Chapter receives a complaint it will be
A. Officers Authorized to
Investigate Disbarment Cases
Only officers from the following are
authorized to investigate cases of
disbarment:
1. The Supreme Court
2. IBP through its Commission on
Bar Discipline or authorized
investigators
3. Office of the Solicitor General
On the other hand, the Court of Appeals
and Regional Trial Courts can only
investigate and take action against
lawyers who appear for litigants in cases
pending before them. They may suspend
an attorney from the practice of law for
any of the causes stated in Section 27,
Rule 138, of the Rules of Court. Once
the lawyer is suspended, he shall not
practice law until further orders from the
Supreme Court. The rationale for this is
regarding further proceedings that will
still be held in the Supreme Court.
B. Where to file complaint for
disbarment?
Ordinarily, the Supreme Court refers
cases of disbarment to the IBP for
investigation, report and
recommendation. Such referral is not
mandatory. Furthermore, after the IBP
Six (6) copies of the verified
forwarded to the IBP National Office
for appropriate action.
C. How the complaint is instituted.
Rule 139-B of the revised Rules of Court
states that:
SECTION 1. How instituted. -
Proceedings for the disbarment,
suspension, or discipline of
attorneys may be taken by the
Supreme Court motu propio, or by
the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP) upon the
verified complaint of any person.
The complaint shall state clearly
and concisely the facts
complained of and shall be
supported by affidavits of
persons having personal
knowledge of the facts therein
alleged and/or by such
documents as may substantiate
said facts.
The IBP Board of Governors
may, motu propio or upon referral
by the Supreme Court or by a
Chapter Board of Officers, or at
the instance of any person,
initiate and prosecute proper
charges against erring attorneys
including those in the
government service.
complaint shall be filed with the
Secretary of the IBP or the
Secretary of any of its chapter
who shall forthwith transmit the
same to the IBP Board of
Governors for assignment to an
investigator.
D. Board of Governors
The IBP is divided into 9 regions with a
governor for each. The Governors elect
their own Executive Vice President who
eventually becomes the next President
following the lapse of the term of the
current President. The Final Report and
Recommendations of the Commission on
Bar Discipline are forwarded for
affirmation and modification to the Board
of Governors. After, their resolutions are
forwarded to the Supreme Court for
ultimate and final action. However,
resolutions are not required to be
forwarded to the Supreme Court all the
time such as when the recommendation is
less than suspension such as admonition,
reprimand, censure or fine, the decision
of the Board will be considered final and
executory. Provided that no party appeals
the same to the Supreme Court within a
period of fifteen (15) days from notice of
the Board’s resolution, If an appeal,
however, is filed the Supreme Court may
rule.

E. Suspension of a Lawyer by the IBP
Board of Governors (Requisites).
(a) Review of the investigator’s report
(b) Formal voting
(c) A vote of at least five (5) members of
the Board.
F. Application for Extension of Time
A 90-day period is given to the IBP to
finish its investigation of administrative
cases from the time of their
commencement. If more time is needed,
a request of acceptance shall be filed with
the Supreme Court together with the
reason for the request.
G. Disqualification of Commissioner or
Investigator.
An investigator may be disqualified by
reason of relationship within the fourth
degree of consanguinity or affinity to any
of the parties or their counsel, pecuniary
interest, personal bias or his having acted
as counsel for either party, unless the
parties sign and enter upon the record
their written consent to his acting as such
investigator. Where the investigator does
not disqualify, himself, a party may appeal
to the IBP Board of Governors, which by
majority vote of the members present,
there being a quorum, may order his
disqualification (Sec. 2, par. 2, Rule 139-
B, RRC).
H. Who can file a disbarment case against
a lawyer?
The following persons can file a
disbarment case against a lawyer:
1. Any person aggrieved by
the misconduct of a
lawyer may file the
corresponding
administrative case with
the proper forum.
2. Any person even if not
aggrieved but who knows
of the lawyer’s
misconduct, unlawful or
unethical act may initiate
the proceedings.
Also, the Supreme Court or the IBP may
motu proprio initiate the proceedings
when they perceive acts of lawyers which
deserve sanctions or when their attention
is called by any one and a probable cause
exists that an act has been perpetrated by
a lawyer which requires disciplinary
sanctions (see Section 1, Rule 139-B,
RRC).
I. The lawyers who can be investigated by
the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline.\
In Circular No. 3-9, Feb. 9, 1989, the
Supreme Court clarified that all lawyers
whether in the government service or in
private practice may be investigated by
the Commission on Bar Discipline. An
exception, however, are those who are in
the judiciary, that is Judges and Justices.
J. Confidentiality of Disbarment or
Suspension Proceedings.
In Ibanez v. Vina, it was said that the
professional success of a lawyer depends
almost entirely on his good reputation. If
that is tarnished, it would be difficult to
restore it to its former state. Thus, Sec. 18,
Rule 139-B of the RRC provides that to
avoid the unnecessary ruin of a lawyer’s
name, disciplinary proceedings are to be
treated as confidential until a final
determination has been made.
K. Mitigating Circumstances in
Disbarment.
Mitigating circumstances may be applied
and considered in favor of the
respondent. It would have an effect of
lessening the gravity of the disciplinary
sanctions that will be given to him.
The following are recognized mitigating
factors:
1. Good faith in the acquisition of a
property of the client subject of
litigation
2. Inexperience of the lawyer
3. Age
4. Apology
5. Lack of intention to slight or
offend the Court
L. Dismissal
The general rule is that “no investigation
shall be interrupted or terminated by
reason of the desistance, settlement,
compromise, restitution, withdrawal of
the charges, or failure of the complainant
to prosecute the same unless, the
Supreme Court motu proprio or upon
recommendation of the IBP Board of
Governors, determines that there is no
compelling reason to continue with the
disbarment or suspension proceedings
against the respondent”. However, this is
not an absolute rule but admits certain
exceptions such as: (a) affidavits of
desistance (b) withdrawal of complaint,
and (c) lack of interest to prosecute. For
the first two, there should be no more
evidence that could substantiate the
charge.