Antonio Lorenzana vs Ma. Cecilia Austria

A.M. No. RTJ-09-2200 – 731 Phil. 82 – 720 SCRA 319 – Legal Ethics; Judicial Ethics – CPRA; Canon II; Propriety – Responsible Use of Social Media – Posting of Sexually Suggestive Photos

In 2008, Antonio Lorenzana filed several administrative complaints against Judge Ma. Cecilia Austria. One of the complaints he filed was about Austria’s Friendster profile. Lorenzana alleged that the judge is guilty of impropriety when she displayed her photographs where she can be seen posing with her upper body barely covered by a shawl, allegedly suggesting that nothing was worn underneath except probably a brassiere.

Austria explained that there is nothing wrong with the posts; that they could hardly be considered vulgar or lewd. She added that an “off-shouldered” attire is an acceptable social outfit under contemporary standards and is not forbidden. She further stated that there is no prohibition against attractive ladies being judges; she is proud of her photo for having been aesthetically made.

ISSUE: Whether or not Austria is administratively liable for her social media post.

HELD: Yes. She was admonished by the SC with a stern warning not to repeat the complained act. While judges are not prohibited from becoming members of and from taking part in social networking activities, they do not shed off their status as judges. They carry with them in cyberspace the same ethical responsibilities and duties that every judge is expected to follow in his/her everyday activities.

Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression. Joining a social networking site is an exercise of one’s freedom of expression. Nevertheless, in the exercise of their freedom of expression, judges should always conduct themselves in a manner that preserves the dignity of the judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the Judiciary.

The rules are: Judges shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of their activities. As a subject of constant public scrutiny, judges must accept personal restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. In particular, judges shall conduct themselves in a way that is consistent with the dignity of the judicial office.

Based on these rules, Austria disregarded the propriety and appearance of propriety required of her when she posted on Friendster photos of herself wearing an “off-shouldered” suggestive dress and made this available for public viewing. It may be acceptable for Austria to show a picture of herself in the attire she wore to her family and close friends, but when she made this picture available for public consumption, she placed herself in a situation where she, and the status she holds as a judge, may be the object of the public’s criticism and ridicule.

Read full text.