G.R. No. 87644 - G and P Manpower Services vs. National Labor Relations Commission

In 2006, Atty. Plaridel C. Nava II filed a Petition for Disbarment (A.C. No. 7253) against Atty. Ofelia M. D. Artuz (respondent), a Prosecutor at the time, for violating Canon 8 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR), Grave Misconduct, and Republic Act No. 6713.
The petition stemmed from respondent’s alleged willful and vicious maligning, insulting, and scorning of Atty. Nava II and his father in her comment dated July 29, 2005, to his Request for Inhibition and Re-Raffle of a case before the City Prosecutor's Office.
Atty. Nava II also alleged that respondent falsely and maliciously imputed a crime against him, maliciously filed criminal cases against him and others to harass them, and maligned her former superior, City Prosecutor Efrain V. Baldago.

Despite a written opposition by Atty. Nava II, respondent was appointed and took her Oath of Office as Presiding Judge of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 5, Iloilo City on October 9, 2006.
Atty. Nava II filed a complaint-petition (A.M. No. MTJ-08-1717) seeking to nullify respondent’s appointment on grounds of pending criminal and administrative cases against her involving character, competence, probity, integrity, and independence.
The Court found that respondent failed to disclose the pending cases in her Personal Data Sheets (PDS) dated October 28, 2005, and November 6, 2006. The Court directed respondent to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken.

Due investigations commenced; the two cases were consolidated by resolution dated June 17, 2015.
On August 29, 2017, the Court found respondent guilty of Grave Misconduct, Dishonesty, and Falsification connected with A.M. No. MTJ-08-1717 and dismissed her from the service with forfeiture of retirement benefits and disqualification from reemployment.
The Court required respondent to show cause why she should not be disbarred for her acts leading to dismissal and to comment on A.C. No. 7253 allegations.
Respondent moved for reconsideration, denied allegations but largely criticized Atty. Nava II, attributing false statements in PDS to “error in judgment” due to reliance on DOJ clearance.
The Court denied her motion for reconsideration by resolution dated January 10, 2018, and referred the disbarment petition and comment to the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) for evaluation.

The OBC recommended disbarment for violations of multiple canons of the CPR and Rules of Court in a report dated March 22, 2019, resting largely on respondent’s guilty findings from the August 29, 2017 decision.
The OBC stressed respondent’s failure to convincingly explain or show cause and her tendency to attack complainant’s credibility instead.
Respondent filed a Motion for Leave to Admit Second Motion for Reconsideration related to A.M. No MTJ-08-1717, arguing lack of notice and violation of due process by the investigating judge; the Court noted but took no action on this motion.

Whether or not respondent Atty. Ofelia M. D. Artuz should be disbarred for violations related to:

Her false statements and omissions in her Personal Data Sheets, punishable as Grave Misconduct, Dishonesty, and Falsification.
Her acts of willfully maligning, insulting, and scorning Atty. Plaridel C. Nava II and his father in official pleadings, violating professional ethical standards.