MANILA, OCTOBER 26, 2010 (MANILA STANDARD) by Rita Linda V. Jimeno - Last week, when newspapers carried the news that the Supreme Court dismissed the complaint for plagiarism against Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo, he was ambush-interviewed by the media while attending the anniversary of the Philippine Constitution Commission.
He said that all he wanted was to move on and that he did not personally want to take to task the faculty members of the University of the Philippines' College of Law who made public a statement that a decision he penned regarding the issue of comfort women was plagiarized. He said he understood the members of the UP Law faculty and that he respected their passion for their advocacies.
This, to me, defined the goodness of heart and benevolence of Justice del Castillo for which he is widely known. Thus, I thought then that it was best to leave the Court's decision be. However, when I learned that the Supreme Court ordered the UP Law Faculty members who signed the statement which called for the upholding of integrity in the Supreme Court to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of court, I was floored. And it was not just me.
Buzz on the issue would not stop in the legal circles. Was it a case of turning the table on the accusers? Some said it appeared like a petty squabble between the UP College of Law and the Ateneo School of Law since the protagonists generally belong to either camp. The only thing extremely out of the ordinary in this situation is that on one side are faculty members of our national university, while on the other is no less than the country's Supreme Court.
One lawyer said this was kind of reminiscent of the biblical David and Goliath fight. Lawyers, and laymen alike, after all, look up to the Supreme Court—not without fear —as the final arbiter of all disputes and as the Court of last resort. The Supreme Court is, in reality, the most powerful institution in the land. It has the power to review and declare as null and void acts of either the Executive or the Legislative branches on grounds of unconstitutionality. But now the Court has allowed itself to be locked in a battle of sorts where, people know, it will be the judge, too.
What led to this unprecedented situation?
As a brief backgrounder, an elderly woman, Isabelita Vinuya, together with about 70 other elderly Filipino women, filed a petition in the Supreme Court. They claimed that during World War II, Japanese soldiers seized and raped them and held them in houses or cells where they were systematically and repeatedly abused and ravished by Japanese soldiers. They filed the petition to ask that the Executive Branch of government be ordered to take up their cause and seek an official apology from Japan.
Their petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court. However, the comfort women's lawyer, together with a number of faculty members of the University of the Philippines' College of Law, elevated to the Supreme Court their observation that the decision penned by Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo contained some 23 plagiarized portions including footnotes from works of four international law experts. Dean Marvic Leonen of the UP College of Law said that their intention in making a statement entitled "Restoring Integrity" was to save the standing of the Supreme Court in the eyes of our people and of the international community.
In the majority decision on the charges of plagiarism against Justice del Castillo, the Supreme Court held that there was no malicious intention by Justice del Castillo to plagiarize. While the Court itself said that certain portions of the decision penned by him were indeed lifted from unattributed sources and that unless such lifting were amply explained, it "could be construed as plagiarism", the Court nonetheless exonerated Justice del Castillo on the ground of absence of malicious intent and editing errors. The Court said that the legal researcher of Justice del Castillo demonstrated how the attributions of the lifted passages were unintentionally deleted. The court also narrated how the female legal researcher "tearfully expressed remorse at her grievous mistake and grief for having caused enormous amount of suffering for Justice del Castillo and his family."
In the dissenting opinion written by the newest and youngest member of the Supreme Court, Associate Justice Maria Lourdes A. Sereno, she said: "What is black can be called white but it cannot turn white by the mere calling." The unfortunate decision of the majority, she said, specifically made "malicious intent" an essential element of plagiarism where before it had never been relevant at all.
Justice Sereno added that the majority decision will thus stand against the overwhelming international conventions on what constitutes plagiarism. In doing so, she said, the decision has created unimaginable problems for the Philippine academic community which will, from now on, have to find a disciplinary response to plagiarism committed by students and researchers. She added that it will also undermine the protection of copyrighted works by making available to plagiarists the defense of "lack of malicious intent."
Other than Justice Sereno, two justices of the Supreme Court dissented against the majority decision. They were Associate Justices Antonio T. Carpio and Conchita Carpio Morales. Justice del Castillo inhibited himself.
The Philippine Constitution has vested the Supreme Court with the highest power among the three branches of government. But this power by the Supreme Court proceeds and emanates from the sovereign Filipino people, no less. The Court is expected at all times to take the moral high ground and the objectivity of the blind-folded lady justice which symbolizes it. Otherwise, David may just win against Goliath in the bar of public opinion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chief News Editor: Sol Jose Vanzi
© Copyright, 2009 by PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE
All rights reserved
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE [PHNO] WEBSITE
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/phnotweet
This is the PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE (PHNO) Mailing List.
To stop receiving our news items, please send a blank e-mail addressed to: phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Please visit our homepage at: http://www.newsflash.org/
(c) Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
phno-digest@yahoogroups.com
phno-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
