MIKE A. FERMIN v. ATTY. LINTANG H. BEDOL
MIKE A. FERMIN v. ATTY. LINTANG H. BEDOL
MIKE A. FERMIN v. ATTY. LINTANG H. BEDOL
BEDOL
THIRD DIVISION
RESOLUTION
PERALTA, J.:
Before the Court is an administrative complaint for disbarment filed by
complainant Mike A. Fermin against respondent Atty. Lintang H. Bedol for
violation of Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Complainant averred that one of his opponents and defeated candidate for the
mayoralty post of Kabuntalan, Maguindanao, Bai Susan Samad, filed with the
COMELEC en banc a petition to declare a failure of election in Precinct No.
25A/26A of Barangay Guiawa, and the subsequent holding of a special election,
which was docketed as Case No. 04-403; and that the COMELEC issued its
Resolution dated July 27, 2004 declaring a failure of election and the holding of the
special election on July 28, 2004. However, before the issuance of the COMELEC
Resolution, the respondent, in his capacity as the Provincial Election Supervisor III
[1]
of Maguindanao, had already issued a Notice dated July 23, 2004 to all
candidates, which included him, political parties and registered voters of Barangay
Guiawa, Kabuntalan, Maguindanao, informing them of the scheduled special
[2]
election for Barangay Guiawa on July 28, 2004; that he issued another notice
informing the candidates and political parties of a conference on July 25, 2004 to
[3]
be held in his office; and that on July 26, 2004, he again issued a notice that the
canvassing of votes shall be held in Shariff Aguak Maguindanao.
Complainant alleged that respondent, without basis in law and in fact, issued the
above-mentioned premature notices of special election which highlighted his
shameless disregard of the truth and brazen disrespect for the rule of law which is
his foremost duty as a member of the Bar; and that those false and illegal notices
showed his dishonest ways and predilection to wrongdoings and his natural
susceptibility to the culture of corruption and deception which renders him totally
and recommended that he be penalized with reprimand, with a stern warning that
a repetition of the same shall be dealt with more severely.[9] In so ruling, the
Commissioner found that respondent started issuing notices of special election and
invitation to prepare for the special election even before the COMELEC had issued
its Resolution on the need for a special election which was highly irregular if not
totally wrong.
[10]
In Resolution No. XIX-2010-313 dated April 16, 2010, the IBP Board of
Governors unanimously adopted and approved with modification the Report and
Recommendations of the Investigating Commissioner, thus:
https://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/cffe0 2/6
3/5/2021 MIKE A. FERMIN v. ATTY. LINTANG H. BEDOL
Based on the foregoing provision of law, the declaration of failure of election and
the calling of special elections shall be decided by the majority vote of the members
of the COMELEC en banc. In this case, the COMELEC en banc issued a Resolution
dated July 27, 2004 declaring the failure of election and the holding of a special
election on July 28, 2004. However, prior to the issuance of the said Resolution,
respondent, as the Provincial Election Supervisor of Maguindanao, had already
issued the following, to wit: Notice dated July 23, 2004 of the special election to be
done on July 28, 2004; Invitation dated July 25, 2004 for conference at his office
in Cotabato City; and Notice dated July 26, 2004 informing that the canvassing of
votes shall be held in Shariff Aguak, Maguindanao.
https://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/cffe0 3/6
3/5/2021 MIKE A. FERMIN v. ATTY. LINTANG H. BEDOL
Respondent's act of issuing those notices ahead of the issuance of the COMELEC en
banc Resolution calling for a special election was not in compliance with the
procedures under the law and the COMELEC rules. In so doing, he breached his
duty to obey the laws and the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities, thus,
violating Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Canon 1 clearly mandates the obedience of every lawyer to laws and legal processes.
To the best of his ability, a lawyer is expected to respect and abide by the law and,
[15]
thus, avoid any act or omission that is contrary thereto. A lawyer's personal
deference to the law not only speaks of his character but it also inspires respect and
[16]
obedience to the law, on the part of the public. As servants of the law and
officers of the court, lawyers are required to be at the forefront of observing and
maintaining the rule of law. They are expected to make themselves exemplars
[17]
worthy of emulation. This, in fact, is what a lawyer's obligation to promote
respect for law and legal processes entails. Moreso, a lawyer who is occupying a
[18]
public office.
Lawyers in public office, such as respondent who was then a Provincial Election
Supervisor of Maguindanao, are expected not only to refrain from any act or
omission which tend to lessen the trust and confidence of the citizenry in
government but also uphold the dignity of the legal profession at all times and
observe a high standard of honesty and fair dealing.[19] A government lawyer is a
keeper of public faith and is burdened with a high degree of social responsibility,
higher than his brethren in private practice.[20]
Respondent's claim that he issued those notices as there was no more time to
prepare for the special elections has no basis in law. To stress, the notices were
issued even prior to the COMELEC Resolution for the holding of a special election.
Members of the Bar are reminded that their first duty is to comply with the rules of
[21]
procedure, rather than seek exceptions as loopholes. Respondent is expected to
promote respect for the law and legal processes.
WHEREFORE, the Court ADOPTS and APPROVES the Resolution of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors, dated April 16, 2010.
Accordingly, Atty. Lintang H. Bedol is found GUILTY of violating Canon 1 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility and he is hereby ordered SUSPENDED from
the practice of law for a period of one (1) year, with a STERN WARNING that a
repetition of the same or a similar offense will warrant the imposition of a more
severe penalty.
Respondent's suspension from the practice of law shall take effect immediately
upon receipt. He is DIRECTED to immediately INFORM the Court that his
suspension has started, copy furnished all courts and quasijudicial bodies where he
https://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/cffe0 4/6
3/5/2021 MIKE A. FERMIN v. ATTY. LINTANG H. BEDOL
NOTICE OF JUDGMENT
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that on September 16, 2019 a Resolution, copy attached
hereto, was rendered by the Supreme Court in the above-entitled case, the original
of which was received by this Office on October 4, 2019 at 2:25 p.m.
Very truly yours,
[1]
Rollo, p. 12.
[2]
Id. at 13.
[3] Id. at 14.
[4]
Id. at 5.
[5] Id. at 7.
[6]
Id. at 19-24.
[7] Resolution dated April 18, 2005, id. at 27.
[8]
Rollo, pp. 121-129.
[9] Id. at 129.
[10]
Id. at 120.
[11]
https://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/cffe0 5/6
3/5/2021 MIKE A. FERMIN v. ATTY. LINTANG H. BEDOL
[11] Id. at 130-131.
[12]
Per Resolution dated August 28, 2013; id. at 135.
[13] Rollo, p. 136.
[14]
An Act Providing for Synchronized National and Local Elections and for
Electoral Reforms, Authorizing Appropriations Therefor, and For Other
Purposes.
[15] Jimenez v. Atty. Francisco, 749 Phil. 551, 565 (2014).
[16]
Id.
[17] See Re: Report on the Financial Audit Conducted on the Books of Accounts of
Atty. Raquel G. Kho, Clerk of Court IV, Regional Trial Court, Oras, Eastern
Samar, A.M. No. P-06-2177, April 19, 2007, 521 SCRA 25, 28-29, citing See Agpalo,
Comments on the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Code of Judicial
Conduct 18 (2001 ed.).
[18]
Id. at 29.
[19] Ramos v. Atty. Imbang, 557 Phil. 507, 516 (2007).
[20]
Id., citing Atty. Vitrolio v. Atty. Dasig, 448 Phil. 199, 209 (2003).
[21] Guarin v. Atty. Limpin, 750 Phil. 435, 440 (2015), citing Suico Industrial
Corp., et al. v. Judge Lagura-Yap, et al., 694 Phil. 286, 303 (2012).
https://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/cffe0 6/6