IN RE: ATTY. VICENTE RAUL ALMACEN G.R. No. L-27654 February 1 !

1"7# $%CTRINE: The SC, by constitutional mandate, has the solemn duty, amongst others, to determine the rules for admission to the practice of law. Inherent in this prerogative is the corresponding authority to discipline and exclude from the practice of law those who have proved themselves unworthy of continued membership in the Bar. The power to discipline attorneys, who are officers of the court, is an inherent and incidental power in courts of record, and one which is essential to an orderly discharge of judicial functions. EMERGENCY RECIT: tty. lmacen filed a !"etition to Surrender the #awyer$s Certificate of Title% to the Supreme Court as a sign of his protest as against to what he call a tribunal peopled by people who are calloused to our pleas for justice. &e also expressed strong words as against the judiciary li'e justice is not only blind, but also deaf and dumb . The petition rooted from the case he lost due to the absence of time and place in his motion in the trial court. &is appeal was dismissed in the Court of ppeals by reason of jurisprudence. In a petition for certiorari in the Supreme Court, it was again dismissed thru a minute resolution. (ith the disappointments, he claimed that this petition to surrender his title is only in trust, and that he may obtain the title again as soon as he regained confidence in the justice system. &aving the authority to discipline erring lawyers, tty. lmacen was suspended for disrespecting and insulting the judiciary. FACT&: Before us is tty. )icente *aul lmacen+s ,"etition to Surrender #awyer+s Certificate of Title,, in protest against what he therein asserts is "a great injustice committed against his client by this Supreme Court." &e indicts this Court, in his own phrase, as a tribunal "peopled by men who are calloused to our pleas for justice, who ignore without reasons their own applicable decisions and commit culpable violations of the Constitution with impunity., &is client+s he continues, who was deeply aggrieved by this Court+s ,unjust judgment,, has become "one of the sacrificial victims before the altar of hypocrisy." In the same breath that he alludes to the classic symbol of justice, he ridicules the members of this Court, saying "that justice as administered by the present members of the Supreme Court is not only blind, but also deaf and dumb." &e then vows to argue the cause of his client "in the people's forum," so that "the people may now of the silent injustice's committed by this Court," and that "whatever mista es, wrongs and injustices that were committed must never be repeated., These statements were -uoted by columnist )icente lbano "acis in the issue of the !anila Chronicle of September ./, 0123. In connection therewith, "acis commented that tty. lmacen had "accused the high tribunal of offenses so serious that the Court must clear itself," and that "his charge is one of the constitutional bases for impeachment." The origin of this incident was a civil case entitled Yaptichay v. Calero, in which Atty. Almacen was counsel for the defendant. The trial court rendered judgment against his client. He moved for its reconsideration but did not notify the plaintiff of the time and place of hearing on said motion. Meanwhile, the plaintiff moved for execution of the judgment. For lack of proof of service, the trial court denied both motions. To prove that he did serve on the adverse party a copy of his first motion for reconsideration, Atty. Almacen filed a second motion for reconsideration; however, this was ordered withdrawn by the trial court upon verbal motion of Atty. Almacen who had already perfected the appeal. Motion for reconsideration was denied by Court of Appeals. tty. lmacen then appealed to the SC by certiorari who in turn refused to ta'e the case, and by minute resolution denied the appeal. 4enied shortly thereafter was his motion for reconsideration as well as his petition for leave to file a second motion for reconsideration and for extension of time. 5ntry of judgment was made and the second motion for reconsideration filed by him was ordered expunged from the records. It was at this juncture that tty. lmacen gave vent to his disappointment by filing his ,"etition to Surrender #awyer+s Certificate of Title,, already adverted to 6 a pleading that is interspersed from

beginning to end with the insolent contemptuous, grossly disrespectful and derogatory remar's hereinbefore reproduced, against this Court as well as its individual members, a behavior that is as unprecedented as it is unprofessional. In the exercise of its inherent power to discipline a member of the bar for contumely and gross misconduct, this Court on 7ovember 03, 0123 resolved to re-uire tty. lmacen to show cause ,why no disciplinary action should be ta'en against him., &owever, his written answer, as undignified and cynical as it is, offered no apology. 8ar from being sorry tty. lmacen continuously repeated his lamentations, this with abundant sarcasm and innuendo. I&&UE: (97 tty. lmacen should be given disciplinary actions for his acts. 'EL$: Indefinite suspension was imposed and may only be lifted until further orders. lmacen$s grievance stems from the minute resolution denial of his petition for review. The SC however argues that if they were to accept every case or write a full opinion for every petition we reject, they would be unable to carry out effectively the burden placed upon us by the Constitution. The proper role of the Supreme is to decide only those cases which present -uestions whose resolutions will have immediate importance beyond the particular facts and parties involved. The court further opined that as a law practitioner who was admitted to the Bar as far bac' as 01:0, tty. lmacen 'new 6 or ought to have 'nown 6 that for a motion for reconsideration to stay the running of the period of appeal, the movant must not only serve a copy of the motion upon the adverse party ;which he did<, but also notify the adverse party of the time and place of hearing ;which admittedly he did not<. &is own negligence caused the forfeiture of the remedy of appeal, which, incidentally, is not a matter of right but of sound judicial discretion. =oreover, the court recogni>es the right to comment upon and critici>e the actuations of public officers. This right is not diminished by the fact that the criticism is aimed at a judicial authority, or that it is articulated by a lawyer. (ell?recogni>ed therefore is the right of a lawyer to critici>e judicial authorities, however, it should be in respectful terms and through legitimate channels. 5ven if the intentions of his accusations are so noble, in spea'ing of the truth and alleged injustices, lmacen has caused enough damage and disrepute to the judiciary. By constitutional mandate, the SC has the duty, amongst others, to determine the rules for admission to the practice of law. Inherent in this prerogative is the corresponding authority to discipline and exclude from the practice of law those who have proved themselves unworthy of continued membership in the Bar. The power to remove or suspend has risen above being a mere inherent or incidental power. It has been elevated to an express mandate by the *ules of Court. 4isciplinary proceedings li'e the present one are sui generis. 7either purely civil nor purely criminal, this proceeding is not and does not involve a trial of an action or a suit, but is rather an investigation by the Court into the conduct of its officers. 7ot being intended to inflict punishment, it is no sense a criminal prosecution. ccordingly, there is neither a plaintiff nor a prosecutor therein. It may be initiated by the Court motu propio. "ublic interest is its primary objective and the real -uestion for determination is whether or not the attorney is still a fit person to be allowed the privileges as such. &ence, in the exercise of its disciplinary powers, the Court merely calls upon a member of the Bar to account for his actuations as an officer of the court with the end in view of preserving the purity of the legal profession and the proper and honest administration of justice