In 2025, the Supreme Court (SC) resolved 3,735 cases, with a disposition rate of 19% for judicial cases and 27% for administrative and Bar matters.
In the exercise of its administrative supervision over members of the Philippine Bar, the SC penalized several lawyers for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA).
CPRA was approved by the Supreme Court in April 2023 (A.M. No. 22-09-01-SC) as the modern relevant, and responsive code for Philippine lawyers, replacing the 1988 Code of Professional Responsibility.
CPRA focuses on seven core values: Independence, Propriety, Fidelity, Competence, Diligence, Equality, and Accountability
Independence means lawyers are urged to engage solely in merit-based legal practice and resist being influenced by dishonest or immoral considerations.
Propriety is maintaining proper behavior in both professional and private settings, including respectful and gender-fair language.
Fidelity means upholding the Constitution and advancing a client’s cause with truth and justice.
Competence implies possession of the necessary legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation to handle a case effectively.
Diligence requires acting promptly on legal matters, upholding high standards of proficiency, and ensuring punctuality in appearances and filings.
Equality mandates that lawyers treat all clients equally, ensuring non-discrimination regardless of personal characteristics or status.
Accountability is upholding the integrity of the profession and facing consequences for unethical actions.
The Supreme Court stressed in several cases that if the practice of law is to remain an honorable profession and attain its basic ideals, whoever is enrolled in its ranks should not only master its tenets and principles but should also, in their lives, accord continuing fidelity to them.
Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers serve to curb misbehavior and promote excellent public service in the Judiciary.
Bar membership may be withdrawn due to the lawyer’s lack of essential qualifications including honesty, fidelity, and integrity as enshrined in the lawyer’s oath.
Disciplinary proceedings are a means of protecting the administration of justice by requiring those who carry out important function in the judicial system to be competent, honorable and reliable men in whom courts and clients may repose confidence.
The primary purposes of disciplinary proceedings are to protect the public, to foster public confidence in the Bar, to preserve the integrity of the profession, and to deter other lawyers from similar misconduct.
Erring lawyers may be penalized either by suspension or disbarment for any violation of the oath, a patent disregard of one’s duties, or an odious deportment unbecoming of an attorney.
Suspended lawyers must immediately cease practicing law, including appearing in court, giving advice, or acting as a notary. Suspension is effective immediately upon receipt of the decision.
Disbarment is imposed where the misconduct and unrepentant demeanor shows a serious flaw in his character and the outright defiance of established norms that put the legal profession in disrepute and place the integrity of the administration of justice in peril.
One lawyer was disbarred for misappropriating more than PHP 60 million of his clients’ funds [A.C. No. 14203, February 18, 2025).
Another was disbarred for neglecting to file a timely appeal for his client [ A.C. No. 10770, July 8, 2025).
A lawyer was likewise disbarred for repeatedly missing hearings, resulting in the loss of his client’s right to cross-examine a witness and unnecessary delay of the trial [ A.C. No. 14232, July 8, 2025).
The SC also found a lawyer guilty of violating the CPRA for falsely claiming that his client had no other pending cases to secure her release. Since the lawyer had already been disbarred, the SC ruled he is not eligible for judicial clemency [A.C. No. 13646, April 22, 2025).
An Assistant Solicitor General was also warned by the SC for using disrespectful language in his pleadings [ G.R. No. 254800, January 14, 2025).
However, the SC emphasized that administrative cases are meant to regulate professional conduct and protect the public, not to enforce private rights unrelated to a lawyer’s duties. It clarified that its disciplinary authority covers only acts that may affect public confidence in the rule of law (A.C. 14228, July 15, 2025).
“The title of lawyer is not an individual aggrandizement. We become lawyers only because we can ethically serve others. We become lawyers only because we understand that it is not the be-all of who we should be: that we continue to build who we are as we engage, assist, and empower others,” says Senior SC Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, who was my professor at the University of the Philippines College of Law.
Atty. Dennis R. Gorecho heads the seafarers’ division of the Sapalo Velez Bundang Bulilan law offices. For comments, e-mail info@sapalovelez.com, or call 0908-8665786
