View full case

OMAR P. ALI v. ATTY. MOSIB A. BUBONG

FACTS:

Atty. Mosib Ali Bubong, while holding the position of Register of Deeds of Marawi City, was the respondent in an administrative case filed by the complainant. The complainant alleged that the respondent engaged in illegal exaction, indiscriminate issuance of a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) to certain individuals, and manipulation of a criminal complaint. The Land Registration Authority (LRA) initially investigated the case and absolved the respondent of the charges. However, the Department of Justice found the respondent guilty of grave misconduct for his imprudent issuance of the TCT and manipulating the criminal case. Former President Fidel V. Ramos issued an administrative order adopting the findings and ordering the respondent's dismissal from government service. The respondent questioned the administrative order before the Supreme Court, which dismissed the petition for certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition. The complainant then sought the disbarment of the respondent based on the outcome of the administrative case. The respondent claimed that his issuance of the TCT was within his ministerial duty and that he had no influence over the dismissal of the criminal case. The case was referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for investigation, and after several proceedings and motions, the IBP Cotabato Chapter recommended the suspension of the respondent for five years. The respondent filed a motion for the transmittal of the case records to the IBP Marawi City Chapter, but the motion was denied, and he also sought the striking of the IBP Cotabato Chapter's recommendation. The complainant opposed the motion, claiming that the respondent was guilty of laches.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the IBP Cotabato Chapter had the authority to conduct the investigation in this case

  2. Whether the respondent was deprived of his right to due process

  3. Whether the motion to authorize IBP Marawi City to conduct an investigation should be granted

  4. Whether the lawyer may be disbarred for grave misconduct committed while in the employ of the government.

    • Whether or not ED should be stricken from the Roll of Attorneys

RULING:

  1. The investigating panel constituted by the IBP Cotabato Chapter had the authority to conduct the investigation in this case. The contention of the respondent that IBP Marawi City had the power to investigate this case was not supported by IBP Resolution XII-96-153 and Commissioner Fernandez's Order of 23 February 1996.

  2. The respondent was not deprived of his right to due process. The report and recommendation submitted by IBP Cotabato Chapter stated that the respondent was duly notified of the hearings conducted by the investigating panel, and yet he did nothing to defend himself. He also failed to submit his position paper when directed to do so.

  3. The motion to authorize IBP Marawi City to conduct an investigation was denied. The chairman of the Commission on Bar Discipline for Mindanao found no need for further investigation as the report of IBP Cotabato Chapter, as well as the complaint and counter-affidavit of the respondent, provided sufficient basis for re-evaluation and recommendation.

  4. The lawyer may be disbarred for grave misconduct committed while in the employ of the government. The Code of Professional Responsibility applies to lawyers in government service in the discharge of their official tasks. A lawyer who holds a government office may be disciplined as a member of the bar if his misconduct constitutes a violation of his oath as a member of the legal profession. In this case, the respondent's grave misconduct undermined the people's confidence in public office and cast doubt on the integrity of the legal profession. Therefore, the withdrawal of his privilege to practice law is warranted.

    • ED is ordered to be stricken from the Roll of Attorneys.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The authority to conduct an investigation may be vested in a specific IBP chapter, as determined by IBP resolutions and orders.

  • Due process requires that a party be given notice and an opportunity to be heard in a judicial or administrative proceeding.

  • Requests for withdrawal of a case may be made, but the decision ultimately lies with the authority handling the case.

  • The findings and conclusions of previous administrative cases may carry weight and be used as evidence in subsequent cases.

  • The Code of Professional Responsibility applies to lawyers in government service in the discharge of their official tasks.

  • A lawyer who holds a government office may be disciplined as a member of the bar if his misconduct constitutes a violation of his oath as a member of the legal profession.

  • Lawyers in government service are expected to uphold the dignity of the legal profession at all times and observe a high standard of honesty and fair dealing.

  • Disciplinary proceedings for suspension or disbarment are undertaken for the purpose of preserving courts of justice from the official ministration of persons unfit to practice in them.

  • The Court has the power to remove or strike lawyers from the Roll of Attorneys for various reasons, such as for dishonesty, grossly immoral conduct, or violation of the lawyer's oath.