A.C. No. 12354 - MARIA VICTORIA L. YAO, GERARDO A. LEDONIO, AND RAMON A. LEDONIO, COMPLAINANTS, VS. ATTY. LEONARDO A. AURELIO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, respondent's alleged transgressions will be scrutinized using the provisions of this Code. Being sui generis and to protect public interest, disciplinary cases serve as avenues for this Court to determine whether a lawyer is still fit to be a member of the legal profession. [52] The penalty imposed must be equivalent to the extent that the lawyer's transgression erodes the public's confidence in the legal profession and in the rule of law. [53] In the same vein, this Court should not allow disbarment cases to become a vehicle to assert private rights. [54] These cases "serve to curb misbehavior and promote excellent public service in the Judiciary." [55] Thus, "[a]s a ground for disbarment, gross immorality requires a nuanced analysis of our collective notions of morality, the prevailing reality of relationships and families, and the particular circumstances of each case." [56] In Perfecto v. Judge Esidera , [57] this Court stated that the standard for determining morality of conduct in disciplinary proceedings must be secular and not religious. [58] This Court must refrain from applying a religious definition of morality [59] and must "observe a clear, objective, and secular standard in handling disciplinary cases that involve imputations of gross immorality, so as to avoid imposing arbitrary standards of morality." [60] In this connection, the State must not excessively intrude into the personal relationships of lawyers as it may unduly affect their professional standing. [61] Thus, complaints for immorality must not be entertained unless initiated by the victims. [62] These are "the betrayed spouse, the paramour who has been misled, or the children who have to live with the parent's scandalous indiscretions." [63] The essence of an administrative case involving gross immorality, in relation to marital relations, are allegations of illicit affairs and allegations that are undoubtedly and deeply private that only these victims "can credibly recount as borne from their own personal knowledge and firsthand experience." [64] Further, these issues ". . . will put relationships and families in a vulnerable state." [65] Unlike any other person whose concern may be relegated to a mere curiosity, academic, or sentimental desire, the interest of these victims is actual and material. [66] Thus, "in administrative cases that ostensibly implicate private familial and marital matters, the Court is called upon to take into consideration the very deep sensitivities attendant to such cases that bear down on the victims." [67] In this connection, this Court has consistently defined immoral conduct as something that must be so corrupt that it amounts to a criminal act. To be the basis of disciplinary action, [a] lawyer's conduct must not only be immoral, but grossly immoral. That is, it must be so corrupt as to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high degree or committed under such scandalous or revolting circumst