The Supreme Court has ordered Quezon City 4th District Representative Bong Suntay and lawyer Ferdinand Topacio to explain why they should not face the ultimate penalty of disbarment over their separate public remarks involving actresses Anne Curtis and Jasmine Curtis-Smith, as well as former Gabriela Party-list Representative Sarah Elago.
In a six-page en banc resolution promulgated on June 3, 2026 and made public on July 8, the High Court initiated motu proprio disbarment proceedings against Suntay and Topacio, consolidating the complaints into Administrative Case No. 14934.
The Court ordered the two lawyers to file their respective comments within a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of the resolution.
“Representative Suntay and Atty. Topacio are ordered to SHOW CAUSE why they should not be meted the ultimate penalty of disbarment by filing with the Court their respective comments within a NON-EXTENDIBLE period of ten (10) days from receipt of this Resolution,” the Court stated.
The Supreme Court also directed the Office of the Bar Confidant to submit an updated list of any pending administrative cases involving Suntay and Topacio within the same period. Meanwhile, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) was ordered to provide a status report on any complaints pending against them.
The administrative case stemmed from remarks made by Suntay during the March 3 hearing of the House Committee on Justice on the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte.
During the hearing, Suntay recounted seeing Anne Curtis at a hotel and admitted imagining her in a sexual context, while insisting that he was merely describing his thoughts and had committed no unlawful act.
His remarks immediately drew widespread criticism from lawmakers, women’s groups, and the public. The House Committee later voted to strike the statements from the official record, while the House of Representatives subsequently reprimanded Suntay, directing him to undergo gender sensitivity training, render community service, and issue a public apology.
The controversy widened after Topacio defended Suntay during his DWIZ radio program. He criticized Jasmine Curtis-Smith for condemning Suntay’s statements and questioned why female celebrities post bikini photos on social media if they did not want to attract men’s attention.
The Court also cited Topacio’s separate statement during the same program in which he admitted that he had once “desired” Sarah Elago after seeing her.
In its resolution, the Supreme Court emphasized that lawyers are expected to uphold the highest standards of morality and professionalism, both inside and outside the courtroom.
The High Court reiterated that membership in the legal profession is a privilege reserved for individuals of good moral character and that lawyers must avoid conduct that is unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or scandalous because such behavior reflects on their fitness to remain members of the Bar.
As of writing, neither Suntay nor Topacio has released an official statement in response to the Supreme Court’s show cause order. Topacio, however, had earlier maintained that he stood by his previous remarks.
