NATIONAL
Advocates Philippines
Supreme Court Reprimands And Fines Five Lawyers For Homophobic Social Media Posts
The Supreme Court reprimanded and imposed fines on five lawyers for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility through inappropriate and offensive comments on Facebook.
The 26-page Per Curiam Decision was issued by the Supreme Court, reprimanding Atty. Morgan Rosales Nicanor, Atty. Joseph Marion Peña Navarrete, Atty. Noel V. Antay, Jr., and Atty. Israel P. Calderon. Additionally, Atty. Ernesto A. Tabujara III was fined PhP25,000 for violating Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Court also issued a stern warning that future repetitions of such offenses would be dealt with more severely.
The case stemmed from a June 29, 2021, resolution by the Court that required the lawyers to explain certain Facebook posts. The posts in question revolved around derogatory and offensive comments about members of the LGBTQIA+ community and judges.
Atty. Antay initiated the thread with a post detailing a case involving the conviction of an LGBTQIA+ individual, which led to derogatory remarks. Atty. Tabujara joined in with a comment that made fun of the judge's appearance and implied inappropriate behavior. Atty. Calderon further added offensive remarks. Atty. Nicanor and Atty. Navarrete also engaged in inappropriate banter about the subject. The Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) recommended admonition for the lawyers, noting their lack of decorum and respect.
In its decision, the Supreme Court emphasized that lawyers' right to privacy on social media is not absolute, even if their accounts are set to private or restricted settings. The Court cited the Belo-Henares v. Guevarra case of 2016, stating that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy for social media posts.
Even locked accounts do not completely bar access to others. The Court further underscored that derogatory and offensive language, even in private settings, can adversely affect a lawyer's professional fitness and bring discredit to the legal profession. The Court stressed the importance of respect for LGBTQIA+ individuals' rights and the principle of non-discrimination and equality.
The ruling highlighted that inappropriate language on social media can potentially lead to criminal liability under the Safe Spaces Act, indicating that gender-based sexual harassment, including transphobic and homophobic slurs, may result in penalties such as fines and imprisonment.
The Court reprimanded Atty. Nicanor, Atty. Navarrete, Atty. Antay, and Atty. Calderon for their use of derogatory language against the LGBTQIA+ community, emphasizing the need for gender-fair language and respectful conduct among lawyers. Notably, the Court imposed a heavier penalty on Atty. Tabujara due to his lack of remorse and his reckless and malevolent behavior, which included harmful stereotypes and offensive statements.
The 26-page Per Curiam Decision was issued by the Supreme Court, reprimanding Atty. Morgan Rosales Nicanor, Atty. Joseph Marion Peña Navarrete, Atty. Noel V. Antay, Jr., and Atty. Israel P. Calderon. Additionally, Atty. Ernesto A. Tabujara III was fined PhP25,000 for violating Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Court also issued a stern warning that future repetitions of such offenses would be dealt with more severely.
The case stemmed from a June 29, 2021, resolution by the Court that required the lawyers to explain certain Facebook posts. The posts in question revolved around derogatory and offensive comments about members of the LGBTQIA+ community and judges.
Atty. Antay initiated the thread with a post detailing a case involving the conviction of an LGBTQIA+ individual, which led to derogatory remarks. Atty. Tabujara joined in with a comment that made fun of the judge's appearance and implied inappropriate behavior. Atty. Calderon further added offensive remarks. Atty. Nicanor and Atty. Navarrete also engaged in inappropriate banter about the subject. The Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) recommended admonition for the lawyers, noting their lack of decorum and respect.
In its decision, the Supreme Court emphasized that lawyers' right to privacy on social media is not absolute, even if their accounts are set to private or restricted settings. The Court cited the Belo-Henares v. Guevarra case of 2016, stating that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy for social media posts.
Even locked accounts do not completely bar access to others. The Court further underscored that derogatory and offensive language, even in private settings, can adversely affect a lawyer's professional fitness and bring discredit to the legal profession. The Court stressed the importance of respect for LGBTQIA+ individuals' rights and the principle of non-discrimination and equality.
The ruling highlighted that inappropriate language on social media can potentially lead to criminal liability under the Safe Spaces Act, indicating that gender-based sexual harassment, including transphobic and homophobic slurs, may result in penalties such as fines and imprisonment.
The Court reprimanded Atty. Nicanor, Atty. Navarrete, Atty. Antay, and Atty. Calderon for their use of derogatory language against the LGBTQIA+ community, emphasizing the need for gender-fair language and respectful conduct among lawyers. Notably, the Court imposed a heavier penalty on Atty. Tabujara due to his lack of remorse and his reckless and malevolent behavior, which included harmful stereotypes and offensive statements.
Aug 17, 2023
