The Supreme Court has disbarred a lawyer after refusing to provide child support.

The high bench said the protection of women and children extends to the cleansing of the ranks of lawyers with the audacity to evade the duty to support one's family and who violate court directives, including those who unlawfully conceal properties beyond the reach of their families and the courts.

Sitting en banc, the Supreme Court in a Per Curiam Decision, imposed the supreme penalty of disbarment on then Atty. Wilfredo A. Ruiz for economic and emotional abuse; gross immorality; committing falsehood and exploiting court processes; unduly delaying a case; impeding the execution of a judgment; and misusing court processes.

In 2008, AAA sued her husband, then Atty. Ruiz, for violation of Republic Act 9262, or the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act (AntiVAWC Law). AAA accused Ruiz of inflicting on her physical violence, emotional stress, and economic abuse by depriving her and her children of support.

She also applied for a Permanent Protection Order granted by the Pasig City Regional Trial Court granted the PPO, which included a directive to Ruiz to provide AAA and their children, BBB and CCC, support equivalent to 50 percent of his income. His employers were thus directed to withhold and automatically remit directly such amount to AAA.

Despite the said directive in the PPO, however, Ruiz still failed to provide for his family. This prompted AAA to enforce the PPO, resulting in the issuance by the RTC of a writ of execution in 2013.

But Ruiz continued to refuse to provide support even with the writ of execution from the RTC. The RTC also had difficulty enforcing the writ of execution as Ruiz could not be found on the five different addresses he provided the Court.

Ruiz also attempted to hide his earnings and properties by executing an agreement with Radelia C. Sy, a woman he was living in with as his common-law spouse.