SC tells lawyers: Behave

The Supreme Court has reminded lawyers that they should observe “only the highest standards” in their profession as it disbarred a Pasay City judge who was earlier axed from the service for sending lewd messages to a fellow female judge and for insubordination.

The high court’s decision to remove Eliza Yu from the roll of attorneys came after House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, President Duterte’s bosom buddy, challenged his critics to file a disbarment case against him for admitting his extramarital affairs.

Alvarez’s illicit relationship with Jennifer Maliwanag Vicencio came to the fore after her alleged verbal tussle with Cathy Binag, the live-in partner of Davao del Norte Rep. Antonio “Tonyboy” Floirendo Jr., triggered the falling out between two of the President’s staunchest allies.

Floirendo, who is still married to 1973 Miss Universe Margie Moran Floirendo, is Mr. Duterte’s biggest campaign donor in the May 2016 elections.

Yu was dismissed as judge of Pasay Metropolitan Trial Court Branch 47 in November 2016 for refusing to attend to her duties as a “night court” judge tasked by the tribunal to expedite the handling of criminal cases of foreign tourists arrested at night in Pasay and Makati.

She was also found guilty of several administrative complaints lodged by court personnel and fellow judges, including a female lower court judge who had accused her of sending sexually explicit e-mail messages.

In a 22-page per curiam resolution, the 15 magistrates of the high court unanimously voted to uphold Yu’s sacking as judge and to expunge her name from the country’s list of lawyers.

“Once again, we express our disdain for judges and (lawyers) who undeservedly think too highly of themselves, their personal and professional qualifications and qualities at the expense of the nobility of the law profession,” read the court’s March 14 ruling, which was released last Friday.

In addition to losing all her retirement benefits as a public employee, the former judge was meted out with a lifetime ban from joining the government service.

“Accordingly, gross misconduct, violation of the Lawyer’s Oath and willful disobedience of any lawful order by the court constitute grounds to disbar an attorney… (S)he was herein found to have committed all these grounds for disbarment, warranting her immediate disbarment as a consequence,” the court ruled.

Besides denying the allegations against her, Yu tried to save herself from being sacked by claiming that the medicines she had been taking for allergies were an “analogous circumstance” in the complaints brought against her.

But the court said she did not provide “compelling argument” that her taking medications for allergies was akin to her having physical illness as defined under Section 48(a) of the Revised Rules of Administrative Cases in Civil Service.

It said: “This court is unable to appreciate how her consumption of medications for allergies could generate arrogance, insubordination, gross ignorance of laws and offensive conduct … ”