Gadon Disbarment April 20 2018

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Commission on Bar Discipline Integrated Bar of the Philippines Manila

ZENA B. BERNARDO, EVANGELINE P. HERNANDEZ, HERNANDEZ, NONA D. ANDAYA-CASTILLO,, ANDAYA-CASTILLO NATIVIDAD DELA CRUZ NATIVIDAD, NATIVIDAD, JOSE MARI TOMINES CALLUENG, CALLUENG, JENNIFER AIZA SANTAOLAYA, SANTAOLAYA, FAITH ANGELIE CATALAN, CATALAN, MARK VINCENT LIM, LIM, Complainants, -versus-

LORENZO GADON, Respondent .

COMPLAINT NO. _________ For: Disbarment, Violation of Rule 138 of Rules of Court and Code of Professional Responsibility

x--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

VERIFIED COMPLAINT PREFATORY STATEMENT

“I don’t care if I am disbarred. I will still eat delicious food and live comfortably. I don’t depend on income from lawyering alone, unlike some IBP officials,” lawyer Lorenzo Gadon said in a statement.

NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING

This is a VERIFIED COMPLAINT  COMPLAINT  submitted to the Honorable Commission on Bar Discipline, Integrated Bar of the Philippines pursuant to Rule 139-B, Rules of Court, and the Rules of Procedure of the Commission on Bar Discipline, Integrated Bar of the Philippines for the disbarment of LORENZO GADON, GADON, for GROSS MISCONDUCT, GROSS IMMORAL CONDUCT AND VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWYER’S OATH.

THE COMPLAINANTS

The complainants, having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, hereby depose and state:

1. The complainants complainant s in the VERIFIED COMPLAINT are the following:

a. ZENA B. BERNARDO, BERNARDO, of legal age and with office address at Regus Manila, 5/F Gateway Tower, General Roxas Avenue cor. General Aguinaldo, Araneta Center, Cubao, Quezon City; b. EVANGELINE P. HERNANDEZ, HERNANDEZ, of legal age and with address at Hustisya, Rm. 3, 2/F, Erythrina Bldg, No. 1 Maaralin cor. Matatag, Barangay Central, Quezon City; c. NONA D. ANDAYA-CASTILLO, ANDAYA-CASTILLO, of legal age and with office address at 2055 Road 5, NDC Compound, Sta. Mesa, Manila; d. NATIVIDAD DELA CRUZ NATIVIDAD, NATIVIDAD, of legal age and with office address at NCCP, 879 EDSA cor. Quezon  Avenue, Quezon Quezon City; e. JOSE MARI TOMINES CALLUENG, CALLUENG, of legal age and with office address at 1550 J. Fajardo St., Sampaloc, Manila; f. JENNIFER AIZA SANTAOLAYA, SANTAOLAYA, of legal age and with office address at Block 37, Lot 56, Southern Heights 2 Subdivision, San Pedro, Laguna; g. FAITH ANGELIE CATALAN, CATALAN, of legal age and with office address at 276 Maria Payo St., Tondo, Manila; h. MARK VINCENT LIM, LIM, of legal age and with office address at Vinzons Hall, University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon Ciy.

2. We are concerned citizens, activists, community workers, mothers who are disgusted by the actions and words of the respondent, and we believe he should be removed from the rolls of the legal profession. profession.

3. Most of us were present during the incident in Baguio City, in which the respondent hurled invectives and flashed the dirty finger against a group of supporters of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

4. We have also seen news reports on television, newspapers, radio, internet regarding the same action and statements of the respondent.

5. We have also monitored the negative public reaction created by the respondent words and actions in Baguio City.

6. Notices and other processes from this Honorable Commission may be served at Hustisya Office, Rm. 3, 2/F, Erythrina Bldg, No. 1 Maaralin cor. Matatag, Barangay Central, Quezon City;

7. We are filing an administrative administrative complaint against respondent Lorenzo Gadon for gross misconduct, gross immoral conduct and violation of his oath as a lawyer and the Code of Professional Professional Responsibility, on two instances:

a. On 10 April 2018, Mr Gadon flashed the dirty finger and publicly cursed supporters of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno outside the Supreme Court in Baguio City, during the quo warrant proceedings against the Chief Justice; b. In March 2016, Mr Gadon made hateful remarks against Filipino Muslims during an interview conducted by GMA News TV.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

10 A pril 2018 incident

8. On 10 April 2018, Mr Gadon made the following statement against supporters of Chief Justice Sereno outside the Supreme Court in Baguio City, and in front of the media  – MR GADON: Kinanginamo!

Ikaw

bobo,

putangina

mo

ka!

9. In the same incident, he also made the following statement – statement  – MR GADON: Mga bobo! Mga bobo!

10. In the same incident, he flashed the dirty finger against supporters of Chief Justice Sereno, as can be seen in this picture – picture  –

11. These statements and actuations appear to be made by a madman unfit to be representing the legal profession.

12. The public response over his actions has been nothing but outrage.

13. The following tweet, (LawStdntsofMNL) is an example:

by

Law

Students

of

Manila

14. Nonetheless, Nonetheles s, Mr Gadon has been unapologetic over his actions in Baguio, even taking a swipe against officials of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and threatening disbarment proceedings against them, stating – stating  –

MR GADON: I dont care if I am disbarred , disbarred  , I wil stil eat delicious food and live comfortably , I dont

depend on income from lawyering alone unlike some ibp officials (sic) (Emphasis supplied.) xxx MR GADON: I will also file diabarment case agaisbt any IBP official for supporting sereno. Because their act of support can be considered as abetting the illegal acts of Sereno , they are upholding the violation of the constitution by sereno therefore they are also liable for violating the code of ethics (sic) (Emphasis (Emphasis supplied.) xxx

 March  Marc h 2016 inc i dent

15. On the other hand, Mr Gadon made the following remarks against Filipino Muslims during an interview with GMA News TV, stating – stating – MR GADON: Sampung beses akong luluhod sa (Moro Islamic Liberation Front para huwag nang manggulo), iiyak ako ng bato at dugo, kapag labing-isang pagkakataon at tumanggi pa rin sila, lulusubin ko sila doon at dadalhin ko ang buong sandatahang Pilipinas at papatayin ko silang lahat, susunugin ko ang bahay nila. Burahin ang lahi nila, kahit masunog ang kaluluwa ko sa impiyerno gagawin ko 'yan (Emphasis supplied.)

16. His anti-Muslim statement has also prompted two Muslim lawyers, Algamar Latiph and Musa Malayang to file for disbarment proceedings against Mr Gadon in the Supreme Court in April 2016 for improper conduct.

17. In fact, as late as October 2017, the same complaining Muslim attorneys had been seeking the continuation of the disbarment case they have filed against Mr Gadon.

18. With his latest hysterics, we are adding our names as among those calling for his disbarment.

GROUNDS FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF THE VERIFIED COMPLAINT

19. Due to the foregoing facts, It is our most respectful position that these actions by Mr Gadon are in violation of the following:

a. Section 20, Rule 138, Rules of Court – Court –

xxx Section 20. Duties of attorneys. — It is the duty of an attorney: xxx

(f) To abstain from all offensive personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to the honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which he is charged; (Emphasis supplied.) xxx b. Rule 7.03, Code of Professional Professional Responsibility Responsibility –  –

Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, law , nor shall he whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession . (Emphasis supplied.)

c. Rule 8.01, Code Code of Professional Professional Responsibility Responsibility –  –

Rule 8.01 - A lawyer shall not, not, in his professional dealings, use language which is abusive, offensive or otherwise improper . improper . (Emphasis supplied.)

20. Further, violations of the above-mentioned above-mentioned provisions warrant either the removal or disbarment or suspension of attorneys, under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, to wit  –

xxx Section 27. Attorneys removed or suspended by Supreme Court on what grounds. — A member of the bar may be removed or suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for   any deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly immoral conduct, or conduct,  or by reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he is required to take before the admission to practice,  or for a willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court, or for corruptly or willful appearing as an attorney for a party to a case without authority so to do. (Emphasis supplied.) xxx

Violation of the attorney’s duty to abstain   from all

offens offens ive iv e pers pers onalit onalityy

21. With the actions and statements of Mr Gadon, he has shown that he has not abstained from all offensive personality, but had in fact exhibited offensive personality before the public, against Filipino Muslims, and against supporters of Chief Justice Sereno.

22. The respondent cannot find refuge from the exception in the provision which allows offensive personality only in cases ‘required by the justice of the cause with which he is charged’, as the respondent has absolutely no personality in the Supreme Court proceedings in Baguio City.

23. In fact, he attempted to delude the public and the Court that he is an Amicus Curiae, by trying to submit a poorly written, spelling and grammar-challenged Amicus Curiae Comment on the Quo Warranto proceeding.

24. But the respondent respondent has fooled no one, as he is not an  Amicus Curiae in the Quo Warranto proceedings, due to the fact that he was never invited to become an amicus curiae by the Court, nor can he even pretend to be an impartial personality on the matter, nor can he even present himself as an expert on quo warranto cases.

25. Further, his Comment is not allowed by the Rules of Court, as he is not even a party to the Quo Warranto proceedings.

26. This kind of ignorance of the law, rules and even elementary grammar and spelling has clearly no place in the legal profession.

27. To recap, this is the absolutely offensive personality displayed by the respondent, and no clearer proof is these words and picture – picture –

xxx MR GADON: Kinanginamo!

Ikaw

bobo,

putangina

xxx MR GADON: Mga bobo! Mga bobo! xxx

mo

ka!

xxx MR GADON: Sampung beses akong luluhod sa (Moro Islamic Liberation Front para huwag nang manggulo), iiyak ako ng bato at dugo, kapag labing-isang pagkakataon at tumanggi pa rin sila, lulusubin ko sila doon at dadalhin ko ang buong sandatahang Pilipinas at papatayin ko silang lahat, susunugin ko ang bahay nila. Burahin ang lahi nila, kahit masunog ang kaluluwa ko sa impiyerno gagawin ko 'yan (Emphasis supplied.) xxx

Vi ola olation of profes profes s ional ional respons ibil ibi lity not to eng eng ag e in conduct that that advers ely ely affects affects his fitnes s to practice practic e law law

28. Obviously, his conduct in Baguio City, and his remarks against Muslim Filipinos show conduct which adversely affects his fitness to practice law, as clearly his statements and actions display a behavior showing unfitness to bear the serious responsibility of being a member of the Bar.

29. In full view of the public and the media, the respondent respondent acted like a madman (apologies to actual madmen) unleashed for a public spectacle. In fact, reviewing the quality of his unsolicited pleadings, he appears to be more fit as a third-rate actor (apologies to actual third-rate actors) than a respectable member of the Bar.

Violation of professional responsibility to not behave in public life in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal  profes  pr ofes s i on

30. With his statements and actions, the respondent has clearly discredited the legal profession.

31. The following tweets exhibit how low the legal profession had found itself in due to the respondent’s actions:

a. The legal profession as untrained in spelling – spelling –

b. The public ashamed at lawyers in general – general –

c. Fellow lawyers being ashamed at his hysterics – hysterics –

d. The respondent turned into a meme – meme –

e. Lawyering described d escribed as a s a foolish fool ish profession, profess ion, among others – others –

f. Non-lawyers Non-lawyers validating their decision decision not not to pursue law law –  –

g. The respondent as setting the bar too low for the legal profession – profession –

h. Lawyers judged as as also ugly on the inside – inside –

i. The respondent as the new bar for unprofessionalism unprofessional ism –  –

Violation of professional responsibility, in his professional dealings, not to use language which is abusive, offensive or otherwis otherwis e improper .

32. There is no further proof to this violation than to revisit everything he has said and done in the above-mentioned facts – facts  –

Xxx MR GADON: Kinanginamo!

Ikaw

bobo,

putangina

xxx MR GADON: Mga bobo! Mga bobo! xxx

mo

ka!

xxx MR GADON: Sampung beses akong luluhod sa (Moro Islamic Liberation Front para huwag nang manggulo), iiyak ako ng bato at dugo, kapag labing-isang pagkakataon at tumanggi pa rin sila, lulusubin ko sila doon at dadalhin ko ang buong sandatahang Pilipinas at papatayin ko silang lahat, susunugin ko ang bahay nila. Burahin ang lahi nila, kahit masunog ang kaluluwa ko sa impiyerno gagawin ko 'yan (Emphasis supplied.) xxx

33. Truly, his words and actions speak for themselves. There is simply no reason for the respondent to remain as a member of the legal profession.

34. His continued existence as a member of the legal profession is literally sickening, and figuratively spits at the sacrifices our lawyers had made to raise the level of the profession in the service of those who have nothing in life except a chance at justice.

35. All of these grounds based on the above-mentioned above-menti oned facts constitute the basis to conclude that respondent Gadon has committed gross misconduct, gross immoral conduct and violations of the lawyer’s oath.

36. These actions justify not only mere suspension from the legal profession, but outright removal from the legal profession.

37. The respondent deserves not a day more in the company of lawyers in the profession.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, we most respectfully pray that the Honorable Commission on Bar Discipline: a. Give due course to this verified complaint; b. After notice and hearing, recommend to the Board of Governors the DISBARMENT OF RESPONDENT LORENZO GADON FOR GROSS MISCONDUCT, GROSS IMMORAL CONDUCT AND VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWYER’S OATH.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands this __ day of  April 2018, at Quezon City City

ZENA B. BERNARDO Complainant

EVANGELINE P. HERNANDEZ Complainant

NONA D. ANDAYA-CASTILLO Complainant 

NATIVIDAD DELA CRUZ NATIVIDAD Complainant

JOSE MARI TOMINES CALLUENG Complainant 

JENNIFER AIZA SANTAOLAYA FAITH ANGELIE CATALAN Complainant Complainant 

MARK VINCENT LIM Complainant 

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) QUEZON CITY ) S.S.

VERIFICATION

We, ZENA B. BERNARDO, EVANGELINE P. HERNANDEZ, HERNANDEZ, NONA D. ANDAYA-CASTILLO, ANDAYA-CASTILLO, NATIVIDAD CRUZ NATIVIDAD, NATIVIDAD, JOSE MARI TOMINES CALLUENG , CALLUENG, JENNIFER AIZA SANTAOLAYA, SANTAOLAYA, FAITH ANGELIE CATALAN, CATALAN, MARK VINCENT LIM, LIM, of legal age, Filipino and with office address at Erythrina Bldg, No. 1 Maaralin cor. Matatag, Barangay Central, Quezon City, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, hereby depose and state: 1. We are the Complainants in the above-captioned case; 2. We caused the preparation and filing of the foregoing Verified Complaint; 3. We have read the contents of said Verified Complaint and we attest that the same are true and correct of my own personal knowledge and based on the records in my possession.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this  __ day of April April 2018 in Quezon City.

ZENA V. BERNARDO Complainant

EVANGELINE P. HERNANDEZ Complainant

NONA D. ANDAYA-CASTILLO Complainant 

NATIVIDAD DELA CRUZ NATIVIDAD Complainant

JOSE MARI TOMINES CALLUENG Complainant 

JENNIFER AIZA SANTAOLAYA FAITH ANGELIE CATALAN Complainant Complainant 

MARK VINCENT LIM Complainant 

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this __ day of April 2018 in Quezon City, complainant exhibited to me their government IDs as indicated above.

Doc. No. _____; Page No. _____; Book No. _____; Series of 2018.