G.R. No.

L-23815 June 28, 1974

ADELINO H. LEDESMA, PETITIONER VS. HON. RAFAEL C. CLIMACO, JUDGE, CFI

FACTS:

Atty. Ledesma filed a motion to withdraw as counsel de parte when he was appointed Election Registrar of the
Municipality of Cadiz, Province of Negros Occidental. Judge Climaco denied the motion and, instead, appointed
him as counsel de oficio for the 2 defendants. Petitioner filed a motion to withdraw as counsel de oficio, premised
on the policy of the COMELEC to require full time service as well as on the volume or pressure of work of
petitioner, which could prevent him from handling adequately the defense. Judge Climaco denied the motion to
withdraw and likewise denied the motion for reconsideration. According to Judge Climaco, the case has been
postponed at least 8 times, and that the witnesses have to come all the way from Manapala. When Atty. Ledesma
assumed office as Election Registrar on October 13, 1964, he knew since October 2, 1964 that the trial would be
resumed. Nevertheless, in order not to prejudice the civil service status of Atty. Ledesma, was designated counsel de
oficio for the accused. Atty. Ledesma alleged that there was a grave abuse of discretion on the part of Judge
Climaco.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Atty. Ledesma should be allowed to withdraw as counsel de officio considering his appointment as
Election Registrar of the COMELEC

RULING:

No. The Court reiterated that there was no incompatibility between Atty. Ledesma’s duty as counsel de oficio and
the performance of his task as an election registrar of the COMELEC.

Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions. It could be that for some lawyers, especially the
neophytes in the profession, being appointed counsel de oficio is an irksome chore.

The law is a profession, not a trade or a craft. Those enrolled in its ranks are called upon to aid in the performance of
one of the basic purposes of the State, the administration of justice. To avoid any frustration thereof, especially in
the case of an indigent defendant, a lawyer may be required to act as counsel de oficio.

For legal practitioners, there are times, and this is one of them, when duty to court and client takes precedence over
promptings of self-interest

DEFINITION OF TERMS:

Counsel de Parte
- refers to counsel of choice of the accused engaged by him to represent him in court

Counsel de Officio
- refers to the counsel appointed by the court to represent and defend the accused in case he cannot afford to employ
one himself.