sica/ab, .ipolo& Cit/ held on >une '3<=(, 1)*= 0pp. 13+<1)', tsn, id.19 that the arran&ement %as for him to fetch her from her residence and ta-e her home from the convention site9 that it %as durin& this occasion that the/ became close to each other and after the convention, he proposed his love to her on >ul/ *, 1)*=9 that 0sic1 a %ee- of courtship, she accepted his proposal and since then he used to invite her 0pp. 1)=<1)@, tsn, id.1. #hat in the evenin& of Au&ust '(, 1)*=, respondent invited complainant to be his partner durin& the Chamber of Commerce affair at the !ope6 S-/room9 that at about 1(8(( p.m. of that evenin& after the affair, complainant complained to him of a headache, so he decided to ta-e her home but once inside the Aeep, she %anted to have a Ao/ ride, so he drove around the cit/ and proceeded to the airport9 that %hen the/ %ere at the airport, onl/ t%o of them, the/ started the usual -isses and the/ %ere carried b/ their passion9 the/ for&ot themselves and the/ made love9 that before midni&ht he too- her home9 that thereafter the/ indul&ed in se7ual intercourse man/ times %henever the/ %ent on Ao/ ridin& in the evenin& and ended up in the airport %hich %as the onl/ place the/ could be alone 0p. 1)+, tsn, id.1. #hat it %as sometime in the later part of ctober 1)*= that complainant told him of her pre&nanc/9 that the/ a&reed that the child be delivered in Manila to avoid scandal and

@
respondent %ould ta-e care of e7penses9 that durin& respondent?s tal- %ith the parents of complainant re&ardin& the latter?s pre&nanc/, he told him he %as married but estran&ed from his %ife9 that %hen complainant %as alread/ in Manila, she as-ed him if he %as %illin& to marr/ her, he ans%ered he could not marr/ a&ain, other%ise, he %ould be char&ed %ith bi&am/ but he promised to file an annulment of his marria&e as he had been separated from his %ife for 1: /ears9 that complainant consented to have se7ual intercourse %ith him because of her love to him and he did not resort to force, tric-er/, deceit or caAoler/9 and that the present case %as filed a&ainst him b/ complainant because of his failure to &ive the mone/ to support complainant %hile in Cebu %aitin& for the deliver/ of the child and, also to meet complainant?s medical e7penses %hen she %ent to 4amboan&a Cit/ for medical chec-<up 0pp. 1)3<'(*, tsn, id.1. FINDING OF FACTS 5rom the evidence adduced b/ the parties, the follo%in& facts are not disputed8 1. #hat the complainant, ,ictoria Barrientos, is sin&le, a colle&e student, and %as about '( /ears and * months old durin& the time 0>ul/< ctober 1)*+1 of her relationship %ith respondent, havin& been born on .ecember '=, 1)+'9 %hile respondent #ransfi&uracion .aarol is married, 2eneral Mana&er of 4amboan&a del Norte Electric Cooperative, and @1 /ears old at the time of the said relationship, havin& been born on Au&ust :, 1)='9 '. #hat respondent is married to Romualda A. Suma/lo %ith %hom be has a son9 that the marria&e ceremon/ %as solemni6ed on September '@, 1)++ at !ilo/, 4amboan&a del Norte b/ a catholic priest, Rev. 5r. Anacleto Pellamo, Parish Priest thereat9 and that said respondent had been separated from his %ife for about 1: /ears at the time of his relationship %ith complainant9 =. #hat respondent had been -no%n b/ the Barrientos famil/ for ;uite sometime, havin& been a former student of complainant?s father in 1)+' and, a former classmate of complainant?s mother at the Andres Bonifacio Colle&e in .ipolo& Cit/9 that he became ac;uainted %ith complainant?s sister, Norma in 1):= and eventuall/ %ith her other sisters, Bab/ and .elia and, her brother, Bo/, as he used to visit Norma at her residence9 that he also befriended complainant and %ho became a close friend %hen he invited her, %ith her parents? consent, to be one of the usherettes durin& the Masonic Convention in Sica/ab, .ipolo& Cit/ from >une '3 to =(, 1)*=, and he used to fetch her at her residence in the mornin& and too- her home from the convention site after each da/?s activities9 @. #hat respondent courted complainant, and after a %ee- of courtship, complainant accepted respondent?s love on >ul/ *, 1)*=9 that in the evenin& of Au&ust '(, 1)*=, complainant %ith her parents? permission %as respondent?s partner durin& the Chamber of Commerce affair at the !ope6 S-/room in the .ipolo& Cit/, and at about 1(8(( o?clocthat evenin&, the/ left the place but before &oin& home, the/ %ent to the airport at Sica/ab, .ipolo& Cit/ and par-ed the Aeep at the beach, %here there %ere no houses around9 that after the usual preliminaries, the/ consummated the se7ual act and at about midni&ht the/ %ent home9 that after the first se7ual act, respondent used to have Ao/ ride %ith complainant %hich usuall/ ended at the airport %here the/ used to ma-e love t%ice or three times a %ee-9 that as a result of her intimate relations, complainant became pre&nant9 +. #hat after a conference amon& respondent, complainant and complainant?s parents, it %as a&reed that complainant %ould deliver her child in Manila, %here she %ent %ith her mother on ctober '', 1)*= b/ boat, arrivin& in Manila on the '+th and, sta/ed %ith her brother<in<la% Ernesto Serrano in Sin&alon&, Manila9 that respondent visited her there on the ':th, '*th and '3th of ctober 1)*=, and a&ain in 5ebruar/ and March 1)*@9 that later on complainant decided to deliver the child in Cebu Cit/ in order to be nearer to .ipolo& Cit/, and she %ent there in April 1)*@ and her sister too- her to the 2ood Shepherd Convent at Bana%a Gill, Cebu Cit/9 that on >une 1@, 1)*@, she delivered a bab/

+
&irl at the Perpetual Succor Gospital in Cebu Cit/ and, named her B.ure6a BarrientosB9 that about the last %ee- of >une 1)*@ she %ent home to .ipolo& Cit/9 that durin& her sta/ here in Manila and later in Cebu Cit/, the respondent defra/ed some of her e7penses9 that she filed an administrative case a&ainst respondent %ith the National Electrification Administration9 %hich complaint, ho%ever, %as dismissed9 and then she instituted the present disbarment proceedin&s a&ainst respondent. 777 777 777 $n vie% of the fore&oin&, the undersi&ned respectfull/ recommend that after hearin&, respondent #ransfi&uracion .aarol be disbarred as a la%/er. 0Rollo, pp. '3<+11. After a thorou&h revie% of the case, the Court finds itself in full accord %ith the findin&s and recommendation of the Solicitor 2eneral. 5rom the records, it appears indubitable that complainant %as never informed b/ respondent attorne/ of his real status as a married individual. #he fact of his previous marria&e %as disclosed b/ respondent onl/ after the complainant became pre&nant. Even then, respondent misrepresented himself as bein& eli&ible to re<marr/ for havin& been estran&ed from his %ife for 1: /ears and dan&led a marria&e proposal on the assurance that he %ould %or- for the annulment of his first marria&e. $t %as a deception after all as it turned out that respondent never bothered to annul said marria&e. More importantl/, respondent -ne% all alon& that the mere fact of separation alone is not a &round for annulment of marria&e and does not vest him le&al capacit/ to contract another marria&e. $nterestin&l/ enou&h. respondent lived alone in .ipolo& Cit/ thou&h his son, %ho %as also stud/in& in .ipolo& Cit/, lived separatel/ from him. Ge never introduced his son and %ent around %ith friends as thou&h he %as never married much less had a child in the same localit/. #his circumstance alone belies respondent?s claim that complainant and her famil/ %ere a%are of his previous marria&e at the ver/ start of his courtship. #he Court is therefore inclined to believe that respondent resorted to deceit in the satisfaction of his se7ual desires at the e7pense of the &ullible complainant. $t is not in accordance %ith the nature of the educated, cultured and respectable, %hich complainant?s famil/ is, her father bein& the Assistant Principal of the local public hi&h school, to allo% a dau&hter to have an affair %ith a married man. But %hat surprises this Court even more is the perverted sense of respondent?s moral values %hen he said that8 B$ see nothin& %ron& %ith this relationship despite m/ bein& married.B 0#SN, p. '(), >anuar/ 1=, 1)**9 Rollo, p. @*1 Corse, he even su&&ested abortion. #rul/, respondent?s moral sense is so seriousl/ impaired that %e cannot maintain his membership in the Bar. $n Pan an v! Ra"os 01(* SCRA 1 E1)31F1, %e held that8 0E1ven his act in ma-in& love to another %oman %hile his first %ife is still alive and their marria&e still valid and e7istin& is contrar/ to honest/, Austice, decenc/ and moralit/. Respondent made a moc-er/ of marria&e %hich is a sacred institution demandin& respect and di&nit/. 5inall/, respondent even had the temerit/ to alle&e that he is a Moslem convert and as such, could enter into multiple marria&es and has in;uired into the possibilit/ of marr/in& complainant 0 Rollo, p. 1+1. As records indicate, ho%ever, his claim of havin& embraced the $slam reli&ion is not supported b/ an/ evidence save that of his self<servin& testimon/. $n this re&ard, %e need onl/ to ;uote the findin& of the ffice of the Solicitor 2eneral, to %it8 Chen respondent %as as-ed to marr/ complainant he said he could not because he %as alread/ married and %ould open him to a char&e of bi&am/ 0p. '((, tsn, >anuar/ 1=, 1)**1. $f he %ere a moslem convert entitled to four 0@1 %ives, as he is no% claimin&, %h/ did he not marr/ complainantD #he ans%er is supplied b/ respondent himself. Ge said %hile he %as a moslem, but, havin& been married in a civil ceremon/, he could no lon&er validl/ enter into another civil ceremon/ %ithout committin& bi&am/ because the

:
complainant is a christian 0p. '@', tsn, >anuar/ 1=, 1)**1. Conse;uentl/, if respondent -ne%, that not%ithstandin& his bein& a moslem convert, he cannot marr/ complainant, then it %as &rossl/ immoral for him to have se7ual intercourse %ith complainant because he -ne% the e7istence of a le&al impediment. Respondent ma/ not, therefore, escape responsibilit/ thru his dubious claim that he has embraced the $slam reli&ion. 0 Rollo, p. @)1. B/ his acts of deceit and immoral tendencies to appease his se7ual desires, respondent .aarol has ampl/ demonstrated his moral delin;uenc/. Gence, his removal for conduct unbecomin& a member of the Bar on the &rounds of deceit and &rossl/ immoral conduct 0Sec. '*, Rule 1=3, Rules of Court1 is in order. 2ood moral character is a condition %hich precedes admission to the Bar 0Sec. ', Rule 1=3, Rules of Court1 and is not dispensed %ith upon admission thereto. $t is a continuin& ;ualification %hich all la%/ers must possess 0People v. #uanda, 131 SCRA :3' E1))(F9 .elos Re/es v. A6nar, 1*) SCRA :+= E1)3)F1, other%ise, a la%/er ma/ either be suspended or disbarred. As %e have held in Piatt v! Abordo 0+3 Phil. =+( E1)==F, cited in #eda v! Taban , '(: SCRA =)+ E1))'F18 $t cannot be overemphasi6ed that the re;uirement of &ood character is not onl/ a condition precedent to admission to the practice of la%9 its continued possession is also essential for remainin& in the practice of la% 0People v. #uanda, Adm. Case No. ==:(, =( >anuar/ 1))(, 131 SCRA :)'1. As aptl/ put b/ Mr. >ustice 2eor&e A. Malcolm8 BAs &ood character is an essential ;ualification for admission of an attorne/ to practice, %hen the attorne/?s character is bad in such respects as to sho% that he is unsafe and unfit to be entrusted %ith the po%ers of an attorne/, the court retains the po%er to discipline him 0Piatt v. Abordo, +3 Phil. =+( E1)==F1. nl/ recentl/, another disbarment proceedin& %as resolved b/ this Court a&ainst a la%/er %ho convinced a %oman that her prior marria&e to another man %as null and void ab initio and she %as still le&all/ sin&le and free to marr/ him 0the la%/er1, married her, %as supported b/ her in his studies, be&ot a child %ith her, abandoned her and the child, and married another %oman 0#erre vs. #erre, Adm. Case No. '=@), >ul/ =, 1))'1. Gere, respondent, alread/ a married man and about @1 /ears old, proposed love and marria&e to complainant, then still a '(</ear<old minor, -no%in& that he did not have the re;uired le&al capacit/. Respondent then succeeded in havin& carnal relations %ith complainant b/ deception, made her pre&nant, su&&ested abortion, breached his promise to marr/ her, and then deserted her and the child. Respondent is therefore &uilt/ of deceit and &rossl/ immoral conduct. #he practice of la% is a privile&e accorded onl/ to those %ho measure up to the e7actin& standards of mental and moral fitness. Respondent havin& e7hibited debased moralit/, the Court is constrained to impose upon him the most severe disciplinar/ action H disbarment. #he ancient and learned profession of la% e7acts from its members the hi&hest standard of moralit/. #he members are, in fact, enAoined to aid in &uardin& the Bar a&ainst the admission of candidates unfit or un;ualified because deficient either moral character or education 0$n re Puno, 1) SCRA @=), E1):*F9 Pan&an vs. Ramos, 1(* SCRA 1 E1)31F1. As officers of the court, la%/ers must not onl/ in fact be of &ood moral character but must also be seen to be of &ood moral character and must lead a life in accordance %ith the hi&hest moral standards of the communit/. More specificall/, a member of the Bar and an officer of the Court is not onl/ re;uired to refrain from adulterous relationships or the -eepin& of mistresses but must also behave himself in such a manner as to avoid scandali6in& the public b/ creatin& the belief that he is floutin& those moral standards 0#olosa vs. Car&o, 1*1 SCRA '1, ': E1)3)F, citin& #oledo vs. #oledo, * SCRA *+* E1):=F and Ro/on& vs. blena, * SCRA 3+) E1):=F1. $n brief, Ce find respondent .aarol morall/ delin;uent and as such, should not be allo%ed continued membership in the ancient and learned profession of la% 0Iuin&%a v. Puno, 1) SCRA @=) E1):*F1.

*
ACC R.$N2!J, Ce find respondent #ransfi&uracion .aarol &uilt/ of &rossl/ immoral conduct un%orth/ of bein& a member of the Bar and is hereb/ ordered .$SBARRE. and his name stric-en off from the Roll of Attorne/s. !et copies of this Resolution be furnished to all courts of the land, the $nte&rated Bar of the Philippines, the ffice of the Bar Confidant and spread on the personal record of respondent .aarol. S R.ERE..

Narvasa$ C!%!$ G&tierrez$ %r!$ Cr&z$ Feliciano$ Padilla$ 'idin$ Gri(o)A*&ino$ Re alado$ Davide$ %r!$ Ro"ero$ Nocon$ 'ellosillo$ +elo and Ca"pos$ %r!$ %%!$ conc&r .