See - 5161.pdf
RE: IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT OF ROLANDO S. TORRES AS A MEMBER OF THE PHILIPPINE BAR. A.C. No. 5161, August 25, 2015.
"x x x.
More significantly, it should be discerned that the root cause of respondent's disbarment was his fraudulent acts against his sister-in-law, the complainant herein. However, no proof was presented to show that he had reconciled or even attempted to reconcile with her so as to show remorse for his previous faults. The dismissal of the criminal complaint against him for Esta/a Through Falsification of Public Documents, filed by complainant is no proof of remorse since the same was based on lack of probable cause. 30 Likewise, its dismissal, could not prove that he was actually innocent of the administrative charges against him, since the parameters and considerations of an administrative case are evidently different from that in a criminal case. As in this case, the lack of probable cause against respondent as found by the prosecutor does not negate his administrative liability already adjudged by this Court. That the prosecutor found that respondent "merely rendered legal services to the Ting siblings"31 does not mean that he rendered the same in accordance with the lawyer's oath and ethical canons.
To add, no other evidence was presented in his Petition to demonstrate his potential for public service, or that he - now being 68 years of age 32 - still has productive years ahead of him that can be put to good use by giving him a chance to redeem himself. Thus, the third and fourth guidelines were neither complied with.
While the Court sympathizes with the predicaments of disbarred lawyers - may it be financial or reputational in cause - it stands firm in its commitment to the public to preserve the integrity and esteem of the Bar. As held in a previous case, "in considering [a lawyer's] application for reinstatement to the practice of law, the duty of the Court is to determine whether he has established moral reformation and rehabilitation, disregarding its feeling of sympathy or pity."33 Ultimately, with the abovediscussed guidelines not complied with, the Court has to be objective and, therefore, denies the petition.
x x x."
While the Court sympathizes with the predicaments of disbarred lawyers - may it be financial or reputational in cause - it stands firm in its commitment to the public to preserve the integrity and esteem of the Bar. As held in a previous case, "in considering [a lawyer's] application for reinstatement to the practice of law, the duty of the Court is to determine whether he has established moral reformation and rehabilitation, disregarding its feeling of sympathy or pity."33 Ultimately, with the abovediscussed guidelines not complied with, the Court has to be objective and, therefore, denies the petition.
x x x."
