MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court has ordered Quezon City Rep. Jesus Suntay and lawyer Ferdinand Topacio to explain why they should not be disbarred over separate public remarks that the high court was examining as possible violations of the ethical standards expected of lawyers.
In a resolution promulgated on June 3, 2026 but only made public on Wednesday, the Supreme Court initiated disbarment proceedings motu proprio, or on its own initiative, and consolidated the complaints against Suntay and Topacio into Administrative Case 14934.
The Court said lawyers were "duty-bound to adhere to the rigid standards of mental fitness, maintain the highest degree of morality, and faithfully comply with the rules of the legal profession."
The case arose from statements made by Suntay during a March 3 hearing of the House Committee on Justice on the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte.
During the hearing, Suntay recounted seeing actress Anne Curtis at a hotel and said he imagined what could happen between them but argued that he could not be prosecuted for what he had merely imagined.
The committee voted 13-2-2 to strike the remarks from the official record. Suntay objected, saying the move created a "dangerous precedent" and amounted to censorship of manifestations that were "neither illegal nor immoral."
The controversy widened on March 5 after Topacio defended Suntay during his DWIZ 882.4 radio program "Yes... Yes... Yo! Topacio."
According to the Supreme Court resolution, Topacio criticized actress Jasmine Curtis-Smith, who had denounced Suntay's remarks, by questioning why she posted bikini photos on social media and claiming they were intended to attract desire and publicity rather than qualify as art.
During the same broadcast, Topacio also admitted that he had once lusted after former Gabriela Party-list representative Sarah Elago and said he did not care if people became angry with him.
The remarks drew widespread criticism. Elago described Suntay's comments as unacceptable and disrespectful to women, while Jasmine Curtis-Smith denounced Topacio on social media. House Committee on Women and Gender Equality chair Ann Matibag urged the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to investigate Topacio, and opposition lawmakers condemned his statements as harassment and an abuse of his position as a lawyer.
Separately, the House of Representatives voted 263-8-7 on June 3 to reprimand Suntay. The chamber directed him to render voluntary community service, undergo gender sensitivity training and issue a public apology to Anne Curtis and to women. Suntay later admitted his mistake before the House ethics panel and accepted the disciplinary sanctions.
In opening the administrative case, the Supreme Court consolidated a letter from Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen and Associate Justices Amy C. Lazaro-Javier and Maria Filomena D. Singh urging disciplinary action against Suntay and Topacio, as well as an appeal from the UP Women Lawyers' Circle seeking an investigation into alleged gender-based misconduct.
The Court also cited its ruling in the disciplinary case against lawyer Lorenzo Gadon, reiterating that every lawyer, as an officer of the court, must not only possess good moral character but must also be seen as living according to the highest moral standards of the community.
The Court ordered Suntay and Topacio to submit their comments within a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of the resolution. It also directed the Office of the Bar Confidant and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to submit status reports on any pending administrative cases involving the two lawyers.
Topacio has since maintained his position, saying, "I stand by what I have said. I have never been a hypocrite. I mean what I say and I say what I mean."