Judge inhibits from case vs. “lawyer”

Judge Monalila Tecson, of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities-branch 1, had inhibited herself from hearing a case against Francisco Rico Pada, a barrister who has been defending himself from a criminal charge for acting as a lawyer without being a member of the bar yet.

“While the accusation of Mr. Pada has no factual basis, the undersigned presiding judge, nonetheless, voluntarily inhibits herself from further hearing the case if only not to give him any reason to doubt the integrity of the proceedings and the decision of the case that may be rendered therein,” Tecson’s order reads.

Tecson’s decision was in effect granted the petition that Pada filed in court for her inhibition because of alleged partiality of the judge against him in the case being heard.

The case against Pada was filed by Elizabeth Vercide who opposed the Pada motion to have Judge Tecson inhibit herself from handling the case but Tecson denied Vercide’s opposition.

After Tecson declared her inhibition from the case, the case was then re-raffled and it is now with the court branch presided by MTCC Judge Francisco Seville.

Vercide sued Pada for alleged violation of the provisions of Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code, or usurpation of authority and official functions, based on allegations that Pada acted as a lawyer and even notarized documents even if he had no authority from the Supreme Court as a lawyer.

On July 17, 1998 Pada allegedly prepared and notarized an affidavit of loss of certificate of registration in favor of his neighbor Tereso Basmayor of barangay Pooc, Talisay City, contended Vercide.

Pada countered however that the charges were mere “fabricated, baseless and unfounded” and that the one who allegedly instigated the filing of the case was Provincial Board member Juan Bolo, the lawyer of Vercide in a civil case she filed in another court against Pada.

Vercide and Pada have also been fighting each other in a pending civil case in another court about a property that Pada allegedly sold to Vercide.

Court records showed that Bolo strongly objected that Pada – a barrister – would be allowed to defend himself in a civil case for specific performance and damages, but the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Pada.

“The accused moves is a clear proof of his evil design to delay the proceedings of this case,” Bolo said. — Rene U. Borromeo/RAE