Office of the Vice President (OVP) Undersecretary and Vice President Sara Duterte’s chief of staff, Atty. Zuleika Lopez. INQUIRER / GRIG MONTEGRANDE
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) distanced itself from the controversy surrounding the contempt and detention orders issued by the House of Representatives against lawyer Zuleika Lopez, chief of staff of Vice President Sara Duterte.
In a statement released on Thursday, IBP president Antonio Pido said that taking a position on the issue would be viewed as a political move, one that “tends to impair the basic feature of the IBP as a nonpolitical organization.”
Established in 1973, the IBP is the national organization of all lawyers in the country both in the private and government sectors.
READ: Zuleika Lopez to take ‘legal steps’ vs House detention extension
Pido cited Section 4 of the organization’s revised bylaws promulgated by the Supreme Court on March 8, 2023, which states that the IBP is “strictly nonpolitical.”
He clarified that Lopez’s profession as a lawyer was unrelated to why she was invited as a resource person during the House committee on good government and public accountability’s hearings on the OVP’s budget expenditure.
“The real reason why she was invited as a resource person is because of her being the Chief of Staff of a national political figure,” Pido said.
ACT Teachers Rep. France Castro moved to cite Lopez for contempt and ordered a five-day detention on Nov. 20 after lawmakers found her committing “undue interference” in the panel’s hearing.
In particular, she was cited for the OVP’s official letter to the Commission on Audit on Aug. 21 requesting that the commission disregard a congressional subpoena for the production of audit reports on the OVP’s confidential expenses in 2022 and 2023.
This group airs stand
Lopez’s detention heightened tensions between Duterte and the Marcos-allied House of Representatives. The situation escalated further when the Vice President took steps to remain “indefinitely” inside the Batasang Pambansa in Quezon City to accompany her aide.
Late on Nov. 22, the House committee on good government ordered Lopez transferred from the chamber’s detention facility to the Correctional Institution for Women in Mandaluyong City. Duterte, claiming that she was Lopez’s legal counsel, tried to block the transfer.
In a dramatic turn, Duterte revealed in a hastily called virtual presser early Saturday morning, held from the office of her brother, Davao Rep. Paolo Duterte, that she had hired a hit man to assassinate President Marcos, first lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and Speaker Martin Romualdez if an alleged plot to kill her materialized.
According to the IBP, the rights of individuals who are invited as resource persons to legislative inquiries in aid of legislation have already been clearly defined in Supreme Court decisions, including the remedies available to them in the event that their rights are violated.
“All lawyers are presumed to know these Supreme Court decisions because these form part of the law of the land. Ignorantia Legis Neminem Excusat,” the organization said.
Without referring to Duterte by name, the IBP said any lawyer who wishes to assist an individual who is held in contempt and ordered detained by a congressional committee “is presumed to know the legal remedies available to that individual, and is encouraged to immediately take legal action to protect the rights of the said individual.”
The IBP’s statement came in contrast with that of another lawyers’ group in Quezon City, which condemned the House of Representatives’ “blatant disregard” of Lopez’s constitutional right to due process and the presumption of innocence.
“The acts undertaken by the House committee on good government and public accountability against Atty. Lopez are patently tantamount to grave abuse of discretion, amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction,” the Quezon City Trial Lawyers League Inc. said in a statement on Monday.
The group is headed by lawyer Victor Rodriguez, former executive secretary to President Marcos, who has now aligned with the Duterte family after a falling out with Marcos shortly after taking office in 2022..
While the lawyers’ group acknowledged the House’s inherent power to cite persons in contempt, the Quezon City Trial Lawyers League Inc. said that “no respect can be accorded when such power is wielded in an abusive and capricious manner, which tends to trample upon the constitutionally mandated rights of persons appearing before said body.”
“Thus, we appropriately call upon the members of the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability to resolve on the merits the Motion for Reconsideration lodged by Atty. Lopez, and to accord her, as well as any and all persons appearing before said body, the right to due process and the presumption of innocence mandated by the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines,” it said.
The group cited the case of Ong et al. vs the Senate of the Philippines, in which the Supreme Court struck down as excessive the use of legislative power in the Senate blue ribbon committee’s order dated Sept. 10, 2021, citing petitioners Linconn Uy Ong and Michael Yang Hong Ming in contempt.
Bedan classmates
“As succinctly pointed out by Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo, witnesses who are charged by Congress with ‘giving false or evasive testimony’ must be accorded stricter due process requirements, such as the opportunity to explain one’s side before being penalized, consistent with the due process safeguards used in criminal proceedings,” the high court’s ruling said.
In a “paid advertisement” that was also circulating online, “concerned members” of the San Beda College of Law Class 2002 issued a statement expressing concern over the detention of Lopez, whom they described as their “classmate and fellow lawyer.”
The statement argued that the OVP’s Aug. 21 letter could not be considered undue interference in the congressional inquiry, as it was not directed at any subpoena duces tecum or processes issued by the House committee on good government and public accountability.
Instead, it referred to a subpoena duces tecum issued by another body—the House committee on appropriations—during budget deliberations, the statement said.
“In fact, the committee’s investigation into the OVP’s confidential funds began only on Sept. 18, 2024, about a month after the subject letter was issued. There can be no interference in an investigation that has not yet commenced,” it noted.
The statement also took issue with the manner in which Lopez was ordered to be transferred to a correctional facility late Friday night, “under circumstances that could have limited her access to legal remedies and counsel.”
“This raises serious questions about whether due process has been fully observed,” it said.