2018 Bar Notes in Legal and Judicial Ethics

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka, Ed.D.

Associate Dean, San Sebastian College of Law
Professor, Arellano University School of Law

Definition
Legal Ethics – It is a branch of moral science which treats of the duties which an attorney owes to the court, to his client, to his
colleagues in the profession and to the public.

Characteristic of Legal Profession

1. Legal Profession is a duty of public service;

2. A relation as an officer of the courts to the administration of judicial involving thorough sincerity, integrity, and
reliability;

3. A relation to clients with the highest degree of fiduciary;

4. A relation to the colleagues at the bar characterized by candor, fairness and unwillingness to resort to current business
methods of advertising and encroachment on their practice or dealing directly with their clients.

Four-Fold Duties of a lawyer:

1. Court – respect or defend against criticisms uphold authority and dignity, obey order and processes assist in the
administration of justice
2. Bar – candor, fairness, courtesy, and truthfulness, avoid encroachment on the business of other lawyers, uphold the
honor of the profession.
3. Client – entire devotion to client’s interest.
4. Public – should not violate his responsibility to society, exemplary for unrighteousness ready to render legal aid, foster
social reforms, guardian of due process, aware of special role in the solution of special problems and be always ready
to lend assistance in the study and solution of social problems.

VII. Lawyer’ Oath

I,___________, do solemnly swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; I support its
Constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities therein; I will do no
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court, I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless false
or unlawful suit, nor give aid nor consent to the same, I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself
as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the courts as to my
clients; and impose upon myself this voluntary obligation without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. So
help me God.

Admission to Practice
The Supreme Court under Sec.5 (5), Art. VIII of the 1987 Constitution shall have the power to admit candidates to the
practice of law. The constitutional power to admit candidates to the legal profession is a judicial function and involves exercise
of discretion. Petition to that end is filed with the Supreme Court as are other proceedings invoking judicial function. (In re:
Almacen, 31 SCRA 562).
The SC acts through a Bar Examination Committee in the exercise of its judicial function to admit candidates to the legal
profession. Thus, the Committee is composed of a member of the Court who acts as Chairman and 8 members of the bar who
acts as examiners in the 8 bar subjects with one subject assigned to each. (In re: Lanuevo 66 SCRA 245)

Bar Matter No. 1153, March 9, 2010 (Amended Section 5, Rule 138)
A Filipino citizen “who graduated from a foreign law school shall be admitted to the bar examination only upon submission to
the Supreme Court of certifications showing:

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 1

(a) completion of all courses leading to the degree of Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent degree;
(b) recognition or accreditation of the law school by the proper authority; and
(c) completion of all fourth year subjects in the Bachelor of Laws academic program in a law school duly recognized by the
Philippine Government.”
A Filipino citizen who completed and obtained his or her degree in Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent in a foreign law school
must also present proof of completion of a separate bachelor’s degree.

What Constitutes Practice of Law

It covers any activity, in or out, which requires the application of law, legal principles, practice or procedure and calls for
legal knowledge, training and experienced (Phil Lawyer’s Association vs. Agrava 105 Phil 173)
To engage in the practice of law is to perform those acts which are characteristics of the legal profession. Generally, to
practice law is to give notice or render any kind of service, which devise or service requires the use, in any degree, of legal
knowledge or skill.

Essential Criteria in Determining engagement in the Practice of Law:

1. Habituality – implies customarily or habitually holding oneself out to the public as a lawyer.
2. Compensation – implies that one must have presented himself to be in the active practice and that his professional
services are available to the public for compensation as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services.
3. Application of law, legal principle, practice or procedure which calls for legal knowledge, training and experience.
4. Attorney-client relationships.

The practice of law a right or a privilege

The practice of law is basically a privilege because it is limited to persons of good moral character with special
qualifications duly ascertained and certified. The practice of law is not a natural, property or constitutional right but a mere
privilege. But while the practice of law is a privilege, a lawyer cannot be prevented from practicing law except for valid reasons,
the practice of law not being a matter of state’s grace or favor.

Requirements before a candidate can engage in the Practice of Law:

1. He must have been admitted to the Bar

2. After his admission to the bar, a lawyer must remain in good and regular standing, which is continuing requirement for
the practice of law.

Duties of a Lawyer:

1. To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and to support the Constitution and obey the laws of the
Philippines;
2. To observe and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers;
3. To counsel and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers;
4. To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him, such means only as are consistent with truth and
honor, and never seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an artifice of false statement of fact or law;
5. To maintain inviolate the confidence and at every peril to himself, to preserve the secrets in connection with his client’s
business except from him or with his knowledge and approval;
6. To abstain from all offensive personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to the honor and reputation of a party or
witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which he is charged;
7. Not to encourage either the commencement or the continuance of an action or proceeding or delay any man’s cause
from any corrupt motive or interest;
8. Never to reject for any consideration personal to himself the cause of the defenseless or oppressed;
9. In the defense of a person accused of crime by all fair and honorable means, regardless of his personal opinion as to the
guilt of the accused to present every defense that the law permits to the end that no person may be deprived of life or
liberty but by due process of law.

Basic Requirements for all applicant for admission to the Bar

He must be:
Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 2
a. A citizen of the Philippines;
b. At least 21 years of age;
c. Of good moral character;
d. Resident of the Philippines;
e. Must produce before the SC satisfactory evidence of good moral character;
f. No charges against him, involving moral turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any court in the
Philippines;
g. Must have complied with the academic requirements;
h. Pass the bar examinations.

Non-Lawyers who are authorized to appear in court

a. Before the MTC, a party may conduct his own litigation in person (Sec 4, Rule 138);

b. Before any court, a party may conduct his litigation personally. But if he gets someone to aid him, that
someone must be a member of the bar. He is bound by the same rules in conducting the trial of the case.
He cannot, after judgment, claim he was not properly represented.

c. In a criminal case before the MTC, in a locality where a duly licensed member of the bar is not available, the
judge may appoint a non-lawyer which is a resident in the province, of good repute for probity and ability to
aid the accused in his defense (Sec.7, Rule 116).

d. A law student who has completed all his third year subjects, who is enrolled in a recognized law school’s
clinical education programs approved by the SC may appear before any court without any compensation to
represent indigent clients accepted by the Legal Clinic of the school. The student shall be under the direct
supervision and control of the IBP member duly accredited by the law school.

e. Under the Labor Code non-lawyers may appear before the NLRC or any Labor arbiter if they:
1. represent themselves;
2. represent their organization or members thereof (Art 228, Labor Code).

f. A non-lawyer may represent a claimant before the Cadastral Court (Sec. 9, Act #2259).

h. Any person appointed to appear for the Government of the Philippines in accordance with law (Sec.33, Rule
138).

Public Officials who cannot practice law in the Philippines:

a. Judges and other officials or employees of superior court;

b. Officials and employees of the Office of the Solicitor General;
c. Government Prosecutors;
d. President, Vice-President, members of the Cabinet, their deputies and assistants;
e. Chairman and members of the Constitutional Commissions;
f. Ombudsman and hid deputies;
g. Governors, city and municipal mayors;
h. Those who, by special law are prohibited from engaging in the practice of their legal profession.

Public Officials with Restrictions in the Practice of Law:

a. Senators and Members of the House of Representatives;

b. Members of the Sanggunian;
c. Retired Justice or Judge;
d. Civil Service officers or employees without permit from their respective department heads.

Restrictions in the Practice of Law of the Members of the Legislature

A lawyer who is a member of the legislature is only prohibited from personally appearing as counsel before any court of
justice, electoral tribunals or quasi-judicial and administrative bodies.

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 3

The word “appearance” includes not only arguing a case before any such but also filing a pleading on behalf of a client
and simply filing a formal motion, plea or answer. Neither can he allow his name to appear in such pleading by itself or as part of
a firm name under the signature of another qualified lawyer because the signature of an agent amounts to signing of a non-
qualified senator or congressman, the office of an attorney being originally of agency and because he will by such act be
appearing in court or quasi-judicial or administrative body in violation of the constitutional restriction. He cannot do indirectly
what the Constitution prohibits.

Roque vs. IAC, November 11, 1985

Barratry necessarily requires a willful and intentional act in its commission.
No honest error of judgment or mere negligence, unless criminally gross, can be barratry.

Ambulance Chasing
The practice of soliciting cases for the purpose of gain, either personally or through paid agents or brokers, constitutes
malpractice.

MCLE, Bar Matter No. 850, October 2, 2001

To ensure that throughout their career, they keep abreast with law and jurisprudence, maintain the ethics of the
profession and enhance the standards of the practice of law.

Exemptions
The President, Vice-President, and the Secretaries and Undersecretaries of executive departments; Senators and
Members of the House of Representatives; The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the SC, incumbent and retired justices of
the judiciary, incumbent members of the Judicial and Bar Council and incumbent court lawyers covered by the Philippine Judicial
Academy Program of continuing legal education; The Chief State Counsel, Chief State Prosecutor and Assistant Secretaries of the
Department of Justice; The Solicitor-General and the Assistant Solicitor-General; The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy
and Assistant Government Corporate Counsel; The Chairman and Members of the Constitutional Commissions; The
Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy Ombudsman, the Deputy Ombudsman and the Special Prosecutor of the Office of the
Ombudsman; Heads of government agencies exercising quasi-judicial functions; Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and professors
of law who have teaching experience for at least 10 years in accredited law schools; The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and
members of the Corps of Professional Lecturers of the Philippine Judicial Academy; and Governors and Mayors; Those who are
not in law practice, private or public; Those who have retired from law practice with the approval of the IBP Board of Governors.

Sanctions
A member who, for whatever reason, is in non-compliance at the end of the compliance period shall pay a non-
compliance fee (P1000.00). A member who fails to comply with the requirements after the sixty (60) day period for compliance
has expired, shall be listed as a delinquent member of the IBP upon the recommendation of the MCLE Committee.

BM 1992, Jan. 14, 2014

Amended the June 3, 2008 resolution by repealing the phrase "Failure to disclose the required information would cause
the dismissal of the case and the expunction of the pleadings from the records" and replacing it with "Failure to disclose the
required information would subject the counsel to appropriate penalty and disciplinary action”
i) The lawyer shall be imposed a fine of P2,000.00 for the first offense, P3,000.00 for the second offense and P4,000.00
for the third offense;
(ii) In addition to the fine, counsel may be listed as a delinquent member of the Bar pursuant to Section 2, Rule 13 of
Bar Matter No. 850 and its implementing rules and regulations; and
(iii) The non-compliant lawyer shall be discharged from the case and the client/s shall be allowed to secure the services
of a new counsel with the concomitant right to demand the return of fees already paid to the non-compliant lawyer.

Mapalad vs. Echanez, June 6, 2017

First. It was clearly established that respondent violated Bar Matter No. 85020. No less than the MCLE Office had issued
a certification stating that respondent had not complied with the first and second compliance period of the MCLE.
Second. Despite such non-compliance, respondent repeatedly indicated a false MCLE compliance number in his
pleadings before the trial courts. In using a false MCLE compliance number in his pleadings, respondent also put his own clients
at risk. Such deficiency in pleadings can be fatal to the client's cause as pleadings with such false information produce no legal
effect. In so doing, respondent violated his duty to his clients.26 Canons 17 and 18 of the CPR.
WHEREFORE, respondent Anselmo S. Echanez is hereby DISBARRED from the practice of law, and his name is ORDERED
STRICKEN FROM THE ROLL OF ATTORNEYS. Let a copy of this Decision be entered in his record as a member of the Bar; and let
notice of the same be served on the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, and on the Office of the Court Administrator for
circulation to all courts in the country

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 4

Arnado vs. Adaza, August 26, 2015
The Case This is an administrative case against Atty. Homobono A. Adaza (respondent) for his failure to comply with the
requirements of the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) under Bar Matter No. 850. The MCLE Governing Board
denied respondent’s application for exemption on 14 January 2009 on the ground that the application did not meet the
requirements of expertise in law under Section 3, Rule 7 of Bar Matter No. 850. Atty. Homobono A. Adaza is a delinquent
member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and SUSPEND him from the practice of law for SIX MONTHS, or until he has fully
complied with the MCLE requirements for the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Compliance Periods, whichever is later, and he
has fully paid the required non-compliance and reinstatement fees.

Remedies Against Unauthorized Practice of Law:

1. Petition for injunction;
2. Declaratory relief;
3. Contempt of court;
4. Disqualification and complaints for disbarment;
5. Criminal complaint for estafa againsta person who falsely represented to be an attorney to the damage of a party.

Suspension and Disbarment

Power to discipline errant lawyers:
Rule 138 Section 27 –Disbarment or is suspension of attorneys by Supreme Court, grounds therefore. A member of the
bar may be disbarred or suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court.

Rule 138-B Section 16 of the Revised Rules of Court

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.
Inferior Courts are not empowered even just to suspend an attorney, although, they may cite or hold a lawyer in
contempt of court for contemptuous acts.

The Supreme Court has the full authority to:

1. Warn;
2. Admonish;
3. Reprimand;
4. Suspend and;
5. Disbar a lawyer.
(Section 27, Rules 138, Rules of Court)

The Court of Appeals and the Regional Trial Court are also empowered to:
1. Warn;
2. Admonish;
3. Reprimand.
As among those of the causes mentioned in Section 27, Rule 138 (Section 16, 139-B), but they cannot disbar a lawyer

Forms of Disciplinary Measures

1. Warning – an act of fact of putting one on his guard against an impending danger, evil consequences, or penalties.

2. Admonition – a gentle or friendly reproof, mild rebuke, warning or reminder, counseling on a fault, error or oversight,
an expression of authoritative advice.

3. Reprimand – a public and formal censure or severe reproof, administered to a person in fault by his superior officer
or a body to which he belongs.

4. Suspension – temporary withholding a lawyer’s right to practice his profession as a lawyer for a certain period or for
an indefinite period of time.

5. Censure – official reprimand.

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 5

6. Disbarment – it is an act of the Philippine Supreme Court in withdrawing from an attorney the right to practice law.
The name of the lawyer is stricken out from the roll of attorneys.

Grounds for Discipline:

1. Deceit
2. Malpractice; or other gross misconduct in office
3. Grossly immoral conduct
4. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
5. Violation of oath of office
6. Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court;
7. Corrupt or willful appearance as an attorney for a party to a case without authority to do so.

Instances of malpractice and gross-misconduct

1. Failure of the lawyer to appeal by allowing the period of appeal to lapse;
2. Failure of a lawyer to submit his client’s brief within the reglementary
period;
3. Preparation and notarization of immoral contracts and agreements;
4. Preparation by a notary public of a false affidavit;
5. Solicitation of cases either directly or indirectly through paid agents or brokers;
6. Abandonment of a client’s case;
7. Delay in the filing of a client’s case;
8. Notary public, who makes it appear in the jurat of a contract that an affiant exhibited to him a residence
certificate when in fact he did not do so; Notarizing a document without the affiant’s presence.
9. Acknowledging a special power of attorney in the absence of one of the parties;
10. Compromising a client’s case without authority;
11. Notarizing documents after the lawyer’s commission as notary public had expired
12. Representing conflicting interests;
13. Encroaching upon the business of another lawyer;
14. Advertisement of a lawyer’s skill in a newspaper or publication
15. Cooperating in illegal practice of law such as the formation of a partnership with the layman;
16. Conversion of a client’s money to his own benefit;
17. Gross negligence
18. Notarizing one’s own affidavit;
19. Intimidating a client by a display of a revolver;
20. Failure to pay a fine imposed for failure to file a brief;
21. Refusal to pay IBP dues;
22. Practicing law despite the lawyer’s suspension even if he refrained from using the word “attorney”;
23. Lack of fidelity, care and devotion to the cause of the client;
24. Attempting to mislead the Supreme Court by raising issues long laid to rest by final and executory judgement;
25. Unwarranted obstinacy in evading payment or debt.

Rule 139-B Section 1

How Instituted: Proceedings for the disbarment, suspension, or discipline of attorneys may be taken by the Supreme
Court motu proprio, or by the IBP upon the verified complaint of any person.

Board The IBP of Governors may, motu proprio or upon referral by the Supreme Court or by the 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.

BAR MATTER N0.1645, October 13, 2015

Section 1. Proceedings for the disbarment, suspension, or discipline of attorneys may be taken by the Supreme Court
motu propio, or upon the filing of a verified complaint of any person before the Supreme Court or the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP).
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.
The IBP shall forward to the Supreme Court for appropriate disposition all complaints for disbarment, suspension and
discipline filed against incumbent Justices of the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals and judges of lower
courts, or against lawyers in the government service, whether or not they are charged singly or jointly with other respondents,
and whether or not such complaint deals with acts unrelated to the discharge of their official functions.

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 6

Application for Reinstatement

Article VIII, Section 5(5) 1987 Constitution

The power of the Supreme Court to reinstate the privilege to practice law to a disbarred lawyer is anchored on its
constitutional prerogative to promulgate rules on the admission of applicants to the practice of law.

Executive pardon to a disbarred lawyer due to conviction for a crime, to be reinstated, there is still a need for the filing
of an appropriate petition to be reinstated, with the Supreme Court.

Characteristics of Disbarment Proceedings

1. Neither civil nor criminal proceeding

2. Defense of double jeopardy is not available
3. Can be initiated motu proprio by the SC or the IBP. It can be initiated
without a complaint
4. Can proceed regardless of interest of the complainants
5. Imprescriptible
6. Conducted confidentially until its final determination
7. It is itself due process of law.

Officers authorized to Investigate Disbarment Cases:

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

Effect of Death of lawyer during pendency of Disciplinary Action

1. Renders action moot and academic

2. Court may still receive case on merit in order to clear publicity the name of the lawyer

Notary Public – not every member of the bar is a notary public because a lawyer requires a commission of appointment to be
designated a notary public.

Qualifications:
Must be citizen of the Philippines
Must be over twenty-one (21) years of age
Must be a resident in the Philippines for at least one (1) year and maintains a regular place of work or business in the
city or province where the commission is to be issued
Must be a member of the Philippine Bar in good standing with clearances from the Office of the Bar Confidant of the
Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
Must not have been convicted in the first instance of any crime involving moral turpitude.

Term of Office of Notary Public

For a period of two (2) years commencing on the 1st day of January of the year in which the commissioning is made
unless earlier revoked or the notary public has resigned according to these Rules and the Rules of Court.

Prohibitions
General Rule: A notary public shall not perform a notarial act outside his regular place of work or business. The
jurisdiction of a notary public in the City of Manila shall be co-extensive with the said city. No notary shall, possess authority to
do any notarial act beyond the limits of his jurisdiction.

Exceptions

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 7

A notarial act may be performed at the request of the parties in the following sites located within his territorial
jurisdiction:
Public offices, convention halls and similar places where oaths of office may be administered;
Public function areas in hotels and similar places for the signing of instruments or documents requiring notarization;
Hospitals and medical institutions where a party to the instrument or document is confined for treatment; and
Any place where a party to the instrument or document requiring notarization is under detention.

Powers and Duties of a Notary Public:

1. To administer all oaths and affirmations provided for by law in all matters incident to his notarial office, and in the
execution of affidavits, depositions, and other documents requiring an oath;

2. To receive proof or acknowledgment of all writings relating to commerce or navigation such as bills of exchange,
bottomries mortgages and hypothecations of ships vessels or boats, charter parties or affreightments, letters of
attorney, deeds, mortgages transfers and assignments of land or buildings or an interest therein, and such other
writings as are commonly proved or acknowledged before notaries;

3. To act as a magistrate in the writing of affidavits or depositons; and,

4. To make declarations and certify to the truth thereof under his seal of office, concerning all matters done by him by
virtue of his office (Sec.241, Notarial Law).

Prohibited Notarial Acts

1. The person involved as signatory to the instrument or document:
a. Is not in the notary’s presence at the time of the notarization; and
b. Is not personally known to the notary public or otherwise identified by the notary public through competent
evidence of identity as defined by these Rules
2. the certificate containing an information known or believed to be false; and
3. he shall not affix an official signature or seal on a notarial certificate that is incomplete.

Disqualifications, Sec. 3. Notarial Practice Rule

A notary public is disqualified from performing a notarial act if he:
(a) is a party to the instrument or document that is to be notarized;
(b) will receive, as a direct or indirect result, any commission, fee, advantage, right, title, interest, cash, property, or
other consideration, except as provided by these Rules and by law; or
(c) is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor, descendant, or relative by affinity or consanguinity of the principal
within the fourth civil degree.

JUDICIAL ETHICS

Judicial Ethics – the branch of moral science which treats of the right and proper conduct to be observed by all judges and
magistrates in trying and deciding controversies brought to them for adjudication which conduct must be demonstrative of
impartiality, integrity, competence, independence, and freedom from improprieties. The freedom from improprieties must be
observed even in the judge’s private life.
Source of Judicial Ethics
New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary. Promulgated April 27, 2004; effective June 1, 2004. Based on
the Bangalore Draft adopted by the Judicial Group on Strengthening Judicial Integrity, intended to be the Universal Declaration
of Judicial Standards, as revised by the Round Table Conference of Chief Justices held at The Hague on November 25-26, 2002.
Court – a board or other tribunal which decides a litigation or contest
Judge – a public officer who, by virtue of his office, is clothed with judicial authority. A public officer lawfully appointed to
decide litigated questions in accordance with law.

Who should be appointed Judges:

Art VIII Section 7 (1) 1987 Constitution

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 8

No person shall be appointed Member of the Supreme Court or any lower collegiate court unless he is a natural-born
citizen of the Philippines. A member of the Supreme Court must be at least forty years of age, and must have been for fifteen
years or more a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.

Article VIII Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution

The Congress shall prescribe the qualifications of judges of lower courts, but no person may be appointed judge thereof
unless he is a citizen of the Philippines and a member of the of the Philippine Bar

Article VIII Section 7(3) of the 1987 Constitution

A member of the Judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.

RTC Judges
Shall be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, at least 35 years of age, and for at least ten years, has been engaged in
the practice of law in the Philippines, or has held a public office in the Philippines requiring admission to the practice of law as an
indispensable requisite.

MTC Judges
Shall be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, at least 30 years of age, and for at least five years, has been engaged in
the practice of law in the Philippines, or has held a public office in the Philippines requiring admission to the practice of law as an
indispensable requisite.

A Judge Is the Visible Representation Of The Law - A judge is the visible representation of the law and more
importantly of justice. As such, he should avoid even the slightest infraction of the law.
A Judge Should Be an Embodiment of Competence, Integrity and Independence - by conniving to stifle and
sabotage the prosecution of the accused for the serious crime of rape, he has placed his integrity, independence and
impartiality under a cloud.

A Judge Should Remain Devoted To The Study Of The Law. Even in the remaining years of his stay in the judiciary he
should keep abreast with the changes in the law and with the latest decisions and precedents. Although a judge is nearing
retirement he should not relax in his study of the law and court decisions. Service in the judiciary means a continuous study
and research on the law from the beginning to end.
Qualities of Judges
CANON 1 – INDEPENDENCE
Judicial independence is a pre-requisite to the Rule of Law and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial.
A judge shall, therefore, uphold and exemplify judicial independence in both its individual and institutional aspects.
CANON 2 - INTEGRITY
Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge of the judicial office, but also to the personal demeanor of judges.
Integrity - the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.
CANON 3 – IMPARTIALITY
Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial office.
It applies not only to the decision itself but also to the process by which the decision is made.
Section 5, Canon 3
Judges shall disqualify themselves from participating in any proceedings in which they are unable to decide the matter
impartially or in which it may appear to a reasonable observer that they are unable to decide the matter impartially. Such
proceedings include, but are not limited to instances where:
a. The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts
concerning the proceedings;
(b) The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a material witness in the matter in controversy;
(c) The judge or a member of his or her family, has an economic interest in the outcome of the matter in controversy;

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 9

d) The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in controversy, or a
former associate of the judge served as counsel during their association, or the judge or lawyer was a material witness therein;
(e) The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of review;
(f) The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within the sixth civil degree or to counsel within
the fourth civil degree;
(g) The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a financial interest, as heir, legatee, creditor, fiduciary, or
otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially
affected by the outcome of the proceedings.
CANON 4 – PROPRIETY
Propriety and the appearance of propriety are essential to the performance of all the activities of a judge.
CANON 5 – EQUALITY
Ensuring equality of treatment to all before the courts is essential to the due performance of the judicial office. It
expands the measures to promote equality required by international human rights agreements. Those agreements advocate a
universal application of law and non-discrimination between the sexes. — UDHR,CEDAW,etc.
CANON 6 - COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
Competence and diligence are pre-requisites to the due performance of judicial office.

GUIDELINES IN EFFICIENT RENDITION OF JUDGMENT OR JUDICIAL OPINION:

1. The judge should observe the usual and traditional method of dispensing justice, which
requires that he should hear both sides with patience and understanding before he should render a decision.
2. The judge should decide a case impartially on the basis of the evidence presented and shall
apply the applicable law with his conscience and knowledge of the law as his guides.
3. The judge should state clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which he based his
judgment.
4. The judge in disposing of controverted cases should indicate his reasons for his opinions or
conclusions to show that he did not disregard or overlook the serious arguments of the parties’ counsel.
5. The judge should make his decisions or opinions brief but complete in all the essentials.
6. If the personal views of the judge contradict the applicable doctrine promulgated by the
Supreme Court, nonetheless, he should decide the case in accordance with that doctrine.
7. The judge should decide cases promptly, that is, within the period required by law.
8. The signed judgment must be unconditionally filed with the Clerk of court to have it
considered within the 90-day deadline for rendering judgments.
9. Extreme care should be made in the making of the dispositive portion of the decision for
that is the part of the decision which is to be implemented.
10. In granting a motion for reconsideration the judge should be more cautious and careful.
11. Judges should draw up their decisions and resolutions with due care and make certain that
they truly and accurately reflect their conclusions and their final dispositions.
12. The practice of penning a decision days before the scheduled promulgation thereof and
leaving the dispositive portion for typing at a time close to the date of promulgation should be discouraged.
13. It must be borne in mind that decisions are written essentially for litigants who are usually
unfamiliar with technical terms.

The deciding judge need not be the one who heard the evidence.

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 10

The fact that the judge who heard the evidence is not himself the one who prepared, signed and promulgated
the decision constitutes no compelling reason to jettison his findings and conclusions, and does not per se render his
decision void. It is axiomatic that judge who did not hear a case may write the decision based on the record of the case.

Diligent discharge of administrative responsibilities.

The judge is responsible for the administrative management thereof. He supervises the court personnel to
ensure prompt and efficient dispatch of business in his court. It is undesirable trait for a judge to be lenient in the
administrative supervision of his employees. For his failure to perform duties, the judge cannot use as excuse the
negligence or malfeasance of his own employees.
Judge must set the right example.
The judge must require his personnel to observe at all times the observance of high standards of public service
and fidelity which he could well do, by example.

When petition for disqualification should be filed

A petition to disqualify a judge must be filed before rendition of judgment by the judge. Mere filing of administrative
case against a judge, not a ground for disqualification. Legal reason for disqualification or inhibition must be stated in the
order. Judge to whom case was transferred cannot review the order of self-disqualification.
Judges Need not live in seclusion. It is not necessary for the proper performance of judicial duties that, judges should live in
retirement or seclusion. Judges also need recreations
Prohibition in accepting positions in political organizations and organizations for profit. Judges cannot serve as officers or
advisers of political organizations established for profit. Judges must refrain from partisan political activities and organizations
through the use of his office or influence
Limitations in participating in civic and charitable activities – While judges may participate in civic and charitable activities,
they are not allowed to solicit donations for such activities.

Solicitations of donations for office equipment is considered misconduct.

Judges may hold and manage investments; restrictions.
If the business dealings of the judge are permissible under the context of the provision of Rule 5.02 he is
allowed under Rule 5.03 to hold and manage investments subject to the restrictions that he cannot serve as an:
a. Officer;
b. Director;
c. Manager;
d. Advisor;
e. or employee of any business.

A.M. No. SB-14-21-J, September 23, 2014Allegations Against Justice Gregory Ong
From respondent's end, there was nothing wrong when he visited Napoles twice in her office considering that the visits took
place long after the promulgation of the decision in the Kevlar case.
Contrary to respondent's submission, such acts also constitute gross misconduct in violation of Canon 4 on Propriety of the
same Code.
Section 1 provides that judges shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
Respondent cannot be excused for his unconcern for the position he holds.
Being aptly perceived as the visible personification of law and justice, his personal behavior, not only while in the
performance of official duties but also outside the court, must be beyond reproach.
A judicial office circumscribes a personal conduct and imposes a number of inhibitions, whose faithful observance is the price
one has to pay for holding an exalted position.

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 11

Respondent maintained that he did not know Napoles at that time because she was not present before the Sandiganbayan
during the hearing of the Kevlar case for she must have waived her appearance.
Respondent's explanation lacks merit.
That court could not have acquired jurisdiction over her if she did not appear personally for arraignment.
WHEREFORE, the Court finds respondent Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Gregory S. Ong GUILTY of GROSS MISCONDUCT,
DISHONESTY and IMPROPRIETY, all in violations of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, for which he is
hereby DISMISSED from the service, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, if any, and with
prejudice to reemployment in any branch, agency or instrumentality of the government including government-owned or
controlled corporations.

Atty. Cecilio D. Duka Page 12