By: Atty. Gregorio B. Austral, CPA
PAO may now represent opposing parties
The Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) may now represent opposing parties in a case.
This has been made clear in A.M. No. 23-05-05-SC. July 11, 2023 (Request of the Public
Attorney’s Office to Delete Section 22, Canon III of the Proposed Code of Professional
Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA), A.M. No. 23-05-05-SC (Resolution), [July 11,
2023]).
PAO requested the deletion of the Section 22, Canon III of the CPRA, which
provides in part that said office shall ensure ready access to its services by the
marginalized sectors of society in a manner that takes into consideration the avoidance
of potential conflict of interest situations which will leave these marginalized parties
unassisted by counsel.
To provide greater access to justice by the marginalized sectors, the Supreme
Court provides in the new CPRA that conflict of interest of any of the lawyers of the
Public Attorney’s Office incident to services rendered for the Office shall be imputed
only to the said lawyer and the lawyer’s direct supervisor. Such conflict of interest shall
not disqualify the rest of the lawyers from the Public Attorney’s Office from representing
the affected client, upon full disclosure to the latter and written informed consent.
In denying the PAO Chief’s request, the Supreme Court explained that the
foregoing rules strike a balance between access to justice and the need to preserve the
fiduciary relationship between the lawyer and the client. The CPRA recognizes that
unlike other clients who can seek legal assistance elsewhere should their counsel of
choice be unable to represent them due to a conflict of interest, indigent clients, who
go to the PAO and legal aid organizations less out of choice than out of necessity, are
left with no legal representation if these entities cannot represent them. On the other
hand, indigent clients must also be assured of the loyalty and confidentiality
characteristic of attorney-client relationships, which are essential to the administration
of justice.
Limiting the conflict of interest rule to the handling lawyers seeks to guarantee
access to legal representation by the poor without compromising the fiduciary
relationship between the lawyer and the client. Verily, the Court adopted Sec. 22, Canon
III of the CPRA in the exercise not only of its power to regulate the practice of law, but
also of its constitutional prerogative to promulgate rules concerning legal assistance to
the underprivileged. It is well to note here, that it is the PAO’s principal mandate to
provide free legal assistance to indigents. (Source: Request of the Public Attorney’s
Office to Delete Section 22, Canon III of the Proposed Code of Professional
Responsibility and Accountability, A.M. No. 23-05-05-SC (Resolution), [July 11, 2023])