Here are select February 2013 rulings of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on legal and judicial ethics: Attorney; confidentiality of proceedings against attorneys; exception. Atty. Fortun filed a petition for contempt against respondents for publicizing the disbarment case against him in media.

Section 18, Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court states that “proceedings against attorneys shall be private and confidential. However, the final order of the Supreme Court shall be published like its decisions in other cases.” The purpose of the rule is not only to enable the Court to make its investigations free from any extraneous influence or interference, but also to protect the personal and professional reputation of attorneys and judges from the baseless charges of disgruntled, vindictive, and irresponsible clients and litigants; it is also to deter the press from publishing administrative cases or portions thereto without authority. Malicious and unauthorized publication or verbatim reproduction of administrative complaints against lawyers in newspapers by editors and/or reporters may be actionable. Such premature publication constitutes a contempt of court, punishable by either a fine or imprisonment or both at the discretion of the Court. However, Section 18, Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court is not a restriction on the freedom of the press. If there is a legitimate public interest, media is not prohibited from making a fair, true, and accurate news report of a disbarment complaint. In the absence of a legitimate public interest in a disbarment complaint, members of the media must preserve the confidentiality of disbarment proceedings during its pendency.

In this case, the filing of a disbarment complaint against Atty. Fortun is itself a matter of public concern considering that it arose from the Maguindanao Massacre case. The interest of the public is not on Atty. Fortun himself but primarily...