In The Matter of The Brewing Controversies in The Election in The Integrated Bar of The Philippines

In the Matter of the Brewing Controversies in the Election in the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines
Facts:
An administrative complaint was filed against Atty. Rogelio A. Vinluan and his group of
Governors for their high-handed and divisive tactics 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.
They were alleged of having committed the following acts:
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 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.
The proper recourse of the Vinluan Group is Section 43, Art. VI of the By-Laws which
provided 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."
The Vinluan Group ignored the proper procedure and adopted a resolution striking out
the previous resolutions. That meeting was illegal, hence, the resolution adopted therein
was null and void.
2. The second special meeting held by the Vinluan Group wherein they approved
Resolution XVIII- 2009 resolving the election protests 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" 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.
Issue: Whether or not Atty. Vinluan and his group of governors committed misconduct (Failure
to uphold the dignity and integrity of the Profession)
Held: yes
Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility states 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.
(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.
Their acts were grossly inimical to the interest of the IBP and were violative of their solemn oath
as lawyers
Their acts 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.
The Resolution of the Court in the case of Re: 1989 Elections of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines 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."
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.
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. (unworthy
and unfit to assume post as IBP President).
Hence, 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.

In The Matter of The Brewing Controversies in The Election in The Integrated Bar of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In The Matter of The Brewing Controversies in The Election in The Integrated Bar of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In the Matter of the Brewing Controversies in the Election in the Integrated Bar of the

They were alleged of having committed the following acts:

You might also like