CANON 13

by Maxi Fernandez
RE: SUSPENSION OF ATTY. BAGABUYO, FORMER
SENIOR STATE PROSECUTOR
(ADM. CASE No. 7006, October 09, 2007)
FACTS:
This administrative case stemmed from the events of the
proceedings in Crim. Case No. 5144, entitled People v. Luis
BucalonPlaza, heard before the sala of Presiding Judge Jose
Manuel P. Tan, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Surigao City,
Branch 29.
Crim. Case No. 5144 was originally raffled to the sala of
Judge Floripinas C. Buyser, RTC of Surigao City, Branch 30.
Judge Buyser inhibited himself from further trying the case
because of the "harsh insinuation" of Senior Prosecutor
Rogelio Z. Bagabuyo that he "lacks the cold neutrality of an
impartial magistrate," by allegedly suggesting the filing of
the motion to fix the amount of bail bond by counsel for the
accused.
The case was transferred to Branch 29 of the RTC of Surigao
City wherein an order dated November 12, 2002 was issued.
It was resolved in the order through a motion to fix the
amount of bail bond which is P40,000
The respondent filed a motion for reconsideration on the said
order but was denied due to lack of merit.
Instead of availing himself only of judicial remedies,
respondent caused the publication of an article regarding the
Order granting bail to the accused in the August 18, 2003
issue of the Mindanao Gold Star Daily. The article, entitled
"Senior prosecutor lambasts Surigao judge for allowing
murder suspect to bail out,"||

The respondent was then ordered to appear in court to

explain why he should not be held in contempt of court for
the publication of the said article which degraded the court
and the presiding judge.
On the scheduled hearing the wirter disclosed that the
respondent said that stated in a press conference that the
crime murder is non-bailable and that he printed those lies
only because his source was the respondent alone which the
respondent denied. Respondent was ordered to be arrested if
he does not put up a bond of P100,000 because of the fact
that the respondent refused to explain why he should not be
held in contempt for the said publication of the article. Atty.
Bagabuyo again resorted to the media, after he was ordered
arrested and put up a bail of P100,000.00 this time at Radio
Station DXKS. He attacked once again Judge Tan and his
disposition on the proceedings of People v. Luis Bucalon
Plaza.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Atty. Bagabuyo has violated the Code of
professional conduct.
HELD:
Atty. Bagabuyo is found guilty of violating the code of
professional conduct Canon 13, Rule 13.02 which states that
a lawyer shall not make public statements in the media
regarding a pending case tending to arouse public opinion
for or against a party. That instead of resorting to the
available judicial remedies before him, Atty. Bagabuyo has
degraded the dignity and authority of the court and the
presiding judge, as well as promoted distrust in the
administration of justice when he resorted to media and
declared his complaints there. Atty. Bagabuyo is also cited
for violation of Canon 11, when he disrespected the courts
and the judicial officers and Rule 11.05 when he did not
submit grievances against a judge to proper authorities only.

FOODSPHERE, INC. v. ATTY. MAURICIO, JR.

(A.C. No. 7199, July 22, 2009)
FACTS:
Foodsphere, a corportation engaged in the business of meat
processing and manufacture of canned goods of CDO filed
an administrative complaint against Atty.Melanio Mauricio, Jr.
for violation of the code of professional responsibility.
Alberto Cordero and his relatives discovered a colony of
worms on a CDO liver spread product that they were eating.
Corderos wife filed a complaint to the Bureau of Food and
Drugs.
Pursuant to Joint DTI-DOH-DA Administrative Order
No. 1, Series of 1993, the BFAD conducted a conciliation
hearing on July 27, 2004 during which the spouses
Cordero demanded P150,000 as damages from
complainant. Complainant refused to heed the demand,
however, as being in contravention of company policy
and, in any event, "outrageous".
Complainant instead offered to return actual medical and
incidental expenses incurred by the Corderos as long as they
were supported by receipts, but the offer was turned down.
And the Corderos threatened to bring the matter to the
attention of the media. Respondent also threatened the
company to publish articles in tabloid newspapers and to a
radio station that degrade the companys products if they
did not adhere to the demand of the Corderos of payment of
P150,000 for damages.
The respondent and compalaonant came in to an agreement
however respondent was not satisfied with the response of

the complainant and instead published in his columns

articles and also featured the CDOs products in a television
segment in UNTV as well as in a session in radio station
DZBB that put the company and its products in bad light.
Complainant thus filed criminal complaints against
respondent and several others for Libel and Threatening to
Publish Libel under Articles 353 and 356 of the Revised Penal
Code before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City
and Valenzuela City. The complaints were pending at he *
time of the filing of the present administrative complaint.
ISSUE:
Whether or not, Atty. Mauricio has violated the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
HELD:
Yes. Atty. Mauricio has violated the code of professional
responsibility. His recourse to the Media, even after being
told to desist from such was a clear violation of Rule 13.03 of
Canon 13, A lawyer shall not make public statements in the
media regarding a pending case tending to arouse public
opinion for or against a party. His action has put not only
the company Foodsphere and CDO in a bad light, but has
also degraded the dignity and authority of the legal system.
Besides the above, he has also violated Canon 1.01 by
engaging in deceitful conduct taking advantage of the
complaint against CDO to advance his own interests, and
Canon 8, when he used abusive and offensive language in
his dealings