Rules of Court | Legal Ethics

Section 2

Effect of Death, Retirement, and Separation from Service to the Proceedings. — (1) Circumstances Already Existing Prior to the Institution of the Proceedings. - Disciplinary proceedings may not be instituted against a Member, official, employee, or personnel of the Judiciary who has already died, retired, or otherwise separated from service. If such proceedings have been instituted notwithstanding the foregoing circumstances, the administrative case against said Member, official, employee, or personnel of the Judiciary shall be dismissed. (2) Circumstances Supervening Only During the Pendency of the Proceedings. – However, once disciplinary proceedings have already been instituted, the respondent's supervening retirement or separation from service shall not preclude or affect the continuation of the same, provided, that, the supervening death of the respondent during the pendency of such proceedings shall result in the dismissal of the administrative case against him or her.

Section 3

Initial Action. — (1) Proceedings Initiated Motu Proprio. - In disciplinary proceedings initiated motu proprio by the Supreme Court or the Judicial Integrity Board, the respondent shall be served with a copy of the records, documents, newspaper or media reports, or other papers used as basis for the disciplinary action. Within ten (10) calendar days from notice, or within any extended period granted by the Judicial Integrity Board not exceeding thirty (30) calendar days, the respondent shall be required to file his or her verified answer or comment thereon, which may be supported by affidavits of persons who have personal knowledge of the facts alleged and/or by documents which may substantiate respondent's defenses. (2) Proceedings Initiated By Complaint. – If the Judicial Integrity Board finds that the verified or anonymous complaint is sufficient in form and substance, the respondent shall be served with a copy thereof, including its attachments. Within ten (10) calendar days from notice, or within any extended period granted by the Judicial Integrity Board not exceeding thirty (30) calendar days, the respondent shall be required to file with the Judicial Integrity Board his or her verified answer or comment thereon, which may be supported by affidavits of persons who have personal knowledge of the facts alleged and/or by documents which may substantiate respondent's defenses. If the verified or anonymous complaint is not sufficient in form and substance, it shall be dismissed. Moreover, if the complaint prima facie appears to be baseless and was filed only to harass or embarrass the respondent, or to unduly delay the release of retirement benefits in case of his or her impending compulsory retirement, the complainant shall be required to show cause why he or she should not be cited in contempt. Furthermore, if the complainant is a lawyer, he or she shall also be required to show cause why he or she should not be administratively sanctioned as a member of the Philippine Bar and as an officer of the Court. (3) Consequence of Respondent's Failure to An sw er or Comment - Failure of the respondent to file his or her verified answer or comment in accordance with Section 3 (1) or (2) above shall, unless otherwise justified, result in his or her waiver to participate in the proceedings, and the investigation may proceed based on the available evidence on record. (4) Prohibited Pleadings. – Motions for bill of particulars, clarification, dismissal, or quashal, and memoranda are prohibited pleadings, and as such, shall only be noted without action and attached to the records.

Section 4

An administrative case against any of those mentioned in Section 1 (1) of this Rule shall also be considered as a disciplinary action against him or her as a member of the Philippine Bar, provided, that the complaint specifically states that the imputed acts or omissions therein likewise constitute a violation of the Lawyer's Oath, the Code of Professional Responsibility, the Canons of Professional Ethics, or such other forms of breaches of conduct that have been traditionally recognized as grounds for the discipline of lawyers. If the complaint fails to include such specific statement, or if the disciplinary proceedings are instituted motu proprio, the respondent, in the interest of due process, must first be required to show cause in this respect before he or she is likewise disciplined as a member of the Philippine Bar as may be warranted by the circumstances of the case. The disciplinary action against the respondent as a member of the Philippine Bar shall be docketed as a separate administrative case but shall be jointly threshed out in, and consolidated with, the investigation of the administrative complaint against him or her as a Member, official, employee, or personnel of the Judiciary. The Judicial Integrity Board shall include its findings on said disciplinary action in the “Report” submitted to the Supreme Court pursuant to Sections 10 and 11 of this Rule.

Section 5

The Supreme Court may, motu proprio or upon recommendation of the Judicial Integrity Board, order the preventive suspension of the respondent without pay and other monetary benefits for a period not exceeding ninety (90) calendar days, unless earlier lifted, or further extended by the Supreme Court for compelling reasons. Upon the lapse of the ninety (90)-calendar day period or any extended period of preventive suspension ordered by the Supreme Court, the respondent shall be automatically reinstated in the service, unless the delay in the disposition of the case is due to the fault or negligence of, or other causes attributable to, the respondent, in which case, the period of delay shall not be included in the counting of the period of preventive suspension. If the respondent is fully exonerated from any administrative liability, he or she may claim back salaries, allowances, and other economic benefits for the entire period that he or she was preventively suspended. The preventive suspension, among others, may be issued to enable the Judicial Integrity Board to conduct an unhampered formal investigation of the disciplinary action, prevent a crisis or disharmony in various courts, or shield the public from any further damages that the continued exercise by the respondent of the functions of his office may cause, or where there is a strong likelihood of his guilt or complicity in the offense charged, or protect the image of the courts as temples of justice.

Section 6

Procedure for Formal Investigation. — (1) When Hearings are not Required. - Any disciplinary action against any of those mentioned in Section 1(1) hereof, which can already be resolved on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, or public or court records, and/or other documents or papers on record, shall be deemed submitted for the preparation and submission by the Judicial Integrity Board of its “Report” containing its findings of facts and recommendations to the Supreme Court within sixty (60) calendar days, or within such extended period granted by the Supreme Court not exceeding thirty (30) calendar days, from receipt of the said pleadings and/or records or documents. For guidance, the Judicial Integrity Board shall notify the parties that the case has been submitted for resolution without the need for any hearing. (2) When Hearings are Required. - If based on the pleadings of the parties, there is a prima facie case against the respondent which requires actual hearings to resolve substantial factual issues raised, the Judicial Integrity Board shall set such hearings, with due notice thereof to the parties. During such hearings, the parties may be heard by themselves and/or counsel. If after due notice, the complainant or respondent fails to appear, the investigation shall proceed ex parte. Furthermore, the parties may present documentary and/or object evidence, as well as testimonial evidence in the form of judicial affidavits to serve as the direct testimony of the parties and of their witnesses; after which, they may be cross-examined by the other party or parties, or through counsel, and may be examined by the Chairperson and members of the Judicial Integrity Board.

Section 7

The Judicial Integrity Board shall have the power to administer oaths to the parties and their witnesses, and to issue subpoenas ad testificandum and duces tecum, conduct ocular inspections and take depositions of the complainant and/or witnesses in accordance with the Rules of Court. The failure or refusal to obey or comply with the subpoena ad testificandum and duces tecum issued by the Judicial Integrity Board shall be referred to the Supreme Court for contempt proceedings, which shall proceed independently from the administrative proceedings.

Section 8

In addition to the circumstances stated in Section 2 (2) of this Rule, the investigation conducted by the Judicial Integrity Board of disciplinary actions shall not be interrupted or terminated by reason of the desistance of the complainant, settlement, compromises, restitution, withdrawal of the disciplinary action by the complainant; failure of the complainant to prosecute the same; or by the respondent having transferred his residence to a foreign country; or by the death of the complainant, subject to the exceptional circumstances as may be determined by the Judicial Integrity Board, conformably with case law.

Section 9

The Judicial Integrity Board may delegate to the Office of the Court Administrator the disciplinary investigation of Judges involving less serious charges and light charges under Sections 15 and 16 of this Rule. The Judicial Integrity Board may also delegate the conduct of disciplinary investigations and hearings of administrative cases likewise involving less serious charges and light charges against court officials and employees to the appropriate Committees or Offices which have administrative control and/or supervision over their respective officials and employees, such as the following: (a) Committee on Ethics in Special Concerns of the Court of Appeals, or Presiding Justice thereof, as provided for in the “Procedure in Administrative Cases” of the Court of Appeals; (b) Committee on Ethics of the Sandiganbayan; (c) Committee of the Court of Tax Appeals on Employee's Rules of Discipline; (d) Office of the Court Administrator for the personnel of the Shari'ah High Court, as well as the personnel of the first and second level courts, including those of Shari'ah District and Circuit Courts; and (e) Complaints and Investigation Division (CID) of the Office of Administrative Services for personnel of the Supreme Court and offices under its supervision, including those of the Office of the Court Administrator, the Judicial Integrity Board, the Philippine Judicial Academy, and all other offices created pursuant to law under the Supreme Court's supervision.

Section 10

The Judicial Integrity Board shall terminate its investigation within ninety (90) calendar days from the date of the first hearing conducted, or within such extended period granted by the Supreme Court not exceeding thirty (30) calendar days. If the Judicial Integrity Board delegates the conduct of investigation to a Committee or Office as stated in Section 9 of this Rule, said Committee or Office shall terminate its investigation within sixty (60) calendar days from the date of delegation, or within any extended period granted by the Judicial Integrity Board not exceeding thirty (30) calendar days, and accordingly submit its “Report” to the latter.

Section 11

Report of the Judicial Integrity Board to the Supreme Court when Hearings are Required. — Within sixty (60) calendar days from the termination of the investigation or within an extended period granted by the Supreme Court not exceeding thirty (30) calendar days, the Judicial Integrity Board shall submit to the Supreme Court its written “Report” thereon containing its findings of facts and recommendations. If the Judicial Integrity Board delegates the conduct of investigation to a Committee or Office pursuant to Section 9 of this Rule, and the said Committee or Office has already submitted its own “Report” to the Judicial Integrity Board, the latter shall submit its recommended action on said “Report” to the Supreme Court within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt thereof, or within an extended period granted by the Supreme Court not exceeding thirty (30) calendar days. All “Reports” for the discipline of all members, officials, employees, and personnel of the Judiciary shall, at all times, be confidential and shall be for the exclusive use of the Supreme Court. Any undue disclosure or tampering of records shall render the responsible party liable for contempt of court, in addition to other penalties/sanctions as may be provided by law.

Section 12

The Supreme Court shall take such necessary action on the “Report” as may be warranted by the facts and the law, the Rules of Court, as well as the issuances of the Supreme Court and its Internal Rules. A copy of the Decision or Resolution of the Supreme Court shall be attached to the official records of the respondent whether in the Office of the Court Administrator, the Office of Administrative Services in the Supreme Court, or in other similar offices in other courts. If the respondent is a lawyer, such copy shall also be furnished to the Office of the Bar Confidant, Office of the Court Administrator, and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.

Section 13

Administrative charges are classified as serious, less serious, or light.

Section 14

Serious charges include: (a) Gross misconduct constituting violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct or of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel; (b) Bribery, direct and indirect, and violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act No. 3019); (c) Serious dishonesty; (d) Gross neglect of duty in the performance or non-performance of official functions; (e) Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment or order; (f) Commission of a crime involving moral turpitude; (g) Falsification of official documents, including making untruthful statements in the certificates of service; (h) Borrowing money or property from lawyers and/or litigants in a case pending before the court; (i) Gross immorality; (j) Gross ignorance of the law or procedure; (k) Partisan political activities; (l) Grave abuse of authority, and/or prejudicial conduct that gravely besmirches or taints the reputation of the service; (m) Sexual harassment; (n) Gross insubordination; and (o) Possession and/or use of illegal drugs or substances.

Section 15

Less serious charges include: (a) Simple misconduct constituting violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct or of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel; (b) Simple neglect of duty in the performance or non-performance of official functions; (c) Habitual absenteeism and/or tardiness; (d) Unauthorized practice of law; (e) Violation of Supreme Court rules, directives and circulars that establish an internal policy, rule of procedure, or protocol; (f) Receiving additional or double compensation unless specifically authorized by law; and (g) Simple dishonesty.

Section 16

Light charges include: (a) Vulgar and unbecoming conduct; (b) Gambling in public; (c) Fraternizing with lawyers and litigants with pending case/cases in his or her court; (d) Undue delay in the submission of monthly reports; and (e)Willful failure to pay judgment debts or taxes due to the government.

Section 17

Sanctions. — (1) If the respondent is guilty of a serious charge, any of the following sanctions shall be imposed: (a) Dismissal from service, forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as the Supreme Court may determine, and disqualification from reinstatement or appointment to any public office, including government-owned or -controlled corporations. Provided, however, that the forfeiture of benefits shall in no case include accrued leave credits; (b) Suspension from office without salary and other benefits for more than six (6) months but not exceeding one (1) year; or (c) A fine of more than P100,000.00 but not exceeding P200,000.00 (2) If the respondent is guilty of a less serious charge, any of the following sanctions shall be imposed: (a) Suspension from office without salary and other benefits for not less than one (1) month nor more than six (6) months; or (b)A fine of more than $35,000.00 but not exceeding P100,000.00. (3) If the respondent is guilty of a light charge, any of the following sanctions shall be imposed: (a) A fine of not less than P1,000.00 but not exceeding P35,000.00; (b) Censure; or (c) Reprimand.

Section 18

Penalty in Lieu of Dismissal on Account of Supervening Resignation, Retirement, or other Modes of Separation of Service. — If the respondent is found liable for an offense which merits the imposition of the penalty of dismissal from service but the same can no longer be imposed due to the respondent's supervening resignation, retirement, or other modes of separation from service except for death, he or she may be meted with the following penalties in lieu of dismissal: (a) Forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as the Supreme Court may determine, and disqualification from reinstatement or appointment to any public office, including government-owned or -controlled corporations. Provided, however, that the forfeiture of benefits shall in no case include accrued leave credits; and/or (b) Fine as stated in Section 17 (1) (c) of this Rule.

Section 19

In determining the appropriate penalty to be imposed, the Court may, in its discretion, appreciate the following mitigating and aggravating circumstances: (1) Mitigating circumstances: (a) First offense; (b) Length of service of at least ten (10) years with no previous disciplinary record where respondent was meted with an administrative penalty; (c) Exemplary performance; (d) Humanitarian considerations; and (e) Other analogous circumstances. (2) Aggravating Circumstances: (a) Finding of previous administrative liability where a penalty is imposed, regardless of nature and/or gravity; (b) Length of service facilitated the commission of the offense; (c) Employment of fraudulent means to conceal the offense; and (d) Other analogous circumstances.

Section 20

If one (1) or more aggravating circumstances and no mitigating circumstances are present, the Supreme Court may impose the penalties of suspension or fine for a period or amount not exceeding double of the maximum prescribed under this Rule. If one (1) or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances are present, the Supreme Court may impose the penalties of suspension or fine for a period or amount not less than half of the minimum prescribed under this Rule. If there are both aggravating and mitigating circumstances present, the Supreme Court may offset each other.

Section 21

If the respondent is found liable for more than one (1) offense arising from separate acts or omissions in a single administrative proceeding, the Court shall impose separate penalties for each offense. Should the aggregate of the imposed penalties exceed five (5) years of suspension or P1,000,000.00 in fines, the respondent may, in the discretion of the Supreme Court, be meted with the penalty of dismissal from service, forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as may be determined, and disqualification from reinstatement or appointment to any public office, including government-owned or -controlled corporations. Provided, however, that the forfeiture of benefits shall in no case include accrued leave credits. On the other hand, if a single act/omission constitutes more than one (1) offense, the respondent shall still be found liable for all such offenses, but shall, nonetheless, only be meted with the appropriate penalty for the most serious offense.

Section 22

When the penalty imposed is a fine, the respondent shall pay it within a period not exceeding three (3) months from the time the decision or resolution is promulgated. If unpaid, such amount may be deducted from the salaries and benefits, including accrued leave credits, due to the respondent. The deduction of unpaid fines from accrued leave credits, which is considered as a form of compensation, is not tantamount to the imposition of the accessory penalty of forfeiture covered under the provisions of this Rule.

Section 23

Decisions or resolutions pronouncing the respondent's administrative liability are immediately executory in nature. The respondent, upon receipt of such decision or resolution, shall immediately serve the penalty indicated therein. In case of suspension, he or she shall formally manifest to the Court that his or her suspension has started within five (5) calendar days upon receipt of the decision or resolution. Upon completion of service of the penalty of suspension, the Presiding Justice, in case of the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan or the Court of Tax Appeals, or the Executive Judge where the respondent is assigned or stationed, in case of the first and second level courts, shall issue a certification that the penalty of suspension has been served by the respondent. The certification shall be submitted to the Supreme Court.

Section 24

All the foregoing provisions shall be applied to all pending and future administrative cases involving the discipline of Members, officials, employees, and personnel of the Judiciary, without prejudice to the internal rules of the Committee on Ethics and Ethical Standards of the Supreme Court insofar as complaints against Members of the Supreme Court are concerned.

Section 25

Any resolution, circular or administrative order issued by the Supreme Court inconsistent herewith is deemed modified or repealed.

Section 26

These Rules shall take effect following their publication in the Official Gazette or in two newspapers of national circulation. February 22, 2022 A.M. No. 21-08-09-SC