Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) chief Persida Acosta on Friday apologized to the Supreme Court (SC) after being reprimanded for airing her “unfounded grievances.”
Acosta’s remarks had to do with her request for the high tribunal to remove a provision on conflict of interest in their Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA), which governs the conduct of lawyers in private and professional matters.
“To our beloved justices of the Supreme Court, on behalf of the Public Attorney’s Office, and all public attorneys nationwide, I humbly and most respectfully apologize if you may have been hurt by the circumstances,” Acosta said in a statement.
“We beg for your understanding and indulgence. The arguments that we have stated were brought about by our passion to efficiently serve our clients and the poor and needy, which we have been inculcating in our lawyers’ practice. That is why we feared of what may happen to our clients and lawyers,” she added.
Earlier this week, SC denied Acosta’s request to remove Section 22 or the rule on conflict of interest from the CPRA.
However, the high court explained that PAO’s primordial mandate is to “extend free legal assistance to indigent persons in criminal, civil, labor, administrative, and other quasi-judicial cases.”
“To turn away indigent litigants and bar them from availing of the services of all PAO lawyers nationwide due to alleged conflict of interest would be to contravene PAO’s principal duty and leave hundreds of poor litigants unassisted by legal counsel they cannot otherwise afford,” the SC said.
As its renders its decision, the SC also asked Acosta to show cause why she should not be cited in indirect contempt for her social media posts and newspaper publications “which tended, directly or indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice.”
“[T]he Court characterized Atty. Acosta’s resort to social and print media to air her unfounded grievances against the Court as a threat to the independence of the judiciary,” it said.
“The Court thus ordered Atty. Acosta to show cause why she should not be disciplined as a Member of the Bar,” the SC added.
While apologizing for her previous actions, Acosta said the PAO will abide by provision of the CPRA on conflict of interest as upheld by the SC.
“Our deepest apologies… rest assured that our Public Attorneys will abide by “Section 22 in relation to Sections 13 and 18, Canon III” of the Code of Professional Responsibility,” she said.
“Again, we convey our utmost respect and love to the Supreme Court, which served as my first haven and home in my public service since 1988 or more or less 35 years ago,” she added.
Section 22 states that “a conflict of interest of any of the lawyers of the PAO incident to services rendered for the Office shall be imputed only to the said lawyer and the lawyer’s direct supervisor.”
The CPRA, which revises the 34-year-old Code of Professional Responsibility that was promulgated in 1988, was launched on April 13. It took effect on May 30.—LDF, GMA Integrated News
PAO chief apologizes to SC over lawyers’ code remark
Source: Balita News
0 Comments