CANON 11 - A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE RESPECT

DUE TO THE COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON

SIMILAR CONDUCT BY OTHERS.
Rule 11.03 - A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous, offensive or menacing
language or behavior before the Courts.
Rule 11.04 - A lawyer shall not attribute to a Judge motives not supported by
the record or have no materiality to the case.
Rule 11.05 - A lawyer shall submit grievances against a Judge to the proper
authorities only.
mere generalizations, speculations, malicious insinuations, and
conclusions without any factual basis.
If the people lose their confidence in the honesty and
integrity of this Court and believe that they cannot expect justice
therefrom, they might be driven to take the law into their own
hands, and disorder and perhaps chaos would be the result.
A careful re-reading of her utterances would readily show that hisr
statements were expressions of personal anger and frustration of the
decision of the 9 justices Justice. In a sense, therefore, her remarks were
outside the pale of intending to destroy the reputation of the Court and its
magistrates, but rather a clear message for personal wrath and disgust ,but
rather a privilege for the benefit of the people and the institution that he
represents them.
noun
1.
the right to publish newspapers, magazines, and other printed matt
erwithout governmental restriction and subject only to the laws of li
bel,obscenity, sedition, etc.
noun
1.
incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.
2.
any action, especially in speech or writing, promoting such
discontent or rebellion.
3.
Archaic. rebellious disorder.

Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the freedom of communication

and expression through mediums including various electronic media and published
materials. While such freedom mostly implies the absence of interference from an
overreaching state, its preservation may be sought through constitutional or
other legal protections.
With respect to governmental information, any government may distinguish which
materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public based on classification of
information as sensitive, classified or secret and being otherwise protected from
disclosure due to relevance of the information to protecting the national interest. Many
governments are also subject to sunshine laws or freedom of information legislation that
are used to define the ambit of national interest.
The United Nations' 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has
the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold
opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media
regardless of frontiers"
This philosophy is usually accompanied by legislation ensuring various degrees of
freedom of scientific research (known as scientific freedom), publishing, press and
printing the depth to which these laws are entrenched in a country's legal system can
go as far down as its constitution. The concept of freedom of speech is often covered by
the same laws as freedom of the press, thereby giving equal treatment to spoken and
published expression.

In The Friends of Voltaire, Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you
say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" (which is often
misattributed to Voltairehimself) as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs.
Hall's quotation is often cited to describe the principle of freedom of
speech.
The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under article 19
of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human
rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article
19 of the ICCPR states that "everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without
interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right
shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds,
regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or
through any other media of his choice". Article 19 additionally states that the
exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may
"therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the
rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of
public order (order public), or of public health or morals".
Freedom of speech and expression are not absolute, and common limitations
to
freedom
of
speech
relateto libel, slander, obscenity, pornography, sedition, incitement, fighting
words, classified information, copyright violation, trade secrets, non-disclosure
agreements, the right to privacy, the right to be forgotten, public security,
and perjury
"the Internet has been a revolution for censorship as much as for free speech".
International, national and regional standards recognise that freedom of speech,
as one form of freedom of expression, applies to any medium, including
the Internet.[14]
[40]

Truth is not stable or fixed, but evolves with time.

In the 20th Century, Noam Chomsky states that: "If you believe in freedom of
speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Stalin and Hitler,
for example, were dictators in favor of freedom of speech for views they liked only. If
you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of

speech precisely for views you despise." [70] Lee Bollinger argues that "the free
speech principle involves a special act of carving out one area of social interaction
for extraordinary self-restraint, the purpose of which is to develop and demonstrate
a social capacity to control feelings evoked by a host of social encounters."

John Stuart Mill (18061873) argued that without human freedom there can be no
progress in science, law or politics, which according to Mill required free discussion
of opinion
Accusation a charge or claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong.
CRITICISM the expression of disapproval of someone or something based on
perceived faults or mistakes.
OUTRAGE an extremely strong reaction of anger, shock, or indignation.
CANON 1 - A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS
OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW OF AND LEGAL
PROCESSES.
The term political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly
abbreviated to PC),[1] in modern usage, is used to describe language, policies, or
measures that are intended primarily not to offend or disadvantage any particular
group of people in society
The law or regulation must meet standards of clarity and precision so that people
can foresee the consequences of their actions. Vaguely worded edicts, whose scope
is unclear, will not meet this standard and are therefore not legitimate. For example,
vague prohibitions on sowing discord in society or painting a false image of the
State would fail the test.
The rationale

It is only fair that people have a reasonable opportunity to know what is

prohibited, so that they can act accordingly

A situation where officials can make rules on a whim is undemocratic.

Decisions limiting human rights must be made by bodies representing the will of
people

Vague laws will be abused. They often give officials discretionary powers that
leave too much room for arbitrary decision-making

Vague laws have a chilling effect and inhibit discussion on matters of public
concern. They create a situation of uncertainty about what is permitted,

resulting in people steering far clear of any controversial topic for fear that it
may be illegal, even if it is not.
The term political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly
abbreviated to PC),[1] in modern usage, is used to describe language, policies, or
measures that are intended primarily not to offend or disadvantage any particular
group of people in society.
as it comes down to a question of whether or not the court system is an
appropriate forum in which to hear the case.
Political Question Doctrine Definition: A doctrine which prevents a court of law
from determining issues which are essentially political; within the purview of the
executive branch of government. Related Terms: Executive Branch, Judicial Branch

Grounds for Disbarment or Suspension of a Lawyer

1. Deceit
Cham vs. Atty. Edilberto D. Pizarro
A.C. No. 5499, August 16, 2005
A lawyer was subjected to disciplinary action for selling a non-disposable land of the
public domain. He violated his oath not to do falsehood and misrepresentation to
the buyer-complainant.
Co vs. Bernardino, 285 SCRA 102 [1998]
Lao vs. Medel, 405 SCRA 227 [2003]
For a lawyer to be dealt with by the Supreme Court, the transaction entered into
need not be in the performance of professional services. It can be in his private
capacity.
Professional honesty and honor are not to be expected as the accompaniment of
dishonesty and dishonor in other relations.
Case references:
Santos vs. Atty. Maria Vivane
Cacho-Calicdan, September 19, 2006

2. Malpractice
Nakpil vs. Atty. Carlos J. Valdes
March 4, 1998
A lawyer violated the trust and confidence of the client when he represented
conflicting interest. He represented the creditors when his accounting firm prepared
and computed the claims of the creditors while his law firm represented the estate.
Case references:
Buted vs. Hernando, 203 SCRA 1
Maturan vs. Gonzales, March 12, 1998
Conflict of interest
(Pormento vs. Pontevedra, March 31, 2005)
A lawyer has to disclose to his client all the circumstances of his relations to the
parties in connection with the controversy which might influence the client in the
selection of counsel.
It is unprofessional to represent conflicting interests except by express consent of
all concerned given after full disclosure of the facts.
Tests to determine if there is conflicting interests:
1.
If the acceptance of the new retainer will require the attorney to do
anything which will injuriously affect his first client in any matter in which he
represents him and also whether he will be called upon in his new relation, to use
against his first client any knowledge acquired thru their connection;
2.
Whether the acceptance of a new relation will prevent an attorney from
full discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to his client or invite
suspicion of unfaithfulness or double dealing in the performance thereof.
Reason for prohibition
The reason for the prohibition is found in the relation of attorney and client, which is
one of trust and confidence of the highest degree. A lawyer becomes familiar with
all the facts connected with his clients case. He learns from his client the weak
points of the action as well as the strong ones. Such knowledge must be considered
sacred and guarded with care. No opportunity must be given him to take advantage
of his clients secrets. A lawyer must have the fullest confidence of his client. For, if
the confidence is abused, the profession will suffer by the loss thereof.
The prohibition applies however slight such adverse interest may be (Nakpil vs.

Valdes, 286 SCRA 758).

The essence of the rule is to maintain inviolate the clients confidence or to refrain
from obtaining anything which will injuriously affect in any matter in which he
previously represented him.
3.
Grossly immoral conduct
Emma Dantes vs. Atty. Crispin Dantes
A.C. No. 6488, September 22, 2004
The wife complained that her husband was a philanderer, having illicit relationship
with two women. He was disbarred. A lawyer must demonstrate that he or she has
good moral character and should behave in accordance with the standards.
Case references:
Barrientos vs. Daarol, 218 SCRA 30
Toledo vs. Toledo, 7 SCRA 757
Obusan vs. Obusan, 128 SCRA 485
Terre vs. Terre, July 3, 1992
Santos vs. Tan, 196 SCRA 16
St. Louis Univ. Laboratory High School Faculty & Staff vs. Atty. Dela Cruz, A.C. No.
6010, August 28, 2006
Disbarment should never be decreed where any lesser penalty could accomplish the
end desired; hence, the penalty of two years suspension was more appropriate.
A lawyer got married again after his failed marriage. He never absconded his
obligations to his first wife and child. After the annulment of his second marriage, he
remained celibate. He was humble enough to offer no defense save for his lone and
declaration of his commitment to his wife and child. (Conjuangco vs. Palma, 438
SCRA 306; 462 SCRA 310 [2005]).
Zaguirre vs. Castillo
398 SCRA 658 [2003]
465 SCRA [2005]
4.
a.

Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude

In the Matter of Disbarment Proceedings vs. Narciso Jaranillo, 101 Phil. 323

A lawyer was disbarred for having been convicted of estafa.

b.

In Re: Dalmacio delos Angeles, 106 Phil. 1

A lawyer was convicted of the crime of bribery. He was disbarred.

Case references:
In Re: Disbarment of Rodolfo Pajo, 203 Phil. 79
In Re: Atty. Isidro Vinzons, 126 Phil. 96
Barrios vs. Atty. Francisco Martinez, A.C. No. 4885, November 12, 2004
5.
a.
2006

Violation of the Lawyers Oath

Judge Ubaldino Larucon vs. Atty. Ellis Jacoba, A.C. No. 5921, March 10,

In his motion, the lawyer stated:

The judgment is an abhorrent nullity, legal monstrosity, horrendous mistake,
horrible error, an insult to the judiciary, and an anachronism in the judicial
process.
The lawyer was suspended. The language exceeded the vigor required of a lawyer
to defend ably his clients cause.
b.

Almendrez vs. Atty. Minervo Langit, A.C. No. 7057, July 25, 2006

A lawyer was suspended for having appropriated the rental deposits for his client in
an ejectment suit.
c.
Suspension from the Practice of Law in the Territory of Guam of Atty. Leon
G. Maquera, 435 SCRA 417
A lawyer who was suspended from the practice of law abroad may likewise be
sanctioned in the Philippines for infraction he committed abroad. (Velez vs. De Vera,
A.C. No. 6697, July 25, 2006).
6.
a.

Willful disobedience to any lawful order of a superior court

People vs. Dalusog, 62 SCRA 540;

Luzon Mahogany Timber Ind., Inc. vs. Castro, 69 SCRA 384;

People vs, Medina, 62 SCRA 253;
Geeslin vs. Navarro, 185 SCRA 230
7.
Willfully appearing as attorney for any party without authority
(Sec. 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court; Atty. Edilberto D. Pizarro, A.C. No. 5499, August
16, 2005)

a.

Porac Trucking Corp. vs. CA, 202 SCRA 674; Garrido vs. Quisumbing, 28

SCRA 614
A lawyer was suspended from the practice of law in appearing for a party defendant
without authority.
A judge may require a lawyer to prove that he is authorized to appear for a client.
b.

Mercado vs. Ulay, 187 SCRA 720