KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN Response to First Endorsement

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: antonio jr. buensuceso <antoniobuensuceso@gmail.com>
Date: 2011/7/14
Subject: KAGAWARAN NG KATARUNGAN Response to First Endorsement
To: vp@ovp.gov.ph, vpbinay@gmail.com


Hulyo 12, 2011

Atty. MARIA CHARINA BUENA-DY PO

Director IV Technical Staff

Kagawaran ng Katarungan, Manila

Republika ng Pilipinas

THROUGH:

USEC. Benjamin E. Martinez, Jr.

Chief of Staff

Office of the Vice President

7th Floor PNB Financial Center

Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard, Pasay City

USAPIN: Tulong sa pag-usig sa mga tauhan ng pamahalaan na lumabag

sa ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT

Kagalanggalang pong taga-usig:

Maligayang pagbati po.

Natanggap ko po ngayong araw ang unang endorsement letter tungkol sa asuntong nais

kong ihingi ng tulong sa butihing Pangalawang Pangulo Jejomar Binay, na kagyat namang inilapit nila sa inyong tanggapan. Bagay na tatanawing kong malaking utang na loob ko sa kanya habangbuhay.

Ako po ay labis na nagagalak sa pangyayaring ito dahil sa wakas ay mabibigyan na ng pag-asa ang inaasam kong katarungan mula sa pagkurakot sa aking retirement pay at labag sa batas na pagtanggal sa akin sa trabaho, pag-alipusta sa aking dangal at dignidad, pagyurak sa aking pagkatao na ginawa sa akin ng SHELL, sampu ng kahihiyan at paghihirap sa katauhan, kaisipan at kalooban na dinulot nito sa aking mga anak at buong pamilya.

Lalong higit ang aking tuwa kapag ang mga lingkod bayan na nakipagkutsabahan at tumulong sa SHELL upang isakatuparan nang lubusan ang kabuktutan at kasakiman ng SHELL ay masampahan ng kaso at mapanagot sa kanilang mga kasalanan nang sa ganoon ay maging babala sa kanilang mga makapangyarihang kumpanya na tapos na ang kanilang kabuhungan at walang pakundangang pagmamalabis o paggamit sa tinatawag nilang management prerogatives upang sikilin at supilin ang mga makatarungang hiling naming mga hamak na mga mangagawa, sa pamamagitan ng mga tiwaling lingkod bayan na sangkot sa usaping ito.

Muli, nais ko pong ipaabot sa inyong kaalaman na ako po ay nakalaang maghintay, maki-isa makipagtulungan upang ang adhikaing linisin ang ating pamahalaan sa kabulukang sistema na dulot ng korapsyon at kabuktutan sa ating bayan na nagdudulot ng labis labis na paghihirap, pagdurusa at pasakit sa abang sambayanang Pilipino ay lubusan nating mapagtagumpayan. Kaya nga po bilang pagtugon sa adhikaing ito ay nais kong gawin ang nararapat kong gawin, hindi lang yun isiwalat ang anumang kabuktutan at korapsyon, ngunit lalong higit yaong mga taong sangkot sa usaping tulad nito ay maiharap sa husgado at tiyaking lubusang mapanagot at maparusahan.

Ipagpaumanhin po ninyo na padaanin ko sa e-mail ang pakikipagtalastasan sa inyo at paggamit muli ng Tanggapan ng Kagalang galang na Pangalawang Pangulo ng Pilipinas Jejomar Binay, sa dahilan pong ang Tanggapan po ng butihing Pangalawang Pangulo ang may access po sa inyo.Ngayon kung sa inyo pong kapahintulutan ay ipagkaloob po ninyong gamitin ko ang direktang e-mail ninyo, iyon po ay malugod kong tatanggapin. Sakali naman pong sa inyong palagay ay nararapat sa koreo daanin ang pakikipagtalastasan sa inyo, ipagbigay alam lang po ninyo sa akin at iyon po ang aking gagawin.

Tanggapin po ninyong lahat ang aking buong pusong pasasalamat.

Lubos na gumagalang,

Antonio L. Buensuceso Jr.

DISCIPLINING JUDGES SHOULD BE TRANSACTED IN PUBLIC

How Judges Hide From Justice

By ROBERT H. TEMBECKJIAN

Published: May 22, 2005

IN the last three months, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct has publicly disciplined four metropolitan-area judges: two from Brooklyn, one from Manhattan and one from Westchester. Apart from some intense public commentary over the merits of these decisions - three public censures and one removal from office - these cases had at least one thing in common. They were all conducted in secret. That should be changed.

Judges are among the most powerful of public servants. They decide who goes to jail, who wins or loses millions of dollars and who gets custody of children. Public confidence in their integrity and impartiality is essential to the rule of law. While a vast majority of judges are honorable, there will always be some who engage in unethical behavior. Disciplining such judges is important business that should be transacted in public, just as any civil or criminal trial would be.

In 38 states, judicial misconduct hearings are indeed open to the public. Not so in New York, where proceedings that stretch over months are held behind closed doors. Only when the results are announced does the public even learn such cases existed. By then, it is usually too late to convey in a meaningful way the strength of the case, the credibility of the witnesses and the merits of the defense. The four recent decisions in New York offer cases in point.
The commission voted to remove a Surrogate's Court judge in Brooklyn for awarding a long-time friend millions of dollars in fees from estates where there was no executor, without confirming that he had done enough work to earn such fees. The judge is appealing the decision.
The commission censured a Westchester Family Court judge who attempted to influence other judges and court workers on behalf of friends in two divorce and custody cases, and who testified in a manner she conceded was inaccurate. It also censured a Brooklyn Criminal Court judge for coming off the bench in unprovoked anger and grabbing and screaming at a defense lawyer. Finally, it censured a Manhattan Civil Court judge for presiding over a personal injury case involving a litigant who was also a lawyer with whom she continued to socialize, and to whom she awarded a fiduciary appointment worth about $80,000 in fees, while the case was pending.
Reasonable people may differ with these decisions. As the prosecutor of judicial misconduct cases in New York, I myself am sometimes at odds with the commission. Yet while some criticized the removal as severe, and others derided the censures as lenient, most tended to miss the context and nuance of the deliberations. The subtleties of an individual disciplinary decision tend to get short shrift in the news. Were the press and public able to follow along as these cases unfolded, the disciplinary process would not seem so sudden and mysterious, and citizens would be better informed along the way. For example, the case against the Brooklyn Surrogate's Court judge lasted 22 months, and the record was over 13,000 pages long. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to capture the complexities of such a proceeding in a single article that reported the final result.
New York's chief judge, Judith Kaye, proposed legislation in 2003, which the commission endorsed, to open up the disciplinary process at the point when a judge is formally charged with misconduct. Unfortunately, the Legislature did not act. Perhaps the commission's recent decisions might spur the Senate and Assembly to revisit the issue. The more citizens know about what goes on at the commission, the more likely they will appreciate that no case is as cut and dried as a critic may suggest. The press and public could follow the arguments as they develop, rather than try to digest them all at once when the decisions are rendered.
Moreover, an open proceeding would shed important light on the rare instance in which a formal charge against a judge is dismissed without any disciplinary action. It would provide the public with the means to assess that a dismissal was deserved and the system was honest.
In short, a public process would transform judicial discipline from a secretive game to one in which the commission's judgments were open to scrutiny and improvement as we went along, while there was time enough to make a difference. Public confidence in the judiciary, and in the disciplinary system that holds them accountable, requires nothing less.
Robert H. Tembeckjian is administrator of and counsel to the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

REPUBLIC ACT No. 3019

ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT

Section 1. Statement of policy. It is the policy of the Philippine Government, in line with the principle that a public office is a public trust, to repress certain acts of public officers and private persons alike which constitute graft or corrupt practices or which may lead thereto.

Section 2. Definition of terms. As used in this Act, that term

(a) "Government" includes the national government, the local governments, the government-owned and government-controlled corporations, and all other instrumentalities or agencies of the Republic of the Philippines and their branches.

(b) "Public officer" includes elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or temporary, whether in the classified or unclassified or exempt service receiving compensation, even nominal, from the government as defined in the preceding subparagraph.

(c) "Receiving any gift" includes the act of accepting directly or indirectly a gift from a person other than a member of the public officer's immediate family, in behalf of himself or of any member of his family or relative within the fourth civil degree, either by consanguinity or affinity, even on the occasion of a family celebration or national festivity like Christmas, if the value of the gift is under the circumstances manifestly excessive.

(d) "Person" includes natural and juridical persons, unless the context indicates otherwise.

Section 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful:

(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules and regulations duly promulgated by competent authority or an offense in connection with the official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such violation or offense.

(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or for any other person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the Government and any other part, wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under the law.

(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for himself or for another, from any person for whom the public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured or obtained, or will secure or obtain, any Government permit or license, in consideration for the help given or to be given, without prejudice to Section thirteen of this Act.

(d) Accepting or having any member of his family accept employment in a private enterprise which has pending official business with him during the pendency thereof or within one year after its termination.

(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision shall apply to officers and employees of offices or government corporations charged with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.

(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request, without sufficient justification, to act within a reasonable time on any matter pending before him for the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any person interested in the matter some pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, or for the purpose of favoring his own interest or giving undue advantage in favor of or discriminating against any other interested party.

(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any contract or transaction manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the public officer profited or will profit thereby.

(h) Director or indirectly having financing or pecuniary interest in any business, contract or transaction in connection with which he intervenes or takes part in his official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by the Constitution or by any law from having any interest.

(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or having a material interest in any transaction or act requiring the approval of a board, panel or group of which he is a member, and which exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes against the same or does not participate in the action of the board, committee, panel or group.Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against those public officers responsible for the approval of manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular transaction or acts by the board, panel or group to which they belong.

(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any person not qualified for or not legally entitled to such license, permit, privilege or advantage, or of a mere representative or dummy of one who is not so qualified or entitled.

(k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential character, acquired by his office or by him on account of his official position to unauthorized persons, or releasing such information in advance of its authorized release date.

The person giving the gift, present, share, percentage or benefit referred to in subparagraphs (b) and (c); or offering or giving to the public officer the employment mentioned in subparagraph (d); or urging the divulging or untimely release of the confidential information referred to in subparagraph (k) of this section shall, together with the offending public officer, be punished under Section nine of this Act and shall be permanently or temporarily disqualified in the discretion of the Court, from transacting business in any form with the Government.

Section 4. Prohibition on private individuals. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person having family or close personal relation with any public official to capitalize or exploit or take advantage of such family or close personal relation by directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any present, gift or material or pecuniary advantage from any other person having some business, transaction, application, request or contract with the government, in which such public official has to intervene. Family relation shall include the spouse or relatives by consanguinity or affinity in the third civil degree. The word "close personal relation" shall include close personal friendship, social and fraternal connections, and professional employment all giving rise to intimacy which assures free access to such public officer.

(b) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to induce or cause any public official to commit any of the offenses defined in Section 3 hereof.

Section 5. Prohibition on certain relatives. It shall be unlawful for the spouse or for any relative, by consanguinity or affinity, within the third civil degree, of the President of the Philippines, the Vice-President of the Philippines, the President of the Senate, or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to intervene, directly or indirectly, in any business, transaction, contract or application with the Government: Provided, That this section shall not apply to any person who, prior to the assumption of office of any of the above officials to whom he is related, has been already dealing with the Government along the same line of business, nor to any transaction, contract or application already existing or pending at the time of such assumption of public office, nor to any application filed by him the approval of which is not discretionary on the part of the official or officials concerned but depends upon compliance with requisites provided by law, or rules or regulations issued pursuant to law, nor to any act lawfully performed in an official capacity or in the exercise of a profession.

Section 6. Prohibition on Members of Congress. It shall be unlawful hereafter for any Member of the Congress during the term for which he has been elected, to acquire or receive any personal pecuniary interest in any specific business enterprise which will be directly and particularly favored or benefited by any law or resolution authored by him previously approved or adopted by the Congress during the same term.The provision of this section shall apply to any other public officer who recommended the initiation in Congress of the enactment or adoption of any law or resolution, and acquires or receives any such interest during his incumbency.It shall likewise be unlawful for such member of Congress or other public officer, who, having such interest prior to the approval of such law or resolution authored or recommended by him, continues for thirty days after such approval to retain such interest.

Section 7. Statement of assets and liabilities. Every public officer, within thirty days after the approval of this Act or after assuming office, and within the month of January of every other year thereafter, as well as upon the expiration of his term of office, or upon his resignation or separation from office, shall prepare and file with the office of the corresponding Department Head, or in the case of a Head of Department or chief of an independent office, with the Office of the President, or in the case of members of the Congress and the officials and employees thereof, with the Office of the Secretary of the corresponding House, a true detailed and sworn statement of assets and liabilities, including a statement of the amounts and sources of his income, the amounts of his personal and family expenses and the amount of income taxes paid for the next preceding calendar year: Provided, That public officers assuming office less than two months before the end of the calendar year, may file their statements in the following months of January.

Section 8. Dismissal due to unexplained wealth. If in accordance with the provisions of Republic Act Numbered One thousand three hundred seventy-nine, a public official has been found to have acquired during his incumbency, whether in his name or in the name of other persons, an amount of property and/or money manifestly out of proportion to his salary and to his other lawful income, that fact shall be a ground for dismissal or removal. Properties in the name of the spouse and unmarried children of such public official may be taken into consideration, when their acquisition through legitimate means cannot be satisfactorily shown. Bank deposits shall be taken into consideration in the enforcement of this section, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary.

Section 9. Penalties for violations. (a) Any public officer or private person committing any of the unlawful acts or omissions enumerated in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, perpetual disqualification from public office, and confiscation or forfeiture in favor of the Government of any prohibited interest and unexplained wealth manifestly out of proportion to his salary and other lawful income. Any complaining party at whose complaint the criminal prosecution was initiated shall, in case of conviction of the accused, be entitled to recover in the criminal action with priority over the forfeiture in favor of the Government, the amount of money or the thing he may have given to the accused, or the value of such thing.

(b) Any public officer violation any of the provisions of Section 7 of this Act shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred pesos nor more than one thousand pesos, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the Court.The violation of said section proven in a proper administrative proceeding shall be sufficient cause for removal or dismissal of a public officer, even if no criminal prosecution is instituted against him.

Section 10. Competent court. Until otherwise provided by law, all prosecutions under this Act shall be within the original jurisdiction of the proper Court of First Instance.

Section 11. Prescription of offenses. All offenses punishable under this Act shall prescribe in ten years.

Section 12. Termination of office. No public officer shall be allowed to resign or retire pending an investigation, criminal or administrative, or pending a prosecution against him, for any offense under this Act or under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on bribery.

Section 13. Suspension and loss of benefits. Any public officer against whom any criminal prosecution under a valid information under this Act or under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on bribery is pending in court, shall be suspended from office. Should he be convicted by final judgment, he shall lose all retirement or gratuity benefits under any law, but if he is acquitted, he shall be entitled to reinstatement and to the salaries and benefits which he failed to receive during suspension, unless in the meantime administrative proceedings have been filed against him.

Section 14. Exception. Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of gratitude or friendship according to local customs or usage, shall be excepted from the provisions of this Act.Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted to prejudice or prohibit the practice of any profession, lawful trade or occupation by any private person or by any public officer who under the law may legitimately practice his profession, trade or occupation, during his incumbency, except where the practice of such profession, trade or occupation involves conspiracy with any other person or public official to commit any of the violations penalized in this Act.

Section 15. Separability clause. If any provision of this Act or the application of such provision to any person or circumstances is declared invalid, the remainder of the Act or the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected by such declaration.

Section 16. Effectivity. This Act shall take effect on its approval, but for the purpose of determining unexplained wealth, all property acquired by a public officer since he assumed office shall be taken into consideration.

Approved: August 17, 1960

.

  Sponsored by:  The ChanRobles Group
  This web page contains the full text of Rule 139-B - Rules of Court Disbarment and Discipline of Attorneys


.  

THE CHAN ROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY - QUICK GLANCE

Philippines      |       Worldwide      |      The Business Page

.

Main Indices of the Library ---> THE LAW FIRM: Home Page Law Firm Overview Law Firm Services Law Firm Offices & Communication Links Chan Robles & Wy, CPAs The ChanRobles Group THE LAW LIBRARY: Foreword Table of Contents Site Map What's New? Philippines: Country Guide Philippine Constitution Constitutional Laws of Nations of the World Philippine Corporate Bulletin On-Line Philippine Environment Laws Philippine Foreign Investment Brief Philippine Foreign Investment Laws Philippine Human Rights Law Resources Philippine Intellectual Property Brief Philippine Labor Circular On-Line Philippine Law Update On-Line Philippine Legal Resources Institute for Strategic Philippine Political Reform & Development Vox Populi: Survey of Burning Issues of the Day Philippine Political Inquirer Philippine Judicial System Philippine Supreme Court Decisions On-Line Philippine Supreme Court Circulars Philippine Tax Update On-Line Primary Sources of Philippine Law Repository of Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes RP-US Treaties Rules of Court of the Philippines U. S. Government Resources U. S. Jurisprudence U. S. Supreme Court Decisions On-Line Worldwide Human Rights Law Resources Worldwide Legal Resources-Alphabetical List Worldwide Legal Resources-By Country Worldwide Legal Resources-By Topic United Nations & World Governments International Court of Justice Worldwide Jurisprudence: Supreme Court Decisions [By Country] Global Political Resources CRALAW Search Engine The Business Page The Entertainment Page The Sports Page Kidstuff Page Y2K Global Resources Law List - Free Listing Databank for Lawyers & Law Firms Philippine Listing of Lawyers & Law Firms Worldwide Listing of Lawyers & Law Firms 

   

DISBARMENT & DISCIPLINE OF ATTORNEYS

Rule 139-B

    Section 1. How instituted. - Proceedings for disbarment, suspension or discipline of attorneys may be taken by the Supreme Court motu proprio, or by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) upon the verified complaint of any person. The complaint shall state clearly and concisely the facts complained of and shall be supported by affidavits of persons having personal knowledge of the facts therein alleged and/or by such documents as may substantiate said facts.chanrobles virtua law library

.   

The IBP Board of Governors may, motu proprio or upon referral by the Supreme Court or by a Chapter Board of Officers, or at the instance of any person, initiate and prosecute proper charges against erring attorneys including those in the government service; Provided, however, that all charges against Justices of the Court of Tax Appeals and the Sandiganbayan, and Judges of the Court of Tax Appeals and lower courts, even if lawyers are jointly charged with them, shall be filed with the Supreme Court; Provided, further, that charges filed against Justices and Judges before the IBP, including those filed prior to their appointment in the Judiciary, shall immediately be forwarded to the Supreme Court for disposition and adjudication. chanrobles virtua law library

 Six (6) copies of the verified complaint shall be filed with the Secretary of the IBP or the Secretary of any of its chapters who shall forthwith transmit the same to the IBP Board of Governors for assignment to an investigator. (As amended by Bar Matter No. 1960). 

  A. PROCEEDINGS IN THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES
Sec. 2. National Grievance Investigator. - The Board of Governors shall appoint from among IBP members an Investigator or, when special circumstances so warrant, a panel of three(3) investigators to investigate the complaint All Investigators shall take an oath of office in the form prescribed by the Board of Governors. A copy of the Investigator's appointment and oath shall be transmitted to the Supreme Court.

An Investigator may be disqualified by reason of relationship within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity to any of the parties or their counsel, pecuniary interest, personal bias, or his having acted as counsel for either party, unless the parties sign and enter upon the record their written consent to his acting as such Investigator. Where the Investigator does not disqualify himself, a party may appeal to the IBP Board of Governors, which by majority vote of the members present, there being a quorum, may order his disqualification.

Any Investigator may also be removed for cause, after due hearing, by the vote of at least six (6) members of the IBP Board Governors. The decision of the Board of Governors in all cases of disqualification or removal shall be final.

Sec. 3. Duties of the National Grievance Investigator. - The National Grievance Investigators shall investigate all complaint against members of the Integrated Bar referred to them by the IBP Board of Governors.

Sec. 4. Chapter assistance to complainant. - The proper IBP Chapter may assist the complainant(s) in the preparation and filing of his complaint(s). chanrobles virtua law library

Sec. 5. Service or dismissal. - If the complaint appears to be meritorious, the Investigator shall direct that a copy thereof be served upon the respondent, requiring him to answer the same within fifteen (15) days from the date of service. If the complaint does not merit action, or if the answer shows to the satisfaction of the Investigator that the complaint is not meritorious, the same may be dismissed by the Board of Governors upon his recommendation. A 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 filed within 15 days from notice of the dismissal of the complainant.

No investigation shall be interrupted or terminated by reason of the desistance, settlement, compromise, restitution, withdrawal of the charges, or failure of the complainant to prosecute the same.

Sec. 6. Verification and service of answer. - The answer shall be verified. The original and five (5) legible copies of the answer shall be filed with the Investigator, with proof of service of a copy thereof on the complainant or his counsel.

Sec. 7. Administrative counsel. - The IBP Board of Governors shall appoint a suitable member of the Integrated Bar as counsel to assist the complainant or the respondent during the investigation in case of need for such assistance.

Sec. 8. Investigation. - Upon joinder of issues or upon failure of the respondent to answer, the Investigator shall, with deliberate speed, proceed with the investigation of the case. He shall have the power to issue subpoenas and administer oaths. The respondent shall be given full opportunity to defend himself, to present witnesses on his behalf and be heard by himself and counsel. However, if upon reasonable notice, the respondent fails to appear, the investigation shall proceed ex parte.

The Investigator shall terminate the investigation within three (3) months from the date of its commencement unless extended for good cause by the Board of Governors upon prior application.

Willfull failure or refusal to obey a subpoena or any other lawful order issued by the Investigator shall be dealt with as for indirect contempt of court.  The corresponding charge shall be filed by the Investigator before the IBP Board of Governors which shall require the alleged contemnor to show cause within ten (10) days from notice. The IBP Board of Governors may thereafter conduct hearings, if necessary, in accordance with the procedure set forth in this Rule for hearings before the Investigator. Such hearing shall, as far as practicable, be terminated within fifteen (15) days from its commencement. Thereafter, the IBP Board of Governors shall within like period fifteen (15) days issue a resolution setting forth its findings and recommendations, which `shall forthwith be transmitted to the Supreme Court for final action and if warranted, the imposition of penalty.

Sec. 9. Depositions. - Depositions may be taken in accordance with the Rules of Court with leave of the investigator(s). chanrobles virtua law library

Within the Philippines, depositions may be taken before  any member of the Board of Governors, the President of any Chapter, or any officer authorized by law to administer oaths.

Depositions may be taken outside the Philippines before a diplomatic or consular representative of the Philippine Government or before any person agreed upon by the parties or designated by the Board of Governors.

Any suitable members of the Integrated Bar in the place where a deposition shall be taken may be designated by the Investigator to assist the complainant or the respondent in taking a deposition.

Sec. 10. Report of Investigator. - Not later than thirty (30) days from the termination of the investigation, the Investigator shall submit a report containing his findings of fact and recommendations to the IBP Board of Governors, together with the stenographic notes and the transcripts thereof and all the evidence presented during the investigation.  The submission of the report need not await the transcription of the stenographic notes, it being sufficient that the report reproduce substantially from the Investigator's personal notes any relevant and pertinent testimonies.

Sec. 11. Defects. - No defect in a complaint, notice, answer, or in the proceeding or the Investigator's Report shall be considered as substantial unless the Board of Governors, upon considering the whole record, finds that such defect has resulted or may result in a miscarriage of justice, in which event the Board shall take such remedial action as the circumstance may warrant, including invalidation of the entire proceedings.chanrobles virtua law library

Sec. 12. View and decision by the Board of Governors. -

(a) 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. The decision of the Board upon such review shall be in writing and shall clearly and distinctly state the facts and the reasons on which it is based. It shall be promulgated within a period not exceeding thirty (30) days from the next meeting of the Board following the submittal of the Investigator's Report   (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 recommendations 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 the disciplinary sanction imposed by it is less than suspension or disbarment (such as admonition, reprimand, or fine) it shall issue a decision exonerating respondent or imposing such sanction. The case shall be deemed terminated unless upon petition of the complainant or other interested party filed with the Supreme Court within fifteen (15) days from notice of the Board's resolution, the Supreme Court orders otherwise.   (d) 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.

.

B. PROCEEDINGS IN THE SUPREME COURT
Sec. 13. Supreme Court Investigators. - In proceedings initiated motu proprio by the Supreme Court in other proceedings when the interest of justice so requires, the Supreme Court may refer the case for investigation to the Solicitor General or to any officer of the Supreme Court or judge of a lower court, in which case, the investigation shall proceed in the same manner provided in Sections 6 to 11 hereof, save that the review report of the investigation shall be conducted directly by the Supreme Court.

Sec. 14. Report of the Solicitor General or other Court designated investigator. - Based upon the evidence adduced at the investigation, the Solicitor General or other Investigator designated by the Supreme Court shall submit to the Supreme Court a resolution containing his findings of fact and recommendations together the record and all the evidence presented in the investigation for the final action of the Supreme Court.

  C. COMMON PROVISIONS
Sec. 15. Suspension of attorneys by Supreme Court. - After receipt of respondent's answer or lapse of the period therefor, the Supreme Court, motu proprio, or at the instance of the IBP Board of Governors upon the recommendation of the Investigator, may suspend an attorney from the practice of his profession for any of the causes specified in Rule 138, Section 27, during the pendency of the investigation until such suspension is lifted by the Supreme Court.chanrobles virtua law library

Sec. 16. Suspension of attorney by the Court of Appeals or Regional Trial Court. - The Court of Appeals or Regional Trial Court may suspend an attorney from practice for any of the causes named in Rule 138, Section 27, until further action of the Supreme Court in the case.

Sec. 17. Upon suspension by Court of Appeals or Regional Trial Court, further proceedings in Supreme Court. - Upon such suspension, the Court of Appeals or a Regional Trial Court shall forthwith transmit to the Supreme Court a certified copy of the order of suspension and a full statement of the facts upon which the same was based. Upon receipt of such certified copy and statement, the Supreme Court shall make a full investigation of the case and may revoke, shorten or extend the suspension, or disbar the attorney as the facts may warrant.

Sec. 18. Confidentiality. - Proceedings against attorneys shall be private and confidential. However, the final order of the Supreme Court shall be published like its decisions in other cases.

Sec. 19. Expenses. - All reasonable and necessary expenses incurred in relation to disciplinary and disbarment proceedings are lawful charges forthwith the parties may be taxed as costs. chanrobles virtua law library

Sec. 20. Effectivity and Transitory Provision. - This Rule shall take effect on June 1, 1988 and shall supersede the present Rule 139 entitled "DISBARMENT OR SUSPENSION OF ATTORNEYS".  All cases pending investigation by the Office of the Solicitor General shall be transferred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors for investigation and disposition as provided in this Rule except those cases where the investigation has been substantially completed. (Bar Matter No. 356, Resolution dated April 13, 1988).

    .

PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEM    Background on the Philippine Judicial System Philippine Judicial Hierarchy Regular Courts Special Courts Collegiate Courts Lower Courts The Supreme Court The Court of Appeals Sandiganbayan Court of Tax Appeals Regional Trial Courts Shari'a District Courts Shari'a Circuit Courts Municipal Trial Courts Metropolitan Trial Courts Municipal Circuit Trial Courts Municipal Trial Courts in Cities Constitutional Provisions on the Judiciary Rules of Court of the Philippines Supreme Court Decisions Supreme Court Circulars Philippine Law Update:  The Supreme Court & the Judiciary   2006 DIRECTORY OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES  of the following courts: PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEM DIRECTORY OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES   Supreme Court Court of Appeals Sandiganbayan Court of Tax Appeals Regional Trial Courts Metropolitan Trial Courts in Cities Municipal Trial Courts/Municipal Circuit Courts Shari'a District Courts Shari'a Circuit Courts

.      Back to Top  -  Back to Main Index   -  Back to Home

.
 

THE CHAN ROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY - QUICK GLANCE

Philippines| Worldwide|The Business Page

Main Indices of the Library --->THE LAW FIRM:Home PageLaw Firm OverviewLaw Firm Services Law Firm Offices & Communication Links Chan Robles & Wy, CPAsThe ChanRobles GroupTHE LAW LIBRARY:Foreword Table of Contents Site Map What's New? Philippines: Country Guide Philippine Constitution Constitutional Laws of Nations of the World Philippine Corporate Bulletin On-Line Philippine Environment Laws Philippine Foreign Investment Brief Philippine Foreign Investment Laws Philippine Human Rights Law Resources Philippine Intellectual Property Brief Philippine Labor Circular On-Line Philippine Law Update On-Line Philippine Legal ResourcesInstitute for Strategic Philippine Political Reform & Development Vox Populi: Survey of Burning Issues of the Day Philippine Political Inquirer Philippine Judicial System Philippine Supreme Court Decisions On-Line Philippine Supreme Court Circulars Philippine Tax Update On-Line Primary Sources of Philippine LawRepository of Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes RP-US Treaties Rules of Court of the Philippines U. S. Government Resources U. S. Jurisprudence U. S. Supreme Court Decisions On-Line Worldwide Human Rights Law Resources Worldwide Legal Resources-Alphabetical List Worldwide Legal Resources-By Country Worldwide Legal Resources-By Topic United Nations & World GovernmentsInternational Court of JusticeWorldwide Jurisprudence: Supreme Court Decisions [By Country]Global Political Resources CRALAW Search Engine The Business PageThe Entertainment PageThe Sports PageKidstuff Page Y2K Global ResourcesLaw List - Free Listing Databank for Lawyers & Law FirmsPhilippine Listing of Lawyers & Law FirmsWorldwide Listing of Lawyers & Law Firms 

.
.

Copyright ©1998-2006 by
ChanRobles Publishing Company
 All Rights Reserved
Since 19.07.98








Serch www.chanrobles.com

	Web  www.chanrobles.com

.

SUPREME COURT'S RECOGNITION OF MY REPRESENTATION