Supreme Court of the Philippines

SC dismisses administrative complaint vs Sara Duterte’s husband

Jairo Bolledo

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

SC dismisses administrative complaint vs Sara Duterte’s husband

SECOND GENTLEMAN. Mans Carpio joins the Carmen, North Cotabato campaign stop.

Lakas-CMD/Uniteam

The High Court says the mere filing of cases against another party did not constitute unethical conduct that deserved administrative punishment

MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court (SC) junked the administrative complaint filed against lawyer Manases Carpio, Vice President Sara Duterte’s husband, and another lawyer, Edgar Dennis Padernal.

“WHEREFORE, the Complaint against Atty. Edgar Dennis A. Pademal and Atty. Manases R. Carpio is DISMISSED for lack of merit,” the resolution issued by the High Court’s First Division said. The resolution was issued on June 14, but made public only on July 27.

The case stemmed from an administrative complaint filed by spouses Alfredo and Lumenaria Honegger with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines-Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) against Carpio and Padernal. The two lawyers represented clients, who filed complaints against the Honegger couple.

In filing the complaint against Carpio and Padernal, the couple claimed that the two lawyers “violated the Lawyer’s Oath when they deliberately assisted in the filing and prosecution of cases that they knew were baseless just to harass and oppress another.” On January 15, 2021, the IBP-CBD issued a report and recommendation, dismissing the complaint against the two lawyers.

In its ruling, the SC said it adopted the IBP-CBD’s resolution, adding that the complainants “failed to adduce any evidence to support their claim that the cases filed against them were merely intended to vex and harass.”

The High Court said Carpio and Padernal’s mere filing of cases against the couple did not constitute unethical conduct that deserved administrative punishment. The two lawyers were allowed to resort to any legal means to protect their clients’ interests, the SC said.

“The Code of Professional Responsibility, in fact, expects nothing less from lawyers of clients with legitimate grievances. In the absence of any indication that the suits against Alfredo and Lumenaria have been filed or prosecuted with bad faith, or on the basis of concocted claims or baseless legal arguments, Attys. Padernal and Carpio cannot be penalized for their resort to remedies allowed by law,” the SC added. – Rappler.com

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!
Avatar photo

author

Jairo Bolledo

Jairo Bolledo is a multimedia reporter at Rappler covering justice, police, and crime.