A.M. No. 21-06-20-SC – Legal Ethics – Canon II; Propriety – Use of Dignified Gender-Fair Language Online
In 2021, Attys. Noel Antay, Jr., Ernesto Tabujara III, Israel Calderon, Morgan Nicanor, and Joseph Marion Navarrete had the following conversation thread on Facebook:
Antay: Just prosecuted and helped convict a member of the LGBTA community for large scale estafa. The new convict then began cussing at me accusing me of being a bigot. A first for me. =) The judge (who is somewhat effeminate) comes to my defense and warns the felon to behave. All in a day’s work. =) =) =)
Tabujara: Sino yung bakla na judge sa Taguig sa MTC sa first floor? Naka eye liner and eye shadow pag nag hehearing. Ang taray pa!
Antay: Napromote na yon, Boss Ticky. RTC Judge na kaya yon. =) =) =)
Tabujara: The joke among lawyers is that sa Taguig sa 2nd floor puro may sira sa ulo mga judge, sa baba bakla at mga corrupt
Antay: No comment, Boss Ticky. May mga kaso pa ako doon eh. =) =) =)
Calderon: Baka type ka.
Antay: Bad ka, Prof. =)
Calderon: SP Leon Yatna malay mo. Nakita n’ya intelligence mo given na good looks eh na convict mo pa s’ya. Tapos syempre di ka mapapasakamay n’ya kaya ayon imbyerna I. Charot haha.
Antay: Ang bad mo sakin, Prof =)
Nicanor: SP Leon Yatna oo tama. feel ko type ka bossing. hehehe.
Antay: Ay anak ng garapon. Dalawang Profs na. =) =) =)
Tabujara: Dapat kinurot mo! Charot!
Navarrete: Morgan Nicanor natatandaan ko yung kliente mo dinala sa Ombudsman.
Antay: Kwento ka naman, Prosec Joseph =)
Navarrete: Pinatawag lang ako ng Prof Morgan Nicanor mga panahon nayan. Tapos bitbit niya kliyente niya. Ang natatandaan ko lang is malagkit tingin kay papa, este Prof. Morgan.
Antay: Matikas kasi si Prof. Morgan eh, Habulin. =)
Since these comments were made publicly on a Facebook group, some users reported the lawyers to the Supreme Court for using inappropriate language against members of the LGBTQIA+ and judges. The SC directed the lawyers to explain why they should not be disciplined.
All the other lawyers also expressed regret and apologized for their posts. For his part, Atty. Tabujara described himself as a law professor and a molder of minds of soon-to-be-lawyers; that he even has a radio show where he hosted LGBTQIA+ members in support of their cause. Atty. Tabujara further explained: “Unfortunately, some conversations may rub some persons the wrong way or offend certain people. I do not profess to be perfect. I do make mistakes occasionally. If I have hurt anyone, I am sorry and seek to make amends. No one is 100% perfect.”
ISSUE: Whether or not the lawyers involved in the thread are administratively liable.
HELD: Yes. The Philippines had long recognized the rights of members of the LGBTQIA+. Members of the legal profession must respect LGBTQIA+ individuals’ freedom to be themselves and express who they are, as part of their constitutionally-guaranteed right of freedom of expression. Inappropriate, disrespectful, and defamatory language of lawyers, even in the private sphere, are still within reach of the SC’s disciplinary authority.
The principle of equality has long been recognized under international law. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. Non-discrimination, together with equality before the law and equal protection of the law without any discrimination, constitutes basic principles in the protection of human rights.
The “Safe Spaces Act” explicitly states that: “It is the policy of the State to value the dignity of every human person and guarantee full respect for human rights. It is likewise the policy of the State to recognize the role of women in nation-building and ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men. The State also recognizes that both men and women must have equality, security and safety not only in private, but also on the streets, public spaces, online, workplaces and educational and training institutions.”
Likewise, various SC pronouncements have recognized the rights of members of the LGBTQIA+.
Verily, members of the legal profession may simultaneously incur administrative, civil and criminal liability on the basis of their language alone. It goes without saying that lawyers are held to a higher standard as they all took the Lawyer’s Oath by which they all committed to “support the Constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities therein.
It is not a defense that the discriminatory language was uttered in what was seemingly intended to be private exchanges among macho men. The fact that their exchanges became public trumps whatever intention they may have had to keep their communications private. Seekers of righteousness cannot seek cover under a pledge of anonymity when their actions are brought to light for everyone’s scrutiny.
The lawyers here were reprimanded and sternly warned. However, Atty. Tabujara was meted a stiffer penalty. He was fined Php25k with a stern warning.
Atty. Tabujara’s liability is graver due to his inappropriate words against members of the judiciary. He also did not sincerely apologize for his actions. He is the only one so far who has not acknowledged his participation in the conversation and he seems to completely sidestep the fact that he made such sweeping statements against judges pertaining to their mental health or their sexual orientation. There is no slightest hint of remorse. What makes the offense worse is that Atty. Tabujara is a professor. He claims of being an ally of the LGBTQIA+ yet his apology is insincere – this smacks of hypocrisy for if he was truly unbiased, he would have refrained from engaging in a homophobic and disrespectful conversation.
