Free legal assistance

Gregorio Miguel Pallugna

THE hearing of the case of Ricky Sta. Isabel last Thursday was shown live on national TV and on the Internet for the whole world to see just as every other congressional inquiry “in aid of legislation,” and these kinds of “shows” never fail to entertain despite the admitted sobriety of the matters involved. During the course of the inquiry which lasted for several hours, some senators brought into question the fact that Sta. Isabel was being assisted by lawyers from the Public Attorney’s Office despite the fact that his net assets amounted to around P20 million. Most certainly, it is questionable how a person who cannot be considered an indigent can be represented by the PAO who is paid by the government to render free legal assistance to those who cannot afford their own private counsel. A lawyer from the PAO then tried to explain why they are allowed to represent him before the senate inquiry, but questions continue to hang as to the eligibility of Sta. Isabel to avail of the services of the PAO.

The confusion as to the qualifications for availing of free legal assistance from the government is not a new one. In fact, over the course of recent history, the participation of public attorneys have been questioned in many cases. One might ask if a person who has no money to hire a private counsel but has properties under his name cannot be represented by the PAO, or if a woman who is filing a case for support against her estranged husband can get government-paid lawyers to assist her, or if a minor child of a rich businessman, arrested for committing a crime, can be represented by the PAO despite the apparent wealth of his father. The questions go on and on. Sta. Isabel is definitely not the first.

The Public Attorney’s Office was created through Executive Order No. 292 or the act instituting the Administrative Code of 1987. It is not a new office but an improvement of what was previously known as the Citizen’s Legal Assistance Office or Clao. The PAO, under the law is mandated to represent, free of charge, indigent persons or the immediate members of their family, in all civil, administrative and criminal cases where, after due investigation, it is determined that the interest of justice will be served thereby. To qualify for PAO assistance, one must pass the “merit test”, which involves the determination of the merit or soundness of the case, and the “indigency test” which determines the incapacity of the client to secure the services of a private counsel. The second the more contentious qualification.

The Public Attorneys Office has issued several Memorandum Circulars over time, updating the considerations in applying the “indigency test.” the 2010 Memorandum Circular of the PAO provides that in cities outside Metro Manila, a net income not exceeding P13,000 per month shall qualify a person to be considered as an indigent. The circular further states that ownership of land shall not per se constitute a ground for disqualification of an applicant for free legal assistance in view of the ruling in Juan Enaje vs. Victorio Ramos, et al. (31 SCRA 141, G.R. No. L-22109, Jan. 30, 1970) that the determinative factor for indigency is the income of the litigant and not his ownership of real property. Although, a complication can come in when the person is married because his and his wife’s income can now be considered as communal or belonging to both of them. The question of qualification must be resolved therefore in a case-to-case basis because the circumstances vary with each person.

The courts can very well decide whether the PAO can represent a party in each case, and there is no problem with that. The problem though is that in the meantime, a party-litigant or an accused in criminal cases end up with their cases being delayed sometimes for a long period of time. Thus, if you are a person who does not have enough resources to pay a counsel of your own choice and the PAO’s participation is being questioned by the other party, it might be better to find other alternatives. One available alternative is to seek free legal assistance from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. The IBP provides free legal assistance to qualified persons and the qualifications are not as stringent as those of the PAO. Private practicing lawyers are also mandated to render at least 60 hours of free legal assistance to qualified persons every year. Although, in reality, the free legal assistance given by private lawyers can amount to more then five hours per month. Nevertheless, seek the help of the IBP and the office will help you find a lawyer who may be generous and willing to help your cause. The PAO is almost always overburdened with government work that they would be very happy if you decide to go seek alternative help from other avenues.

• •

Free Legal Advice. As for myself, I intend to further contribute my free services through this column. If you need legal advice, indigent or not, please feel free to ask me through this column by sending your question in letter form to my e-mail address gregpallugna@yahoo.com. A letter will be chosen each week to be published here with the free legal advice, beginning next Tuesday, Feb. 7, 2017.