DESPITE her rigid efforts in bringing the Philippine justice system to a reputable form, Department of Justice (DOJ) Secretary Leila De Lima is now in hot water – with the possibility of losing her license as a lawyer.
In a nine-page complaint filed on Monday, in perhaps a form retaliation from Former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s camp, Lawyer Ricardo Rivera filed the disbarment case against De Lima for allegedly defying the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by the Supreme Court (SC) that allowed Arroyo to travel abroad.
“Consequently, respondent, an officer of the Court, instead of promoting the people’s faith and confidence in the judicial system emasculates and undermines such faith and confidence to the detriment of the entire judiciary itself and its zealously guarded integrity,” the complaint stated.
Upon the filing of his complaint, Rivera asked the (SC) for an immediate investigation to be conducted by the Integrated Board of the Philippines’ (IBP) Board of Governors directing the body to act on his complaint with dispatch, and to report its findings to the SC soonest.
Rivera also wanted the High Court to suspend De Lima from the practice of law pending the investigation of the case, and after due proceedings, to disbar her and remove her name from the Roll of Attorneys.
Coincidentally, before De Lima’s feats were questioned, Bayan Muna Rep. Teodoro Casiño accused the former president and her lawyers of deliberately deceiving the people and the court, after Arroyo’s lawyers filed a motion for house arrest, saying her health has improved.
Casiño insisted that Arroyo should be put in jail first, before the court determines if she should be placed under house arrest.
On November 28, just before the disbarment case was filed against De Lima, Arroyo’s camp even vehemently dared Rep. Casiño to file disbarment cases against them.
Although De Lima’s defiant stand against the Supreme Court may be viewed as just and heroic, looking at the issue in a legalistic approach puts her in a tight spot.
De Lima in her defense said she was not properly served the TRO issued by the SC. She said that under Section 5, Rule 58 of the Rules of Court, a TRO is effective only upon service to the party or person sought to be enjoined.
“Rule 13 of the Rules of Court on Service provides that the manner of service shall be by personal service, by mail or by substituted service,” she stressed.
While De Lima is facing an overwhelming predicament, what her critics seem to have overlooked is the power that she possesses, as a member of the Executive branch of the government.
Her position as the Justice Secretary grants her the sole responsibility of defending all civil actions brought against the government, and represents the current administration and the public interest in the courts.
As defendant of the public interest in a wider sense, De Lima may make application for judicial review to enforce public legal rights. She has a right to intervene in any case involving a matter of great public interest. The secretary stands for the public interest as counsel to tribunals of inquiry.
In the fight between GMA’s constitutional rights vs what the government calls “right of the state,” both camps have been successful in finding loopholes in the Constitution and in each other’s stand, while failing to recognize how it continues to damage the already tainted reputation of the Philippine judicial system.
With Arroyo still in the hot seat, key players in her pending cases will have fundamental roles in determining whether the country’s justice system is honorable or questionable.
Meanwhile, De Lima – with the truth behind her back – continues to fight for justice. In this endeavor, she takes with her primary measures necessary for the realization of a justice system that is easy for the people to utilize. These measures are necessary in order for people in the justice system to participate and in strengthening functions of the legal profession, other reforms in the justice system, as well as improvements in the infrastructure of that system.
(www.asianjournal.com)
(LA Midweek Nov 30-Dec 3, 2011 Sec A pg.6)
Back To Top