Case Digest (A.C. No. 7252)
Facts:
Johnny Ng, Complainant, vs. Atty. Benjamin C. Alar, Respondent, Admin. Case No. 7252 (CBD 05-1434), November 22, 2006, the Supreme Court First Division, Austria‑Martinez, J., writing for the Court.A verified complaint dated February 15, 2005 was filed by Johnny Ng before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD), accusing Atty. Benjamin C. Alar of misconduct amounting to disbarment for language used in pleadings he filed in connection with a labor case pending at the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). Ng alleged that Alar, counsel for certain complainants in NLRC NCR CA No. 040273-04, resorted to abusive and imputative language in a Motion for Reconsideration with Motion to Inhibit (MRMI) after the NLRC First Division affirmed the Labor Arbiter’s dismissal.
The MRMI quoted in the complaint contained repeated invective and disparaging descriptions of the NLRC commissioners (including specific attacks on Commissioner Dinopol’s integrity, impartiality and competence), expressions accusing the panel of copying decisions from respondents’ pleadings, and other language the Investigating Commissioner characterized as insulting and denigratory of the NLRC. In his Answer with Counter-Complaint, Atty. Alar maintained that the complaint was meant to harass and influence the NLRC proceedings, argued that the Code of Professional Responsibility and Rules of Court apply only suppletorily in NLRC proceedings, and defended the forcefulness of labor counsel’s rhetoric when confronting perceived corruption.
Attached to Alar’s counter-complaint was an affidavit by union president Marilyn Batan alleging misconduct by counsel for Ng’s opposing party (Attys. Jose Raulito E. Paras and Elvin Michael Cruz) in other related matters (tax issues, filing of civil actions before the City Engineer, and alleged diminution of claimants), prompting a counter-complaint against Paras and Cruz. Paras and Cruz answered, denying improper conduct and explaining that the City Engineer’s actions and the tax matters were distinct and not within their responsibility.
The CBD assigned the matter to Commissioner Patrick M. Velez as Investigating Commissioner. In his Report and Recommendation the Investigating Commissioner found Atty. Alar guilty of using improper and abusive language and recommended suspension for not less than three months with a stern warning, while finding no actionable misconduct against Attys. Paras and Cruz and recommending dismissal of the counter-complaint for lack of merit. The IBP Board of Governors adopted the Report and Recommendation but, with modification, reprimanded Alar with a stern warning and dismissed the counter-complaint agai...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did Atty. Benjamin C. Alar violate Canons 8 and 11 (and attendant rules) of the Code of Professional Responsibility by the language used in his MRMI?
- If there was a violation, was the reprimand imposed by the IBP Board of Governors an appropriate sanction, or should a stiffer penalty be imposed?
- Should the counter-complaint against Attys. Jose Raulito E. Paras and Elvin...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)