Even private lawyers can provide free legal services to indigent clients under the so-called Lapid Law, according to the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO).
The PAO maintained that there is no necessity to assign a PAO lawyer to represent the accused and another on behalf of the complainant in the same case since Republic Act 9999 or The Free Legal Assistance Act authored by Senator Lito Lapid, mandates incentives to private lawyers who could provide free legal aid to indigent clients.
PAO cited a Bureau of Internal Revenue regulation signed and approved by Finance Secretary Benjamin Diokno on Sept. 8, 2022, in compliance with RA 9999 stating guidelines on the incentives a private lawyer offering free legal assistance, can obtain.
The law is clear that the actual free legal assistance would be exclusive of the minimum 60-hour mandatory legal aid services rendered to indigent litigants as required under a Supreme Court decision, it said.
“We are filing a most humble respectful request for issuance of implementing rules and regulations of RA 9999,” PAO chief Persida Acosta told the Manila Standard.
She believes Supreme Court Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo would reconsider their plea and review the conflict-of-interest provision of the newly SC-approved Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability.
“Along with the 2, 500 public lawyers and other PAO personnel, I appeal to the honorable Chief Justice to please heed our call to remove the ‘detrimental’ provision under the new code, wherein two public lawyers would challenge one another in one and the same criminal or civil case,” she said.
Lawyers from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and the National Union of Lawyers of the Philippines can also provide free legal assistance to indigent clients, she noted.
The Lapid Law provides incentives for practicing private lawyers who offer free legal assistance of up to 10 percent deduction of their gross income derived from the actual performance of the legal profession, Acosta said.
In April, Acosta, together with the agency senior officials, filed a very respectful request to the High Court seeking a review of Section 21 of the new code allowing two PAO lawyers represent the accused and the complainant in one and the same case.
“Not only that, it likewise puts at risk the life and limb of the handling public attorneys because if things go wrong, clients would have enough reason to suspect that their counsels double-crossed them.
Also, it would create a disruption in public service,” she lamented.
