Report of Ad Hoc Committee Re: Investigation on Bar Matter 565

October 15, 1991

B.M. No. 565

Gentlemen :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En Banc dated October 15, 1991

"Bar Matter No. 565. — Re: Report of the Ad Hoc Committee to the Court En Banc on its investigation on Bar Matter No. 565. — The Court Resolved to APPROVE the Report of the Ad Hoc Committee to the Court En Banc on its investigation of Bar Matter No. 565, dated October 4, 1991, attached hereto As Annex 'A'." Melencio-Herrera, J., is on leave. Padilla, Sarmiento and Griño-Aquino, JJ., took no part.

Very truly yours,

 

DANIEL T. MARTINEZClerk of Court

By:

 

(SGD.) LUZVIMINDA D. PUNOAssistant Clerk of Court

ANNEX A

REPORT OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE TO THE COURT EN BANC ON ITS INVESTIGATION OF BAR MATTER NO. 565

On 6 November 1990, several staff members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) filed a letter-complaint, dated 30 October 1990, addressed to the Chief Justice Hon. Marcelo B. Fernan, bringing to the attention of the Court their grievances against IBP President Eugene A. Tan and his administration. Attached to the letter is a list of officers and employees hired by then IBP President Eugene A. Tan, showing their corresponding items/positions and salary increases. The main grievance was Atty. Tan's alleged discrimination or favoritism in the hiring of officers and employees and in substantially increasing their salaries within a few months, in contrast to the meager salary increases he gave the other IBP employees within the same period, and his alleged extravagant or irregular expenditures of IBP funds.

Acting on the complaint, the Court en banc issued a Resolution dated 15 November 1990, creating the herein Ad Hoc Committee, composed of the undersigned: Associate Justice Teodoro R. Padilla, as Chairman, and Associate Justices Abraham F. Sarmiento and Carolina Griño-Aquino, as Members, to "investigate the grievances regarding the incumbent administration of President Eugene A. Tan in the Integrated Bar of the Philippines."

A subsequent Resolution, dated 6 December 1990, was issued by the Court en banc requiring the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to explain/clarify its position on the following matters relating to the IBP:

"Acting on recent events and developments affecting or relating to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), the Court Resolved to require the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to EXPLAIN/CLARIFY, within ten (10) days from notice, its position on the following matters:

1. Re. IBP waiver of subsidies from the Supreme Court for legal aid and bar discipline

a. Extent and duration of the waiver

b. From where will IBP draw the financial support to carry out legal aid and bar discipline activities; or does it intend to discontinue them?

2. Re: IBP creation of Judicial Commission

a. Legal basis of IBP's power over members of the judiciary, even if they are members of the bar.

b. Conflict with, and encroachment into the power of the Courts, especially the Supreme Court, to discipline members of the judiciary.

c. Funding of Judicial Commission.

3. Re: IBP Declaration of Independence

a. Independence from whom? And from what?

b. Mechanism of asserting and exercising such independence.

4. Re: Authority of IBP Executive Committee to pre-empt the IBP Board of Governors

Since IBP policies are for the IBP Board of Governors to adopt, when can the IBP Executive Committee assume the exercise of such power of the Board of Governors? Why were the policies in Nos. 1, 2 and 3, above, approved by the Executive Committee only, not by the Board of Governors?"

Eventually, the Court required Atty. Tan and members of the Board of Governors to submit their individual clarifications or explanations to the abovecited matters (Resolution of the Ad Hoc Committee, dated 18 December 1990).

The position of the IBP, as invariably stated in its pleadings filed before the Court, is as follows:

1. The complaint is a minor wage increase gripe of the complaining employees (Letter of Atty. Carolina Ramos-Chua, dated 13 December 1990, addressed to Atty. Daniel Martinez); a petty labor claim which is unworthy of the time of this Court (Comment of Atty. Eugene A. Tan, dated 31 December 1990); a mere labor claim over which this Court has no original jurisdiction (Manifestation, dated 11 March 1991, submitted by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines).

2. The employees, who were instigated by a certain "group" to file the complaint, were disgruntled about the partial reorganization instituted by Task Force on Evaluation/Reorganization (Comment of Atty. Tan, supra) and are not lawyers or IBP members, neither do they have electoral mandate to govern the IBP whose funds exclusively belong to the IBP members and not to them (Manifestation of IBP, supra) and should not be allowed to question the appointments made by the Tan administration (Memorandum, dated 11 August 1991, submitted by Atty. Eugene A. Tan).

3. There are no irregularities in all the appointments, expenditures, reorganization and adoption of the Revised IBP By-Laws as they were approved or ratified by the Board of Governors.

On 18 December 1990, the Court en banc resolved to "widen" the authority of this Committee "to look into all IBP matters, as needed, and to submit its recommendation to the Court when necessary."

Pursuant to the aforementioned resolutions, this Committee proceeded to receive evidence by scheduling hearings from 17 January 1991 up to 11 July 1991, inclusive, and calling twenty-three (23) witnesses to testify on the matters under investigation.

Facts Established During The Hearings

I. Authority of Atty. Eugene A. Tan, as IBP President to make appointments:

At the organizational meeting of the Board of Governors held on 30 January 1990, the Board resolved to declare the following positions vacant: "Secretary, Executive Director, Treasurer, Chairman, Vice Chairman and Members of Standing and Special Committees as well as all positions under the committees." (Minutes of the Meeting, p. 2). The Board likewise authorized Atty. Tan to appoint all officers to the vacant position within a reasonable period, giving its consent "in advance" to the appointments, subject to the withdrawal of said appointments should any of the appointees be found by the Board of Governors not qualified for the position. (Ibid., p. 3)

Having been granted such authority, Atty. Eugene A. Tan then and there appointed Atty. Ramon A. Felipe IV as Secretary of the Board of Governors. IBP Governor Yolanda Q. Javellana was appointed Chairman of the Committee on Legal Aid. Both appointments were forthwith confirmed by the Board likewise created the Executive Committee composed of IBP President Eugene A. Tan, as Chairman, Executive Vice-President Numeriano G. Tanopo, Jr. as Vice-Chairman, and Governor Yolanda Q. Javellana as member.

I. Positions created and appointments made by Atty. Eugene A. Tan after 30 January 1990

	POSITION	NAME OF APPOINTEE
1.	Asst. National Secretary	Pilar R. Trinidad
2.	Exec. Asst. to the Pres.	Cesar L. Villanueva
3.	Exec. Asst. to the Pres.	Antonio M. Bernardo
4.	Asst. National Treasurer	Rafael P. Garcia, Jr.
5.	Executive Director	Francisco M. Rodriguez
6.	Dep. Exec. Director	Romeo L. Gutierrez
Six (6) Deputy Directors for the following areas concern:
7.	Dep. Director for Adm.	Leopoldo E. San Buenaventura
8.	Dep. Director for Chapter
	Relations	Jose Antonio S. Bernas
9.	Dep. Director for Committee	Ma. Filomena Legaspi-Rosales
10.	Dep. Director for Bar Discipline	Basilio H. Aloline
11.	Dep. Director for Legal Aid	Reynaldo A. Cortes
12.	Dep. Director for Finance	Fernando C. Cojuangco

The creation of the above-mentioned positions and the appointments thereto were approved or ratified post facto by the Board in its regular meeting held on 24 February 1990. Also ratified by the Board were appointments made by Atty. Tan to different positions in the IBP National Offices, standing committees. (Annex "D", Sworn Statement of Atty. Eugene Tan, VI. 17).

The following additional positions/items were later created by Atty. Tan, appointing persons to said positions and fixing the salaries thereof:

1. Press and Media Liaison Officer. — Eva de los Reyes was appointed on 1 April 1990 with a starting salary of P3,802.50 a month. Worked part time at the IBP Her important duty was to take care of the press releases on chapter visitations of Atty. Eugene A. Tan, accompanying him during these visitations and taking down notes, and acted as official photographer of the event. She also did such as bringing drafts of press releases for payment therefor to Mr. Isidro Roman of the Manila Bulletin. At the same time, she worked full time in the Tan, Manzano and Velez Law Office as a confidential assistant to Atty. Eugene A. Tan, receiving a monthly salary of P6,000.00 (TSN, 28 February 1991, p. 32-33). Her salary in the IBP was increased to P4,182.75 a month in October 1990.

2. Director for Legal Aid — Atty. Christine T. Espinosa was appointed on 16 March 1990 with monthly a salary of P12,000.00. Reappointed as Planning and Director for Legal Aid, Greater Manila Region in August 1990, with the same monthly salary.

3. Two (2) Deputy Directors for Bar Discipline:

(a) Atty. Jose Martin Morente, appointed with a monthly salary of P5,000.00 effective March 1990. By the time he resigned in June 1990, he was receiving a salary of P6,000.00 a month.

(b) Atty. Carolina Ramos-Chua, original appointment was Deputy Director for Bar Discipline with a monthly salary of P6,000.00 effective 16 April 1990. Reappointed as Director for Bar Discipline effective 1 July 1990 with a monthly salary of P13,000.00. Again, in October 1990, she was reappointed as Acting Executive Director (Executive Director for Internal Affairs) with a monthly salary of P15,000.00. Appointed Executive Director in November 1990 with the same salary of P15,000.00. Aside from the salary she was receiving from the IBP, she received a monthly salary of P4,000.00 from Atty. Eugene A. Tan's law office which was considered his contribution to IBP inasmuch as he could not give her a higher salary in the IBP. (TSN, 25 April 1991, p. 7).

4. Four (4) Deputy Directors for Legal Aid:

(a) Atty. Antonio Ligon. Original appointment with a monthly salary of P4,000.00 effective 1 April 1990 on a part time basis; raised to P5,262.50 May 1990. Appointed Executive Director in June 1990 with a salary of P7,525.00. Salary was increased to P13,500.00 effective July 1990. Atty. Ligon is the lawyer referred to in the letter-complaint as the officer given a 125% salary increase. Resigned in August 1990.

(b) Atty. Fred Gutierrez. Original appointment with a monthly salary of P3,000.00 on a part time basis, effective 16 April 1990. Salary reduced to P2,000.00 effective 1 June 1990.

(c) Atty. Augusto Bundang. Original appointment with a monthly salary of P6,000.00 effective 16 April 1990. Resigned on 16 June 1990.

(d) Atty. Julian Torcuator, Jr. — Original appointment with a monthly salary of P6,000.00 effective May 1990. Resigned in October 1990.

5. Deputy Executive Director — Atty. Edgar Mendoza. Original appointment with a monthly salary of P6,000.00 effective 15 May 1990. Salary was increased to P9,000.00 a month effective July 1990. Resigned in August 1990.

6. Managing Director for Legal Aid — Atty. Estanislao Angeles III. Original appointment with a monthly salary of P13,000.00 effective 1 August 1990. Redesignated Legal Aid Director with the same salary.

7. Director for Legal Affairs — Atty. Basilio H. Alo. Original appointment with a monthly salary of P2,000.00 on, a part time basis effective 1 October 1990. Went to IBP only on Wednesday afternoons.

8. Deputy Director for Bar Discipline and Liaison Officer to Congress — Atty. Julita A. Espartero. Original salary of P12,000.00 effective 15 October 1990 on a part time basis as she was still working in the office of Senator Heherson Alvarez when she was appointed to the IBP. Started working full time with the IBP when she was appointed Director for Bar Discipline in January 1991 after she resigned from her work with the Senate. (TSN, 21 February 1991, pp. 31-32).

9. Secretary, Legal Aid — Ms. Judith Ocampo. Original appointment with monthly salary of P3,000.00 effective October 1990 Resigned in January 1991.

According to Atty. Tan, he created the abovementioned positions; appointed persons thereto and fixed their salaries, on the strength of the broad and general authority granted to him by the Board of Governors in its organizational meeting on 30 January 1990. (TSN, 27 June 1991, p. 31) In the budget for July 1990-June 1991, there is an item of Salaries, Wages and Allowances from which he drew the salaries for any position that may be created. He believes he had the prior and continuing authority to appoint, subject to later confirmation and ratification of the Board of Governors. (TSN, 27 June 1991, p. 50).

The appointments made and compensations fixed by Atty. Tan between February 1990 and 2 June 1990 were not expressly confirmed by the Board but were included in the approved Budget for July 1990-June 1991 which specifies the names of the appointees and their corresponding salaries and positions. (TSN, 14 March 1991, p. 34).

The salary increases or adjustments given after 2 June 1990 were included in the Reorganization Plan. The Report on the Reorganization was approved by the Board of Governors very much later, i. e., in its meeting on March 1991. (TSN, 27 June 1991 p. 51).

II. Favoritism in the Grant of Salary Increases

During the administration of Atty. Eugene A. Tan starting on 30 January 1990 when he assumed the IBP presidency, he hired 15 lawyers (Report on the Reorganization, dated 30 January 1991). Some lawyers started with a salary that remained unchanged until they left the IBP. An example would be Atty. Francisco Rodriguez whose monthly salary in February 1990 of P7,525.00 as Executive Director remained unchanged until he left the IBP in May 1990. His successor to the position, Atty. Antonio Ligon, started with a monthly salary of P4,000.00 in April 1990; increased to P5,262.00 in May; to P7,525 when he was appointed Executive Director in June; increased to P13,500.00 in July. He left the IBP in August 1990.

Another lawyer, Atty. Carolina Ramos-Chua, started as Deputy Director for Bar Discipline in April 1990 with a starting monthly salary of P6,000.00; increased to P8,000.00 in June 1990; then to P13,000.00 in July; and finally to P15,000.00 in October 1990. She likewise received P4,000.00 a month from Atty. Eugene A. Tan in addition to her IBP salary, which he considered as a donation to IBP.

Atty. Julita Espartero started with a monthly salary of P12,000.00 as Deputy Director for Bar Discipline, working part time only. Worked as IBP consultant at the same time that she was working and receiving salary from the law office of Heherson Alvarez.

Atty. John Bongat started as Deputy Director for Legal Aid with a salary of P3,000.00 in June 1990; increased to P8,000.00 in June 1990 in August, then to P10,000 in October, and to P12,000.00 in November 1990. In the approved Reorganization Plan, he was appointed Director for Legal Aid with a monthly salary of P13,000.00. Another lawyer, Atty. Estanislao Angeles IV started with a salary of P13,000.00 as Director for Legal Aid and was receiving the same salary when he left the IBP in January 1991.

Judith Ocampo, formerly working with the Tan, Manzano and Velez Law Office was hired in October 1990 with a salary of P3,000.00 and a new position was created and monthly to accommodate her.

Eva de los Reyes was another employee in Atty. Tan's law office who received a monthly salary of P4,182.75 from the IBP while at the same time working full time in Atty. Tan's law office and receiving salary from the law office. A new position was created in the IBP to which she was purposely appointed.

In contrast to the above substantial increases, from the general staff, Ms. Angelina Mendoza, CPA and IBP Chief Accountant since May 1981, was given an increase of only 16% during the administration of Atty. Tan and now receives a monthly salary of P5,000.00.

Mrs. Aurora G. Geronimo, Head Executive Assistant, has been working with the IBP since 1977. After the increase given, she now receives a monthly salary of P5,900.00 only.

The rank-and-file employees were given a 10% across the board increase in salaries effective 1 October 1990.

III Expenditures/Disbursements

A. Payroll

A comparative study of the payrolls between December 1989 and December 1990, shows the following:

DECEMBER 1-31, 1989
FUND	NO. OF EMPLOYEES	AMOUNT
General IBP Staff	21	P64,574.86
Legal Aid	5	13,848.95
National Grievance
Investigation Office
(NGIO)	9	27, 853.61
	——	—————
TOTAL	35	P105,955.42
		=========
DECEMBER 1-31, 1990
General IBP Staff	24
Legal Aid	14
NACOMBID	10
	——	—————
TOTAL	48	P201,686.53*

* Vouchers for December 1-15 and December 16-31, 1990 state only payment of the salaries of "all IBP Personnel" for the period concerned. (Exh. "I") However, Ms. Angelina Mendoza testified on 24 January 1991, that the payroll for the IBP General staff was P110,000.00 to P115,000.00 monthly; for Legal Aid Employees, P73-75,000.00 per month; for NACOMBID, P52-53,000.00 for employees and one (1) Deputy Director.

The increase in the payroll expenses can readily be attributed to the appointments to the newly-created positions during the period of February to December 1990, after the Tan administration assumed office on 30 January 1990.

B. Travel Expenses

Atty. Eugene A. Tan usually traveled with at least two (2) officers and one (1) employee (Eva de los Reyes) of the IBP Chapters. From 30 January up to the end of 1990 he made about seven (7) out-of-town chapter visitations. (TSN, 17 January, pp. 55, 61, 62). Funds of the Legal Aid were used in these travels (TSN, ibid., p. 64 ) Cost of airplane, tickets, land transportation, hotel bills, meal expenses, porterage fees and photograph expenses were charged by Atty. Tan and company to the Legal Aid Fund (Exhs. "B-1" to "B-6")

For the period of April 6 April 1990 up to 13 July 1990 alone, their travel expenses amounted to P66,000.00 when they made Chapter visitations in Ilocos Sur, Ilocos Norte, Abra, and Negros Occidental (TSN, Ibid., pp. 52-53). For the year 1990, the total travel expenses reached P90,000.00 (TSN, ibid., p. 135).

During the pre-Tan administration, whenever the Board met outside Metro Manila, the members paid out of their own pockets their plane tickets and hotel bills. Two (2) personnel (employees) who recorded the proceedings were paid from the IBP Welfare Fund (TSN, 18 April 1991, pp. 46-47).

C. Publicity

Under the pre-Tan administration an amount of P1,000.00 (later raised to P2,000.00 a month in 1988 or 1989) was set aside in the budget by the Board of Governors for press releases. Atty. Vicente Foz who took care of the press releases of the IBP was the recipient of this amount (TSN, 18 April 1991, PP. 11-12).

Under the Tan administration, press releases were taken care of by Mr. Isidro Roman of the Manila Bulletin. From February to August 1990, payments to him in checks totaled P46,300.00 (Exhs. "C-1" to "C-10"). He acted as a press consultant on matters relating to publicity and press relations, sometimes writing the news items or stories and had them cleared by Atty. Tan. His arrangement with Atty. Tan was that he would receive P8,000.00 a month as press consultant (TSN, 21 February 1991, pp. 52-58; TSN, 28 February 1991, pp 33-34)

There were other newspapermen, aside from Mr. Roman, who did press release work for IBP, such as Cris Icban, Ben Rodriguez, Rey Panaligan.

In the Budget for the period 1 July 1989 to 30 June 1990, the amount of P50,000.00 was set aside for Publicity/Honorarium (Memorandum of Treasurer Sixto S. Esquivias IV to Exec. Director Antonio Ligon, dated 14 June 1990 attached to Exh. "7-a").

In his testimony on 7 February 1991, Atty. Esquivias IV stated that he called the attention of Atty. Tan to a possible deficit in the old budget for media and press release (TSN, 7 February 1991, p. 31). Since then Atty. Tan stopped charging publicity expenses to IBP. In the Budget for July 1990 — June 1991, the amount of P90,000.00 for publicity was earmarked (Exh. "DD").

D. Miscellaneous Expenses:

1. Convention/Sportsfest for IBP Eastern and Western Visayas Regions held in Cebu City on 3-5 May 1990. IBP disbursed a total of P122,152.60 to pay for the hotel bills. (included therein were telephone bills), meals, transportation expenses and sports facilities of the IBP national officers who attended the convention/sportsfest at the Cebu Plaza Hotel. In addition, the amounts of P2,134.50 and P36,670.00 were disbursed to pay for the round-trip airplane tickets of Atty. Eugene Tan, and Atty. Francisco Rodriguez to attend the affair in Cebu City. However, in the case of Atty. Tan, he later issued checks to refund IBP for his plane ticket.

2. Visit of the China Law Society Delegates. The IBP shouldered the hotel bills and other expenses of the Chinese delegates who were billeted at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel. The total hotel bills amounted to P88,381.68. However, according to Atty. Esquivas, they were able to raise P61,000.00 in donations from private individuals so that IBP actually shouldered only about P27,000.00 of the hotel bills. Gifts for the Chinese delegates, P1,310.00; flowers P322.50 miscellaneous expenses P3,0480.54. All these expenses were paid from the IBP General Fund.

3. The "IBP Independence Day" celebration ( an innovation of the Tan administration) in December 1990 called for an expenditure of around P17,771.10. No similar event was celebrated during past IBP administrations. Expenditures for the celebration were also paid from the IBP General Fund.

IV. IBP Revised By-Laws 1

Section 77, Article XI of the IBP By-Laws, which took effect on 1 November 1974, provides for the manner of amending the By-Laws. It reads:

"SEC. 77. Amendments. — These By-Laws may be amended, modified or repealed by the Supreme Court motu proprio or upon the recommendation of the Board of Governors."

According to Atty. Tan, the IBP Revised By-Laws "that took effect on 23 March 1991," were adopted by express mandate of Presidential Decree No. 181 for IBP "to make and adopt by-laws, rules and regulations." The By-Laws were also adopted pursuant to the authority of the Board of Governors to "prescribe such other rules and regulations as may be necessary and proper to carry out the purposes of the Integrated Bar." (Sec. 6, last paragraph, Rule 139-A, Rules of Court). The Revised By-Laws clearly recognize; according to Atty. Tan, that they are always subject to the rule-making authority of this Court which can be exercised any time; hence, it is not necessary that the said By-Laws or their revision be recommended for approval by the Supreme Court. That is why the Revised By-Laws were expressly made effective upon approval by the Board of Governors. (Manifestation and Motion, dated 2 May 1991, submitted by the IBP).

During the regular meeting of the Board of Governors on 30 January 1991, Governor Elias B. Lopez made the observation that the IBP By-Laws were adopted way back in 1973 and since then changes and revisions were made by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, he (Lopez) moved for the creation of a committee to study, prepare and adopt new IBP By-Laws to be submitted to the Board for approval at its next meeting on 23 March 1991. The committee was composed of Executive Vice-President Numeriano G. Tanopo, Jr., as Chairman, Executive Director Carolina Ramos-Chua and Director John G. Bongat, as members.

At the meeting on 23 March 1991, the proposed Revised IBP By-Laws which were prepared by the committee headed by Atty. Tanopo were approved by a majority of the Board after a vote of confidence. Governor Elias B. Lopez narrated how the revised By-Laws were approved. He wanted to discuss the new By-Laws but somebody moved for a vote of confidence. The majority of those present voted for the approval. After that, they adjourned. There was no deliberation or discussion of the new amendments (TSN, p. 16, 29 April 1991). The "Revised By-Laws" were never submitted to the Supreme Court for approval.

Observation:

In creating new positions in the IBP Plantilla, fixing their salaries and making appointments thereto, without the Board's prior approval, Atty. Tan constantly invokes two (2) bases of his "broad" and "extraordinary type" of authority to do so. One is the resolution adopted by the Board of Governors at its organizational meeting on 30 January 1990 which reads:

"RESOLVED, that the President appoint all officers to the vacantpositions within a reasonable period, and the Board of Governors hereby consents in advance to the appointments; thereafter, these appointments can be withdrawn should any of the appointees made (sic) by the President be found not qualified for the position upon the finding by the Board of Governors." (emphasis supplied).

Earlier, during the same meeting, the Board declared vacant the positions of Secretary, Executive Director, Treasurer, Chairman, Vice Chairman, and members of the standing committees and special committees. It is therefore obvious that appointments to the positions other than those declared vacant by the Board could be filled up by Atty. Tan only with prior consent of the Board.

Atty. Tan insists that the scope of the authority granted him by the Board on 30 January 1990 is understood by the Board to include old or existing functions or new positions; that the Board clearly meant it to encompass all the appointments made by him. If this were the intention of the Board, why did it not clearly state so in the above Resolution instead of explicitly referring to the "vacant" positions only? The subsequent ratification or confirmation of the acts of the Executive Committee (headed by Atty. Tan himself) was but perfunctory action of the Board. Minutes of the meetings of the Executive Committee were at all times ratified or confirmed by the Board and almost always the reading thereof was dispensed of usually upon motion or suggestion of Governor Yolanda Q. Javellana. With only three (3) "oppositionists" in the Board (composed of nine (9) Governors Francisco B. Santiago, Elias B. Lopez and Macabangkit B. Lanto, any motion or suggestion presented by any of the three (3) named governors was merely noted and rarely, if ever, carried into voting division of the Board.

Another basis of authority to appoint claimed by Atty. Tan is Section 48 of the IBP By-Laws which, he avers, allowed him to appoint "other officers and employees as the Board may require" What is clear in this rule is that the positions created must be required by the Board which then gives its consent to the appointments. In other words, the Board first requires the creation of the position and later consents to the filling up of positions by the President. During Atty. Tan's administration, he created the positions for the Board and appointed their occupants without prior Board approvals.

Atty. Tan reasons out that because "draconian" measures were urgently called for in order to restore normalcy in a "dormant" IBP when he took over and the difficulty of getting a quorum during the regular monthly meetings of the Board of Governors, the acts of the Executive Committee, which he headed, had to first get the approval or ratification of the Board. In addition, according to him, the authority given to him by the Board necessarily carried with it authority to fix the corresponding compensations, subject to later Board approval and budgetary guidelines. This practice, however, was never followed in previous administrations, according to the testimony of Atty. Teresita Cruz-Sison, former IBP National Treasurer. (TSN, pp. 16 an 18, 1991)

The prevailment of Atty. Tan in the Board of Governors was manifested in the acts of the other officers in the IBP. The National Secretary, Atty. Sixto Esquivias IV, did not question the correctness of expenditure for salaries as long as they were within the budget. Neither did he ask Atty. Tan for the Board's resolutions authorizing the expenses. He just relied on the word of Atty. Tan whom he presumed to have Board authority (TSN, pp. 18, 26, 7 February 1991) .

The Executive Director, Atty. Carolina Ramos-Chua, simply followed whatever instructions Atty. Tan, as head of the Executive Committee and Chairman of the Board, gave her, such as signing pleadings or correspondence prepared by either the Executive Committee or the Board, through Atty. Tan. She never advised Atty. Tan about signing vital or important communications himself, such as correspondence addressed to this Court, unless he solicited her advice. (TSN, pp. 38-40, 25 April 1991).

Atty. Tan's self-importance in the matter of signing vital correspondence manifested when he let Atty. Carolina Ramos-Chua sign the letter addressed to the Supreme Court dated 2 April 1991, furnishing this Court with a copy of the Revised By-Laws and another letter addressed to the Clerk of Court, Atty. Daniel Martinez, dated 13, December 1991. On the other hand, he insisted on being addressed his title of IBP National President, calling attention of the Court for addressing several resolutions personally to him "without the courtesy of the official title as required by protocol and ethics"; that the Court should "lead the example in respecting the IBP; otherwise it would be hard to expect others to respect it." (Comment, dated 31 December 1991, submitted by Atty. Eugene A. Tan).

At the regular meeting of the Board on 21 December 1990, Atty. Javellana and Atty. Tanopo reported that the IBP funds were only good up to the end of December 1990; that Legal Aid was no longer in a position to give additional loans to the IBP. This announcement appears to have been conveniently made after the complaint of the IBP employees was filed in November 1990. If the claim of Gov. Javellana were correct, then the budget for the year 1990-1991 on which the IBP was operating since July 1990 would seem to have been exhausted within six (6) months (from July to December 1990) instead of up to June 1991. In fact, the approved 1990-1991 budget set aside P1,700,000.00 for salaries, wages and allowances (Annex "H" of Atty. Tan's Sworn Statement). 

In fine, while receiving salary from the IBP by its officers is not per se censurable for, in the words of Atty. Javellana, "the stomach still controls . . . like the non-lawyer staff they have also families, . . ." (TSN, p. 56, 11 July 1991), still it is timely to refer to Section 5, Article I of the IBP By-Laws which reflects the true spirit and real purpose of the IBP, and which reads as follows:

"SEC. 5. Positions honorary. — Except as may be specifically authorized or allowed by the Supreme Court, no national or local officer, or committee or commission member shall receive any compensation, allowance or emolument from funds of the Integrated Bar for any service rendered therein, or be entitled to reimbursement for any expense incurred in the discharge of his functions."

The salary adjustments and upgrades for the benefit of a selected few during the Tan administration of the IBP certainly departed from this spirit and purpose.

Recommendation:

From all the foregoing, the Committee finds the complaint lodged by the IBP employees in November 1990 to be well-taken and meritorious.

The fact that Atty. Tan never profited financially from his acts or those of the Board (Memorandum of Atty. Eugene A. Tan, dated 11 August 1991, p. 15) is not in issue here. The evidence adduced supports the employees' complaint of favoritism in salary adjustments, creation of new positions without prior approval of the Board and extravagance/irregularity in the disbursements of IBP funds by Atty. Eugene A. Tan and his administration. In more ways than one, the IBP was made a "milking cow" for certain favorites of Atty. Tan and his administration (several of whom were working in his law office).

The Committee finds the above actuations of Atty. Tan as constituting grave abuse of authority and serious misconduct in office; and if he were still the IBP National President at this time, the same actuations would warrant the recommendation of removal from said office. However, on 30 April 1990, the Court suspended Atty. Tan as IBP President. Thereafter, or on 8 May 1991, while still under suspension, he tendered his resignation as IBP President; while on 30 June 1991, his term of office as IBP President expired. Thus, any sanction that may be imposed on him as IBP President has become largely moot and academic. Nonetheless, the Committee recommends a severe censure for his aforementioned actuations.

Before closing, it should be mentioned that the censurable acts of Atty. Tan, aforedescribed were tolerated, if not encouraged, by the obvious abdication of power by the members of the Board who never questioned such acts but readily ratified or blindly confirmed them. It is unfortunate that the Board of Governors during Atty. Tan's administration, except for a few members, were remiss in the performance of their duties as trustees of the IBP membership.

Manila, 4 October 1991.

 

(SGD.) TEODORO PADILLAAssociate JusticeChairman

 

(SGD.) ABRAHAM R. SARMIENTOAssociate JusticeMember

 

(SGD.) CAROLINA C. GRIÑO-AQUINOAssociate JusticeMember