SC asked to withdraw order vs 37 faculty members

MANILA, Philippines - Officials of the University of the Philippines Diliman asked the Supreme Court (SC) to withdraw its show cause order against 37 faculty members of the UP College of Law who criticized an associate justice for reportedly committing plagiarism.

In a statement, the UP Diliman Executive Committee, composed of college deans, directors, the chancellor, vice chancellors and the university registrar, has denounced plagiarism while upholding academic integrity.

“As educators, scholars and researchers, our worth is measured by the integrity, excellence and discipline we bring to our work. Plagiarism undermines that integrity and destroys the value of scholarship,” the statement read.

The committee expressed strong disagreement with the Supreme Court’s decision to exonerate Justice Mariano del Castillo from charges of plagiarism based on the lack of malice or negligence on his part (in Re: Del Castillo, A.M. No. 10-7-17-SC, 15 October 2010).

“The lack of malice or intent does not excuse the act of plagiarism. The Court has undermined academic freedom by threatening to discipline 37 faculty members of the UP College of Law for taking a principled position on a grave academic concern,” the committee stressed.

The executive committee issued the statement during a meeting on Wednesday.

The law faculty brought to the high court’s attention the alleged plagiarism made by Justice Del Castillo in a decision on the issue of comfort women.

The Supreme Court, however, on Oct. 12, cleared Del Castillo, claiming the footnotes attributing to the proper sources were allegedly “accidentally deleted” by the associate justice’s legal researcher.

The SC added that Justice Del Castillo and his researcher did not have any motive for omitting the attributions.

The SC afterwards, issued a resolution asking 37 UP College of Law faculty members to explain why they should not be disciplined for calling for Del Castillo’s resignation in August.

Among those facing possible sanction are UP Law Dean Marvic Leonen, former law dean Pacifico Agabin, UP vice president for legal affairs Theodore Te, lawyer Evalyn Ursua, and 33 others.

The high court said the law faculty violated the Code of Professional Conduct for Lawyers, which bars making public statements that may influence public opinion while a case is ongoing.

However, some of the 37 law professors asked for an extension of their deadline to explain why they should not be penalized for alleged violation of canons of the Code of Professional Responsibilities of Lawyers.

They asked the SC to give them 20 more days, or until Nov. 20, to respond to the order.

Yesterday should have been the deadline for the filing of the reply to the SC order received by the law professors last Oct. 21. But they said 10 days were not enough since some of them intend to consult separate counsels.

The UP law professors and lawyers, all under administrative supervision of the Supreme Court, were ordered to explain why a “dummy” statement was submitted even if it was supposedly “not a true and faithful reproduction” of the UP faculty of law.

Court administrator and spokesman Jose Midas Marquez explained that the Code bars lawyers from making public statements that tend to influence public opinion while a case is pending.

Chief Justice Renato Corona signed the order. Nine others concurred:

Associate Justices Presbitero Velasco Jr., Antonio Eduardo Nachura, Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, Arturo Brion, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Martin Villarama Jr., Jose Perez and Jose Mendoza.

Three others dissented – Senior Justice Antonio Carpio, Associate Justices Conchita Carpio-Morales and Ma. Lourdes Sereno. Associate Justice Roberto Abad was on leave.

Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo, subject of the plagiarism charge, took no part in the voting.

It was found during earlier SC probe that only 37 out of 81 faculty members signed the statement condemning the alleged plagiarism and calling for resignation of the magistrate. – With Edu Punay