AC 8392; (June, 2010) (Digest)
A.C. No. 8392; June 29, 2010
ROSARIO T. MECARAL, Complainant, vs. ATTY. DANILO S. VELASQUEZ, Respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Rosario T. Mecaral charged respondent Atty. Danilo S. Velasquez with Gross Misconduct and Gross Immoral Conduct. She alleged that after hiring her as his secretary in 2002, she became his lover and common-law wife. In October 2007, respondent brought her to a remote area in Biliran and left her with a religious group he led. When she returned home, he forcibly brought her back. She was subsequently tortured, injected with drugs, and, upon attempting escape, was tied spread-eagled to a bed, guarded constantly, and deprived of proper food and clothing until her rescue by police officers in December 2007.
Complainant further charged respondent with bigamy, submitting certified documents proving his marriages to two different women—Ma. Shirley G. Yunzal in 1990 and Leny H. Azur in 1996—which were both subsisting. Despite due notice, respondent failed to file an Answer to the complaint or appear at the mandatory conference before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
ISSUE
Whether respondent Atty. Danilo S. Velasquez should be disbarred for Gross Misconduct and Gross Immoral Conduct.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court ordered the respondent’s disbarment. The practice of law is a privilege conditioned on the continuous possession of good moral character. The Court found the charges substantiated by clear preponderant evidence, which is the standard in administrative cases. Respondent’s acts—maintaining an illicit relationship with his secretary, committing bigamy by contracting two marriages, and orchestrating the complainant’s torture and illegal detention—constitute grossly immoral conduct and gross misconduct. These acts violate Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Lawyer’s Oath, which mandate obedience to the law and upholding the integrity of the profession.
Respondent’s failure to participate in the proceedings or rebut the allegations, despite an opportunity to do so, was construed as an implied admission of the charges. The IBP’s findings, which noted that the acts were corroborated by evidence including a prosecutor’s resolution from a related criminal case for Serious Illegal Detention, were adopted. By engaging in such reprehensible conduct, respondent demonstrated a moral unfitness to remain a member of the Bar. Consequently, Atty. Danilo S. Velasquez was DISBARRED and his name was ordered STRICKEN from the Roll of Attorneys.