Procedure in the Disbarment and Other Disciplinary Proceedings

I. Disbarment Proceedings, Judicial in Nature

In a disbarment proceeding, the Supreme Court or the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines conducts an investigation so as to determine the fitness of a
lawyer to remain in the Roll of Attorneys. The Respondent lawyer is accorded
due process of law and the ultimate authority to decide the matter of
disbarment rests in the Supreme Court alone.

Considering the serious consequences of disbarment or suspension, it has
been consistently held that clearly preponderant evidence is required to
justify the imposition of either penalty.

II. Filing of Complaint and Investigation

Officers Authorized to Investigate Disbarment

Only the following officers are authorized to investigate cases of disbarment:

1. Supreme Court
2. IBP through its Commission on Bar Discipline or authorized investigators
3. Office of the Solicitor General

The Court of Appeals and Regional Trial Courts can only investigate and take
action against lawyers who appear for litigants in cases pending before them.
The Court of Appeals and Regional Trial Courts, however, may only suspend
but not disbar an attorney from practice of law for any of the causes stated in
Section 16, Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court. The lawyer, once suspended,
shall not practice law until the Supreme Court orders otherwise.

It must be noted that the IBP has no jurisdiction to investigate violations of
R.A. No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees) unless the acts involved also transgress provisions of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.

III. Who can File a Complaint Against a Lawyer

Any person aggrieved by the misconduct of a lawyer may file the
corresponding administrative case with the proper forum or any person, even
if not aggrieved but who knows of the lawyers misconduct, unlawful or
unethical act may initiate the proceedings.

The Supreme Court may motu propio initiate the proceedings when they
perceive acts of lawyers deserve sanctions, or when their attention is called by
anyone and a probable cause exists that an act which requires disciplinary
action was perpetrated by a lawyer.

IV. Where to File Complaint for Disbarment

A complaint for disbarment may be filed directly in the Supreme Court, the
IBP National Office located at the IBP Bldg., Julia Vargas St., Ortigas Center,
Pasig City, or in any of the IBP Chapter Offices in the Country.

The Supreme Court usually refers disbarment cases to the IBP for
investigation. Nevertheless, it may in certain circumstances opt to investigate
the case by itself.

V. How the Complaint is Instituted

Section 1, Rules 139-B of the Revised Rules of Court on Disbarment and
Discipline of Attorneys states:

1. Proceedings for disbarment, suspension, or discipline of attorneys may be
taken by the Supreme Court motu propio; or
2. By the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) upon the verified complaint
of any person.
3. Complaint shall state clearly and concisely the facts complained of
4. Supported by affidavits of persons having personal knowledge of the facts
or
5. Such documents as may substantiate said facts.
6. Six (6) copies of the verified complaint shall be filed with
7. The Secretary of the IBP or the Secretary of any of its chapters.

VI. Proceedings in the Integrated Bar of the Philippines

1. Complainant files six (6) copies of a verified complaint with the IBP.
2. The IBP Board of Governors shall appoint from among the IBP members
an investigator or a panel of three investigators where special
circumstances so warrant.
3. The IBP Board of Governors shall also appoint a suitable member of the
Integrated Bar as counsel to assist the complainant or respondent during
the investigation in case of need for such assistance.
4. If the complaint appears to be meritorious, the investigator shall direct
that a copy thereof be served upon the respondent, requiring him to file a
verified answer within 15 days from the date of service.

*If complaint does not merit action or if the answer of respondent lawyer
shows to the satisfaction of the investigator that the complaint is not
meritorious, the complaint may be dismissed by the Board of Governors
upon the investigators recommendation.

Copy of the resolution of dismissal shall be furnished the complainant and
the Supreme Court which may review the case motu proprio or upon
timely appeal of the complainant within 15 days from notice of the
dismissal of the complaint.
5. Upon joinder of issues or upon failure of the respondent to answer and if
the respondent fails to appear despite reasonable notice, the investigator
shall, proceed with the investigation of the case ex parte.
6. The hearing shall as far as practicable be terminated within 3 months
from the date of its commencement, unless extended for good cause by
the Board of Governors upon prior application.
7. Investigator shall submit a report containing his findings of fact and
recommendations to the IBP Board of Governors not later than 30 days
from the termination of the investigation.
8. Every case heard by an investigator shall be reviewed by the IBP Board of
Governors upon the record and evidence transmitted to it by the
investigator with his report.
a. Decision of the Board must be in writing and shall clearly and
distinctly state the facts and the reasons on which it is based.
b. If the Board, by the vote of a majority of its total membership,
determines that the respondent should be suspended from the
practice of law or disbarred, it shall issue a resolution setting forth
its findings and recommendation which, together with the whole
record of the case, shall forthwith be transmitted to the Supreme
Court for final action.
c. If the respondent is exonerated by the Board or where the
disciplinary action imposed is less than suspension or disbarment,
it shall issue a decision exonerating respondent or imposing such
sanction.
9. Notice of the resolution or decision of the Board shall be given to all
parties through their counsel. A copy of the same shall be transmitted to
the Supreme Court.
10. The case shall be deemed terminated unless petition of the complainant or
other interested party is files with the Supreme Court within fifteen days
from notices of the Boards resolution or unless the Supreme Court orders
otherwise.

VII. Investigation is Mandatory

In complaints for disbarment, formal investigation is mandatory and ex parte
investigation may only be conducted when respondent fails to appeal despite
reasonable notice. (case: Villanueva vs. Deloria)

VIII. Proceedings in the Supreme Court

Proceedings initiated motu proprio by the Supreme Court may be referred by
the Supreme Court to the Solicitor General or to any officer of the Supreme
Court or judge of a lower court for investigation. Investigation shall proceed
in the same manner as it would in the IBP.

IX. Confidentiality of Disbarment or Suspension Proceedings

The professional success of a lawyer depends almost entirely on his good
reputation. If that is tarnished, it is difficult to restore the same to its former
state. Thus, it has been held that the lawyers good name in the last analysis is
his most important possession. Therefore, in order to avoid unnecessary ruin
of a lawyers name, disciplinary proceedings are directed to be confidential (or
closed door) until their final determination. (Sec. 18, Rule 139-B of the
Revised Rules of Court)

X. Mitigating Circumstances in Disbarment

Mitigating circumstances are considered in favor of the respondent to lessen
the gravity of the sanction that may be imposed upon him. The following have
been considered as mitigating factors:

1. Good faith in the acquisition of a property of the client subject of
litigation
2. Inexperience of the lawyer
3. Age
4. Apology
5. Lack of intention to slight or offend the Court

XI. Effect of Affidavit of Desistance, Settlement, Compromise, Restitution,
Withdrawal of Charges, or Failure to Prosecute

The general rule is that no investigation shall be interrupted or terminated by
reason of desistance, settlement, compromise, restitution, withdrawal of
charges, or failure of complainant to prosecute unless the Supreme Court,
motu proprio or upon recommendation of the IBP Board of Governors,
determines that there is no compelling reason to continue with the
disbarment or suspension of proceedings against respondent.

An affidavit of desistance may cause the dismissal of case if there is nothing
more which could substantiate the charge. (Arfapo vs. Nano, Punzalan vs.
Plata) The same thing is true with regard to withdrawal of complaint.
However, the authenticity and voluntariness of the withdrawal of the
complaint against a member of the bar must also be determined first before
the same shall be considered at all.