EDITORIAL - An honest mistake?

The law is what the Supreme Court says it is. That was among the arguments of those who persuaded President Aquino to bow to the court when it upheld the validity of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s appointment of Renato Corona as Chief Justice during the election period, in the twilight of her presidency. From his actions, it looks like President Aquino has gone along with this argument in the case of the Chief Justice.

The law, however, derives its legitimacy from the people and what can be reasonably considered the common good. In yet another controversy, the Supreme Court has found itself under fire from various quarters after it cleared one of its own of plagiarism. Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo was recently absolved by his peers of lifting whole passages from three sources without attribution in a majority ruling that he penned in April. Del Castillo argued for the dismissal of a petition filed by comfort women who wanted an apology from Tokyo and compensation for their ordeal during World War II.

The women filed a motion for reconsideration, and then a supplemental motion in July, accusing Del Castillo of plagiarism. The authors of the disputed passages — Evan Criddle and Evan Fox-Decent, Mark Ellis, and Christian Tams – also came out in public to say that their arguments were plagiarized verbatim and twisted out of context.

Earlier this month, 10 of the SC justices voted to dismiss the plagiarism complaint, pinning the blame on a researcher who accidentally deleted the requisite footnotes for the passages. This could be true, but it would be easier to sell this story to the people if the researcher were identified and at least given a public reprimand, and if the high court issued a strong statement condemning plagiarism and upholding intellectual property rights. In other countries, IPR is a serious issue, with even TV host Oprah Winfrey facing a complaint yesterday for plagiarism. In this country, plagiarism can be a ground for expulsion from school or an enterprise that puts a premium on integrity.

Instead the SC has come out swinging against its critics, threatening sanctions against certain lawyers and professors at the University of the Philippines Law Center. This is rubbing salt on the wound. It threatens freedom of expression and goes against the spirit of democracy. If this is truly a case of an honest mistake, there must be a better way of selling it to a skeptical public.