Rule 71 following acts may be punished for indirect
contempt:
CONTEMPT
Q: How do you define contempt?
A: Contempt - it is a disregard of or
disobedience with rules or orders of a judicial body,
or an interruption of its proceedings by disorderly
behavior, or insolent language, in its presence or so
near thereto, as to disturb the proceedings or to
impair the respect due to such a body. (17 C.J.S. 4)
According to SC, the power to punish contempt,
is inherent in all courts; its existence is essential to
the preservation of order in judicial proceedings
and the enforcement of judgements, orders and
mandates of the court, and, consequently to the
due administration of justice. (Perkins vs. Dir. of
Prisons, 58 Phil. 271) The court said, the reason
behind this power to punish for contempt is that
respect of the courts guarantee, the stability of that
institution, without such guarantee, such institution
will be resting on a very shaky foundation. (Cornejo
vs. Tan, 85 Phil. 772)
Rule 135 (5) inherent power of the courts, - to
compel obedience to its orders, to maintain its
dignity while proceedings are going on (that’s the
essence). Violation of the same, you will be held
liable for contempt.
Section 1. Direct contempt punished summarily —
A person guilty of misbehavior in the presence of or
so near a court as to obstruct or interrupt the
proceedings before the same, including disrespect
toward the court, offensive personalities toward
others, or refusal to be sworn or to answer as a
witness, or to subscribe an affidavit or deposition
when lawfully required to do so, may be summarily
adjudged in contempt by such court and punished by
a fine not exceeding two thousand pesos or
imprisonment not exceeding ten (10) days, or both, if
it be a Regional Trial Court or a court of equivalent or
higher rank, or by a fine not exceeding two hundred
pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one (1) day, or
both, if it be a lower court. (1a)
Sec. 2. Remedy therefrom — The person adjudged
in direct contempt by any court may not appeal
therefrom, but may avail himself of the remedies of
certiorari or prohibition. The execution of the
judgment shall be suspended pending resolution of
such petition, provided such person files a bond fixed
by the court which rendered the judgment and
conditioned that he will abide by and perform the
judgment should the petition be decided against him.
(2a)
Sec. 3. Indirect contempt to be punished after
charge and Hearing — After a charge in writing has
been filed, and an opportunity given to the
respondent to comment thereon within such period
as may be fixed by the court and to be heard by
himself or counsel, a person guilty of any of the
(a) Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the
performance of his official duties or in his official
transactions;
(b) Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ,
process, order, or judgment of a court, including the
act of a person who, after being dispossessed or
ejected from any real property by the judgment or
process of any court of competent jurisdiction, enters
or attempts or induces another to enter into or upon
such real property, for the purpose of executing acts
of ownership or possession, or in any manner
disturbs the possession given to the person adjudged
to be entitled thereto;
(c) Any abuse of or any unlawful interference with
the processes or proceedings of a court not
constituting direct contempt under section 1 of this
Rule;
(d) Any improper conduct tending, directly or
indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the
administration of justice;
(e) Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of a
court, and acting as such without authority;
(f) Failure to obey a subpoena duly served;
(g) The rescue, or attempted rescue, of a person or
property in the custody of an officer by virtue of an
order or process of a court held by him.
But nothing in this section shall be so construed as
to prevent the court from issuing process to bring the
respondent into court, or from holding him in custody
pending such proceedings. (3a)
Classifications of Contempt:
As to the manner of commission:
1. Direct Contempt under Section. 1
2. Indirect Contempt under Section. 3
As to the nature of Contempt:
1. Criminal Contempt
2. Civil Contempt
Q: Distinguish Civil from Criminal Contempt:
A: A civil contempt consists in the failure to do
something ordered to be done by a court or judge
in a civil case for the benefit of the opposing party
therein; whereas a criminal contempt consists in
conduct that is directed against the authority and
dignity of a court or of a judge acting judicially, as
in unlawfully assailing or discrediting the authority
and dignity of the court or judge, or in doing a dully
forbidden act. Perkins vs. Dir. of Prisons, 58 Phil.
271)
A good example of civil contempt is when you
are file an injunction with a TRO. On the other
hand, when You are inside the court room and while
the trial is going on, you start singing and dancing
inside the court room, that is Criminal Contempt. It
is directed against the dignity, that is disrespect to
the court while proceeding is going on.
 courtroom like a market place because
REMMAH ENTERPRISE, INC. vs. CA the judge may hold you in contempt.
268 SCRA 68, February 26, 1997 b.) refusal to be sworn or to answer as
witness. This is related to evidence. So,
ISSUE: How do you characterize if you refuse to answer, the judge may
whether the contempt is civil or declare you in contempt of court
criminal?
HELD: The SC said, the real character c.) Refusal to subscribe to an affidavit or
of the proceedings in contempt cases is deposition when lawfully required to do so.
to be determined by the relief sought or
by the documents purpose. When you
ask the court to cite somebody in Q: How is a person made liable?
contempt, what is the purpose behind A: He may be summarily adjudged in contempt
that? The proceedings are to be of court. Summarily means no hearing!
regarded criminal when the purpose is
primarily for punishment. And it is civil Q: What is the penalty?
when the purpose is primarily A: If you are found guilty of contempt, the
compensating or remedial. maximum imprisonment is ten (10)days. The
In general, criminal contempt maximum fine is P2,000 - or both penalties may be
proceedings should be conducted in given. This is before the RTC and CA. In MTC, the
accordance with the principles and rules maximum fine is P200 and imprisonment should
applicable to criminal cases, in so far as not exceed 1 day - or both.
such procedure is consistent with the
summary nature of contempt
proceedings. Strict rules that govern Sec. 2. Remedy therefrom — The person adjudged
criminal prosecution apply to a in direct contempt by any court may not appeal
prosecution for criminal contempt. The therefrom, but may avail himself of the remedies of
accused will be accorded with certiorari or prohibition. The execution of the
judgment shall be suspended pending resolution of
protections provided in regular criminal such petition, provided such person files a bond fixed
cases and proceedings under the by the court which rendered the judgment and
statutes governing them are to be conditioned that he will abide by and perform the
strictly construed. We just follow the judgment should the petition be decided against him.
general principles in criminal cases. (2a)
However, criminal proceedings are not
required to take any particular form so Q: Is an order of direct contempt appealable?
long as the substantial rights of the A: NO, you cannot appeal.
accused are preserved.
Civil contempt proceedings, Q: Suppose the judge held you in direct
according to the SC, are generally held contempt with grave abuse of discretion?
to be remedial and civil in nature, that is A: Yur remedy is certiorari or prohibition - not an
for the enforcement of some duty and appeal.
essentially, the remedy resulted to
preserve and enforce the right of a And maybe the court will give you few days to
private party to an action and to compel file your opposition. On the meantime, the
obedience to a judgement or decree judgement will be suspended but you put up a
intended to benefit such party litigant. bond. The bond will be a condition that you will
The rules of procedure governing abide by and perform the judgement should the
criminal contempt proceedings or opposition be decided against you.
criminal prosecutions or devarily are
inapplicable to civil contempt Q: How is a charge for indirect contempt made?
proceedings. A: There must be a charge in writing and the
respondent is given opportunity to comment
Q: what are considered acts of direct contempt? thereon and he can be heard. That is one main
A: a.) misbehaviour in the presence of or difference between direct and indirect contempt. In
disrespect towards the court or judge or direct contempt, there is no hearing, there is no
to abstracts… Some lawyers are guilty charge, there is no petition. On the spot! Your are
of this, minsan nagaaway or not given the chance to comment. But in indirect
nagmumura na sila sa courtroom. One contempt, the normal due process is observed.
must maintain ones cool and Similar to a trial after which only then can a court
professionalism. Don’t treat the within you are guilty.
Q: What are the grounds for Indirect Contempt?
A: The following:
a.) disobedience of an officer in court…
What’s the difference between this
act and in Sec.1? The difference is, in
Sec.1, your act of misbehaviour is right
there in the presence of the judge. In
Sec.3, it is something that you do in the
performance of your duty and somebody
brings to the attention of the court, so it
must be heard. Lawyers can be held
liable here because they are held
officers of the court. (ex. Sheriff, clerk of
court, etc.)
b.) disobedience…
A good example would be resistance
to heed an order or writ of preliminary
injunction (TRO)
A resistance to be considered
contemptuous, some requisites must be
considered:
1.) It must appear that an order was in
fact made by a court requiring the
performance of some particular act.
2.) The act which is forbidden or
required to be done must be clearly
and precisely defined so as to leave
no reasonable doubt to what specific
act is required or forbidden.
3.) The order must be lawful. (Ex. TRO,
after the lapse of 30 days, wala ng
violation dyan because the TRO
already expired.
4.) The disobedience must be willful or
deliberate (not just negligence or
mistake)
Q: Suppose you are sued for forcible
entry. After trial you lost the case and you
are ordered, to vacate. But despite the
judgement, you refused to leave the
property. Can you be held liable for indirect
contempt?
A: No, there is no contempt here
because back to execution, there are two
types of judgements: Ordinary and Special
Judgment(Rule 39):
A party can be punished for contempt if
it is based on a special judgement, but if it is
an ordinary judgement - you will not be
punished. Special judgement is a judgement
which required a party to perform an act
other than to pay money or to deliver a
property.
Whose judgements are ordinary? Ex.
Judgement ordering a party to pay a sum of
money. But if the defendant will not pay, will
you ask the court to render him in contempt
of court? No- you just ask to levy his
property, you don’t send him to jail! Order
to vacate - (ordinary judgement) delivery of
property - No contempt, But if it is a special
judgement, you may be held in contempt.
Ex. Rule 65 (9), the law says, disobedience
thereto, shall be punished for contempt -
that provision is for a special judgement.
So what is the correct procedure in an
ejectment case when the losing party fails
to vacate?- You get a writ of execution and
the sheriff now will forcibly eject the
defendant from your land. And then after a
month, balik na naman sya! What will you
do now? You look at Section 3 par (b).- Ayan
contempt ka na! That is the difference
between the two situations.
So if you are enforcing a judgement - no
contempt but if the judgement is enforced
already, and you come back - that is when
you will be liable for contempt under
paragraph b of Section 3.
C.) Abuse of Court process…
Example: Postponement of trial on the
ground that a party is very, very sick and
the court believes but later found out that
the same was not true and it was proven.
Now, can you hold him guilty for contempt?
Yes. You abuse a court process. What
process? The process of postponement. In
this case, you are trying to abuse the court
process.
Another example is forum-shopping -
this is an abuse of court process.
D.) Any impropper conduct… though courts are
very lenient about this.
Example: the media… writing stories
about a certain case or the life of the
accused, this is subjudice. There should be
no commentary. What if you comment on a
pending case, what happens? That is
contemptuous! An improper conduct
degrading the wheel of justice.
What if the case has been disposed of?
You many comment but not when the case
is pending. But what , if you say that the
decision is wrong because the judge is
ignorant, he doesn’t know the law! Now,
that is different and is already
contemptuous because you are tending to
degrade the administration of judgement.
Take note that this is already after the
judgement was given!
 You ask why it is contemptuous to
comment a case while it is pending? The
answer would be that it might influence or
affect the proceedings and judgement of the
case.
However, supposed the judge is strong-
willed or he never read or heard of the
story- so, your attempt to influence will not
really affect him. Can you still be held liable
for contempt? Yes, because you still degrade
the administration of judgement.
Another reason is that you will influence
the mind of the public that would defeat the
principle that an accused is held innocent
until proven guilty. This may degrade the
court/judge who rules on evidence because
the public may insist the guilt of the
accused. Remember that the court is not
guided by publicity.
E.) Appearing as an attorney for a party without
authority, that is contemptuous!
F.) Failure… Ayaw magsipot sa court!
G.) Interfering with court processes.
Sec. 4. How proceedings commenced — procedure in filing a criminal complaint
Proceedings for indirect contempt may be initiated
motu proprio by the court against which the
contempt was committed by an order or any other
formal charge requiring the respondent to show
cause why he should not be punished for contempt.
In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt
shall be commenced by a verified petition with
supporting particulars and certified true copies of
documents or papers involved therein, and upon full
compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory
pleadings for civil actions in the court concerned. If
the contempt charges arose out of or are related to a
principal action pending in the court, the petition for
contempt shall allege that fact but said petition shall
be docketed, heard and decided separately, unless
the court in its discretion orders the consolidation of
the contempt charge and the principal action for joint
hearing and decision. (n)
If you will notice Section 4 is a new provision in
Rule 71
Q: How will you receive charges (?) in contempt
proceedings?
A: If you look at the first paragraph, there are
two ways:
1.) Motu propio by the court
2.) And other formal charge requires the
respondent to show the cause why he
should not be punished for contempt.
This proceeding is taken from the
rulings of the SC, particularly…. (end
of tape)
NAZARENO vs. BARNES
136 SCRA 37
FACTS: This case was originated in
Municipality of Bagangga, Davao. del
Norte. The petitioner here is Dr.
Nazareno, the respondent is former late
judge Roque Barnes(?) who was
assigned there before as judge of the
CFI. Now, there must have been some
bad blood between the petitioner and
the respondent because Nazareno
distributed letters to different people
(Pres., SC etc.) attacking judge Barnes -
questioning the latter’s integrity. The
petitioner tried to convince the judiciary
to disallow or deny further appointment
for Judge Barnes under the Judiciary
Reorganization Act. Now, Barnes felt that
the acts of petition are contemptuous.
The question is where there is
contempt? Judge Barnes was convinced
that there is, but how will he institute a
contempt proceeding in his own sala
without complaint?
Now, since the case is criminal in
nature, Judge Barnes followed the
first by filing an information so and so
for contempt. Of course there are so
many things discussed in the Sala of
judge Barnes. Then Nazareno went to SC
on certiorari and one of the issues was,
how are contempt proceedings initiated?
If the judge initiates contempt, do
you initiate it by way of information
using the rules of criminal procedure?
HELD: The SC said that the contempt
proceedings against Nazareno was
wrongfully initiated. The nature there of
being that of an indirect contempt/a
written change(?) being necessary, of
course you went to Sec. 3 of Rule 71.
The written charge may partake the
nature of:
1.) An order requiring the respondent
to show cause why he should not
be punished for contempt for
having committed a
contemptuous act imputed upon
him.
2.) A petition for contempt by way of
special civil action under Rule 71
The first procedure will apply only
when the indirect contempt is
committed against a court or judge who
 possessed and endowed with contempt
powers.
Therefore in the case of Nazareno vs.
Judge Barnes, neither of the two modes
of commencing an indirect contempt
proceedings was availed in the instant
case. What was filed against Nazareno
was, to all intents and purposes, was an
information in a criminal case.
“Contempt however is not in the
nature of a criminal offense within the
meaning of the law, and need not be
instituted by means of an information.”
“The institution of charges by the
prosecuting official is not necessary to
hold persons guilty for civil or criminal
contempt amenable to trial and
punishment by the court. The law only
requires that there will be a charge in
writing during trial in court and the
opportunity for the person charged to be
heard.”
Distinction between two modes: The first is
initiated by the judge (motopropio), the second is
inititated by another person through a verified
petition with supporting particulars and with full
compliance in filing indicating pleadings. The
second paragraph is a new and radical change from
the old because the case for contempt will be
decided separately from the main action.
Therefore, the case will be treated as a new case,
docketed and heard - panibagong kaso yan! So it’s
possible that the contempt proceeding under
second paragraph will be handled by another
judge. But for convenience, you may ask for
consolidation of the contempt charge and the
principal action for a joint hearing.
Before, a contempt charge is treated as a mere
motion. The same docket no. etc. But now it’s
different! Bingo na!
GERMINO vs. RAMOS
Example is you file a written charge
of contempt, is there a particular from,
in Section 3, there seem to be none but
in Section 4, there is such as the filing,
attachment of particulars and full
compliance of requirements for filing on
initiating pleading (non-forum shopping
etc.)
Do you have to furnish a copy of the
contempt case to the respondent? No,
because there will be another summon,
so and so . This is another case. The
next question in this case is:
Suppose there will be a promulgation
in the judgement for contempt, either
one is aquitted or held liable, how will
you promulgate the decision in a
contempt proceeding? Will you follow
the rules in criminal proceeding for
promulgation (ready for contempt,
presence of the accused in court etc.) Is
that also the procedure for contempt
proceedings?
HELD: The SC said NO, just serve a
copy of the decision to him just like the
other civil case. So you don’t really have
to follow all the rules in criminal
procedure 100%.
REYES vs. PALSIS
193 SCRA 649
FACTS: Whether somebody has a
legal personality to file a contempt
proceeding? I think the contempt charge
here is under Section 3 (b) -
disobedience of or resistance to a court
order. Usually who will file this? The
party in whose favor the order was
issued - siya man ang agrabyado!
But in this case, the one who filed
the petition is somebody who is not part
of the case. A complete stranger. He is
not the person who benefited by the
order and yet, he is the one inititating
the petition against one of the parties
their for disobedience on a lawful court
order. Now, if you are the respondent,
how will you challenge? As usual - You
have no personality. So, that is what has
been resolved in this case.
ISSUE: Will a charge of contempt for
alleged diobedience properly lie if it is
initiated by a person/s not party/ies to
the action or proceeding in which the
order is issued?
HELD: The SC said YES, because of
the following reasons:
1.) There is nothing in the Rule 71
that says only the party/ies to the
case has the personality to
receive the contempt proceeding.
2.) In the exercise of the court’s
power to punish for contempt,
the interest of private parties,
either litigants or not in a case, in
which it is invoked is at best only
a coincidental, not a necessary or
indispensable factor. Meaning,
the interest of the private parties
are merely incidental, not
indispensable.
 Sec. 5. Where charge to be filed — Where the
charge for indirect contempt has been committed
against a Regional Trial Court or a court of equivalent
or higher rank, or against an officer appointed by it,
the charge may be filed with such court. Where such
contempt has been committed against a lower court,
the charge may be filed with the Regional Trial Court
of the place in which the lower court is sitting; but
the proceedings may also be instituted in such lower
court subject to appeal to the Regional Trial Court of
such place in the same manner as provided in
section 2 of this Rule. (4a)
For example you want to file a petition for
indirect contempt for disobeying am RTC order. You
file the petition in the RTC. How about a resistance
to a MTC order? You file the petition for contempt in
the MTC but you can also file it in the RTC.
In other words, petition for contempt in the MTC
order can be initiated either in the MTC or RTC. So
the RTC can declare you guilty of contempt by
disobeying an order of the MTC.
Sec. 6. Hearing; release on bail — If the hearing is
not ordered to be had forthwith, the respondent may
be released from custody upon filing a bond, in an
amount fixed by the court, for his appearance at the
hearing of the charge. On the day set therefor, the
court shall proceed to investigate the charge and
consider such comment, testimony or defense as the
respondent may make or offer. (5a)
In the indirect contempt, it is possible for the
respondent to be held already in custody -unless
you file a bond, but it is discretionary.
Sec. 7. Punishment for indirect contempt — If the
respondent is adjudged guilty of indirect contempt
committed against a Regional Trial Court or a court of
equivalent or higher rank, he may be punished by a
fine not exceeding thirty thousand pesos or
imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or both.
If he is adjudged guilty of contempt committed
against a lower court, he may be punished by a fine
not exceeding five thousand pesos or imprisonment
not exceeding one (1) month, or both. If the
contempt consists in the violation of a writ of
injunction, temporary restraining order or status quo
order, he may also be ordered to make complete
restitution to the party injured by such violation of
the property involved or such amount as may be
alleged and proved.
The writ of execution, as in ordinary civil actions,
shall issue for the enforcement of a judgment
imposing a fine unless the court otherwise provides.
(6a)
Sec. 8. Imprisonment until order obeyed — When
the contempt consists in the refusal or omission to do
an act which is yet in the power of the respondent to
perform, he may be imprisoned by order of the court
concerned until he performs it. (7a)
When you are supposed to perform something,
ayan no, the court will order you to be imprisoned,
to be released when you are already willing to
comply. Example, failure to comply with the order
to support pendente lite- ayaw magbayad. The
court can order you na ikulong to be released if you
are willing to give the support already.
Sec. 9. Proceeding when party released on bail
fails to answer — When a respondent released on
bail fails to appear on the day fixed for the hearing,
the court may issue another order of arrest or may
order the bond for his appearance to be forfeited and
confiscated, or both; and, if the bond be proceeded
against, the measure of damages shall be the extent
of the loss or injury sustained by the aggrieved party
by reason of the misconduct for which the contempt
charge was prosecuted, with the costs of the
proceedings, and such recovery shall be for the
benefit of the party injured. If there is no aggrieved
party, the bond shall be liable and disposed of as in
criminal cases. (8a)
When you are released through bail and if you
fail to appear, the bond will be confiscated, just like
in criminal cases.
Sec. 10. Court may release
respondent — The court which issued the
order imprisoning a person for contempt
may discharge him from imprisonment
when it appears that public interest will
not be prejudiced by his release. (9a)
The same with Sec. 6, because the court can
order you to be placed in custody while the
contempt charge is pending. But Sec. 10 said, the
court, which orders you to be in prison, may
discharge you from imprisonment when the interest
of the public will not be prejudiced by the release.
This is discretionary on the part of the court.
Sec. 11. Review of judgment or final order; bond
for stay — The judgment or final order of a court in a
case of indirect contempt may be appealed to the
proper court as in criminal cases. But execution of
the judgment or final order shall not be suspended
until a bond is filed by the person adjudged in
contempt, in an amount fixed by the court from
which the appeal is taken, conditioned that if the
appeal be decided against him he will abide by and
perform the judgment or final order. (10a)
If you are judged guilty for contempt of court,
you are guilty of indirect contempt of court – one
(1) month imprisonment, can you appeal? Yes, this
is unlike direct contempt because in direct
contempt, there is no appeal. Dito pwede.
Therefore, the judgement sentencing you to 1
month imprisonment will be suspended until the
appeal is resolved.

Q: Supposed the respondent is declared not
liable, he did not commit an act of contempt, can
the adverse party appeal?
A: The SC said No because we follow the rule in
criminal prosecution - the prosecution cannot
appeal from an order of acquittal (double jeopardy).
If you are liable, of course, you can appeal, just like
the accused.
PEOPLE vs. GODOY,
March 29, 1995
Q: The case originated in RTC, after it
was decided, it was appealed to the CA.
Supposed you are the party who commit
the contempt in the RTC, who will
declare him in contempt? The RTC or
CA? Remember that the case started in
the RTC and once it was appealed, the
RTC lost jurisdiction over the case. So,
who will now declare the party in
contempt?
A: In this case, it is the CA because
the appeal completely transfers the
records and the proceedings thereto, or
where there is tendency to affect the
status quo or otherwise interfere with
the jurisdiction of the appellate court.
Q: Second, is it possible that a case
of libel be filed against him under the
penal code and the case for contempt
afaisnt him under the Rules of court?
Pwede ba yung dalawa?
A: Yes - both may be filed. The fact
that the act of constituting a contempt is
also criminal and punishable by
indictment or other method of criminal
prosecution does not prevent the
outraged court from punishing him of
contempt. This principle stems from the
fundamental doctrine that an act may be
punished as a contempt even though it
has been punished as a criminal offense.
The defense of anyone made in jeopardy
based on the conviction of a criminal
offense would not lie a bar the contempt
proceedings on the proposition of the
contempt may be on the offense against
the dignity of a court and at the same
time an offense against the peace and
dignity of the people of the state,
because in criminal, the offended party
is the people of the Philippines, while in
contempt it is directed against the court.
So there is no inconsistency.
In the case of Godoy, the judge was
maligned just like in Nazareno’s case.
Here the defendant said to be the judge
that he should not file a contempt
charge because talo siya, pano judge
ang kalaban, eh, File ka na lang ng libel,
that way pareho tayo, pantay ang
bakbakan.
But the SC said No, the suggestion
that judges who are unjustly attacked
can be remedied in an action for libel is
without rational basis and the principle
according to the SC. In the first place,
the outrage is not directed to the judge
as a private individual but in a judge as
such and to the court as an organ for the
administration of justice. In the second
place, public interest will greatly suffer
where the judge as such will from time
to time be pulled down in his room, of
his judicial authority, to face his on equal
grounds and prosecute cases in his
behalf as a private individual.
Q: The last question, if a lawyer does a
contemptuous act, can you file two cases against
him - a case for contempt and a case for
disbarment (ethical grounds)?
A: The SC said YES, the basic rule is that the
power to punish for contempt and the power to
disbar are separate and distinct ant that the
exercise of one does not exclude the other. A
contempt proceeding or misbehaviour in court is
designed to vindicate the authority of the court, On
the other hand, the object of disciplinary
proceeding is to heed the fitness of the court’s
officer to continue in that office to preserve and
protect the court from the official ministrations of
persons unfit or unworthy to hold such an office.
(People vs. Godoy)
Iba ang purpose nang contempt sa disbarment.
The position required as a penalty in a contempt
proceeding is not considered res judicata to a
subsequent charge for unprofessional conduct.
That is for the lawyer to show cause, why he should
not be punished for contempt cannot be
considered as a notice to show cause why he
should not be suspended from the grounds of law,
considering that each of them, there is a separate
object and for each of them a different procedure is
established.
Contempt of court is governed by the procedure
laid down under the Rule 71 of the Rules, whereas
disciplinary actions in the practice of law are
governed by Rules 138 and 139 of the Rules. So,
that the holdings in the case of People vs. Godoy
Sec.12. Contempt against quasi-judicial entities —
Unless otherwise provided by law, this Rule shall
apply to contempt committed against persons,
entities, bodies or agencies exercising quasi-judicial
 functions, or shall have suppletory effect to such
rules as they may have adopted pursuant to
authority granted to them by law to punish for
contempt. The Regional Trial Court of the place
wherein the contempt has been committed shall
have jurisdiction over such charges as may be filed
therefor. (n)

Q: Do quasi-judicial bodies have the power to

punish for contempt?
A: No, unless a court or a law specifically grants
this body the power. Remember, the power to
punish for contempt is inherently judicial. Now, if
the law gives you the power - no problem.

Q: But suppose there is no such provision.

There is no power. What if you will misbehave
before these bodies, ex. NLRC, what will the
remedy be?
A: The procedure is to file a petition declaring in
contempt to the RTC. Meaning the RTC will be the
one to hold him liable for contempt in the NLRC
because the NLRC has no power, pero kung meron
doon kana magfile.

-oOo-