SC upholds with finality Noli Eala's disbarment

The Supreme Court denied with finality former Philippine Basketball Association (PBA) commissioner Jose Emmanuel "Noli" Eala’s appeal to reverse its earlier ruling which ordered Eala's disbarment. In a minute-resolution, the High Court said Eala failed to present any new and substantial evidence that would warrant a reversal of the High Court’s August 1 decision removing his name from the roll of attorneys. Eala was disbarred for grossly immoral conduct after he was found guilty of carrying an illicit affair with a married woman. Shortly after the first ruling was handed down, Eala resigned his post as PBA commissioner. "Acting on the motion for reconsideration, the Court resolved to deny with finality the said motion, considering that the basic issues have already been passed upon and there is no substantial argument to warrant the reversal of the questioned decision," the Supreme Court said. The High Tribunal, in its per curiam decision, reversed a resolution of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines' (IBP) Board of Governors, which dismissed recommendations of the IBP's investigating commissioner that Eala should be disbarred for violating at least two provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Court noted that in engaging in an affair, Eala ridiculed the institution of marriage as a mere "scrap of paper," and made light his lawyer's oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws. "As a lawyer, respondent should be aware that a man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife are presumed to have entered into a lawful contract of marriage. In carrying on an extra-marital affair... and despite himself being married, he showed disrespect for an institution held sacred by the law. And he betrayed his unfitness to be a lawyer," the Court ruled. Under Rule 1.01 of Canon 1 of CPR, "a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct." On the other hand, Rule 7.03 of Canon 7 states that "a lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession." In its decision, the Supreme Court further stated that under Section 27 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court of the Philippines, a lawyer may be disbarred for any deceit, malpractice or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude." The Court gave weight on the admission of Eala, who was married to a Mary Anne Tantoco, that there was indeed a "special" relationship between him and a certain Irene Moje, wife of complainant Joselano Guevarra, although he denied that he was "flaunting a scandalous relationship." "The case at bar involves a relationship between a married lawyer and a married woman who is not his wife. It is immaterial whether the affair was carried out discreetly," the Court said. It further held that the fact that the marriage between complainant Guevarra and Moje was subsequently declared void does not clear Eala of the charge of adultery since the acts complained of took place before the marriage was dissolved. - GMANews.TV