2/7/2017 Court of Appeals

CourtofAppeals HOME::COURTPROFILE::INCUMBENT
Ma.OrosaSt., JUSTICES::ADMINISTRATION::
Ermita,Manila, COMPOSITION::REFERENCES::
Philippines JOURNAL/YEARBOOKARTICLES::
GENDERCORNER::TRANSPARENCY::
DECISIONSANDRESOLUTIONS::JOB
VACANCIES::PROCEDURES::
ANNOUNCEMENTS::PROCUREMENT::
CONTACTUS::

Website Directory
TodayisTuesday,February07,2017
Links

TheLawyer'sOath
::SUPREMECOURT
::SANDIGANBAYAN ByJ.JoseL.Sabio,Jr.
::CTA
TheOath:TheLawyer'sIdeal

What is an oath? Webster defines it as: A solemn appeal to God, or in a wider

sense,toanysacredorreveredpersonorsanctionforthetruthofanaffirmationor
declarationorinwitnessoftheinviolabilityofapromiseorundertaking.Asearly
asAlvarezvs.CFI,theSupremeCourtexplaineditsmeaninginthiswise:

In its broadest sense, an oath includes any form of attestation by

which a party signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform an
act faithfully and truthfully. It is an outward pledge given by the
person taking it, that his attestation or promise is made under an
immediatesenseofhisresponsibilitytoGod.

Section17ofRule138oftheRulesofCourtstatesthatanapplicantwhohaspassed
the required examination, or has been otherwise found to be entitled to admission
to the bar, shall take and subscribed before the Supreme Court an oath of office.
The new lawyer swears before a duly constituted authority as an attestation that
he/shetakesonthedutiesandresponsibilitiesproperofalawyer.Moreparticularly,
form28ofthejudicialstandardformsprescribesthefollowingoathtobetakenby
theapplicant:

I___________of___________dosolemnlyswearthatIwillmaintain
allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines I will support its
Constitution and obey laws as well as the legal orders of the duly
constitutedauthoritiesthereinIwilldonofalsehood,norconsentto
thedoingofanycourtIwillnotwittinglynorwillinglypromoteorsue
anygroundless,falseorunlawfulsuit, or give aid nor consent to the
same I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct
myself as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and
discretionwithallgoodfidelityaswelltothecourtsastomyclients
and I impose upon myself this voluntary obligations without any
mentalreservationorpurposeofevasion.SohelpmeGod.

Thetakingofthisoathisaconditiontotheadmissiontopracticelawandmayonly
be taken before the Supreme Court by a person authorized by the high court to
engageinthepracticeoflaw.Andwhatisthenatureofalawyer'soath?Inthecase
ofSebastianvs.CalistheSupremeCourtheldthat:Alawyer'soatharenotmere
facile words, drift and hollow, but a sacred trust that must be upheld and kept

http://ca.judiciary.gov.ph/index.php?action=mnuactual_contents&ap=j8080 1/5
2/7/2017 Court of Appeals
inviolable.The substance and gravity behind these words may be understood in
thelightofthesubstanceandgravitybehindtheoathbeingtaken.Inasense,the
oath embodies the ideals by which a lawyer lives by in the practice of the legal
profession.Thisiswhythelawyer'soathhasbeenlikenedtoacondensedversionof
the canons of professional responsibility. This seems to have been confirmed in
Endaya vs. Oca, where it was held that: the lawyer's oath embodies the
fundamental principles that guide every member of the legal fraternity. From it
springs the lawyer's duties and responsibilities that any infringement thereof can
causehisdisbarment,suspensionorotherdisciplinaryactions.

In the words of the Supreme Court, an oath is any form of attestation by which a
party signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform an act faithfully and
truthfully.Whatthendoesalawyerpromisetoperformfaithfullyandtruthfullywhen
he takes on the oath upon being admitted to the practice of law? It is the very
practice of his duties and responsibilities as a lawyer. The gravity of the oath is
grounded on two important things: on the gravity of a lawyer's duties and on the
fact that he makes a solemn promise before God to undertake these duties
faithfully. When a great amount of trust is placed on such an office, then a
corresponding sense of integrity and responsibility is expected of those who have
taken on that office. The legal profession is one such office laden with a great
amountoftrust.Inthehandsofthelawyerisentrustednotonlythepowertosteer
the course of some client's personal or business future but more importantly, the
very nature of the legal profession presupposes a certain moral burden that
demandspersonalintegrity.AsstatedbytheSupremeCourt:

Lawyers are expected to abide by the tenets of morality, not only

upon admission to the Bar but also throughout their legal career, in
order to maintain one's good standing in that exclusiveandhonored
fraternity.Goodmoralcharacterismorethanjusttheabsenceofbad
character. Such character expresses itself in the will to do the
unpleasant thing if it is right and the resolve not to do the pleasant
thing if it is wrong. This must be so because vast interests are
committed to his care he is the recipient of unbounded trust and
confidencehedealswithhisclient'sproperty,reputation,hislife,his
all.

A lawyer is said to be the servant of the law and belongs to a profession to which
society has entrusted the administration of law and the dispensing of justice. For
thisreason,alawyer'soathimpressesuponhimtheresponsibilitiesofanofficerof
the court upon whose shoulders rest the grave responsibility of assisting courts in
theproper,fair,speedyandefficientadministrationofjustice.

In fact, it may be understood that the words contained in the oath of office
summarize the main duties and responsibilities a lawyer is supposed to take on in
thepracticeoflaw.Inotherwords,everytimeanoathofofficeistaken,theperson
makingthestatementineffectstatesthatintakingontheoathhe/shepromisesto
conscientiously fulfill the duties entrusted to his office. Section 20 of Rule 138
enumerateswhatthesedutiesare.Itisthedutyofanattorney

(a) To maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and to

supporttheConstitutionandobeythelawsofthePhilippines

(b)To observe and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice
andjudicialofficers

(c) To counsel or maintain such actions or proceedings only as

appearingtohimtobejust,andsuchdefensesonlyashebelievesto
behonestlydebatableunderthelaw

(d)Toemploy,forthepurposeofmaintainingthecausesconfidedto
him, such means only as are consistent with truth and honor, and
neverseektomisleadthejudgeoranyjudicialofficerbyanartificeor
falsestatementoffactorlaw

(e)Tomaintaininviolatetheconfidence,andateveryperiltohimself,
topreservethesecretsofhisclient,andtoacceptnocompensationin
connection with his clients' business except from him or with his
knowledgeandapproval

(f) To abstain from all offensive personality and to advance no fact

prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless
requiredbythejusticeofthecausewithwhichheischarged

(g)Nottoencourageeitherthecommencementorthecontinuanceof
anactionorproceeding, or delay any man's cause, from any corrupt
motiveorinterest

http://ca.judiciary.gov.ph/index.php?action=mnuactual_contents&ap=j8080 2/5
2/7/2017 Court of Appeals
(h) Never to reject, for any consideration personal to himself, the
causeofthedefenselessoroppressed

(i) In the defense of a person accused of crime, by all fair and

honorablemeans,regardlessofhispersonalopinionastotheguiltof
theaccused,topresenteverydefensethatthelawpermits,totheend
thatnopersonmaybedeprivedoflifeorliberty,butbydueprocess
oflaw.

Inordertofulfilltheseduties,everylawyerisexpectedtolivebyacertainmodeof
behavior now distilled in what is known as the Code of Professional Responsibility.
TheCodemandatesuponeachlawyer,ashisdutytosociety,theobligationtoobey
the laws of the land and promote respect for law and legal processes. Specifically,
he is forbidden to engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. In
essence, all that is contained in this Code is succinctly summarized in the oath of
officetakenbyeverylawyer.ItisoflittlesurprisetofindthatinMagdaluyovs.Nace
the Supreme Court declares that the lawyer's oath is a source of obligations and
violationthereofisagroundforsuspension,disbarmentorotherdisciplinaryaction.
InthecaseofBusinosvs.Ricafort,theSupremeCourtalsoheldthat:

By swearing the lawyer's oath, an attorney becomes a guardian of

truthandtheruleoflaw,andanindispensableinstrumentinthefair
and impartial administration of justice a vital function of
democracy,afailureofwhichisdisastroustosociety.Whiletheduty
toupholdtheconstitutionandobeythelawsisanobligationimposed
uponeverycitizen,alawyerassumesresponsibilitiesoverandbeyond
the basic requirements of good citizenship. As servant of the law, a
lawyer ought to make himself an example for others to emulate. He
should be possessed of and must continue to possess good moral
character.

InBrionJr.vs.Brillantes,Jr.,theSupremeCourtalsoruled:thelawyer'sprimary
duty as enunciated in the attorney's oath is to uphold the constitution, obey the
lawsofthelandandpromoterespectforthelawandlegalprocesses.Thatdutyin
its irreducible minimum entails obedience to the legal orders of the court. The
importanceandsignificanceinupholdingthesanctity of a lawyer's oath have been
highlighted by the Supreme Court in the various rulings it made involving
disciplinaryactionsagainstmembersofthelegalfraternity.

TheRealWorldOfTheLegalPractice

While it is true that these ideals by which every lawyer swears to live by remain
sublime, the same ideals often hardly motivate some lawyers in the real world of
legal practice. Instead of high ideals, less honorable reasons and more pragmatic
considerations often financial and material in nature take hold of many a
cynicalandhardenedlawyer.Thishasbeenthecauseoflamentandexpressionsof
graveconcernbyhonorableindividuals,amongthemthelateSupremeCourtChief
JusticeFredRuizCastro.Inanaddressbeforemembersofthelegalprofession,he
said:

Many a legal practitioner, forgetting his sacred mission as a sworn

publicservantandhisexaltedpositionasanofficerofthecourt,has
allowedhimselftobecome:

Aninstigatorofcontroversy,insteadofamediatorforconcordanda
conciliatorforcompromise

Avirtuosooftechnicalityintheconductoflitigation,insteadofatrue
exponentoftheprimacyoftruthandmoraljustice

A mercenary purveying the benefits of his enlightened advocacy in

directproportion to a litigant's financial posture, instead of a faithful
friend of the courts in the dispensation of equal justice to rich and
pooralike.

Thoughthesewordswereexpressedsometimeago,yetisissadtonotethatChief
JusticeRuiz'swordsstillringloudandtruetoday.Thegoalofremainingtruetothe
idealsofthelegalprofessionishamperedbytheseeminglyirresistibleinfluenceand
pressuresofmoderndaycommercialisminalmosteveryfacetofhumanactivityand
endeavor. In various cases, the Supreme Court has denied applicant's petition to
take the lawyer's oath for grave misconduct or for any serious violation of the
canons of professional responsibility which puts in question the applicant's moral
character. Moreover, a reading of the latest rulings of the highest tribunal would
revealthelawyer'sutterdisregard,ifnotdisdain,forthelawyer'soath.

InVitriolavs.Dasig,acasefordisbarmentagainstanofficialofthecommissionon
higher education charged with gross misconduct in violation of the attorney's oath

http://ca.judiciary.gov.ph/index.php?action=mnuactual_contents&ap=j8080 3/5
2/7/2017 Court of Appeals
forhaving used her public office to secure financial spoils, the Supreme Court, in
orderingrespondent'sdisbarment,held:

The attorney's oath is the source of the obligations and duties of

every lawyer and any violation thereof is a ground for disbarment,
suspension, or other disciplinary action. The attorney's oath imposes
uponeverymemberofthebarthedutytodelaynomanformoneyor
malice.

Said duty is further stressed in Rule 1.03 of the code of professional

responsibility.Respondent's demands for sums of money to facilitate
the processing of pending applications or requests before her office
violatessuchduty,andrunsafouloftheoathshetookwhenadmitted
tothebar.

TheaffirmationbyalawyertoupholdthelawwasthesubjectinDeGuzmanvs.De
Dios. In this case where respondent was charged for representing conflicting
interest, found guilty and suspended for six months, with a warning, the highest
tribunalheld:

Tosaythatlawyersmustatalltimesupholdandrespectthelawisto
statetheobvious,butsuchstatementcanneverbeoveremphasized.
Considering that, 'of all classes and professions, (lawyers are) most
sacredly bound to uphold and respect the law', it is imperative that
theylivebythelaw.

Accordingly, lawyers who violate their oath and engage in deceitful

conducthavenoplaceinthelegalprofession.Asalawyer,respondent
isboundbyheroathtodonofalsehoodorconsenttoitscommission
andtoconductherselfasalawyertothebestofherknowledgeand
discretion. The lawyer's oath is a source of obligation and violation
thereof is a ground for suspension, disbarment, or other disciplinary
action.TheactsofrespondentAtty.DeDiosareclearlyinviolationof
hersolemnoathasalawyerthatthiscourtwillnottolerate.

InSevillano Batac, Jr., et al. vs. Atty. P. Cruz, Jr., the Supreme Court in ordering
the suspension of respondent, quoted Sec. 27 of Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of
Court,thus:

Section27.Disbarmentorsuspensionofattorneysbysupremecourt
grounds therefor: A member of the bar may be disbarred or
suspendedfrom his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any
deceit,malpractice,or,othergrossmisconductinsuchoffice,grossly
immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a crime involving
moralturpitude,orfor any violation of the oathwhichheisrequired
to take before admission to practice, or for a willful disobedience of
any lawful order of a superior court, or for corruptly or willfully
appearingasanattorneyforapartytoacasewithoutauthoritysoto
do.

The practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either personally or
through paid agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice. A lawyer, under his oath,
pledgeshimselfnottodelayanymanformoneyormaliceandisboundtoconduct
himself with all good fidelity to his client. Such was the pronouncement of the
Supreme Court in ordering the disbarment of lawyer who converted the money of
his client to his own personal use without her consent. The lawyer's oath exhorts
lawpractitionersnottowittinglyorwillinglypromoteorsueanygroundless,falseor
unlawfulsuit,norgiveaidnorconsenttothesame.InYoungvs.Batuegas,where
respondent was suspended for six months for knowingly alleging an untrue
statementoffactinhispleading,theSupremeCourtsaid,thus:

Alawyermustbeadiscipleoftruth.Hesworeuponhisadmissionto
thebarthathewill'donofalsehoodnorconsenttothedoingofanyin
court'andheshallconducthimselfasalawyeraccordingtothebest
of his knowledge and discretion with all good fidelity as well to the
courts as to his clients. He should bear in mind that as an officer of
the court his high vocation is to correctly inform the court upon the
lawandthefactsofthecaseandtoaiditindoingjusticeandarriving
atacorrectconclusion.

The courts, on the other hand, are entitled to expect only complete
honesty from lawyers appearing and pleading before them. While a
lawyer has the solemn duty to defend his client's rights and is
expected to display the utmost zeal in defense of his client's cause,
hisconductmustneverbeattheexpenseoftruth.

Thatalawyer'soatharenotmerefacilewords,driftandhollow,wasappliedbythe
Supreme Court in Vda. De Rosales vs. Ramos, where a notary public commission

http://ca.judiciary.gov.ph/index.php?action=mnuactual_contents&ap=j8080 4/5
2/7/2017 Court of Appeals
wasrevokedandrespondentdisqualifiedfrombeinganotarypublic,inthismanner:
wherethenotarypublicisalawyer,agraverresponsibilityisplaceduponhimby
reasonofhissolemnoathtoobeythelawsandtodonofalsehoodorconsenttothe
doingofany.

Indeed when an office entrusted with great responsibility and trust by society is
violatedandabused,onefindstruthintheexpressioncorruptiooptimipessima(the
corruption of the best is the worst). The words of former Presiding Justice of the
CourtofAppealsPompeyoDiascannotfindamorerelevantapplication:

Therearemeninanysocietywhoaresoselfservingthattheytryto
make law serve their selfish ends. In this group of men, the most
dangerous is the man of the law who has noconscience.He has, in
the arsenal of his knowledge, the very tools by which he can poison
anddisruptsocietyandbringittoanignobleend.

AReturntoBasicIdeals

With the glaring reality of legal practice evidenced by the increasing numbers of
administrative cases filed against lawyers in the Courts, it is no surprise therefore
thatlegalethicshas been prescribed as a subject under the Mandatory Continuing
Legal Education (MCLE). Moreover, of the 36 units prescribed under the MCLE, six
unitspertaintolegalethics.Thereisclearlyaperceivedneedtoinstilllegalethicsin
the practice of the legal profession. The pressing need for legal ethics was
highlightedbytheSupremeCourtinEndayavs.Oca:

For practical purposes, the lawyers not only represent the law they
are the law. With their ubiquitous presence in the social milieu,
lawyershavetoberesponsible.Theproblemstheycreateinlawyering
become public difficulties. To keep lawyers responsible underlies the
worth of the ethics of lawyering. Indeed, legal ethics is simply the
aesthetictermforprofessionalresponsibility.

Undoubtedly, faithful compliance and observance of the canons of the Code of

Professional Responsibility is the main object of the MCLE. And to ensure success
thereof,theSupreme Court, in its various pronouncements in administrative cases
filedagainstlawyers,hasemphasizedthelawyer'sbasicdutiesandresponsibilities.
In a more recent ruling, the Supreme Court recapitulated the significance and
importanceoftheoathinthiswise:Thisoathtowhichalllawyershavesubscribed
insolemnagreementtodedicatethemselvestothepursuitofjusticeisnotamere
ceremony or formality for practicing law to be forgotten afterwards nor is it mere
words, drift and hollow, but a sacred trust that lawyers must uphold and keep
inviolable at all times. By swearing the lawyer's oath, they become guardians of
truth and the rule of law, as well as instruments in the fair and impartial
dispensationofjustice.

Indeed, if the legal profession is to achieve its basic ideal to render public service
and serve the ends of justice, there is a need to unceasingly and constantly
inculcate professional standards among lawyers. As the Supreme Court in Cordon
vs. Balicanta (supra), said: If the practice of law is to remain an honorable
profession and attain its basic ideal, those enrolled in its ranks should not only
master its tenets and principles, but should also in their lives accord continuing
fidelitytothem.

Copyright2016CourtofAppealsWebsite
Designed,developedandmaintainedbytheMISDivision

http://ca.judiciary.gov.ph/index.php?action=mnuactual_contents&ap=j8080 5/5