EN BANC

[ A.M. No. 09-5-2-SC, December 14, 2010 ]

IN THE MATTER OF THE BREWING CONTROVERSIES IN THE

ELECTION IN THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES,

[A.C. NO. 8292]

ATTYS. MARCIAL M. MAGSINO, MANUEL M. MARAMBA AND NASSER

MAROHOMSALIC, COMPLAINANTS, VS. ATTYS. ROGELIO A. VINLUAN,

ABELARDO C. ESTRADA, BONIFACIO T. BARANDON, JR., EVERGISTO

S. ESCALON AND RAYMUND JORGE A. MERCADO, RESPONDENTS.

R E S O L U T I O N

CORONA, C.J.:

This resolves the above matter involving the leadership controversy at the

Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) and the administrative case that was

filed against some of the high-ranking officers of the IBP on account thereof.

I. Antecedents

The Court in an En Banc Resolution dated June 2, 2009 created a Special

(Investigating) Committee[1] to look into the "brewing controversies in the

IBP elections, specifically in the elections of Vice-President for the Greater

Manila Region and Executive Vice-President of the IBP itself xxx and any

other election controversy involving other chapters of the IBP, if any", that

includes as well the election of the Governors for Western Mindanao and

Western Visayas.

Consequently, the Special Committee called the IBP officers involved to a

preliminary conference on June 10, 2009. With respect thereto, Atty. Rogelio

A. Vinluan then submitted a Preliminary Conference Brief on the same day.

During the conference it was determined that the investigation would focus

on the following issues or controversies:

1. What is the correct interpretation of Section 31, Article V of the IBP By-

Laws which provides:

"SEC. 31. Membership. - The membership (of Delegates) shall consist of all

the Chapter Presidents and, in the case of Chapters entitled to more than

one Delegate each, the Vice-Presidents of the Chapters and such additional

Delegates as the Chapters are entitled to. Unless the Vice-President is

already a Delegate, he shall be an alternate Delegate. Additional Delegates

and alternates shall in proper cases be elected by the Board of Officers of

the Chapter. Members of the Board of Governors who are not Delegates

shall be members ex officio of the House, without the right to vote."

2. Who was validly elected Governor for the Greater Manila Region?

3. Who was validly elected Governor for Western Visayas Region?

4. Who was validly elected Governor for Western Mindanao Region?

5. Who was validly elected IBP Executive Vice President for the next term?

6. What is the liability, if any, of respondent Atty. Rogelio A. Vinluan under

the administrative complaint for "grave professional misconduct, violation of

attorney's oath, and acts inimical to the IBP" filed against him by Attys.

Marcial Magsino, Manuel Maramba and Nasser Marohomsalic?

Meanwhile, a Supplemental Complaint dated June 11, 2009 was received

from Attys. Magsino, Maramba and Marohomsalic regarding the earlier

complaint that they filed last May 21, 2009 against Atty. Vinluan.

As such, then IBP President Feliciano M. Bautista and then Executive Vice

President (EVP) Vinluan agreed to submit their respective position papers on

the above issues and controversies. Also, Atty. Vinluan was required to file

his answer to the administrative complaint against him.

A Position Paper dated June 15, 2009 was then received from Atty. Vinluan.

Attys. Elpidio G. Soriano, III and Erwin M. Fortunato also filed their Position

Papers both dated June 15, 2009. It appears that an earlier Position Paper

also dated June 15, 2009 was submitted by Atty. Benjamin B. Lanto.

For their part, Attys. Bautista, Maramba and Magsino filed their Position

Paper dated June 16, 2009. Incidentally, in a Manifestation likewise dated

June 16, 2009 Attys. Bautista, Maramba and Marcial M. Magsino submitted

the same paper but already bearing the signature of Atty. Bautista.

Atty. Nasser A. Marohomsalic submitted his Position Paper dated June 17,

2009. The Special Committee, in the course of its investigation, further

received a letter dated June 22, 2009 from Atty. Alex L. Macalawi, President

of the IBP Lanao del Sur Chapter.

As to the administrative case filed against him, Atty. Vinluan, as respondent,

filed his Comment dated June 15, 2009. In turn, Attys. Magsino, Maramba

and Marohomsalic, as complainants, submitted their Reply dated June 23,

2009.

The Special Committee then submitted a Report and Recommendation dated

July 9, 2009 the dispositive portion of which read as follows:

A. That to avoid further controversy regarding its proper interpretation and

implementation, Sec. 31, Article V, of the By-Laws should be amended as

follows (suggested amendments are in bold print):

"SEC. 31. Membership. - The membership of the House of Delegates shall

consist of all the Chapter Presidents and in the case of Chapters entitled to

mo(r)e than on(e) Delegate each, the Vice President of the Chapters and

such additional Delegates as the Chapters are entitled to. Unless the Vice

President is already (a) delegate, he shall be an alternate

Delegate. Additional Delegates and their respective alternates shall

be elected from, and by, the Board of Officers of the Chapter. If the

Delegate chosen is incapacitated, or disqualified, or resigns, or

refuses to serve, and there are enough members of the Board to be

elected as Delegates, then the Board of Officers shall elect the

additional delegates and alternates from the general membership of

the Chapter, and his corresponding alternate shall take his place."

B. That to avoid any ambiguity as to how the President shall preside and

vote in meetings of the House of Delegates, paragraph (g), Sec. 33, Article V

of the By-Laws should be amended as follows:

"(g) In all meetings and deliberations of the House, whether in annual or

special convention, the President shall preside, or the Executive Vice

President, if the President is absent or incapacitated, but neither of

them shall vote except to break a tie."

C. Similarly, Sec. 42, Article VI of the By-Laws, on meetings of the Board of

Governors, should be amended to read as follows:

"Sec. 42. Meetings. - The Board shall meet regularly once a month, on such

date and such time and place as it shall designate. Special meetings may be

called by the President, and shall be called by him upon the written request

of five (5) members of the Board. The President shall not vote except to

break a tie in the voting. When for any reason, the President cannot

preside on account of his absence, incapacity, or refusal to call a

meeting, the Executive Vice President shall preside, there being a

quorum to transact business, but he may not vote except to break a

tie.

D. That Sec. 43, Article VI of the By-Laws, on the procedure for approving a

resolution by the Board of Governors without a meeting, should be amended

by adding the following exception thereto so that the procedure may not be

abused in connection with any election in the IBP:

"This provision shall not apply when the Board shall hold an election

or hear and decide an election protest."

E. That the provision for the strict implementation of the rotation rule among

the Chapters in the Regions for the election of the Governor for the regions,

(as ordered by this Honorable Court in Bar Matter No. 586, May 14, 1991)

should be incorporated in Sec. 39, Article VI of the By-Laws, as follows:

"Sec. 39. Nomination and election of the Governors. - At least one (1)

month before the national convention the delegates from each region shall

elect the Governor for their region, who shall be chosen by rotation

which is mandatory and shall be strictly implemented among the

Chapters in the region. When a Chapter waives its turn in the

rotation order, its place shall redound to the next Chapter in the line.

Nevertheless, the former may reclaim its right to the Governorship

at any time before the rotation is completed; otherwise, it will have

to wait for its turn in the next round, in the same place that it had in

the round completed.

F. That in view of the fact that the IBP no longer elects its President,

because the Executive Vice President automatically succeeds the President

at the end of his term, Sec. 47, Article VII of the By-Laws should be

amended by deleting the provision for the election of the President.

Moreover, for the strict implementation of the rotation rule, the Committee

recommends that there should be a sanction for its violation, thus:

"Sec. 47. National Officers. - The Integrated Bar of the Philippines shall have

a President, an Executive Vice President, and nine (9) regional

Governors. The Executive Vice President shall be elected on a strict

rotation basis by the Board of Governors from among themselves, by

the vote of at least five (5) Governors. The Governors shall be ex

officio Vice President for their respective regions. There shall also be a

Secretary and Treasurer of the Board of Governors.

"The violation of the rotation rule in any election shall be penalized

by annulment of the election and disqualification of the offender

from election or appointment to any office in the IBP."

G. That Atty. Manuel M. Maramba should be declared the duly elected

Governor of the Greater Manila Region for the 2009-2011 term.

H. That Atty. Erwin Fortunato of the Romblon Chapter should be declared

the duly elected Governor of the Western Visayas Region for the 2009-2011

term.

I. That a special election should be held in the Western Mindanao Region,

within fifteen (15) days from notice, to elect the Governor of that region for

the 2009-2011 term. In accordance with the rotation rule, only the six (6)

Chapters in the region that have not yet been elected to the Board of

Governors, namely: Zamboanga Sibugay, Zamboanga del Norte,

Za(m)boanga del Sur, Lanao del Norte, Misamis Occidental, and

Maguindanao-Cotabato City, shall participate in the election.

J. That, thereafter, a special election should also be held by the Board of

Governors to elect the Executive Vice President for the 2009-2011 term with

strict observance of the rotation rule. Inasmuch as for the past nine (9)

terms, i.e., since the 1991-1993 term, the nominees of the Western Visayas

and Eastern Mindanao Regions have not yet been elected Executive Vice

President of the IBP, the special election shall choose only between the

nominees of these two (2) regions who shall become the Executive Vice

President for the 2009-2011 term, in accordance with the strict rotation rule.

K. That the high-handed and divisive tactics of Atty. Rogelio A. Vinluan and

his group of Governors, Abelardo Estrada, Bonifacio Barandon, Jr., Evergisto

Escalon, and Raymund Mercado, which disrupted the peaceful and orderly

flow of business in the IBP, caused chaos in the National Office, bitter

disagreements, and ill-feelings, and almost disintegrated the Integrated Bar,

constituted grave professional misconduct which should be appropriately

sanctioned to discourage its repetition in the future.

II. Findings of the Special Committee

In its Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009, the Special

Committee disclosed when it was discussing the Board of Officers of each

chapter that:

The government of a Chapter is vested in its Board of Officers composed

of nine (9) officers, namely: the President, Vice-President, Secretary,

Treasurer, and five (5) Directors who shall be elected by the members of the

Chapter at the biennial meeting on the last Saturday of February, and shall

hold office for a term of two (2) years from the first day of April following

their election and until their successors shall have been duly chosen and

qualified. For the 2009-2011 term, the election of Chapter officers was held

on February 28, 2009.

In 1983 up to 1995, the Quezon City Chapter elected the usual nine (9)

officers to its Board of Officers and they were all delegates to the House of

Delegates. Beginning with the 1997-1999 term, when it added a Public

Relations Officer (P.R.O.) and Auditor to its Board of Officers, the number of

delegates allotted to the Chapter was also increased to eleven (11) like the

membership in its Board of Officers, pursuant to a reapportionment of

delegates by the Board of Governors under Sec. 30, Art. V of the By-Laws.

Up to the 2007-2009 term, all the officers of the QC Chapter were also the

Chapter's delegates to the House of Delegates. Atty. Victoria Loanzon who

has been an officer of the Chapter in various capacities since 2003, like her

fellow officers in the Board, automatically became a delegate since 2003 up

to this time.

For the 2009-2011 term, the Board of Officers of the IBP-QC Chapter that

assumed office on April 1, 2009, is composed of six (6) officers and (5)

directors, namely:

President - - - - - - - - - - Tranquil Salvador III

Vice President - - - - - - Jonas Cabochan

Secretary - - - - - - - - - - Christian Fernandez

Treasurer - - - - - - - - - - Victoria Loanzon

Auditor - - - - - - - - - - - Ginger Anne Castillo

P.R.O. - - - - - - - - - - - - Ernesto Tabujara III

Director - - - - - - - - - - - Annalou Nachura

Director - - - - - - - - - - - Melody Sampaga

Director - - - - - - - - - - - Francois Rivera

Director - - - - - - - - - - - Joseph Cerezo

Director - - - - - - - - - - - Marita Iris Laqui

It is important to be an officer of one's Chapter and a delegate to the House

of Delegates, because a delegate gets to elect the Governor for the Region

(which must rotate among the Chapters in the region). The Governor of the

Region becomes a member of the Board of Governors, and gets to elect, or

be elected, as the next IBP Executive Vice President who automatically

becomes President for the next succeeding term (which must also rotate

among the Regions).[2]

The Special Committee then pointed out that with respect to the IBP Board

of Governors this consists of "nine (9) Governors from the nine (9) Regions.

One (1) Governor for each Region shall be elected by the members of the

House of Delegates from that region only. The Governors, the President and

the Executive Vice-President shall hold office for a term of two (2) years

from July 1 immediately following their election, up to June 30 of their

second year in office and until their successors shall have been duly chosen

and qualified." It was further added by the Committee that:

At least one (1) month before the national convention, the delegates from

each Region shall elect the Governor for their region. The IBP By-Laws

provide that "starting in 1993-1995, the principle on rotation shall be

strictly implemented so that all prior elections for Governor in the region

shall be reckoned with or considered in determining who should be Governor

to be selected from the different chapters to represent the region in the

Board of Governors. Hence, the governorship of the region shall rotate

among the chapters in the region.

The Governors-elect shall, by a vote of at least five (5), choose an Executive

Vice-President, x x x either from among themselves or from other members

of the Integrated Bar. The Executive Vice-President shall automatically

become President for the next succeeding term. The Presidency shall

rotate among the nine (9) Regions.[3]

According to the Committee, the "rotation of the position of Governor of a

region among the Chapters was ordered by the Supreme Court in its

Resolution dated May 14, 1991 in Bar Matter No. 586 (Clarification Re: Bar

Matter No. 491, Atty. Romulo T. Capulong petitioner)". With respect thereto,

it was revealed that:

Pursuant to the principle of rotation, the governorship of a region shall

rotate once in as many terms as the number of chapters there are in the

region, to give every chapter a chance to represent the region in the Board

of Governors. Thus, in a region composed of 5 chapters, each chapter is

entitled to the governorship once in every 5 terms, or once every ten (10)

years, since a term is two (2) years.

The record of the National IBP Secretariat shows that during the past five

(5) terms, from 1999 up to 2009, the GMR (Greater Manila Region)

governorship was occupied by the five (5) chapters of the region as follows:

1999-2001 ----- Jose P. Icaonapo ------------ Manila III

2001-2003 ----- Santos V. Catubay, Jr. ---- QuezonCity

2003-2005 ----- Rosario Setias-Reyes ------ Manila II

2005-2007 ----- Alicia A. Risos-Vidal ------ Manila I

2007-2009 ----- Marcial M. Magsino ------- Manila IV

In the next round, which starts with the 2009-2011 term, the same order of

rotation should be followed by the five (5) chapters, i.e., Manila III shall

begin the round, to be followed by Quezon City for 2011-2013 term, Manila

for the 2013-2015 term, Manila I for the 2015-2017 term, and Manila IV for

the 2017-2019 term.

In the Western Visayas Region which is composed of ten (10) chapters, each

chapter is entitled to represent the governorship of the region once every

ten (10) terms. The first chapter to occupy the governorship, must wait for

the nine (9) other chapters to serve their respective terms, before it may

have its turn again as Governor of the region.

The same rule applies to the Western Mindanao Region which is composed of

twelve (12) chapters.

On April 25, 2009, the election of Governors for the nine (9) IBP regions

proceeded as scheduled, presided over by their respective outgoing

Governor.[4]

It was then cited by the Special Committee that "Sec. 47, Art. VII of the By-

Laws, as amended by Bar Matter 491, Oct. 6, 1989, provides that the

Executive Vice President shall be chosen by the Board of Governors from

among the nine (9) regional governors. The Executive Vice President shall

automatically become President for the next succeeding term. The

Presidency shall rotate among the nine Regions." Further, the Committee

averred that:

The list of national presidents furnished the Special Committee by the IBP

National Secretariat, shows that the governors of the following regions were

President of the IBP during the past nine (9) terms (1991-2009):

Numeriano Tanopo, Jr. (Pangasinan) --- Central Luzon --- 1991-1993

Mervin G. Encanto (Quezon City) ------ Manila ------------ 1993-1995

Raul R. Angangco (Makati) -------------- Southern Luzon - 1995-1997

Jose Aguila Grapilon (Biliran) ----------- Eastern Visayas - 1997-1999

Arthur D. Lim (Zambasulta) ------------- Western Mindanao-1999-2001

Teofilo S. Pilando, Jr. (Kalinga-Apayao)-Northern Luzon - 2001-2003

Jose Anselmo I. Cadiz (Camarines Sur) -Bicolandia -------- 2003-2005

Jose Anselmo I. Cadiz (Camarines Sur) -Bicolandia ----2005-Aug 2006

Jose Vicente B. Salazar (Albay) ---------- Bicolandia --- Aug. 2006-2007

Feliciano M. Bautista (Pangasinan) ------ Central Luzon ---- 2007-2009

Only the governors of the Western Visayas and Eastern Mindanao regions

have not yet had their turn as Executive Vice President cum next IBP

President, while Central Luzon and Bicolandia have had two (2) terms

already.

Therefore, either the governor of the Western Visayas Region, or the

governor of the Eastern Mindanao Region should be elected as Executive

Vice-President for the 2009-2011 term. The one who is not chosen for this

term, shall have his turn in the next (2011-2013) term. Afterwards, another

rotation shall commence with Greater Manila in the lead, followed by

Southern Luzon, Eastern Visayas, Western Mindanao, Northern Luzon,

Bicolandia, Central Luzon, and either Western Visayas or Eastern Mindanao

at the end of the round.[5]

The Committee then disclosed that the controversies involved herein and

should be resolved are the following: (I) the dispute concerning additional

delegates of the QC Chapter to the House of Delegates; (II) the election of

the Governor for the Greater Manila Region (GMR); (III) the election of

Governor for the Western Visayas Region; (IV) the election of Governor for

the Western Mindanao Region; (V) the resolution of the election protests;

(VI) the election of the IBP Executive Vice President for the 2009-2011

term; and, (VII) the administrative complaint against EVP Rogelio Vinluan.

In addressing the above controversies, the Committee arrived at the

following findings and conclusions:

I. The silence of Sec. 31, Art. V of the IBP By-Laws on who may be

elected as additional delegates and alternates by the remaining

members of the Board of Officers of the Chapter when the Chapter is

entitled to more than two (2) delegates to the House of Delegates, is the

root cause of the conflicting resolutions of the Bautista and Vinluan factions

on the proper interpretation of the aforementioned provision of the By-Laws.

According to the Resolution No. XVIII-2009 dated April 17, 2009 of the

Bautista Group, "the additional delegate/s shall be elected by the Board of

Officers of the Chapter only from among the remaining duly elected officers

and members of the Board, in consideration of their mandate from the

general membership.

According to the Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special-23 April 2009) of the

Vinluan Group, "the election of the additional delegate/s for the Chapters

entitled to more than two (2) delegates shall be elected by the Board of

Officers of the Chapter from among the general membership who are in

good standing to include the remaining duly elected officers and members of

the Board."

The Committee finds the qualification introduced by Resolution No. XVIII-

2009 - "that the additional delegate/s and alternates must be elected

from among the remaining officers of the Chapter" - to be consistent

with the precedent set by Section 31 itself in appointing members of the

Board of Officers, namely, (a) the president of the Chapter as the

delegate, and the vice president as the alternate, or second, delegate to the

House of Delegates, when the Chapter is entitled to two (2) delegates. There

is a manifest intention in Sec. 31, Art. V of the By-Laws to reserve

membership in the House of Delegates (which is the deliberative body of the

IBP) for the elected officers of the Chapter since they have already received

the mandate of the general membership of the Chapter.

For the past four (4) terms (2003-2011), Atty. Loanzon has been an officer

and delegate of the QC Chapter to the House of Delegates, until the Vinluan

Group introduced its own interpretation of the aforementioned provision of

the By-Laws and elected non-officers of the Chapter as delegates to the

House of Delegates in lieu of herself and Atty. Laqui.

We find the Vinluan Group's interpretation of Sec. 31, Art. V, of the By-Laws

in Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special - 23 April 2009) to be in error and

devoid of rational and historical bases.

II. Attys. Victoria Loanzon and Marite Laqui were properly

recognized as delegates of the QC Chapter by the Presiding Officer, GMR

Governor Marcial Magsino, during the election on April 25, 2009 of the

Governor for the Greater Manila Region, in accordance with the guideline in

Resolution No. XVIII-2009.

The argument of the QC-Chapter President Tranquil Salvador, that Attys.

Loanzon and Laqui were not delegates because they were not elected by the

QC-Board of Officers, is not well taken.

Sec. 31, Art. V of the By-Laws provides that:

"Additional Delegates and alternates shall in proper cases be elected by

the Board of Officers of the Chapter."

The QC Chapter is not a "proper case" for the election of additional delegates

by the Board of Officers because the Chapter is entitled to the same number

of delegates (11) to the House, as the number of officers in its Board of

Officers. Its officers are ipso facto the Chapter's delegates to the House.

There is no need for the Board of Officers to conduct an election.

A "proper case" for the election of additional delegates and alternates by the

Board of Officers occurs when the number of additional delegates and

alternates for the Chapter is less than the members of the Board of Officers,

for, then, the Board of Officers must select, and elect, who among

themselves should be the additional delegate/s and alternates of the Chapter

to the House of Delegates. That has never been the case of the QC Chapter.

III. Atty. Manuel Maramba (Manila III Chapter) was validly elected

as GMR Governor for the 2009-2011 term, not only because he outvoted

his rival, Atty. Elpidio Soriano (Quezon City Chapter), but also because

under the principle of rotation of the governorship (Bar Matter No. 586, May

14, 1991) since the five (5) chapters of the Greater Manila Region have all

represented the region in the Board of Governors during the past five (5)

terms, in the following order:

1999-2001 -------- Manila III -------- Jose P. Icaonapo

2001-2003 -------- Quezon City ----- Santos V. Catubay, Jr.

2003-2005 -------- Manila II ---------- Rosario Setias-Reyes

2005-2007 -------- Manila I ----------- Alicia A. Risos-Vidal

2007-2009 -------- Manila IV --------- Marcial M. Magsino

it is now the turn of the representative of the Manila III Chapter to sit again

in the Board of Governors for the next round which begins in the 2009-2011

term. The Manila III representative, Atty. Manuel M. Maramba, has every

right to the position not only because he won the election with 13 votes in

his favor against 12 for Atty. Soriano, but also because his election follows

the rotation rule decreed by the Supreme Court.

On the other hand, the election of Atty. Soriano (QC Chapter) in the special

election that was presided over by EVP Vinluan on May 4, 2009, was a nullity

on three (3) grounds: First, because Atty. Soriano already lost the election

on April 25, 2009. Second, the special election conducted by the Vinluan

Group on May 4, 2(00)8 was illegal because it was not called nor presided

over by the regional Governor. Third, Atty. Soriano is disqualified to run for

GMR Governor for the 2009-2011 term because his "election" as such would

violate the rotation rule which the Supreme Court requires to be "strictly

implemented". Under the rotation rule, the GMR governorship for the 2009-

2011 term belongs to the Manila III Chapter, not to the QC Chapter, whose

turn will come two (2) years later, in 2011-2013 yet.

IV. Atty. Erwin Fortunato of the Romblon Chapter was duly elected

as Governor for the Western Visayas Region for the 2009-2011

term, not only because he obtained the highest number of votes among the

three (3) candidates for the position, but also because under the rotation

rule, it is now the turn of the Romblon Chapter to represent the Western

Visayas Region in the IBP Board of Governors.

The contention of the protestants, Attys. Cornelio Aldon (Antique Chapter)

and Benjamin Ortega (Negros Occidental Chapter) that the rotation rule in

Sections 37 and 39 of the IBP By-Laws is not mandatory but only directory,

betrays their ignorance of the resolution of the Supreme Court in Bar Matter

No. 586 dated May 16, 1991, ruling that "the principle on rotation shall be

strictly implemented so that all prior elections for governor in the region

shall be reckoned with or considered in determining who should be the

governor to be selected from the different chapters to represent the region

in the Board of Governors."

V. Neither Atty. Nasser Marohomsalic nor Atty. Benjamin Lanto is

qualified to be elected Governor of Western Mindanao Region. Sec.

39, Art. VI of the IBP By-Laws provides that: "Starting in 1993-1995, the

principle of rotation in the position of governor among the different chapters

to represent the region in the Board of Governors shall be strictly

implemented.

Under Sec. 37, Art. VI of the By-Laws, the Governor of a region shall be

elected by the members of the House of Delegates from that region only.

Since the delegate of a Chapter to the House of Delegates is the President of

the Chapter, not the Board of Officers, the nominee of the Chapter

President, not the nominee of the Board of Officers, is the valid nominee for

Governor of the Region.

However, under the rotation rule, it is not the Lanao del Sur Chapter

that should represent the Western Mindanao Region in the Board of

Governors for the 2009-2011 term. The record of the IBP National

Secretariat shows that, starting in 1993-1995 when the strict

implementation of the rotation rule began, the 12-chapter Western

Mindanao Region has been represented in the Board of Governors by only

six (6) Chapters, as follows:

1993-1995 ----- Lanao del Sur ------ Dimnatang T. Saro

1995-1997 ----- Cotabato ------------ George C. Jabido

1997-1999 ----- ZAMBASULTA -- Arthur D. Lim

1999-2001 ----- ZAMBASULTA -- Paulino R. Ersando

2001-2003 ----- North Cotabato --- Little Sarah A. Agdeppa

2003-2005 ----- Sultan Kudarat ---- Carlos L. Valdez, Jr.

2005-2007 ----- SOCSARGEN ----- Rogelio C. Garcia

2007-2009 ----- Sultan Kudarat ---- Carlos L. Valdez, Jr.

Therefore, pursuant to the strict rotation, the Lanao del Sur Chapter must

wait for the six (6) other Chapters in the region (Zamboanga Sibugay,

Zamboanga del Norte, Zamboanga del Sur, Lanao del Norte, Misamis

Occidental, and Maguindanao-Cotabato City) to have their turn in the Board

of Governors before Lanao del Sur may again represent the Western

Mindanao Region in the Board of Governors.

Since both Attys. Nasser Marohomsalic and B(e)njamin Lanto belong to the

Lanao del Sur Chapter, both of them are disqualified to be elected as

Governor of the Western Mindanao Region for the 2009-2011 term. With

respect to Atty. Benjamin Lanto, his nomination by the Board of Officers was

not only invalid, but also lost credibility after three (3), out of the thirteen

(13) signatories to his nomination, resigned from the Board of Officers, and

six (6) others signed "authorizations" in favor of Atty. Macalawi authorizing

him to nominate and elect the Governor for the Western Mindanao Region.

That left only four (4) votes in favor of his nomination for Governor of the

Western Mindanao Region.

VI. The elections for the IBP Executive Vice President separately

held on May 9, 2009 by the Bautista and Vinluan Groups were null

and void for lack of quorum. The presence of five (5) Governors-elect is

needed to constitute a quorum of the 9-member Board of Governors-elect

who shall elect the Executive Vice President.

As previously stated, there were two (2) simultaneous elections for the

Executive Vice President for the 2009-2011 term - one was called and

presided over by EVP Vinluan in the Board Room of the IBP National Office,

while the other election for the same position was presided over by outgoing

IBP Pres. Bautista in another room of the same building, at the same time,

9:00 A.M., on the same date, May 9, 2009.

Those present at the meeting of the Vinluan Group were:

1. Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano

2. Atty. Benjamin B. Lanto

3. Atty. Amador Tolentino, Jr., Governor-elect for Southern Luzon

4. Atty. Jose V. Cabrera, Governor-elect for Bicolandia

5. Atty. Erwin Fortunato, Governor-elect for Western Visayas

6. Atty. Roland B. Inting, Governor-elect for Eastern Visayas

Since both Attys. Soriano and Lanto were not validly elected as Governors

respectively of the Greater Manila Region and the Western Mindanao Region,

they were disqualified to sit in the incoming Board of Governors and

participate in the election of the succeeding Executive Vice President. The

remaining four (4) Governors-elect - Governors Tolentino, Cabrera,

Fortunato, and Inting, did not constitute a quorum of the Board of Governors

to conduct a valid election of the IBP Executive Vice President. The election

of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano as Executive Vice President by the Vinluan Group

was invalid. Aside from lack of a quorum to conduct the elections, EVP

Vinluan wrongly presided over the election. Thus, Atty. Soriano was not duly

elected as Governor of the Greater Manila Region, hence, he is disqualified

to sit in the Board of Governors.

Neither did the meeting of the Bautista Group fare any better, for those

present were:

1. Atty. Milagros Fernan-Cayosa, Governor-elect for Northern Luzon

2. Atty. Ferdinand Y. Miclat, Governor-elect for Central Luzon

3. Atty. Manuel M. Maramba, Governor-elect for Greater Manila

4. Atty. Roan Libarios, Governor-elect for Eastern Mindanao

5. Atty. Nasser Marohomsalic

Atty. Marohomsalic's election as Governor for Western Mindanao was invalid

for violating the rotation rule. The four (4) remaining governors-elect (Attys.

Cayosa, Miclat, Maramba and Libarios) like those in the Vinluan Group, did

not constitute a quorum to conduct the election of the IBP Executive Vice

President for the current term. The election of Governor Roan Libarios as

Executive Vice President by this group was therefore null and void.

Besides that flaw in his election, since the Eastern Visayas Region,

represented by Governor Jose Aguila Grapilon of Biliran, had succeeded to

the presidency in 1997-1999, its next turn will come after the eight (8) other

regions shall have also served in the presidency. That will be after sixteen

years, or, in 2015-2017 yet.

VII. The administrative complaint against EVP Rogelio A. Vinluan

and his Group of Governors (Abelardo Estrada of Northern Luzon,

Bonifacio Barandon of Bicolandia, Evergisto Escalon of Eastern

Visayas, and Raymund Mercado of Western Visayas) is

meritorious, for their conduct was fractious and high-handed, causing

disunity and acrimonious disagreements in the IBP.

1. The request of the EVP Vinluan's Group for a special meeting of the Board

of Governors on April 23, 2009 - two (2) days before the scheduled election

of the regional Governors on April 25, 2009 - when IBP Pres. Bautista was in

Zamboanga on IBP business, and the other Governors had just returned to

their respective regions to prepare for the April 25 election of the regional

governors, was unreasonable.

The special meeting on April 23, 2009 which he himself presided over,

violated Sec. 42, Art. VI of the By-Laws which provides that it is the

President who shall call a special meeting, and it is also the President

who shall preside over the meeting, not Atty. Vinluan (Sec. 50, Art. VII,

By-Laws).

The proper recourse for the Vinluan Group, in view of President Bautista's

refusal to call a special meeting as requested by them, is found in Section

43, Art. VI of the By-Laws which provides that-

"The Board may take action, without a meeting, by resolution signed by at

least five Governors provided that every member of the Board shall have

been previously apprised of the contents of the resolution."

But the Vinluan Group ignored that procedure. They held a special meeting

on April 23, 2009, where they adopted Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special-

23 April 2009) striking out as ultra vires the earlier Resolution No. XVIII-

2009 passed in the regular monthly meeting of the Board of Governors on

April 17, 2009. That meeting was illegal, hence, the resolution adopted

therein was null and void.

2. The second special meeting held by the Vinluan Group on April 30, 2009

wherein they approved Resolution XVIII-2009 (Special-A-30 April 2009)

resolving the election protests in the GMR, Western Visayas and Western

Mindanao governors' elections, with complete disregard for the protestees'

right to due process, was likewise illegal, hence, the Group's resolution of

the election protests was likewise null and void, and the new election of the

GMR Governor which they set on May 4, 2009 was invalid.

3. The "Board Resolution" which was adopted and faxed to the Governors-

elect on May 8, 2009, by the Vinluan Group, setting the election of the IBP

Executive Vice President on May 9, 2009, at 9:00 A.M.; declaring Pres.

Bautista "unfit to preside" over the election and "designating EVP Vinluan to

preside over the election" in lieu of Pres. Bautista, was uncalled and

unwarranted, and caused disunity and disorder in the IBP. It was in effect

a coup to unseat Pres. Bautista before the end of his term, and prematurely

install EVP Vinluan as president.

The actuations of Atty. Vinluan's Group in defying the lawful authority of IBP

President Bautista, due to Atty. Vinluan's overweening desire to propel his

fraternity brother, Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano, to the next presidency of the IBP,

smacked of politicking, which is strongly condemned and strictly prohibited

by the IBP By-Laws and the Bar Integration Rule.[6]

Again, it must be noted that while the pending administrative case against

Atty. Vinluan and his co-respondents has not yet been resolved, Atty.

Vinluan was not allowed to assume his position as President of the IBP for

2009-2011. Instead, the Supreme Court designated retired Supreme Court

Associate Justice Santiago Kapunan as Officer-in-Charge of the IBP.

III. Rulings of the Court

The Court completely agrees with the recommendations of the Special

Committee with respect to, among others, the following:

1. Declaring Atty. Manuel M. Maramba (Manila III Chapter) as the duly

elected Governor of the Greater Manila Region for the 2009-2011

term[7]; and,

2. Declaring Atty. Erwin M. Fortunato (Romblon Chapter) as the duly

elected Governor of the Western Visayas Region for the 2009-2011

term[8].

As far as the Court is concerned, there is no dispute that the election of Atty.

Maramba was in order. During the election held last April 25, 2009 which

was duly presided over by then outgoing Greater Manila Region Governor

Marcial Magsino, it was Atty. Maramba who garnered the highest number of

votes among the delegates compared to Atty. Soriano, 13 votes to 12 votes.

However, instead of accepting the said defeat graciously, Atty. Soriano then

filed an election protest on April 27, 2009 claiming that the said election was

void because there were non-delegates, particularly Attys. Loanzon and

Laqui of the Quezon City Chapter, who were allowed to vote. Consequently,

Atty. Soriano got a favorable ruling from the group of Atty. Vinluan, as EVP,

and former Governors Estrada (Northern Luzon), Barandon, Jr. (Bicolandia),

Escalon (Eastern Visayas) and Mercado (Western Visayas) per Resolution No.

XVIII-2009 (Special A-30 April 2009). This then resulted in the anomalous

election of Atty. Soriano as Governor of the Greater Manila Region last May

4, 2009.

In addressing the said controversy, and as already discussed, the Committee

concluded that "the Vinluan Group's interpretation of Sec. 31, Art. V, of the

By-Laws in Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special-23 April 2009) to be in error

and devoid of rational and historical bases." It was then pointed out that

"(t)he argument of the QC-Chapter President Tranquil Salvador, (as well as

by Atty. Soriano), that Attys. Loanzon and Laqui were not delegates because

they were not elected by the QC-Board of Officers, is not well taken."

Likewise, the Committee considered the situation then involving the Quezon

City Chapter as "not a `proper case' for the election of additional delegates

by the Board of Officers because the Chapter is entitled to the same number

of delegates (11) to the House (of Delegates), as the number of officers in

its Board of Officers. Its officers areipso facto the Chapter's delegates to the

House. There is no need for the Board of Officers to conduct an election."

Thus, and as rightly determined by the Committee to which the Court

subscribes to, "the election of Atty. Soriano (QC Chapter) in the special

election that was presided over by EVP Vinluan on May 4, 2009, was a nullity

on three (3) grounds: First, because Atty. Soriano already lost the election

on April 25, 2009. Second, the special election conducted by the Vinluan

Group on May 4, 2(009) was illegal because it was not called nor presided by

the regional Governor (Atty. Magsino). Third, Atty. Soriano is disqualified to

run for GMR Governor for the 2009-2011 term because his "election" as such

would violate the rotation rule which the Supreme Court requires to be

"strictly implemented"." This being so, since he was not a duly elected

Governor of the Greater Manila Region, then Atty. Soriano cannot be voted

as well as IBP Executive Vice President for 2009-2011.

With respect to the case of Atty. Fortunato, his election as Governor for the

Western Visayas Region was upheld since "he obtained the highest number

of votes among the three (3) candidates for the position" and "also because

under the rotation rule, it is now the turn of the Romblon Chapter to

represent the Western Visayas Region in the IBP Board of Governors." On

account thereof, the Court is convinced that the contentions of protestees

Attys. Cornelio Aldon (Antique Chapter) and Benjamin Ortega (Negros

Occidental Chapter) cannot prosper. After all, the Court already upheld per

its Resolution in Bar Matter No. 586 dated May 16, 1991 that the "rotation

rule" under Sections 37 and 39 of the IBP By-Laws "shall be strictly

implemented so that all prior elections for governor in the region shall be

reckoned with or considered in determining who should be the governor to

be selected from the different chapters to represent the region in the Board

of Governors." More so, when the concerned chapter invoked its right

thereto as in the case of Atty. Fortunato who came from the Romblon

Chapter which was next in the rotation.

To the Court, the election of Atty. Fortunato as Governor last April 25, 2009

is well-settled. He did not only come from the chapter which is entitled to be

elected for the said position, but also got the highest number of votes

among the candidates that included protestees Attys. Aldon and Ortega. As

the election was presided over by then outgoing Governor Raymund

Mercado, the Court finds no cogent reason as well to reverse the findings of

the Committee insofar as upholding the election of Atty. Fortunato is

concerned. Suffice it to say, the Committee was correct in not finding any

anomaly with respect thereto.

On the nullification of the election of Atty. Nasser Marohomsalic as Governor

for the Western Mindanao Region, the Court does not agree with the

recommendation of the Committee to hold a special election in the said

region[9]. Instead, the Court rules to uphold the election of Atty.

Marohomsalic last April 25, 2009 which was presided over by then outgoing

Governor Carlos Valdez, Jr.

It must be pointed out that Atty. Marohomsalic was duly nominated by Atty.

Alex Macalawi, President of the Lanao del Sur Chapter, and the official

delegate of the said chapter to the House of Delegates for the Western

Mindanao Region during the elections held last April 25, 2009. On the other

hand, Atty. Benjamin Lanto was supposedly nominated by the Board of

Officers of the Lanao del Sur Chapter, except Atty. Macalawi, in Resolution

No. 002-2009 dated February 28, 2009. However, it appears that, as

discovered by the Committee, "three (3) signatories of the resolution"

apparently "resigned as members of the Board of Officers" since they are

prosecutors who are "ineligible for election or appointment to any position in

the Integrated Bar or any Chapter thereof", while "(s)ix (6) other signatories

of the resolution" allegedly "recalled their signatures" and they, instead,

"signed an `authorization' authorizing the Chapter President, Atty. Macalawi,

"to select and vote" "for the Regional Governor for Western Mindanao"."

Thus, "(t)he withdrawal of nine (9) signatures from the Resolution No. 002,

left only four (4) votes in support of Lanto's nomination - a puny minority of

the 14-member Board of Officers of the Lanao del Sur Chapter." [10]

The attempt of Atty. Vinluan and his group of Governors to nullify the

election of Atty. Marohomsalic through Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special

A-30 April 2009) was clearly irregular and unjustified. Based on the April 25,

2009 election results, Atty. Marohomsalic won over his rival Atty. Lanto, 6

votes to 5 votes. Consequently, he was duly proclaimed as the elected

Governor of the Western Mindanao Region. On April 27, 2009, Atty. Lanto

filed an election protest, "questioning the validity of Atty. Marohomsalic's

nomination by Atty. Macalawi, President of the IBP Lanao del Sur Chapter,

and claiming that his (Lanto's) nomination by the Board of Officers of the

Lanao del Sur Chapter was the valid nomination."

Immediately, on April 30, 2009, the group of Atty. Vinluan issued Resolution

No. XVIII-2009 proclaiming Atty. Lanto as the duly elected Governor without

affording Atty. Marohomsalic his right to due process. More importantly,

instead of calling for another election like what it did for the Greater Manila

Region, the group of Atty. Vinluan proceeded to instantly declare Atty. Lanto

as having been duly elected "on the ground that the nomination of the

protestee, Nasser Marohomsalic, was contrary to the will of the Lanao del

Sur Chapter expressed through Board Resolution No. 00(2)-2009 of the

Board of Officers (of the Lanao del Sur Chapter)."[11]

As borne out by the records, Atty. Marohomsalic was duly nominated by

Atty. Alex Macalawi, President of the Lanao del Sur Chapter, and the official

delegate of the said chapter to the House of Delegates for the Western

Mindanao Region during the elections. On the other hand, Atty. Lanto was

supposedly nominated by the Board of Officers of the same Chapter in a

resolution dated February 28, 2009, which was not signed and approved by

Atty. Macalawi. However, and as already pointed out by the Committee, the

"withdrawal of nine (9) signatures from the Resolution No. 002, left only four

(4) votes in support of Lanto's nomination - a puny minority of the 14-

member Board of Officers of the Lanao del Sur Chapter."[12]

Thus, the Committee, citing Sec. 37, Art. VI of the By-Laws, clearly

repudiated and overturned Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special A- 30 April

2009) of Atty. Vinluan and his group of Governors. In its Report, it declared

that the "nominee of the Chapter President, not the nominee of the Board of

Officers, is the valid nominee for Governor of the Region,"[13] thereby

sustaining the position of Atty. Marohomsalic and, in effect, the validity of

his nomination by Atty. Macalawi.

Despite the said findings, Atty. Marohomsalic was stripped of his electoral

mandate and victory when the Committee, invoking the strict application of

the "rotation rule," proceeded to altogether nullify the result of the elections

duly conducted on April 25, 2009. According to the Committee, neither

Lanto nor Marohomsalic is qualified to be elected governor because it was

not the turn of Lanao del Sur chapter to represent the Western Mindanao

Region in the Board of Governors for the 2009-2011 term. As declared in the

Report --

However, under the rotation rule, it is not the Lanao del Sur Chapter

that should represent the Western Mindanao Region in the Board of

Governors for the 2009-2011 term. The record of the IBP National

Secretariat shows that, starting in 1993-1995 when the strict

implementation of the rotation rule began, the 12 -chapter Western

Mindanao Region has been represented in the Board of Governors only six

(6) Chapters, as follows:

1993-1995---Lanao del Sur-----Dimnatang T. Saro

1995-1997---Cotatabato---------George C. Jabido

1997-1999---ZAMBASULTA--Arthur D. Lim

1999-2001---ZAMBASULTA---Paulino R. Ersando

2001-2003---North Cotabato---- Little Sarah A. Agdeppa

2003-2005---Sultan Kudarat-----Carlos L. Valdez, Jr.

2005-2007---SOCSARGEN-----Rogelio C. Garcia

2007-2009---Sultan Kudarat-----Carlos L. Valdez, Jr.

Therefore, pursuant to the strict rotation rule, the Lanao del Sur Chapter

must wait for the six (6) other Chapters in the region (Zamboanga Sibugay,

Zamboanga del Norte, Zamboanga del Sur, Lanao del Norte, Misamis

Occidental, and Maguindanao-Cotabato City) to have their turn in the Board

of Governors before Lanao del Sur may again represent the Western

Mindanao Region in the Board of Governors.

Since both Attys. Nasser Marohomsalic and Benjamin Lanto belong to the

Lanao del Sur Chapter, both of them are disqualified to be elected as

Governor of the Western Mindanao Region for the 2009-2011 term.

The ruling of the Committee insofar as it nullified the election of Atty.

Marohomsalic as Governor of the Western Mindanao Region cannot be

sustained for not being in full accord with facts and the rules. While the

Committee may have correctly pointed out that under the rotation rule it

was not yet the turn of IBP Lanao del Sur Chapter to represent the region in

the Board of Governors for the 2009-2011 term, it does not necessarily

follow that the result of the elections should be altogether nullified on that

ground. Evidently, and as determined by the Committee itself, there are

instances when the "rotation rule" was not followed insofar as the elections

in 1999 and 2007 were concerned with respect to the Western Mindanao

Region.

In the regular election of April 25, 2009, there is no dispute that the voting

delegates of IBP Western Mindanao Region voted into office Atty.

Marohomsalic of Lanao del Sur Chapter as Governor for the 2009-2011 term.

During the said election, his only rival was Atty. Benjamin Lanto who also

belongs to the same Lanao del Sur Chapter. A third candidate, Atty. Escobar

from the Sarangani Chapter, was nominated but he declined the nomination.

While the Committee points out that six (6) chapters in the region, including

Sarangani, are entitled to precedence over the Lanao del Sur chapter in the

order of rotation, the fact remains that not one of them nominated or

fielded a candidate from their respective ranks during the April 25,

2009 election. Neither did any one of them challenge the

nominations of the Lanao del Sur Chapter based on the order of

rotation.

By not fielding a candidate for Governor and by declining the nomination

raised in favor of its Chapter President (Atty. Escobar), the IBP Sarangani

Chapter is deemed to have waived its turn in the rotation order. The same

can be said of the remaining chapters. They too are deemed to have waived

their turn in the rotation as they opted not to field or nominate a candidate

from among their respective members. Neither did they invoke the rotation

rule to challenge the nominations from the Lanao del Sur Chapter. On the

contrary, they fully expressed their concurrence to the cited nominations,

which may be interpreted as a waiver of their right to take their turn to

represent the region in the Board of Governors for the 2009-2011 term.

It need not be stressed that, as cited by the Committee itself, there were

instances when the Governor of the Western Mindanao Region came from

the same chapter such as ZAMBASULTA (1997-1999 & 1999-2001) and

Sultan Kudarat (2003-2005 & 2007-2009). Thus, Atty. Marohomsalic

could not be faulted if the other chapters opted not to field or nominate

their own candidates. Having been validly nominated and duly proclaimed as

the duly elected Governor of Western Mindanao, Atty. Marohomsalic

therefore deserves to assume his position during the remainder of the term.

It would have been a different story if another Chapter in the order of

rotation fielded its own candidate or invoked the rotation rule to challenge

Atty. Marohomsalic's nomination. But the record is bereft of any showing

that his nomination and subsequent election was challenged on that basis. If

there was any challenge at all, it merely referred to his nomination by Atty.

Macalawi which the Committee itself has found to be in order. Thus, no

compelling reason exists to disregard the electoral mandate and nullify the

will of the voting delegates as expressed through the ballot.

The "rotation rule" is not absolute but subject to waiver as when the

chapters in the order of rotation opted not to field or nominate their own

candidates for Governor during the election regularly done for that purpose.

If a validly nominated candidate obtains the highest number of votes in the

election conducted, his electoral mandate deserves to be respected unless

obtained through fraud as established by evidence. Such is not the case

here.

Suffice it to say, the "rotation rule" should be applied in harmony with, and

not in derogation of, the sovereign will of the electorate as expressed

through the ballot. Thus, Atty. Marohomsalic cannot be divested and

deprived of his electoral mandate and victory. The order of rotation is not a

rigid and inflexible rule as to bar its relaxation in exceptional and compelling

circumstances.

If only to stress, compared to the case of Atty. Fortunato whose Romblon

Chapter invoked the "rotation rule," no chapter in the Western Mindanao

Region which was next in the rotation invoked the said rule.

Now, in its Report, the Committee nullified the elections for the IBP EVP

separately and simultaneously conducted by President Bautista and EVP

Vinluan on May 9, 2009 and called for a special election[14] for the same. In

the case of the election conducted by EVP Vinluan, the results were nullified

for lack of authority to preside over the election and for lack quorum, citing

the disqualification of Attys. Soriano and Lanto to sit in the incoming Board

of Governors. The finding deserves to be sustained.

In the same Report, the Committee also nullified the result of the election

for the incoming EVP conducted by President Bautista. While

recognizing President Bautista's authority to conduct the election, the

Committee nonetheless nullified the election results for lack of quorum,

citing the ineligibility of Atty. Marohomsalic to sit in the incoming Board of

Governors, thereby leaving only four (out of nine) Governors-elect in

attendance which did not constitute a quorum.

With the election of Atty. Marohomsalic as Governor of Western Mindanao

being deemed valid, then the defect of lack of quorum that supposedly

tainted the election proceedings for EVP separately conducted by IBP

President Bautista may have been cured, five (5) Governors being sufficient

to constitute a quorum.

Be that as it may, the recommendation of the Committee to hold a special

election for the EVP for the remaining 2009-2011 term deserves to be

upheld to heal the divisions in the IBP and promote unity by enabling all the

nine (9) Governors-elect to elect the EVP in a unified meeting called for that

purpose. This will enable matters to start on a clean and correct slate, free

from the politicking and the under handed tactics that have characterized

the IBP elections for so long.

In the conduct of the unified election of the incoming EVP, the following

findings and recommendations of the Committee shall be adopted:

THE ROTATION OF THE

PRESIDENCY AMONG THE REGIONS-

Sec. 47, Art. VII of the By-Laws, as amended by Bar Matter 491, Oct. 6,

1989, provides that the Executive Vice President shall be chosen by the

Board of Governors from among the nine (9) regional governors. The

Executive Vice President shall automatically become President for the next

succeeding term. The Presidency shall rotate among the nine Regions."

The list of national presidents furnished the Special Committee by the IBP

National Secretariat, shows that the governors of the following regions were

President of the IBP during the past nine (9) terms (1991-2009):

Numeriano Tanopo, Jr. (Pangasinan)...Central Luzon...1991-1993

Mervin G. Encanto (Quezon City)... Greater Manila 1993-1995

Raul R. Anchangco (Makati)...Southern Luzon...1995-1997

Jose Aguila Grapilon (Biliran)... Eastewrn Visayas ... 1997-1999

Arthur D. Lim ( Zambasulta)...Western Mindanao...1999-2001

Teofilo S. Pilando, Jr. (Kalinga Apayao)...Northern Luzon...2001-2003

Jose Anselmo L. Cadiz (Camarines Sur)...Bicolandia...2005-Aug. 2006

Jose Vicente B. Salazar (Albay)...Bicolandia... Aug. 2006-2007

Feliciano M. Bautista (Pangasinan)...Central Luzon...2007-2009

Only the Governors of the Western Visayas and Eastern Mindanao regions

have not yet had their turn as Executive Vice President cum next IBP

President, while Central Luzon and Bicolandia have had two (2) terms

already.

Therefore, either the governor of the Western Visayas Region, or the

governor of the Eastern Mindanao Region should be elected as Executive

Vice President for the 2009-2011 term.

Accordingly, a special election shall be held by the present nine-man IBP

Board of Governors to elect the EVP for the remainder of the term of 2009-

2011, which shall be presided over and conducted by IBP Officer-in-Charge

Justice Santiago Kapunan (Ret.) within seven (7) days from notice.

Further, in its report, the Committee declared that "the high-handed and

divisive tactics of Atty. Rogelio A. Vinluan and his group of Governors,

Abelardo Estrada, Bonifacio Barandon Jr., Evergisto Escalon, and Raymund

Mercado, which disrupted the peaceful and orderly flow of business in the

IBP, caused chaos in the National Office, bitter disagreements, and ill-

feelings, and almost disintegrated the Integrated Bar, constituted grave

professional misconduct which should be appropriately sanctioned

to discourage its repetition in the future." [15]

The Committee, however, fell short of determining and recommending the

appropriate penalty for the grave professional misconduct found to have

been committed by Atty. Vinluan and his group of Governors. Still, with the

above firm and unequivocal findings and declarations of the Committee

against Atty. Vinluan and his group that included Attys. Estrada, Barandon,

Jr., Escalon and Mercado as "unprofessional" members of the IBP Board of

Governors (2007-2009 term) they certainly do not deserve to hold such

esteemed positions.

It has long been held that, as provided for in Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code

of Professional Responsibility[16] that "(a) lawyer shall not engage in

unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct." Added to this, Rule 7.03,

Canon 7 requires that "(a) lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely

reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he whether in public or

private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal

profession." In the case at bar, such canons find application.

In addition, it was clear to the Committee, and the Court agrees, that "(t)he

actuations of Atty. Vinluan's Group in defying the lawful authority of IBP

President Bautista, due to Atty. Vinluan's overweening desire to propel his

fraternity brother, Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano, to the next presidency of the IBP,

smacked of politicking, which is strongly condemned and strictly prohibited

by the IBP By-Laws and the Bar Integration Rule." Indeed, said actuations of

Atty. Vinluan and his group of former IBP Governors Estrada, Barandon, Jr.,

Escalon and Mercado were grossly inimical to the interest of the IBP and

were violative of their solemn oath as lawyers. After all, what they did

served only to benefit the apparently selfish goals of defeated candidate

Atty. Elpidio Soriano to be elected as IBP EVP and be the next IBP President

for the 2011-2013 term by hook or by crook.

Bearing the above in mind, what Attys. Vinluan, Estrada, Barandon, Jr.,

Escalon and Mercado conspired to do was truly "high-handed and divisive"

that must not pass unsanctioned. Otherwise, future leaders of the IBP,

Governors at that, might be similarly inclined to do what they did, much to

the prejudice of the IBP and its membership. Surely, this should be

addressed without much delay so as to nip-in-the-bud such gross

misconduct and unprofessionalism. They all deserve to suffer the same fate

for betraying as well the trust bestowed on them for the high positions that

they previously held.

The Resolution of the Court in the case of Re: 1989 Elections of the

Integrated Bar of the Philippines[17] already declared that unethical practices

of lawyers during IBP elections cannot but result in the stature of the IBP as

an association of the practitioners of a noble and honored profession being

diminished. As held therein, "(r)espect for law is gravely eroded when

lawyers themselves, who are supposed to be minions of the law, engage in

unlawful practices and cavalierly brush aside the very rules that the IBP

formulated for their observance."[18] Indeed, the said strong and vigorous

declaration of this Court on the 1989 IBP Election scandal is relevant here.

While Atty. Vinluan and his group deserve to be stripped of their positions in

the IBP, this can no longer be done as their terms as Governors already

expired, specially on the part of Attys. Estrada, Barandon, Jr., Escalon and

Mercado. However, in the case of Atty. Vinluan, as former EVP of the IBP he

would have automatically succeeded to the presidency for the term 2009-

2011 but now should not be allowed to. After all, and considering the

findings of the Committee, he has clearly manifested his unworthiness to

hold the said post. On account thereof, Atty. Vinluan is thus declared unfit to

assume the position of IBP President. To the Court, if Atty. Vinluan cannot

be fit to become a Governor and EVP of the IBP then he is not entitled to

succeed as its President for the 2009-2011 term.

Also, Atty. Vinluan and his group should no longer be allowed to run as

national officers to prevent such similar irregularity from happening

again. Thus, in subsequent elections of the IBP, they are disqualified to run

as candidates.

On the recommendation of the Committee to amend Sections 31[19], 33, par.

(g) [20], 39[21], 42[22], and 43[23], Article VI and Section 47[24], Article VII of

the IBP By-Laws, the Court finds the same in order. As such, and in order to

immediately effect reforms in the IBP, particularly in the holding of its

elections for national officers, the subject amendments are hereby adopted

and approved.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court resolves that:

1. The elections of Attys. Manuel M. Maramba, Erwin M. Fortunato and

Nasser A. Marohomsalic as Governors for the Greater Manila Region,

Western Visayas Region and Western Mindanao Region, respectively, for the

term 2009-2011 are UPHELD;

2. A special election to elect the IBP Executive Vice President for the 2009-

2011 term is hereby ORDERED to be held under the supervision of this Court

within seven (7) days from receipt of this Resolution with Attys. Maramba,

Fortunato and Marohomsalic being allowed to represent and vote as duly-

elected Governors of their respective regions;

3. Attys. Rogelio Vinluan, Abelardo Estrada, Bonifacio Barandon, Jr.,

Evergisto Escalon and Raymund Mercado are all found GUILTY of grave

professional misconduct arising from their actuations in connection with the

controversies in the elections in the IBP last April 25, 2009 and May 9, 2009

and are hereby disqualified to run as national officers of the IBP in any

subsequent election. While their elections as Governors for the term 2007-

2009 can no longer be annulled as this has already expired, Atty. Vinluan is

declared unfit to hold the position of IBP Executive Vice President for the

2007-2009 term and therefore barred from succeeding as IBP President for

the 2009-2011 term;

4. The proposed amendments to Sections 31, 33, par. (g), 39, 42, and 43,

Article VI and Section 47, Article VII of the IBP By-Laws as contained in the

Report and Recommendation of the Special Committee dated July 9, 2009

are hereby approved and adopted; and

5. The designation of retired SC Justice Santiago Kapunan as Officer-in-

Charge of the IBP shall continue, unless earlier revoked by the Court, but

not to extend beyond June 30, 2011.

SO ORDERED.

Leonardo-De Castro, Brion,** Bersamin, Abad, Villarama, Jr.,

Perez, and Mendoza, JJ., concur.

Carpio, J., join the dissenting opinion of J. Velasco.

Carpio Morales, Nachura, Peralta, Del Castillo, and Sereno, JJ., no part.

Velasco, Jr., J., on official leave but left dissenting opinion, see dissenting

opinion.

** On sick leave but left concurring vote.

[1] Composed of Justice Carolina C. Griño-Aquino (Ret.), as Chairman, and

Justices Bernardo P. Pardo (Ret.) and Romeo J. Callejo, Sr. (Ret.), as

Members.

[2] Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009, pp. 4-5.

[3] Ibid, p. 6.

[4] Ibid, pp. 7-8.

[5] Ibid, pp. 8-9.

[6] Ibid, pp. 21-28.

[7] Letter G, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[8] Letter H, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[9] Letter (I), Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[10] Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009, pp. 14-15.

[11] Ibid, p. 17.

[12] Ibid, pp. 14-15.

[13] Ibid, p. 24.

[14] Letter J, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[15] Letter K, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[16] Promulgated on June 21, 1988.

[17] 178 SCRA 398.

[18] Re: 1989 Elections of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, 178 SCRA

398, 418.

[19] Letter A, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[20] Letter B, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[21] Letter C, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[22] Letter C, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[23] Letter E, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009.

[24] Letter F, Report and Recommendation dated July 9, 2009..

D I S S E N T I N G O P I N I O N

VELASCO, JR. J.:

With due respect to the Chief Justice, I am constrained to register my

dissent.

A.M. No. 09-5-2-SC originated from three (3) separate Protests filed

regarding the elections for the Regional Governors of the Integrated Bar of

the Philippines (IBP) for the Greater Manila Region (hereafter, GMR),

Western Visayas, and Western Mindanao held in April 2007 for a term of two

(2) years starting July 1, 2007. Consolidated with A.M. No. 09-5-2-SC is

A.C. No. 8292 filed by Attys. Marcial M. Magsino, Manuel M. Maramba and

Nasser A. Marohomsalic against Attys. Rogelio A. Vinluan, Evergisto S.

Escalon, Bonifacio T. Barandon, Jr., Abelardo C. Estrada, and Raymund Jorge

A. Mercado for grave professional misconduct, violation of attorney's oath

and acts inimical to the IBP.

The facts culled from the pleadings and evidence extant on record are as

follows:

The GMR Election Protest

(Atty. Elpidio Soriano v. Atty. Manuel M. Maramba)

Atty. Victoria Loanzon, the incumbent Treasurer of the IBP-Quezon City

Chapter (IBP-QC Chapter), filed an undated letter on April 15, 2009 with the

office of the outgoing IBP National President, Atty. Feliciano Bautista,

seeking an interpretation of Section 8 on the Chapter By-Laws of Article IV

and Sec. 31, Article V of the IBP By-Laws in reference to the qualification of

the delegates who would vote in the election for GMR Governor on April 25,

2009.[1] Said Sections read:

Section 8. Delegates. - The President shall concurrently be the Delegate of

the Chapter to the House of Delegates. The Vice President shall be his

alternate, unless the chapter is entitled to have more than one Delegate, in

which case the Vice President shall also be a Delegate. Additional Delegates

and alternates shall in proper cases be elected by the Board."

Section 31. Membership. - The membership of the House of Delegates shall

consist of all the Chapter Presidents and in the case of Chapters entitled to

more than one Delegate each, the Vice Presidents of the Chapters and such

additional Delegates as the Chapters are entitled to. Unless the Vice

President is already a Delegate, he shall be an alternate Delegate. Additional

Delegates and alternates shall in proper cases be elected by the Board of

Officers of the Chapter. Members of the Board of Governors who are not

Delegates shall be members ex officio of the House, without the right to

vote.

The Loanzon letter was taken up in the IBP Board of Governors (BOG)

meeting held on April 17, 2009. In attendance were five (5) IBP Governors,

namely:

Gov. Marcial Magsino Greater Manila (Sponsor)

Gov. Ramon Edison Batacan Eastern Mindanao (Affirmative

vote)

Gov. Carlos Valdez, Jr. Western Mindanao (Affirmative

vote)

Gov. Raymund Jorge Mercado Western Visayas

(Abstain/Affirmative)

Gov. Evergisto Escalon Eastern Visayas (Negative

vote)[2]

Upon motion of then Governor Marcial Magsino, the Board approved, by a

vote of 4-1, Resolution No. XVIII-2009, which I quote:

Resolved as it is hereby resolved by this Board of Governors that in case of

Chapters entitled to more than two delegates as provided under Section 8,

Chapter By-Laws of Article IV, Section 29 and Article V, Section 31 of the

By-Laws of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the additional delegate(s)

shall be elected by the Board of Officers of the Chapter only from among the

remaining duly elected officers and members of the Board, in consideration

of their mandate from the general membership of the Chapter.[3]

On the belief that BOG Resolution No. XVIII-2009 imposed an additional

qualification for the Delegates to be elected by the Board of Officers of IBP

Chapters that are entitled to more than two (2) delegates, the IBP-QC

Chapter, through its Board of Officers, passed Resolution No. 09-005, dated

April 20, 2009, urging the BOG to recall Resolution No. XVIII-

2009.[4] Resolution No. 09-005 was received by the Office of the National

President on April 21, 2009.[5]

On April 23, 2009, five (5) members of the BOG, namely: Gov. Rogelio A.

Vinluan (Executive Vice President and Governor for Southern Luzon); Gov.

Abelardo C. Estrada (Governor for Northern Luzon); Gov. Bonifacio T.

Barandon, Jr. (Governor for Bicolandia); Gov. Evergisto S. Escalon

(Governor for Eastern Visayas); and Gov. Raymund Jorge A. Mercado

(Governor for Western Visayas), met at the National Office. They voted

unanimously to recall and set aside Resolution No. XVIII-2009, through

another resolution which reads:

Resolved, further, that the appropriate interpretation of the aforementioned

provision of the By-Laws, consistent with the long established practice of the

IBP, is that the election of the additional delegate(s) for Chapters entitled to

more than two (2) delegates shall be elected by the Board of Officers of the

Chapter from among the general membership who are in good standing to

include the remaining duly elected officers and members of the Board.[6]

On the same day, the Board of Officers of the IBP-QC Chapter held a special

meeting where the majority of its officers nominated Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano

III as candidate for the position of Governor for GMR. At the same time, the

Board elected its Delegates for the election of the IBP Governor for GMR to

be held on April 25, 2009. The following won as official, elected regular, and

elected alternate delegates, of the Chapter pursuant to Resolution No. 09-

007,[7] viz:

Official Delegates Elected Alternate Delegates

1. Tranquil G. S. Salvador III Ruel Ulysses E. De Guzman

2. Jonas L. Cabochan Sherwin V. Reyes

Elected Regular Delegates Elected Alternate Delegates

1. Christian R. Fernandez (Secretary) Roland A. Tulay

2. Ginger Anne S. Castillo (Auditor) Anthony Raymond M. Velicaria

3. Ernesto A. Tabujara III (P.R.O.) Anna Celeste P. Bernad

4. Annalou S. Nachura (Director) Maria Clarissa L. Pacis-Trinidad

5. Melody S. Sampaga (Director) Rhea R. Julian

6. Joseph Cerezo (Director) Cherrie B. Belmonte-Lim

7. Francois D. Rivera III (Director) Gerely C. Rico

8. Renato M. Callanta (Past President) Ramon C. Chingcuangco

9. George S. Briones (Past President) Felix Jasper D.C. Tumaneng

In the same special meeting, IBP-QC Chapter Treasurer, Atty. Loanzon and

Director Atty. Marita Iris Laqui, who were both present, were nominated for

the position of chapter delegates. However, they failed to get elected.

During the April 25, 2009 election of the IBP Governor of GMR, then

incumbent GMR Governor Magsino, who was Presiding Officer of the GMR

elections, noted the IBP-QC Chapter Resolution No. 09-007.[8] He also

acknowledged the April 24, 2009 Memorandum issued by IBP President Atty.

Bautista:

MEMORANDUM

TO : EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT ROGELIO A. VINLUAN

GOVERNOR ABELARDO C. ESTRADA

GOVERNOR ERNESTO A. GONZALES, JR.

GOVERNOR MARCIAL M. MAGSINO

GOVERNOR BONIFACIO T. BARANDON, JR.

GOVERNOR EVERGISTO S. ESCALON

GOVERNOR RAYMUND JORGE M. MERCADO

GOVERNOR RAMON EDISON C. BATACAN

GOVERNOR CARLOS L. VALDEZ, JR.

RE : ELECTION OF REGIONAL GOVERNORS, APRIL 25, 2009

FROM : NATIONAL PRESIDENT

DATE : APRIL 24, 2009

x------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---x

For purposes of the conduct of the election of the Regional Governors

tomorrow, April 25, 2009, only the following resolution passed and approved

at the regular meeting of the Board of Governors on April 17, 2009 will

apply, to wit:

RESOLUTION NO. XVIII-2009-____

"Resolved as it is hereby resolved by this Board of Governors that in case of

Chapters entitled to more than two delegates as provided under Section 8,

Chapter By-Laws of Article IV, Section 29 and Article V, Section 31 of the

By-Laws of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the additional delegate(s)

shall be elected by the Board of Officers of the Chapter only from among the

remaining duly elected officers and members of the Board, in consideration

of their mandate from the general membership of the Chapter."

No other resolution shall be applicable.

For your strict compliance and guidance.

(Sgd.) FELICIANO M. BAUTISTA[9]

Pursuant to Bautista's Memorandum, Gov. Magsino declared Atty. Loanzon

and Atty. Laqui as Delegates of the IBP-QC Chapter[10] entitled to vote in the

election of the GMR Governor.

Atty. Tranquil Salvador III, the incumbent President of the IBP-QC Chapter,

questioned the declaration of Magsino for the following reasons: (1) the April

23, 2009 Resolution issued by the BOG superseded the April 17, 2009

Resolution, alleging that the latter was in violation of the IBP By-Laws,

particularly Section 8 on the Chapter By-Laws of Article IV and Section 31,

Article V thereof; (2) the Presiding Officer, Gov. Magsino, wrote a letter

dated April 20, 2009 addressed to Atty. Salvador, advising him to require

the regular and alternate delegates to attend the election of the new IBP

Governor for GMR, without any reference to the April 17, 2009 Resolution of

the BOG; and (3) the Board of Officers of the IBP-QC Chapter has passed a

Resolution electing their regular and alternate delegates pursuant to the IBP

By-Laws and the April 23, 2009 Resolution of the BOG.[11]

Gov. Magsino overruled the challenge of Salvador and explained that the

April 23, 2009 Resolution of the BOG is void, because: (1) the IBP National

President was not present at the special meeting which resulted in the

issuance of such resolution; (2) there was no quorum in the April 23, 2009

special meeting as only four (4) governors met and approved the resolution;

and (3) the recall of the April 17, 2009 Resolution was not validly done, as

the recall of a Resolution needs the 3/4 vote of the BOG.[12]

Atty. Salvador, however, countered that the IBP By-Laws should be

controlling and that the IBP-QC Chapter merely complied with the IBP By-

Laws when it elected its regular and alternate delegates, who should be the

only delegates from IBP-QC Chapter allowed to vote. To resolve the issue,

Atty. Salvador suggested that all the elected delegates of IBP-QC Chapter,

as well as two (2) officers not elected as delegates (Loanzon and Laqui), be

allowed to vote. Thereafter, the four (4) votes in question can be set aside

and opened only if these would be determinative of the results of the

election. Gov. Magsino again disagreed with Atty. Salvador.[13]

Atty. Verena Kasilag-Villanueva of the Manila II Chapter posed the query if

under both the April 17 and the April 23 BOG resolutions, the Delegates

must be elected. Gov. Magsino, citing the April 17, 2009 Resolution of the

BOG,[14] answered in the affirmative.

Finally, Gov. Magsino ruled that the April 23, 2009 IBP-QC Chapter

Resolution, electing its delegates, is illegal because: (1) it did not comply

with the BOG April 17, 2009 Resolution that the delegates must be elected

from among the Board of Officers of the Chapter concerned; and (2) it

disenfranchised two (2) members of the Board of Officers of the IBP-QC

Chapter--Atty. Loanzon and Atty. Laqui.[15] Atty. Salvador opposed the view

that Attys. Loanzon and Laqui were disenfranchised as, in fact, they were

nominated for the position of Delegates but unfortunately were not

elected. The procedure adopted by the IBP-QC was strictly in accordance

with Section 8 on the Chapter By-Laws of Article IV and Section 31, Article V

of the IBP By-Laws.[16]

After voiding Board Resolution No. 09-007 of the IBP-QC Chapter, Gov.

Magsino ruled that only officers of IBP-QC Chapter may be Delegates, and,

thus, Attys. Loanzon and Laqui can vote as Delegates of their Chapter.[17]

Thereafter, the elections were held. Atty. Soriano and Atty. Maramba were

nominated for the position of IBP Governor for GMR. After the casting of

votes and counting of ballots, including those cast by Loanzon and Laqui (the

alleged non-delegates), Atty. Maramba was declared winner by garnering a

vote of 13 as against Atty. Soriano's 12.[18]

On April 27, 2009, Atty. Soriano filed his Protest[19] with the office of the IBP

National President pursuant to Section 40, Article VI of the IBP By-Laws.

The Western Mindanao Region Election Protest

(Atty. Benjamin B. Lanto v. Atty. Nasser Marohomsalic)

Atty. Benjamin B. Lanto of the IBP-Lanao del Sur Chapter was a nominee of

the Lanao Del Sur Chapter for the position of IBP Governor for Western

Mindanao. On the other hand, Atty. Nasser Marohomsalic of the IBP-Lanao

del Sur Chapter was nominated by Atty. Alex Macalawi, the President of the

same chapter.[20]

During the April 25, 2009 meeting for the nomination and election of the

candidates for the Regional Governor of Western Mindanao, Atty.

Macabangkit Lanto, an officer of the IBP-Lanao del Sur Chapter, informed

the delegates that the Board of Officers of his Chapter--through a resolution

signed by all its officers except for Chapter President Atty. Macalawi--

officially nominated Lanto for Regional Governor of Western Mindanao.[21]

Despite said resolution, Macalawi nominated Marohomsalic for Regional

Governor of Western Mindanao. The nomination of Marohomsalic was

recognized and accepted by the presiding officer, outgoing Gov. Carlos L.

Valdez Jr. Lanto and Marohomsalic each received five (5) votes after the

votes were counted.[22]

On April 27, 2009, Lanto filed a Protest questioning Marohomsalic's

nomination and the counting of votes in his favor and claiming that under

Section 6, Rule 139-A of the Rules of Court, only one nominee shall come

from any IBP chapter. He asserted that the Chapter's Board of Officers, not

the Chapter President, by a majority vote shall determine the Chapter's

official nominee for Governor of its region.[23]

The Western Visayas Region Election Protest

(Atty. Cornelio P. Aldon and Atty. Benjamin

Ortega v. Atty. Erwin Fortunato)

Atty. Erwin Fortunato of the IBP-Romblon Chapter was proclaimed the duly-

elected Regional Governor for Western Visayas in the April 25, 2009

elections.[24]

In separate protests, Atty. Cornelio P. Aldon of IBP-Antique Chapter and

Atty. Benjamin Ortega of IBP-Negros Occidental Chapter claimed they were

nominated by their respective chapters for Governor of Western Visayas but

were not allowed to be elected on account of the "Rotation Rule" under

Sections 37 and 39 of the IBP By-Laws.[25]

Despite their disqualification, Ortega obtained three (3) votes, Aldon

obtained one (1) vote; and Fortunato, the eventual winner, obtained five (5)

votes, with one (1) delegate opting to abstain.[26]

Aldon and Ortega argued that the rotation rule is merely directory and not

mandatory and claimed a failure of elections, as nominees from the other

chapters were disqualified.[27]

Resolution of the Protests

On April 28, 2009, pending Soriano's Protest, Maramba took his oath as GMR

Governor before Manila Regional Trial Court Judge Antonio Eugenio.[28]

On April 30, 2009, Soriano and his counsel, Atty. Salvador, and the

respective counsels of Fortunato and Aldon appeared before the BOG for the

hearing of their respective protests. Maramba and Marohomsalic did not

appear or file any comment/opposition to the protests, despite due notice to

them.[29]

On April 30, 2009, the BOG resolved the three (3) Protests, as follows:

Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special-A-30 April 2009)

RESOLVED, as it is hereby RESOLVED, that the petition filed by Atty.

Cornelio P. Aldon be DENIED and the election of Atty. Erwin Fortunato be

UPHELD on the ground that he is rightfully entitled to be elected Governor of

Western Visayas pursuant to the rotation rule as set forth under Section 39

of the IBP By-Laws;

RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the protest of Atty. Benjamin Ortega, involving

as it does identical issues and having been filed out of time, be likewise

DISMISSED.

Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special-B-30 April 2009)

RESOLVED, as it is hereby RESOLVED, that the protest filed by Atty. Elpidio

G. Soriano III, be GRANTED for being meritorious and that the election of

the IBP Greater Manila Region held on 25 April 2009 be declared as NULL

and VOID.

RESOLVED, FURTHER, that a new election for the IBP Governor for the

Greater Manila Region be held on Monday, May 4, 2009, at 6:00 P.M. at the

IBP National Office, Ortigas Center, Pasig City and that the Presiding Officer

thereof be directed to follow the Resolution of the Board of Governors issued

on April 23, 2009 on who can be properly designated as delegates by the

Board of Officers of the Chapters;

RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the Executive Vice President be directed to

preside at the said election;

RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the protestant, Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, the

protestee, Atty. Manuel M. Maramba, and the different Chapter Presidents of

the Greater Manila Region be notified immediately about this Resolution and

the holding of a new election aforestated.

Resolution No. XVIII-2009 (Special-C-30 April 2009)

RESOLVED, as it is hereby RESOLVED, that the protest of Atty. Benjamin B.

Lanto be GRANTED on the ground that the nomination of the protestee, Atty.

Nasser Marohomsalic, was in contravention of the will of the Lanao Del Sur

Chapter expressed thru Board Resolution No. 002, 2009.

RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the petitioner, Atty. Benjamin B. Lanto, be

declared as the duly elected Governor of the Western Mindanao Region.[30]

The member-chapters of the GMR, namely Manila I, II, III, IV and Quezon

City, were duly served copies of the above resolution by facsimile message

and personal service.[31]

On May 4, 2009, the special election for the GMR Governor was held at the

IBP National Office. On the other hand, President Bautista, Gov.

Magsino, Atty. Maramba and others held a press conference in the morning

of that same day questioning the special election and other actions taken by

the BOG.[32]

During the special election, a total of fifteen (15), out of twenty-five (25)

delegates from the five (5) GMR chapters (Manila I, Manila II, Manila III,

Manila IV, and Quezon City), attended.[33]

Soriano was nominated by the IBP-QC Chapter, and was the sole nominee

for the position of GMR Governor. After the casting of ballots and counting of

votes, Soriano was declared the duly-elected GMR Governor, garnering a

total of fifteen (15) votes.[34]

Election of the next IBP Executive Vice President (EVP)

After the special election for the GMR Governor, the BOG sent notices to IBP

National President Bautista and both the incumbent and newly-elected

members of the BOG regarding the election for the next IBP EVP on May 9,

2009 at 9:00 a.m. at the IBP Board Room. In the said election held on May

9, 2009, the following were present:

Incumbent members of the Board of Governors:

Rogelio A. Vinluan EVP and Governor for Southern Luzon

Abelardo C. Estrada Governor for Northern Luzon

Bonifacio T. Barandon, Jr. Governor for Bicolandia

Evergisto S. Escalon Governor for Eastern Visayas

Raymund Jorge A. Mercado Governor for Western Visayas

Newly-elected members of the Board of Governors:

Elpidio G. Soriano III Governor for GMR

Amador Z. Tolentino, Jr. Governor for Southern Luzon

Jose V. Cabrera Governor for Bicolandia

Erwin M. Fortunato Governor for Western Visayas

Roland B. Inting Governor for Eastern Visayas

Benjamin B. Lanto Governor for Western Mindanao

GMR Governor Soriano was the sole nominee for the position of IBP EVP. All

the newly-elected members of the BOG in attendance unanimously voted for

Soriano as the next IBP EVP and he was proclaimed as the new IBP EVP.[35]

On the other hand, National President Bautista presided over the meeting of

the other group of Governors, consisting of the following:

Incumbent members of the Board of Governors:

Marcial M. Magsino Governor for GMR

Ramon Edison Batacan Governor for Eastern Mindanao

Carlos Valdez, Jr. Governor for Western Mindanao

Newly-elected members of the Board of Governors:

Manuel M. Maramba Governor for GMR

Ma. Milagros N. Fernan-Cayosa Governor for Northern Luzon

Ferdinand Y. Miclat Governor for Central Luzon

Roan I. Libarios Governor for Eastern Mindanao

Nasser Marohomsalic Governor for Western Mindanao

In this meeting presided by Bautista, Atty. Roan Libarios was elected as the

next IBP EVP.[36]

Thereafter, this Court received separate reports of Bautista and Vinluan

regarding the election of the incoming IBP EVP.

Creation of the Special Committee

In its June 2, 2009 En Banc Resolution, this Court created a Special

Committee to investigate the disputes relating to the elections for Governor

of the GMR, Executive Vice-President of the IBP, and other IBP positions.

Named to the Special Committee were Justice Carolina Griño-Aquino

(retired) as Chairperson and Justices Bernardo P. Pardo and Romeo J.

Callejo, Sr. as Members.

The Special Committee conducted hearings and the parties adduced their

respective evidence.[37]

Thereafter, the Special Committee submitted its Report and

Recommendation dated July 2, 2009 to the Court, the fallo of which reads:

A. That to avoid further controversy regarding its proper interpretation and

implementation, Sec. 31, Article V, of the By-Laws should be amended as

follows (suggested amendments are in bold print):

SEC. 31. Membership. - The membership of the House of Delegates shall

consist of all the Chapter Presidents and in the case of Chapters entitled to

more than one Delegate each, the Vice President of the Chapters and such

additional Delegates as the Chapters are entitled to. Unless the Vice

President is already a delegate, he shall be an alternate

Delegate. Additional Delegates and their respective alternates shall

be elected from, and by, the Board of Officers of the Chapter. If the

Delegate chosen is incapacitated, or disqualified, or resigns, or

refuses to serve, and there are enough members of the Board to be

elected as Delegates, then the Board of Officers shall elect the

additional delegates and alternates from the general membership of

the Chapter, and his corresponding alternate shall take his place.

B. That to avoid any ambiguity as to how the President shall preside and

vote in the meetings of the House of Delgates, paragraph (g), Sec. 33,

Article V of the By-Laws should be amended as follows:

(g) In all meetings and deliberations of the House, whether in annual or

special convention, the President shall preside, or the Executive Vice

President, if the President is absent or incapacitated, but neither of

them shall vote except to break a tie.

C. Similarly, Sec. 42, Article VI of the By-Laws, on meetings of the Board of

Governors, should be amended to read as follows:

Sec. 42. Meetings. - The Board shall meet regularly once a month, on such

date and such time and place as it shall designate. Special meetings may be

called by the President, and shall be called by him upon written request of

five (5) members of the Board. The President shall not vote except to

break a tie in the voting. when for any reason, the President cannot

preside on account of his absence, incapacity or refusal to call a

meeting, the Executive Vice President shall preside, there being

quorum to transact business, but he may not vote except to break a

tie.

D. That Sec. 43, Article VI of the By-Laws, on the procedure for approving a

resolution by the Board of Governors without a meeting, should be amended

by adding the following exception thereto so that the procedure may not be

abused in connection with any election in the IBP:

This provision shall not apply when the Board shall hold an election

or hear and decide an election protest.

E. That the provision for the strict implementation of the rotation rule among

the Chapters in the Regions for the election of the Governor for the regions,

(as ordered by this Honorable Court in Bar Matter No. 586, May 14, 1991)

should be incorporated in Sec. 39, Article VI of the By-Laws, as follows:

Sec. 39. Nomination and election of the Governors. -At least one (1) month

before the national convention the delegates from each region shall elect the

Governor for the region, who shall be chosen by rotation which is

mandatory and shall be strictly implemented among the Chapters in

the region. When a Chapter waives its turn in the rotation order, its

place shall redound to the next Chapter in the line. Nevertheless, the

former may reclaim its right to the Governorship at any time before

the rotation is completed; otherwise, it will have to wait for its turn

in the next round, in the same place that it had in the round

completed.

F. That in view of the fact that the IBP no longer elects its President,

because the Executive Vice President automatically succeeds the President

at the end of his term, Sec 47, Article VII of the By-Laws should be amended

by deleting the provision for the election of the President, moreover, for the

strict implementation of the rotation rule, the Committee recommends that

there should be a sanction for its violation, thus:

Sec. 47. National Officers. - The integrated Bar of the Philippines shall have

a President, an Executive Vice President, and nine (9) regional

Governors. The Executive Vice President shall be elected on a strict

rotation basis by the Board of Governors from among themselves, by

the vote of at least five (5) Governors. The Governors shall be ex

officio Vice President for their respective regions. There shall also be a

Secretary and Treasurer of the Board of Governors.

The violation of the rotation rule in any election shall be penalized

by annulment of the election from election or appointment to any

office of the IBP.

G. That Atty. Manuel M. Maramba should be declared the duly elected

Governor of the Greater Manila Region for the 2009-2011 term.

H. That Atty. Erwin Fortunato of the Romblon Chapter should be declared

the duly elected Governor of the Western Visayas Region for the 2009-2011

term.

(I.) That a special election should be held in the Western Mindanao Region,

within fifteen (15) days from the notice, to elect the Governor of that region

for the 2009-2011 term. In accordance with the rotation rule, only the six

(6) Chapters in the region that have not yet been elected to the Board of

Governors, namely: Zamboanga Sibugay, Zamboanga del Norte,

Za(m)boanga del Sur, Lanao del Norte, Misamis Occidental, and

Maguindanao-Cotabato City, shall participate in the election.

J. That, thereafter, a special election should also be held by the Board of

Governors to elect the Executive Vice President for the 2009-2011 term with

strict observance of the rotation rule. Inasmuch as for the past nine (9)

terms, i.e., since the 1991-1993 term, the nominees of the Western Visayas

and Eastern Mindanao Regions have not yet been chosen only between the

nominees of these two (2) regions who shall become the Executive Vice

President for the 2009-2011 term, in accordance with the strict rotation rule.

K. That the high-handed and divisive tactics of Atty. Rogelio A. Vinluan and

his group of Governors, Abelardo Estrada, Bonifacio Barandon, Jr., Evergisto

Escalon, and Raymund Mercado, which disrupted the peaceful and orderly

flow of business in the IBP, caused chaos in the National Office, bitter

disagreements, and ill-feelings, and almost disintegrated the Integrated Bar,

constituted grave professional misconduct which should be appropriately

sanctioned discourage its repetition in the future.

In the meantime, the Court designated Justice Santiago M. Kapunan

(retired) as Officer-in-Charge of the IBP, tasked with managing its day-to-

day activities.

Issues to Be Resolved

1. What is the correct application of Section 8 on the Chapter By-Laws of

Article IV and Section 31, Article V of the IBP By-Laws?

2. Was the 30 April 2009 Resolution of the BOG, which resolved the protests

filed by Atty. Soriano, Atty. Lanto, Atty. Aldon, and Atty. Ortega, valid?

3. Who was validly elected IBP Executive Vice President for the next term?

4. What is the liability, if any, of respondents Attys. Rogelio A. Vinluan,

Abelardo Estrada, Bonifacio Barandon, Jr., Evergisto Escalon and Raymond

Mercado under the administrative complaint for "grave professional

misconduct, violation of attorney's oath, and acts inimical to the IBP" filed

against them by Attys. Marcial Magsino, Manuel Maramba, and Nasser

Marohomsalic?

As a backgrounder, allow me to explain the structure of the Intergrated Bar

of the Philippines (IBP).

The IBP is divided into nine (9) regions: Northern Luzon, Central Luzon,

Southern Luzon, Bicolandia, Greater Manila, Western Visayas, Eastern

Visayas, Western Mindanao and Eastern Mindanao. Each of these regions is

represented by a Governor elected by delegates from among the member-

Chapters of each region. These nine Governors constitute the Board of

Governors (BOG), which is the governing body of the IBP and has the

general charge of its affairs and activities. Aside from the Governors, the

other national officers of the IBP include: the National President, the

Executive Vice-President (EVP), the National Secretary, the National

Treasurer, and the heads of the National Committees.

The National President, the EVP and the Governors sit for a period of two (2)

years, assume office on July 1 and serve until June 30 of their second year.

After their election to the Board, the members of the BOG elect from among

themselves the new EVP, who shall automatically become the next IBP

National President for the next term.

The National President is designated as the Chief Executive Officer of the

IBP. He is tasked with presiding over all meetings of the BOG. On the other

hand, the EVP shall exercise the powers and perform the functions and

duties of the President during the absence or inability of the latter to act and

shall perform such other functions and duties as are assigned to him by the

President and the Board of Governors. The EVP is a voting member of the

Board, since he is an incumbent Governor elected by and from among the

Governors. Meanwhile, the BOG shall have general charge of the affairs and

activities of the IBP.

The BOG holds a regular meeting once a month. However, special meetings

may be called by the IBP National President and shall be called by him upon

written request of five (5) members of the BOG. In the special meetings,

five members of the BOG shall constitute a quorum to transact

business. However, even without a meeting, the BOG is empowered to issue

resolution as long as it is signed by at least five (5) members, with notice of

the contents thereof to the other members of the BOG.

The BOG also decides on all election protests within the IBP. Their

resolutions on protests are final and conclusive.

Having put the issues in the proper context, we now go to the merits of the

protests and complaint.

Contrary to the fallo of the ponencia, the protests of Soriano and Lanto in

A.M. No. 09-5-2-SC should be granted, while the protests of Aldon and

Ortega should be dismissed for lack of merit. The complaint against Vinluan

and others in A.C. No. 8292 should be dismissed likewise for lack of merit.

Additional Delegates Must Be Elected

by the IBP Chapter Board of Officers

The threshold issue is the conflicting positions on the correct meaning and

application of Section 8, Article IV of the Chapter By-Laws and Sec. 31,

Article V of the IBP By-Laws.

Former National President Bautista and his group of IBP Governors contend

that Section 8 on the Chapter By-Laws of Article IV and Section 31, Article V

of the IBP By-Laws should be interpreted to mean that in Chapters which are

entitled to more than two delegates, the additional delegate(s) shall be

elected by the Board of Officers of the Chapteronly from among the

remaining duly elected officers and members of the Board, in consideration

of their mandate from the general membership of the Chapter. This

interpretation is expressed in the April 17, 2009 Resolution of the IBP BOG

led by Bautista.

EVP Vinluan and his group of Governors contend otherwise, claiming that the

April 17, 2009 Resolution is invalid for being substantially and procedurally

flawed. They asseverate that the April 17, 2009 Resolution effectively

amended the IBP By-Laws, an act which cannot be done without the

approval of this Court. Thus, the BOG led by EVP Vinluan passed the April

23, 2009 Resolution, which recalled the April 17, 2009 Resolution.

I submit that the April 17, 2009 Resolution of the BOG led by President

Bautista is invalid.

On the basis of Loanzon's letter seeking clarification of certain provisions of

the IBP By-Laws, the BOG issued the April 17, 2009 Resolution, the

pertinent portion is quoted as follows:

Resolution No. XVIII-2009-

Resolved as it is hereby resolved by this Board of Governors that in case of

Chapters entitled to more than two delegates as provided under Section 8,

Chapter By-Laws of Article IV, Section 29 and Article V, Section 31 of the

By-Laws of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the additional delegate(s)

shall be elected by the Board of Officers of the Chapter only from among the

remaining duly elected officers and members of the Board, in consideration

of their mandate from the general membership of the Chapter.

This assailed resolution is invalid for the following reasons:

First, the provisions of the By-Laws are unequivocal and do not need any

interpretation.

Section 39, Article VI of the IBP By-Laws provides for the nomination and

election of the Governors, as follows:

Section 39. Nomination and election of the Governors. - At least one (1)

month before the national convention the delegates from each region shall

elect the governor for their region, the choice of which shall as much as

possible be rotated among the chapters in the region.

For purposes of the election of a Governor, the number, designation and

election of the delegates are crucial. Thus, to reiterate, Section 8 on the

Chapter By-Laws of Article IV and Section 31, Article V of the IBP By-Laws

provide, as follows:

Section 8. Delegates. - The President shall concurrently be the Delegate of

the Chapter to the House of Delegates. The Vice President shall be his

alternate, unless the chapter is entitled to have more than one Delegate, in

which case the Vice President shall also be a Delegate. Additional Delegates

and alternates shall in proper cases be elected by the Board.

Section 31. Membership. - The membership of the House of Delegates shall

consist of all the Chapter Presidents and in the case of Chapters entitled to

more than one Delegate each, the Vice Presidents of the Chapters and such

additional Delegates as the Chapters are entitled to. Unless the Vice

President is already a Delegate, he shall be an alternate Delegate. Additional

Delegates and alternates shall in proper cases be elected by the Board of

Officers of the Chapter. Members of the Board of Governors who are not

Delegates shall be members ex officio of the House, without the right to

vote.

These provisions say that the additional delegates and alternates shall be

elected by the Chapter Board of Officers. The only restriction is the

requirement that the Chapter President and the Vice President are

automatically Delegates in Chapters which are entitled to two (2)

delegates. If a Chapter is entitled to more than two delegates, the

additional delegates shall be elected by the Board of Officers of the

Chapter, not necessarily from among the members of the Board. The

phrase "in proper cases" means if the Chapter is entitled to two (2)

delegates, then the President and Vice-President are mandatorily delegates

and the alternate delegate shall be elected by the Chapter Board of

Officers. In case the Chapter is entitled to three (3) delegates, then the first

two (2) delegates shall be the Chapter President and Vice-President, and the

third regular delegate shall be elected by the Chapter Board of Officers from

the members of the Chapter, and so on.

The interpretation that the other elected Board Members and Officers of the

Chapter are automatically delegates has no basis at all from the challenged

By-Laws. There is nothing in said By-Laws to imply such strained

construction.

Second, this absence of a restriction enveloped in the clear wordings of the

By-Laws is consistent with the autonomy granted to the Chapters with

respect to their chapter-activities.

By imposing an additional requirement that all delegates should be Chapter

Officers, the BOG clearly weakened the authority of the local chapters to

freely elect their additional delegates. The operative term in Section 8 on the

Chapter By-Laws of Article IV and Section 31, Article V of the IBP By-Laws is

to "elect" the delegates. Logic dictates that if it were the intention to limit

the delegates to the officers of a particular chapter, then the IBP By-Laws

should not have given the chapters the freedom to "elect" their delegates. It

would be an exercise in futility to hold an election if the same would be

limited to the officers of the chapters. The IBP Rules should have simply

stated that the additional Delegates should be the members of the Board of

each chapter, or that the members of the Board automatically become

Delegates.

The IBP By-Laws created local chapters having in mind the autonomy of its

own government within its territorial jurisdiction. Thus, Section 28, Article IV

and Section 5 of the Chapter By-Laws provide:

Section 28. Chapter Local Government. - Each Chapter shall have its own

government.

Section 5. Board of Officers. - The government of the Chapter is vested in

a Board of Officers composed of a President, a Vice President, a Secretary, a

Treasurer, an Auditor, a Public Relations Officer and five Directors, who shall

be elected at the biennial meeting and shall hold office for a term of two

years from the first day of April next following their election and until their

successors shall have been duly chosen and qualified.

While the chapters are under the general direction and supervision of the

BOG as provided in Section 1 of the Chapter By-Laws, each Chapter has the

power to administer the affairs of the Integrated Bar within its territorial

jurisdiction. To enforce this, the Chapters were expressly given the powers,

prerogatives, functions, duties and responsibilities under Section 3 of Article

I of the IBP By-Laws, to wit:

Section 3. Powers, Prerogatives, Functions, Duties And

Responsibilities. - The powers, prerogatives, functions, duties and

responsibilities, of the Integrated Bar, its Chapters and other agencies, its

officers and committees, national and local, its commissions, and its

members, are as provided by law, the Integration Rule, Presidential Decree

No. 181, these By-Laws, and pertinent rules and regulations.

The abovementioned powers of the Chapters are exercised by their

respective Boards with full discretion and without restriction, save for the

minimum requirement of the Integration Rule that a member must first be in

good standing to avail of its membership privileges. To impose an additional

requirement, such as the one provided under the April 17, 2009 Resolution,

would be to restrict the authority of the Board of Officers to freely elect the

additional and alternate Delegates of their respective Chapters.

Third, to impose that only Chapter Officers may be Delegates is illogical

given the basic and essential differences between the functions of a Chapter

Officer and a Member of the House of Delegates.

Thus, I find the submission of the proponents of the April 17, 2009

Resolution that the Board of Officers of a particular Chapter should be

Delegates because they enjoy the mandate of general membership having

been elected to their respective positions, illogical and without legal basis.

With this, I would like to emphasize the difference between a Delegate and a

Chapter Officer pursuant to the different functions given them under the IBP

By-Laws.

On one hand, Chapter Officers constitute the governing body of a Chapter,

as set forth in Section 5 on the Chapter By-Laws of Article IV, as follows:

Sec. 5. Board of Officers. - The government of the Chapter is vested in a

Board of Officers composed of a President, a Vice President, a Secretary, a

Treasurer, an Auditor, a Public Relations Officer and five Directors, who shall

be elected at the biennial meeting and shall hold office for a term of two

years from the first day of April next following their election and until their

successor shall have been duly chosen and qualified. (As amended pursuant

to Bar Matter No. 668)

In addition to the elected officers, the immediate Past-President shall ipso

facto become an ex-officio (non-voting) member of the Board of Directors.

(As amended pursuant to Bar Matter No. 1049)

The President and Vice President shall be chairman and vice chairman,

respectively.

Chapter Officers are also elected at large by the general membership of the

Chapter. This is clearly provided under Section 12 (a) and (c) on the

Chapter By-Laws of Article IV, as follows:

Sec. 12. Rules governing elections. - The following rules shall govern

elections:

Date and place of elections. - Elections of Officers and Directors shall be held

on the last Saturday of February every other year at such time and place as

the Board shall designate, which shall be stated in the notice to be sent to

every member by personal delivery or by mail not less than thirty days prior

to the elections.

x x x x

Voters' list. - Not earlier than twenty-five days nor later than fifteen days

prior to the elections, the Secretary shall submit to the Board of Officers a

list of the names of all the members entitled to vote. The voters' list shall

then remain closed and shall not be altered except upon direction of the

Board. However, it shall be open to inspection by all members, and, upon

request, copies thereof shall be furnished to any member upon payment of

actual cost.

Any member who is delinquent in the payment of dues or any assessment,

including surcharges owing, twenty-five days prior to the day of the

elections, shall be excluded from the voters' list.

On the other hand, Delegates compose the House of Delegates which acts

under Section 33(f) of Article V of the IBP By-Laws. It is the IBP's

deliberative body whose resolutions bind the Integrated Bar when concurred

in by the BOG. Under Section 36 of the same Article, Delegates have a

separate duty from that of a Chapter Officer, to wit:

Sec. 36. Duties of Delegates. - The Delegates shall attend every

convention of the House, promote the work of the convention and make

reports of the proceedings thereof to their respective Chapters.

Also, for the purpose of electing Regional Governors, the IBP By-Laws

designates Chapter Presidents and Vice Presidents as members of the House

of Delegates, while additional Delegates are elected by the Board of Officers

of a Chapter, as clearly stated in Section 31, Article V of the IBP By-Laws,

which is again quoted below:

Section 31. Membership. - The membership of the House of Delegates shall

consist of all the Chapter Presidents and in the case of Chapters entitled to

more than one Delegate each, the Vice Presidents of the Chapters and such

additional Delegates as the Chapters are entitled to. Unless the Vice

President is already a Delegate, he shall be an alternate Delegate. Additional

Delegates and alternates shall in proper cases be elected by the Board of

Officers of the Chapter. Members of the Board of Governors who are not

Delegates shall be members ex officio of the House, without the right to

vote.

Furthermore, Article V of the IBP By-Laws provides a term of office for a

Delegate, thus:

Section 32. Term of Office. - The term of office of additional and alternate

Delegates shall be coterminous with that of the Chapter Delegates.

A study of the abovementioned provisions would show that if the intention of

the IBP By-Laws were to limit the position of a Delegate to only the

incumbent Chapter, then there would no longer be a need to provide for a

separate term of office for "additional and alternate delegates" under Section

32, Article V of the IBP By-Laws. This is due to the fact that a Chapter

Officer's term of office would coincide with that of the "Chapter Delegates,"

which in this case are the President and/or the Vice President of a Chapter.

Fourth, consistent with the foregoing arguments and gleaned from the

records of this case, [38] it has been the practice of the IBP House of

Delegates, since its inception in 1973, to allow members who are not officers

of their respective chapters, to wit:

SUMMARY OF MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES

WHO ARE NOT OFFICERS OF THEIR RESPECTIVE CHAPTERS

TERM OF THE

HOUSE OF

NAME OF DELEGATE

CHAPTER

DELEGATES

1973-1974 Atty. Alexander Castro Pangasinan

Atty. Abelardo Subido Manila IV

Atty. Cirilo Asperilla Manila IV

1975-1977 Atty. Francisco Santiago Rizal

Atty. Pablo Garcia Cebu City

Atty. Angel Purisima Manila IV

Atty. Gonzalo River Manila IV

1977-1979 Atty. Jose Balajadia Rizal

Atty. Ponciano Mortera Quezon City

1979-1981 No records were made available

1981-1983

1983-1985 Atty. Teodoro Regino Pangasinan

Atty. Gines Abellana Cebu City

Atty. Leoncio Mercado Manila II

Atty. Ponciano Mortera Quezon City

1985-1987 No records were made available

1987-1989

1989-1991 No records were made available

1991-1993

1993-1995

1995-1997 Atty. Oscar Fernandez Pangasinan

Atty. Ma. Elena Francisco Manila II

Atty. Yolando Lim Manila IV

Atty. Antonio Abad, Jr. Quezon City

Atty. Teresita Oledan Quezon City

1997-1999 Atty. Hermogenes Decano Pangasinan

1999-2001 No records were made available

2001-2003 Atty. Ma. Victoria Cabrera Pangasinan

Atty. Gines Abellana Cebu City

2003-2005 Atty. Nicasio Templanza Manila IV

Atty. Napoleon Espiritu Manila IV

2005-2007 Atty. Hermogenes Decano Pangasinan

Atty. Nestor Nuez Cebu City

2007-2009 Atty. Baltazar Servito Pangasinan

Atty. Bienvenido Somera, Jr. Makati City

Atty. Grace Quevendo-Panagsagan Makati City

Atty. Democrito Barcenas Cebu City

The table displayed above confirms the practice of the IBP House of

Delegates to allow the participation of non-officers of the different Chapters

in its proceedings. I further note that this practice has been prevalent

among some Chapters of the Greater Manila Region itself, among them

Quezon City, where one of whose officers oddly enough instituted this

quandary. As the provisions of the By-Laws have in fact been accepted and

practiced by the IBP since 1973, I cannot find a reason to detract from the

same.

Fifth, the April 17, 2009 Resolution of the BOG constitutes an introduction of

an amendment to the IBP By-Laws.

By requiring that only "duly elected officers" of a Chapter are to be elected

as additional delegates, the April 17, 2009 Resolution effectively imposed an

additional qualification on the delegates of a Chapter. Indeed, a "deliberate

selection of language other than that used in an earlier act is indicative that

a change in the law was intended."[39]

Therefore, since the April 17, 2009 Resolution is an amendment to the IBP

By-Laws, it must be approved by this Court, as required by Section 17 on

the Chapter By-Laws of Article IV and Section 77 of the IBP By-Laws, which

state, as follows:

Section 17. Amendments. - These by-laws may be amended by the Board of

Governors with the approval of the Supreme Court.

The rules and regulations which may be adopted by the Chapter under the

authority of Section 29 (Uniform by-laws) of the By-Laws of the Integrated

Bar may be amended by the vote of two-thirds of the members present at a

meeting called for the purpose, subject to the approval of the Board of

Governors.

Section 77. Amendments. - These By-Laws may be amended, modified or

repealed by the Supreme Court motu proprio or upon the recommendation

of the Board of Governors.

A perusal of the wordings of these provisions shows that the approval of the

Supreme Court is mandatory whenever amendments are introduced by the

BOG. In fact, Sections 17 and 77 demonstrate that the power of the BOG

to amend the IBP By-Laws is merely recommendatory, since the Supreme

Court has the power to "amend, modify or repeal" and finally approve the

amendments to the By-Laws motu proprio.

Thus, the April 17, 2009 Resolution of the BOG, being an amendment to the

IBP By-Laws, is ineffective and should not have been used in the April 25,

2009 elections since it was not approved by this Court.

Validity of the April 23, 2009 Resolution of the BOG

As discussed, the BOG voted to recall and set aside its April 17, 2009

Resolution thru its April 23, 2009 Resolution, which provides that:

Resolved, further, that the appropriate interpretation of the aforementioned

provision of the By-Laws, consistent with the long established practice of the

IBP, is that the election of the additional delegate(s) for Chapters entitled to

more than two (2) delegates shall be elected by the Board of Officers of the

Chapter from among the general membership who are in good standing to

include the remaining duly elected officers and members of the Board.

After carefully studying the Report and Recommendation of the Special

Committee and the arguments of the parties to this case, I find that the April

23, 2009 Resolution of the BOG is valid.

In general, for the BOG to carry out its business, Section 6, Rule 139-A of

the Rules of Court provides, among other things:

Section 6. Board of Governors. - x x x.

The Board shall meet regularly once every three months, on such date at

such time and place as it shall designate. A majority of all the members of

the Board shall constitute a quorum to do business. Special meetings may

be called by the President or by five members of the Board. x x x

Similarly, Section 43, Article VI of the IBP By-Laws provides:

Section 43. Quorum. - Five members of the Board shall constitute a quorum

to transact business. However, the Board may take action, without a

meeting, by resolution signed by at least five governors, provided that every

member of the Board shall have been previously apprised of the contents of

the resolution.

Lastly, Section 37, Article VI of the IBP By-Laws plainly states that the BOG

is the governing body of the IBP, as follows:

Section 37. Composition of the Board. - The Integrated Bar shall be

governed by a Board of Governors consisting of nine (9) Governors from the

(9) regions as delineated in Section 3 of the Integration Rule, on the

representation basis of one (1) Governor for each region to be elected by the

members of the House of Delegates from the region only. The position of

Governor should be rotated among the different Chapters in the Region. (As

amended pursuant to Bar Matter No. 491)

Based on the above-quoted provisions and the facts of this case, there is no

question that a quorum was formed and present when Governors Vinluan,

Estrada, Barandon, Escalon and Mercado passed the April 23, 2009

Resolution. Proceeding from this, I can also conclude that a majority of the

BOG in fact voted and approved said Resolution. Thus, the April 23, 2009

Resolution was validly issued pursuant to the requirements under the Rules

of Court and the IBP By-Laws.

On the other hand, the Memorandum issued on April 24, 2009 by the

incumbent IBP National President, Atty. Bautista, wherein he stated that the

April 17, 2009 Resolution of the BOG should be the one followed for

purposes of the election of the new Governors, cannot be given any

effect. Clearly, nothing in the IBP By-Laws granted authority upon

the IBP National President to overrule the valid actions of the IBP

BOG.

In fact, as provided for under Section 50(a), Article VII of the IBP By-Laws,

the duties of the IBP National President are to primarily act as the chief

executive of the IBP and to preside at all meetings of the BOG. Thus:

Section 50. Duties of Officers. - (a) President: The President shall be the

chief executive of the Integrated Bar, and shall preside at all meetings of the

Board of Governors.

From assumption of office and for the duration of his term, the President

shall dissociate himself from any and all activities that may, in one way or

another, restrict or hamper the effective exercise of his powers and

performance of his functions and duties.

Therefore, Atty. Bautista cannot, in his capacity as IBP National President,

set aside or render null and void any lawful resolution of the BOG, simply

because he was not given any power to do so. Being the IBP President, he

merely executes the lawful resolutions and actions of the BOG, which is the

entity vested with the power and authority to act as the governing board in

charge of the affairs of the Integrated Bar.

Anent the argument that the recall of the April 17, 2009 Resolution was not

validly done since the recall of a Resolution needs the 3/4 vote of the BOG, I

find the argument to be without merit.

Nothing in the IBP By-Laws requires a 3/4 vote of the BOG for the approval

of a recall of its previous Resolutions. Indeed, the "3/4 vote" argument is

without legal basis.

With regard to the contention that Gov. Vinluan, as the EVP of the IBP, lost

his right to vote when he assumed the post of Presiding Officer during the

April 23, 2009 meeting, I find the same to be without merit.

Unlike the IBP National President, an EVP is chosen by and from among the

nine (9) Regional Governors who have been duly elected by the respective

regions' Delegates. Like the other Regional Governors, the EVP has the right

to vote in the proceedings of the BOG. Nothing in the IBP By-Laws indicates

the loss of an EVP's right to vote when he presides over a

meeting. Therefore, even if the EVP presides over the meeting of the IBP

BOG, he remains to be a Governor, unlike the President, and is entitled to

vote as a Governor on matters within the authority of the IBP BOG.

Moreover, the special meeting held on April 23, 2009 called for by Governors

Vinluan, Estrada, Barandon, Escalon and Mercado to discuss the April 17,

2009 Resolution was done in accordance with Section 6 of Rule 139-A of the

Rules of Court which provides that "special meetings may be called by the

President or by five members of the Board."

Also, Section 50(b), Article VII of the IBP By-Laws states:

Section 50. Duties of officers. - x x x.

(b) Executive Vice President: The Executive Vice President shall exercise the

powers and perform the functions and duties of the President during the

absence or inability of the latter to act, and shall perform such other

functions and duties as are assigned to him by the President and the Board

of Governors.

Based on this provision, EVP Vinluan's act of presiding over the special

meeting held on April 23, 2009 was validly and legally made, since the IBP

National President, Atty. Bautista, was absent. Hence, the absence of Atty.

Bautista during the special meeting does not invalidate its proceedings.

Furthermore, the April 23, 2009 Resolution enjoys a disputable presumption

of validity.

The Court, in Velez v. De Vera, ruled:[40]

It should be noted that the general charge of the affairs and activities of the

IBP has been vested in the Board of Governors. The members of the Board

are elective and representative of each of the nine regions of the IBP as

delineated in its By-Laws. The Board acts as a collegiate body and decides in

accordance with the will of the majority. The foregoing rules serve to negate

the possibility of the IBP Board acting on the basis of personal interest or

malice of its individual members. Hence, the actions and resolutions of the

IBP Board deserve to be accorded the disputable presumption of validity,

which shall continue, until and unless it is overcome by substantial evidence

and actually declared invalid by the Supreme Court. In the absence of any

allegation and substantial proof that the IBP Board has acted without or in

excess of its authority or with grave abuse of discretion, we shall not be

persuaded to overturn and set aside the Board's action or resolution.

Thus, it is the BOG, not the IBP National President, which has general charge

of the affairs of the IBP. Besides, the BOG acts as a collegial body and

decides in accordance with the will of the majority. In relation to the instant

controversy, no evidence was provided to show the alleged grave abuse of

discretion on the part of the five (5) Governors in passing the April 23, 2009

Resolution. Also, the special meeting was called by the majority of the BOG

due to the refusal of Atty. Bautista to call the meeting despite the request of

the majority of the BOG. Thus, Governors Vinluan, Estrada, Barandon,

Escalon and Mercado merely exercised the available administrative remedies

provided by both the Rules of Court under Rule 139-A and the IBP By-Laws.

Resort to the Court was not necessary in view of said available

administrative remedies. As clearly stated in Velez:[41]

x x x [T]he effectiveness of the IBP, like any other organization, is diluted if

the conflicts are brought outside its governing body for then there would be

the impression that the IBP, which speaks through the Board of Governors,

does not and cannot speak for its members in an authoritative fashion. It

would accordingly diminish the IBP's prestige and repute with the lawyers as

well as with the general public.

As a means of self-preservation, internecine conflicts must thus be adjusted

within the governing board itself so as to free it from the stresses that

invariably arise when internal cleavages are made public.

The doctrine of majority rule is almost universally used as a mechanism for

adjusting and resolving conflicts and disagreements within the group after

the members have been given an opportunity to be heard. While it does not

efface conflicts, nonetheless, once a decision on a contentious matter is

reached by a majority vote, the dissenting minority is bound thereby so that

the board can speak with one voice, for those elected to the governing board

are deemed to implicitly contract that the will of the majority shall govern in

matters within the authority of the board.

Indeed, the April 23, 2009 Resolution of the IBP BOG was made in

compliance with the Rules of Court and the IBP By-Laws.

In view of all the foregoing, Section 8 on the Chapter By-Laws of Article IV

and Section 31, Article V of the IBP By-Laws should be applied as it is.

Accordingly, in cases where IBP Chapters are entitled to more than two

delegates as provided under Section 8, Chapter By-Laws of Article IV and

Section 31, Article V of the By-Laws of the IBP, the additional delegate(s)

shall be elected by the Board of Officers of the Chapter not only from among

the remaining duly elected officers and members of the Board but also from

other members as well.

Was the April 30, 2009 Resolution of the BOG, which resolved

the protests filed by Atty. Soriano, Atty. Lanto, Atty. Aldon,

and Atty. Ortega, valid?

Section 40 of the IBP By-Laws provides that the jurisdiction to hear and

decide all protests concerning elections in the IBP is vested with the Board of

Governors, to wit:

Section 40. Election contests. - Any nominee desiring to contest an

election shall, within two days after the announcement of the results of the

elections, file with the President of the Integrated Bar a written protest

setting forth the grounds therefor. Upon receipt of such petition, the

President shall forthwith call a special meeting of the outgoing Board of

Governors to consider and hear the protest, with due notice to the

contending parties. The decision of the Board shall be announced not later

than the following May 31 and shall be final and conclusive.

Under the same provision, the IBP National President is mandated to call a

special meeting of the IBP BOG upon receipt of election protests. When

Soriano, Lanto, Aldon, and Ortega filed their respective election protests

with the IBP, Atty. Bautista failed to call a special meeting. Instead, he

ordered the protestees and protestants to file their respective comments and

replies. After the parties' compliance with his order, he would direct the

national secretary to issue a notice of special meeting of the Board after five

(5) days from the time all the pleadings have been filed. This was done

despite the fact that the election for EVP was scheduled on May 9, 2009 or

thirteen (13) days after the protests were filed.

In view of the refusal of Atty. Bautista to call a special meeting regarding the

election protest, Atty. Vinluan and his group of Governors called for the

special meeting themselves. On April 28, 2009, Atty. Jaime Vibar, acting

upon instructions of the BOG, sent notices to all parties to the protests,

namely: Atty. Benjamin Lanto, Atty. Nasser Marohomsalic, Atty. Elpidio G.

Soriano III, Atty. Manuel Maramba, Atty. Cornelio P. Aldon, and Atty. Erwin

M. Fortunato. The parties were instructed to be present at the hearing that

would be conducted on April 30, 2009 and to submit whatever comment or

opposition they may deem proper. Copies of the notice were likewise sent

to the IBP National President and the other governors: Ernesto A. Gonzales,

Marcial Magsino, Ramon Edison Batacan, and Carlos Valdez, through the

staff facilities of the IBP.[42] All notices were duly received by the

parties. The proceeding for the hearing and the BOG's deliberations were

thereafter conducted on the same day.[43]

Considering that the parties were duly notified and given the opportunity to

present their respective positions on the protest, I find nothing irregular with

the actions of the BOG in calling for a special meeting on the election

protests.

The actuations of the BOG in setting the protests for hearing on April 30,

2009 are logical under the circumstances. I note that the election of the next

EVP of the IBP was slated on May 9, 2009. Time was of the essence to

resolve the protests in order to proceed with the election of the next EVP of

the IBP. Thus, it was necessary to hold the election prior to the EVP

elections, since duly-elected Governors are required to validly conduct the

election of the next EVP of the IBP within their rank. Considering further

that since nobody among the parties of these cases even endeavored to

move the schedule of the election of the next EVP of the IBP to another date

to provide more time to resolve the election protests, then it was necessary

to resolve the protests prior to the pre-determined EVP election date. The

BOG in this case was hard pressed to move forward, in accordance with the

IBP Rules on notices and voting, because they were not given much leeway

to resolve the possible impasse.

As to who were validly elected Governor for Western Visayas, Greater

Manila, and Western Mindanao Regions, I shall discuss the rulings of the

BOG in seriatim.

Prefatorily, it bears stressing that the decisions made by the BOG regarding

election protests are final and conclusive. The Court held in Parlade v. Board

of Governors:[44]

As correctly observed by the respondents, the decision of the Board of

Governors in election contests is final (Sec. 13, IBP By-Laws). And one of

the governing principles in the integration of the bar is "maximum Bar

autonomy with minimum supervision and regulation by the Supreme Court.

Nevertheless, I shall discuss the issues on the election of the Governors for

the three aforementioned regions due to their paramount significance.

Western Visayas Region Protest

The election of Fortunato as Governor for the Western Visayas Region was

upheld by the BOG since he obtained the highest number of votes among

the three candidates for the position; and under the rotation rule, it is now

the turn of the Romblon Chapter to represent the Western Visayas Region in

the IBP Board of Governors. The Special Committee, in its Report and

Recommendation, concurred with the BOG.

I agree with the said ruling.

Again, Section 37 of the IBP By-Laws provides:

Section 37. Composition of the Board. - The Integrated Bar of the

Philippines shall be governed by a Board of Governors consisting of nine (9)

Governors from the nine (9) regions as delineated in Section 3 of the

Integration Rule, on the representation basis of one (1) Governor for each

region to be elected by the members of the House of Delegates from the

region only. The position of Governor should be rotated among the different

Chapters in the Region. (As amended pursuant to Bar Matter 491).

The above section applicable to the selection of Governors for the regions is

mandatory. As correctly pointed out during the hearing, the mandatory

nature of the "rotation rule" under Section 37 was necessary to give a

chance to every chapter to have at least a governor at some time.

Considering that the only remaining chapter in the Western Visayas Region

that has not yet had a Governor is Romblon and that since Fortunato

obtained the highest number of votes among the three candidates for the

position, then Fortunato should be the validly elected Governor for Western

Visayas.

Greater Manila Region Protest

With respect to the protest filed by Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, the BOG

granted the protest and declared the election of the IBP Greater Manila

Region held on April 25, 2009 as null and void. Thereafter, new elections

were ordered to be held on May 4, 2009.

Having earlier passed upon the non-validity of the April 17, 2009 Resolution

of the BOG, I now consider the validity of the April 25, 2009 election for the

Greater Manila Region. Specifically, I shall focus on the validity of the votes

cast by the delegates from the Quezon City Chapter.

It is not disputed that of the eleven (11) delegates from Quezon City

Chapter, two (2) are automatic delegates and nine (9) are additional

delegates. From among those who were allowed to cast their votes, two (2)

were not elected by the QC Board of Officers: Atty. Victoria Loanzon and

Atty. Iris Laqui. Unfortunately for Atty. Loanzon and Atty. Laqui, neither of

them holds the position of either President or Vice-President of the Chapter

and, thus, cannot be considered as an automatic delegate. Therefore,

pursuant to the provisions of Section 31, Article V of the IBP By-Laws, Atty.

Loanzon and Atty. Laqui need to be elected by the Board of Officers to

qualify as additional delegates.

Per Board Resolution 09-007 of the IBP-QC Chapter, neither Atty. Loanzon

nor Atty. Laqui was an official delegate duly elected by the Board and should

not have been allowed by Presiding Officer Atty. Marcial Magsino to cast

their votes. The BOG then ruled correctly in ordering elections for the GMR

to be held anew, since the declaration of Atty. Loanzon and Atty. Laqui as

Delegates of the IBP-QC Chapter is material in deciding the tight race

between Atty. Elpidio Soriano III and Atty. Manuel Maramba.

On the argument that Atty. Soriano cannot be elected as GMR Governor by

virtue of the "rotation rule," the same lacks merit.

For clarity, I quote again Section 37, Article VI of the IBP By-Laws:

Section 37. Composition of the Board. - The Integrated Bar of the Philippines

shall be governed by a Board of Governors consisting of nine (9) Governors

from the (9) regions as delineated in Section 3 of the Integration Rule, on

the representation basis of one (1) Governor for each region to be elected by

the members of the House of Delegates from the region only. The position of

Governor should be rotated among the different Chapters in the Region. (As

amended by Bar Matter 491)

Based on the records turned over to the Special Committee, the following

has been the rotation of the Governors for GMR within the chapters

comprising the region:

Term Chapter Governor

2007-2009 Manila IV Atty. Marcial Magsino

2005-2007 Manila I Atty. Alicia Risos-Vidal

2003-2005 Manila II Atty. Rosario Setias-Reyes

2001-2003 Quezon City Atty. Santos Catubay Jr.

1999-2001 Manila III Atty. Jose Icaonapo Jr.

1997-1999 Manila I Atty. Jacinto Formes

1995-1997 Manila III Atty. Amy Wong

2/1994 - 6/1995 Manila III Atty. Amy Wong

7/1993 - 2/1994 Manila II Atty. Gonzalo Santos, Jr.

1991-1993 Quezon City Atty. Mervyn G. Encanto

1989-1991 Manila IV Atty. Yolanda Q. Javellana

During the hearings before the Special Committee, it was submitted that

since the cycle of the rotation from 1999-2009 had already been completed,

the next GMR Governor should come from the Manila III Chapter because in

the previous cycle, the first Governor was a member of the Manila III

Chapter.

This contention is untenable.

An analysis of the history of the "rotation rule" would show that when the

"rotation rule" was ordained by Bar Matter No. 491 in 1989, for the GMR, the

first GMR Governor for the term 1989-1991 was Atty. Yolanda Quisumbing-

Javellana who came from the Manila IV Chapter.

This shows that in the cycle prior to when Manila III (Jose Icaonapo, Jr.) was

first elected as the GMR Governor, the first GMR Governor actually came

from Manila IV (Yolanda Quisumbing-Javellana). This clearly negates the

theory that each cycle must start with Manila III. Besides, the contention

renders nugatory the necessity of electing Governors. If the rotation rule

were implemented as such, there would be no need to conduct elections.

The Chapters would simply wait for their turn every time a new cycle

commences. This would unduly restrict the discretion of the Chapters (as

well as the individual nominees) to field and choose their next Governor

whose responsibilities are neither miniscule nor trivial. The "rotation rule" is

meant to ensure an equitable sharing of responsibility in the professional

organization. It is not intended to shackle the IBP or to reduce its Chapters

into automatons.

Thus, the "rotation rule" should mean that once a member of a Chapter is

elected Governor, the said Chapter is excluded and becomes ineligible to

have another member elected as Governor until all the other Chapters in the

region have had a chance to elect a Governor from among its members. The

series of exclusions takes place at each election until the cycle of rotation

among all the Chapters is concluded. After all the Chapters have had their

respective Governors elected, then the Governor-slate is wiped clean.

Thereafter, the second rotation cycle begins and all the Chapters are once

again eligible to have one of their members elected as Governor. Once a

Chapter has its member elected as Governor, it is again excluded from

having another member elected as Governor until all the other Chapters in

the region have had a chance to elect a governor in the second cycle, and so

on.

Considering that in the last cycle, all the five (5) chapters in the Greater

Manila Region had already elected a Governor, the cycle began anew in 2009

and any of the Chapters could field a candidate. In view thereof, Atty.

Soriano is not disqualified to be elected as GMR Governor under the "rotation

rule."

As I have discussed the reason for holding as void the election of the IBP

Greater Manila Region held on April 25, 2009, I now delve into the validity of

the election of Atty. Soriano for the position of Governor for GMR on May 4,

2009.

Records[45] show that after the BOG resolved all the individual protests on

April 30, 2009, the concerned parties and the various Chapters of GMR were

notified of the special election to be held on May 4, 2009.

Atty. Vinluan presided over the said special election for the Governor of GMR

pursuant to the April 30, 2009 Resolution of the BOG. A total of fifteen (15),

out of twenty-five (25), delegates from the five (5) chapters comprising the

GMR attended. Soriano was the sole nominee for the position of GMR

Governor. After the casting of ballots and counting of votes, Soriano was

declared the duly-elected GMR Governor, garnering a total of fifteen (15)

votes.

In assailing the validity of the said proceedings, Atty. Magsino argues that it

was irregular for EVP Vinluan to have presided over the special election of

the GMR Governor on May 4, 2009, since he alone, being the incumbent

GMR Governor, has the authority to call and preside over the election of the

next GMR Governor.

This argument, however, is bereft of any merit.

Section 39, Article VI of the By-Laws provides:

Section 39. Nomination and election of the Governors. - At least one (1)

month before the national convention the delegates from each region shall

elect the governor for their region, the choice of which shall as much as

possible be rotated among the chapters in the region. (As amended pursuant

to Bar Matter 491).

A study of Section 9, Article VI of the By-Laws shows that there is no explicit

rule as to who shall preside in the election of Regional Governors. By

tradition, however, the incumbent Governor of a particular region acts as the

Presiding Officer for the election of the Governor of his or her region.

Meanwhile, Section 41, Article VI of the IBP By-Laws provides the functions

of the BOG, to wit:

Section 41. Functions of the Board. - The Board of Governors shall have

general charge of the affairs and activities of the Integrated Bar. It shall

have authority, inter alia, to:

(a) Fix the date, time and place of every convention of the House of

Delegates, subject to the provisions of Sections 33 (Annual convention) and

34 (Special conventions);

(b) Make appropriations and authorize disbursements from the funds of the

Integrated Bar, subject to the provisions of Sec. 14 of the Integration Rule

and Section 5 (Positions honorary) of these By-Laws;

(c) Engage the services of employees, define their duties and fix their

compensation;

(d) Receive, consider and act on reports and recommendations submitted by

the House of Delegates or its committees;

(e) Provide for the publication of the Journal of the Integrated Bar;

(f) Administer the Welfare Fund in accordance with such rules and

regulations as it may promulgate;

(g) Fill vacancies, however arising in the positions of officers of the

Integrated Bar, subject to the provisions of Sec. 8 of the Integration Rule,

and Section 11 (Vacancies), Section 44 (Removal of members), Section 47

(National officers), Section 48 (Other officers), and Section 49 (Terms of

office) of these By-Laws;

(h) Subject to the approval of the Supreme Court, promulgate Canons of

Professional Responsibility for all members of the Integrated Bar;

(i) Promulgate rules and regulations for the establishment and maintenance

of lawyer referral services throughout the Philippines;

(j) Subject to the approval of the Supreme Court, impose special

assessments for specific national purposes, and impose, or recommend in

proper cases to the Court the imposition of, sanctions for non-payment or

delinquency in the payment thereof;

(k) Prescribe such rules and regulations as may be necessary and proper to

carry out the objectives and purposes of the Integrated Bar as well as the

provisions of the Integration Rule and Presidential Decree No. 181; and

(l) Perform such other functions as may be necessary or expedient in the

interest of the Integrated Bar.

As to the duties of individual Governors, Section 50(c), Article VII of the IBP

By-Laws provides:

Section 50. Duties of officers. - x x x.

(c) Governors: In addition to his duties as a member of the Board of

Governors, each elective Governor shall act as representative of his Region

in the Board. He shall promote, coordinate and correlate activities of the

Chapters within his Region.

Again, a careful reading of these two (2) provisions would show that there is

no rule which states that the Regional Governors must call and preside over

the election of the incoming Governors of their respective regions.

Therefore, Atty. Magsino's claim that he is the only one authorized to call

and preside over the election of the GMR Governor has no legal basis. Also,

it must be remembered that the special election on May 4, 2009 was

brought about by a resolution of Atty. Soriano's protest by the BOG, which is

final and conclusive; hence, the act of Atty. Vinluan in presiding over the

said special election is not irregular or illegal.

Western Mindanao Protest

As ruled by the BOG on April 30, 2009, the petition of Lanto was granted

and he was declared as the duly elected Governor for Western Mindanao.

I agree with the ruling of the BOG on April 30, 2009.

The main issue raised by Lanto in his protest is the validity of the nomination

of Marohomsalic.

Section 6 of Rule 139-A provides that:

Sec. 6. Board of Governors. - The Integrated Bar shall be governed by a

Board of Governors. Nine governors shall be elected by the House of

Delegates from the nine Regions on the representation basis of one

Governor from each Region. Each Governor shall be chosen from a list of

nominees submitted by the Delegates from the Region, provided that not

more than one nominee shall come from any Chapter. The President and the

Executive Vice-President, chosen by the Governors from outside of

themselves as provided in Section 7 of this Rule, shall ipso facto become

members of the Board.

A perusal of the said provision would show that there should only be one (1)

nominee for Governor for each Chapter.

Section 5 of the Chapter By-Laws provides that:

Sec. 5. Board of Officers. - The government of the Chapter is vested in a

Board of Officers composed of a President, a Vice-President, a Secretary, a

Treasurer, an Auditor, a Public Relations Officer and five Directors, who shall

be elected at the biennial meeting and shall hold office for a term of two (2)

years from the first day of April next following their election and until their

successors shall have been duly chosen and qualified. x x x

Meanwhile, Section 7 of the Chapter By-Laws provides that:

Sec. 7. Duties of officers.

(a) President. - The President shall be the chief executive of the Chapter. He

shall preside at all chapter meetings and at all meetings of the Board of

Officers. x x x

A comparison of these two provisions would show that the will of a Chapter

is manifested through the acts of the Board of Officers as a collegial body.

Thus, the Chapter resolution which was jointly passed last February 28,

2009 by both the outgoing and incoming Board of Officers of Lanao del Sur

Chapter and which also designated Lanto as the official nominee of the

Chapter for Governor prevails over the nomination of Atty. Marohomsalic by

the Chapter President, Macalawi.

Neither is Lanto disqualified under the "rotation rule" for the position of

Western Mindanao Governor.

While the Special Committee points out that six (6) chapters in the region,

including Sarangani, are entitled to precedence over the Lanao Del Sur

Chapter in the order of rotation, the fact remains that not one of them

nominated a candidate from their respective ranks during the April 25, 2009

election. Neither did any one of them challenge the nominations of the Lanao

Del Sur Chapter based on the order of rotation. Thus, the six (6) chapters in

the region that are entitled to precedence over the Lanao Del Sur Chapter in

the order of rotation are deemed to have waived their turn in the rotation

order.

Who was validly elected IBP EVP for the next term?

In accordance with Section 43 of the By-Laws, the BOG passed a Resolution

recognizing the duly-elected Governors of the various regions of the IBP.

Thereafter, a call for the election of the next IBP Executive Vice President

would follow.

Considering that the May 4, 2009 election wherein Soriano won the seat of

GMR Governor is valid, it follows that he is entitled to vote and be voted for

in the May 9, 2009 election of the Executive Vice President. Also, since the

records[46] disclose that Soriano was unanimously voted by all six (6) newly-

elected members of the Board of Governors on May 9, 2010, there is no

question that his election to the position of IBP Executive Vice President is

legally binding.

In contrast, the election of Atty. Roan I. Libarios as IBP Executive Vice

President, which was conducted on the same date, is invalid. Apart from the

assailed validity of its proceedings, he was voted upon to such position by

only three (3) newly-elected Governors, as Marohomsalic and Maramba were

not the duly elected Governors of their respective regions, and their votes

cannot be considered.

I also disagree with the finding of the Special Committee that the Governors

of the Western Visayas and Eastern Mindanao regions are the only ones

qualified to be elected as Executive Vice President for the term 2009-2011.

Contrary to the said finding, all the nine (9) regions of the IBP have already

produced an Executive Vice President. As held by this Court in Velez:[47]

In Bar Matter 491, it is clear that it is the position of IBP EVP which is

actually rotated among the nine Regional Governors. The rotation with

respect to the Presidency is merely a result of the automatic succession rule

of the IBP EVP to the Presidency. Thus, the rotation rule pertains in

particular to the position of IBP EVP, while the automatic succession rule

pertains to the Presidency. The rotation with respect to the Presidency is but

a consequence of the automatic succession rule provided in Section 47 of the

IBP By-Laws.

In the case at bar, the rotation rule was duly complied with since upon the

election of Atty. De Vera as IBP EVP, each of the nine IBP regions had

already produced an EVP and, thus, the rotation was completed. It is only

unfortunate that the supervening event of Atty. de Vera's removal as IBP

Governor and EVP rendered it impossible for him to assume the IBP

Presidency. The fact remains, however, that the rotation rule had been

completed despite the non-assumption by Atty. de Vera to the IBP

Presidency

Thus, after the election of Atty. Jose Vicente B. Salazar as EVP and

eventually, as IBP President for the term 2005-2007, the rotation of all the

nine regions of the IBP had been completed. A new rotation cycle

commenced for the term 2007-2009.

It is also my opinion that the Special Committee's finding that Eastern

Mindanao has not had its turn of having an Executive Vice President of the

IBP is erroneous. In A.M. No. 07-3-13-SC, entitled In Re: Compliance of IBP

Chapters with Adm. Order No. 16-2007, Letter-Compliance of Atty. Ramon

Edison C. Batacan,[48] the Court held:

There is no merit to Atty. Batacan's claim that in view of the removal of Atty.

Leonardo de Vera, IBP Eastern Mindanao Region was denied meaningful

participation.

In Velez, the Court held that "the rotation rule had been completed despite

the non-assumption by Atty. De Vera to the IBP Presidency." Atty. De Vera's

removal from the position of EVP took place on the twenty-third month of his

term for 2003 to 2005. Only a month short of completing his term, it is clear

that he had effectively exercised the functions of an EVP as representative of

the IBP Eastern Mindanao Region.

Contrary to the conclusion reached by the Special Committee, the Eastern

Mindanao region already had its turn of having an EVP representative in the

person of Atty. Leonard De Vera, who served as EVP for 23 months during

the term 2005-2007.

In light of the foregoing, for the term 2009-2011, all Regional Governors,

except that of Central Luzon,[49] are qualified to run for the post of Executive

Vice President.

What is the liability, if any, of respondents Attys. Rogelio A. Vinluan,

Abelardo Estrada, Bonifacio Barandon, Jr., Evergisto Escalon and

Raymond Mercado if guilty of "grave professional misconduct,

violation of attorney's oath, and acts inimical to the IBP"?

Having shown that the acts of Atty. Vinluan and the four other members of

the BOG were in accordance with the IBP By-Laws, I see no reason to hold

them liable for grave misconduct, violation of their oath as lawyers, and for

committing acts inimical to the interest of the IBP. As a matter of fact,

respondent Attys. Vinluan, Estrada, Barandon, Jr., Escalon and Mercado

have always followed to the letter, the relevant provisions of the IBP By-

Laws.

But the same cannot be said with regard to the actions taken by Atty.

Bautista and his group, which also includes his co-complainants, Atty.

Manuel Maramba and Atty. Nasser Marohomsalic. The evidence clearly

shows that Atty. Bautista's actuations produced conflict among the leaders

and members of the IBP.

One last point. The complainants failed to clearly show that the respondents

were motivated by ulterior motives in committing the acts alleged to be

violative of their oath as members of the legal profession. As held

in Arboleda v. Gatchalian:[50]

x x x [I]n disbarment proceedings, the burden of proof rests upon the

complainant and the charge against the lawyer must be established by

convincing proof. The record must disclose as free from doubt a case which

compels the exercise by this Court of its disciplinary powers. The corrupt

character of the act must be clearly demonstrated. Moreover, considering

the serious consequences of the disbarment or suspension of a member of

the Bar, We have consistently held that clearly preponderant evidence is

necessary to justify the imposition of either penalty.

A difference in opinion as to the proper interpretation of a provision in the

Rules or the IBP By-Laws should never be used as a ground to charge

another member of the legal profession for unethical conduct.

As a result, the administrative complaint filed against Attys. Vinluan,

Estrada, Barandon, Jr., Escalon and Mercado should be dismissed for lack of

merit.

WHEREFORE, I recommend that this Court RULE and UPHOLD the

following:

1. The proclamation of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III as the duly-elected

Governor for the Greater Manila Region of the Integrated Bar of the

Philippines for the term 2009-2011;

2. The proclamation of Atty. Benjamin B. Lanto as the duly-elected

Governor for the Western Mindanao Region of the Integrated Bar of

the Philippines for the term 2009-2011;

3. The proclamation of Atty. Erwin M. Fortunato as the duly-elected

Governor for the Western Visayas Region of the Integrated Bar of the

Philippines for the term 2009-2011;

4. The May 6, 2009 Resolution of the IBP Board of Governors recognizing

the following as the duly-elected Regional Governors of the Integrated

Bar of the Philippines for the term 2009-2011:

a. Northern Luzon - Atty. Ma. Milagros F. Cayosa

b. Central Luzon - Atty. Ferdinand Y. Miclat

c. Southern Luzon - Atty. Amador Z. Tolentino, Jr.

d. Greater Manila Region - Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III

e. Bicolandia - Atty. Jose V. Cabrera

f. Western Visayas - Atty. Erwin M. Fortunato

g. Eastern Visayas - Atty. Roland B. Inting

h. Eastern Mindanao - Atty. Roan I. Libarios

i. Western Mindanao - Atty. Benjamin B. Lanto

5. The proclamation by the IBP Board of Governors in the May 9, 2009

election of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III as the duly-elected Executive

Vice President of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines for the term

2009-2011.

6. That the administrative complaint against Atty. Rogelio Vinluan, Atty.

Abelardo Estrada, Atty. Bonifacio Banrandon, Jr., Atty. Evergisto

Escalon, and Atty. Raymund Jorge Mercado be DISMISSED for lack of

merit.

7. Finally, to ALLOW Atty. Rogelio Vinluan to assume his post as IBP

National President for the remaining portion of the term 2009-2011.

With regard to the recommendations of the Special Committee on the

possible revision of the IBP Rules in order to prevent similar instances or

controversies in the future, said recommendations should be referred to the

Court Oversight Committee on Integrated Bar Affairs for further study and

consideration.

[1] Exhibit "A" of the Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III.

[2] Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, p. 5.

[3] Exhibit "B" of the Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III.

[4] Exhibit "C," id.

[5] Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, p. 7.

[6] Exhibits "D" and "D-1" of the Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III.

[7] Exhibit "E," id.

[8] Memorandum of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, p. 7.

[9] Exhibit "G" of the Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III.

[10] Memorandum dated July 3, 2009 of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, p. 10.

[11] Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, pp. 10-11.

[12] Id. at 11.

[13] Id.

[14] Id.

[15] Memorandum of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, p. 11.

[16] Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, p. 12.

[17] Id.

[18] Id. at 12-13.

[19] Exhibit "H" of the Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III. Art. VI,

Sec. 40 of the IBP By-Laws provides:

Sec. 40. Election contests.--Any nominee desiring to contest an election

shall, within two days after the announcement of the results of the elections,

file with the President of the Integrated Bar a written protest setting forth

the grounds therefor. Upon receipt of such petition, the President shall

forthwith call a special meeting of the outgoing Board of Governors to

consider and hear the protest, with due notice to the contending parties. The

decision of the Board shall be announced not later than the following May

31, and shall be final and conclusive.

[20] Memorandum dated July 3, 2009 of Atty. Rogelio Vinluan, pp. 13-14.

[21] Id. at 14.

[22] Id.

[23] Id. at 15.

[24] Id.

[25] Id. at 15.

[26] Id.

[27] Id. at 15-16.

[28] Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III, p. 14.

[29] Memorandum dated July 3, 2009 of Atty. Rogelio Vinluan, pp. 53-59.

[30] Exhibit "L-4" of the Memorandum dated July 3, 2009 of Atty. Rogelio

Vinluan.

[31] Exhibit "J-2" of the Position Paper of Atty. Elipidio G. Soriano III.

[32] Position Paper of Atty. Elipidio G. Soriano III, p. 15.

[33] Id. at 15-16.

[34] Exhibits "K," "K-1" to "K-10" of the Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G.

Soriano III.

[35] Exhibits "M," "N," "O" and "P," id.

[36] Memorandum dated July 3, 2009 of Atty. Rogelio Vinluan, pp. 26-27.

[37] The hearings were held on June 10, 2009; June 23, 2009; June 25,

2009; June 26, 2009; and July 2, 2009 at the Division Hearing Room,

Supreme Court, Manila.

[38] Exhibit "U," Memorandum of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III.

[39] Aves v. Joson, No. L-29922, August 29, 1969, 29 SCRA 268, 270.

[40] A.C. No. 6697, Bar Matter No. 1227, A.M. No. 05-5-15-SC, July 25,

2006, 496 SCRA 345, 392-393.

[41] Supra note 40, at 390-391.

[42] Exhibit "J," "J-1" to "J-6" of the Memorandum of Atty. Rogelio A. Vinluan

dated July 3, 2009.

[43] Exhibits "L-1," "L-2," "L-3," "J-5," and "J-6" of the Memorandum of Atty.

Rogelio A. Vinluan dated July 3, 2009.

[44] No. L-56532, September 21, 1981, 107 SCRA 589, 592.

[45] Exhibits "J," "J-1" to "J-2," Position Paper of Atty. Elpidio G. Soriano III;

and Exhibits "L-5" to "L-7," Memorandum of Atty. Rogelio A. Vinluan dated

July 3, 2009.

[46] Memorandum of Atty. Rogelio A. Vinluan dated July 3, 2009, p. 76.

[47] Supra note 40, at 398.

[48] February 27, 2008, 547 SCRA 1, 8-9.

[49] Atty. Feliciano M. Bautista, then Regional Governor for Central Luzon,

was elected EVP and assumed the Presidency for the term 2007-2009.

[50] A.C. No. 1034, July 23, 1974, 58 SCRA 64, 67; citations omitted.

Source: Supreme Court E-Library

This page was dynamically generated

by the E-Library Content Management System (E-LibCMS)