AC 5438; (March, 2004) (Digest)
G.R. No. 5438. March 10, 2004. Dan Joel V. Lim and Richard C. Tan, complainants, vs. Atty. Edilberto Barcelona, respondent.
FACTS
Complainants Dan Joel V. Lim and Richard C. Tan, both businessmen, filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Edilberto Barcelona, a lawyer formerly with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). Lim alleged that in August 2000, respondent, identifying himself as an NLRC lawyer, contacted him regarding a fabricated labor complaint filed by his employees. Respondent demanded P20,000.00 from Lim, threatening to shut down his business and have him jailed if he refused. An entrapment operation by the NBI was conducted on August 16, 2000, during which Lim handed marked money to respondent, who was subsequently arrested. Forensic examination confirmed fluorescent powder from the marked bills on his hands.
Complainant Tan similarly alleged that respondent contacted him regarding a suspended employee, demanding money to settle a purported case. Respondent’s actions were corroborated by witness statements, including that of Aurora Cruz, who overheard respondent discussing the P20,000.00 payment. The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) confirmed respondent’s arrest and the presence of fluorescent evidence. Criminal charges for robbery/extortion were filed against him.
ISSUE
Whether Atty. Edilberto Barcelona should be held administratively liable for his conduct.
RULING
Yes, Atty. Edilberto Barcelona is administratively liable and is ordered DISBARRED. The Court found clear and convincing evidence that respondent engaged in corrupt activity, deceit, and gross misconduct. As a lawyer and a public official at the NLRC, he exploited his position to extort money from complainants by fabricating labor cases and using threats of business closure and imprisonment. His actions during the entrapment, where he received marked money, were substantiated by forensic evidence and witness testimonies.
The legal logic rests on the violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Lawyer’s Oath. A lawyer must uphold the law, act with honesty, and avoid deceitful conduct. Respondent’s extortion scheme, leveraging his official capacity to prey upon private individuals, constitutes gross misconduct that undermines public confidence in the legal profession. The Court emphasized that disbarment is appropriate for acts showing moral unfitness, as the protection of the public and the preservation of the integrity of the bar are paramount. His behavior demonstrated a blatant disregard for ethical standards, warranting the ultimate penalty of removal from the Roll of Attorneys.