this is a private blog.

Tabao v Asis
252 SCRA 581

Facts: This is a complaint filed by the sisters Azucena and Jesusa Tabao against Judge Enrique Asis charging him with gross irregularity in the performance of his duties and abuse of authority and conduct unbecoming of a judge, among others. While acting as MTCC Judge of Tacloban City, Br.1, respondent notarized a Special Power of Attorney purportedly executed in behalf of their aunt Marquita M. Cinco-Jocson, to sell a parcel of land while the latter was confined in the hospital which was done, according to respondent judge, as a “gesture of Christian charity and brotherly love for people in need” considering that the proceeds were used for the payment of the medical expenses. However, an examination of the SPA negates the professed “gesture of Christian charity and brotherly love for people in need” since it was already notarized one month and 20 days before.

Issue: Whether or not the actuations of respondent judge is violative of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Held:

Yes. Canon 5, Rule 5.07 of the Code of Judicial Conduct provides that no judge or other official or employee of the superior courts shall engage in private practice as a member of the bar or give professional advice to clients. It is based on sound reasons of public policy, for there is no question that the rights, duties, privileges and functions of the office of an attorney-at-law are so inherently incompatible with the high official functions, duties, powers, discretions and privileges of a judge of the Regional Trial Court.