黑料社

MANILA, Philippines 鈥� The Public Attorney鈥檚 Office (PAO) has ordered its lawyers to comply with聽Section 22, Canon III or the 鈥淐onflict of Interest鈥� provision after the Supreme Court denied its request to remove it from the new lawyers鈥� code.

Section 22, Canon III of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA) states: 鈥淚n the pursuit of its mandate under its charter, the Public Attorney鈥檚 Office shall ensure ready access to its services by the marginalized sectors of society in a manner that takes into consideration the avoidance of potential conflict of interest situations which will leave these marginalized parties unassisted by counsel.鈥�

The same provision states that: 鈥淎 conflict of interest of any of the lawyers of the Public Attorney鈥檚 Office incident to services rendered for the Office shall be imputed only to the said lawyer and the lawyer鈥檚 direct supervisor. Such conflict of interest shall not disqualify the rest of the lawyers from the Public Attorney鈥檚 Office from representing the affected client upon full disclosure to the latter and written informed consent.鈥�

PAO聽Chief Persida Rueda-Acosta believed that the provision would result in a conflict of interest as public defenders would be representing both sides of a case.

But the Supreme Court reminded PAO that: 鈥淭o turn away indigent litigants and bar them from availing of the services of all聽PAO聽lawyers nationwide due to alleged conflict of interest would be to contravene聽PAO鈥檚 principal duty and leave hundreds of poor litigants unassisted by legal counsel they cannot otherwise afford.鈥�

PAO, in Office Order No. 096, told its lawyers to follow Section 22 of the new code.

鈥淚n as much as the Supreme Court has already publicly issued a press statement/release published on its official website on July 12, 2023, we will hereby comply/adhere to the same,鈥� the office order stated.

鈥淲e hereby give the discretion and disposition as a lawyer to the individual resident public attorneys assigned in specific courts to comply with the said rule in relation to Sections 13 and 18, Canon III thereof,鈥� it added.

Section 13 requires the written informed consent of all concerned in cases of conflict of interest, while Section 18 requires lawyers to maintain the private confidences of a former client except upon the written informed consent, or if allowed under the new lawyers鈥� code or when the information becomes generally known.

PAO also reminded its lawyers of Art. 209 of the Revised Penal Code, which punishes betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor.

The provision imposes a penalty of between 6 months and one day to 2 years and four months and/or a fine of between P40,000 and P200,000 on a lawyer or his/her representative for a 鈥渕alicious breach of professional duty or of inexcusable negligence or ignorance鈥� that prejudices the client, or for revealing a client鈥檚 secrets which a lawyer obtained in his/her professional capacity.

The provision also requires the consent of the first client if the lawyer later defends the opposing party.

鈥淧AO resident attorneys are likewise advised to adopt precautionary measures in handling conflict-of-interest cases to protect their life and limb as well as to avoid criminal and administrative liability,鈥� the office order stated.

PAO also reminded its lawyers 鈥渢o adopt precautionary measures in handling conflict-of-interest cases to protect their life and limb as well as to avoid criminal and administrative liability.鈥�

A copy of the order was given to all Regional Public Attorneys, the Office of the President, and Vice President, 15 justices of the Supreme Court, the Office of the Executive Secretary, Chief Presidential Legal Counsel, Justice Secretary, and the Office of the Court Administrator.

RELATED STORIES:

SC denies PAO鈥檚 bid to remove 鈥榗onflict of interest鈥� clause in lawyers鈥� new code

PAO seeks indefinite suspension of 鈥榗onflict of interest鈥� provision in new lawyer鈥檚 code

PAO wants part in lawyers鈥� code changed to avoid conflict of interest

JPV