G.R. No. A.C. No. 7578. August 14, 2019.
Paquito Pelipel, Jr., Complainant, vs. Atty. Cirilo A. Avila, Respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Paquito Pelipel, Jr., president of PP Bus Lines, Inc., filed a disbarment complaint against respondent Atty. Cirilo A. Avila, then Director of the Land Transportation Office’s Law Enforcement Service. The complaint charged Atty. Avila with extortion and receiving bribes, constituting unlawful, dishonest, immoral, and deceitful conduct in violation of the Lawyer’s Oath. The allegations stemmed from an incident in June 2003 where a Land Transportation Office team led by Atty. Avila impounded five out-of-line buses operated by PP Bus Lines. The buses were released upon payment of prescribed fees and after Atty. Avila insisted on a weekly protection money of ₱3,000.00 and a one-time amount of ₱150,000.00 to ensure immunity from future arrests and impoundments. Pelipel paid the weekly amount from August to September 2003 but stopped in October due to financial difficulties. Atty. Avila continued to demand payment. Pelipel, with his sister, sought assistance from the National Bureau of Investigation, which conducted an entrapment operation on February 26, 2004. Atty. Avila was apprehended at Barrio Fiesta Restaurant in Ali Mall, Cubao, Quezon City, after receiving marked money. An ultraviolet light examination confirmed fluorescent specks on his hands. Following his arrest, criminal cases for direct bribery and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act were filed against him. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines, after investigation, recommended a two-year suspension from the practice of law.

ISSUE

Whether or not respondent Atty. Cirilo A. Avila acted in an unethical manner that would justify the imposition of disciplinary sanctions.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court found respondent Atty. Cirilo A. Avila guilty of unethical conduct warranting disbarment. The Court sustained the findings of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines but modified the recommended penalty. The Court held that the entrapment operation provided substantial evidence that Atty. Avila solicited and received bribes, which constituted unlawful, dishonest, immoral, and deceitful conduct in violation of Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. As a lawyer in government service, his actions also violated Rule 7.03, which prohibits conduct that adversely reflects on fitness to practice law. The Court emphasized that lawyers in government are held to higher ethical standards and that disciplinary proceedings are sui generis, independent of criminal cases, requiring only substantial evidence. Citing precedents involving similar acts of extortion and bribery by government lawyers, the Court ruled that disbarment is the appropriate penalty. Atty. Avila was ordered disbarred, his name stricken from the Roll of Attorneys, and he was perpetually disqualified from reinstatement.