UP Law profs defend statement vs SC 'plagiarism'

Calling for integrity in the Supreme Court should not be misinterpreted as an attack against the highest court in the land. This was the argument of the 37 University of the Philippines (UP) College of Law faculty members who now face possible sanctions for issuing last August the "Restoring Integrity" statement. The professors’ statement had criticized the alleged plagiarism committed by Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo in writing a judicial decision, and asked for his resignation for supposedly breaching the court's "high standards of moral conduct." Last October 12, the court had cleared Del Castillo from the accusations of plagiarism. A week later, the high tribunal ordered the professors to "show cause" or explain why they should not be disciplined for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility for lawyers. The code prohibits the airing of public statements that tend to influence public opinion while a case is pending. On Friday, 36 of the law professors submitted a compliance (response) saying that the statement was issued not to malign the court but "to help promote integrity in judicial decision-writing, and thereby maintain the public's respect for the Courts." "Respondents submit that the Restoring Integrity Statement cannot fairly be characterized as an 'institutional attack.' It was certainly not the respondents’ intention to malign the Honorable Court," they said. "On the contrary, the respondents endeavored, as they still do now, to convince the Court to protect itself and the judicial system against the consequences of the misdeed of one of its members and guide 'the Bench and the Bar to ensure only the highest quality of legal research and writing in pleadings, practice and adjudication' by taking preventive and corrective action," the 36 professors added. UP law dean Marvic Leonen, in a separate statement issued on Friday, also said the professors' statement "was issued in discharge of the solemn duties and trust resposed upon us as teachers in the profession of the law and as members of the Bar to speak out on a matter of public concern as one that is of vital interest to us." The 37th professor, Owen Lynch, filed a separate manifestation indicating he is an American citizen and is not part of the Philippine bar. Still, Lynch stated he is among the signatories in the law professors' statement. 'Special interest' In their statement, the professors said that as members of the academe, they have taken a "special interest and duty" to be on the watch against intellectual dishonesty. "Intellectual honesty is a bedrock principle in the academe and plagiarism is intellectual dishonesty and misrepresentation," they said. The professors said that if they turn a blind eye on what they believe is Del Castillo's plagiarism, they will "lose their moral authority to prevent and sanction cheating and plagiarism among students and other members of their academic community." Why single us out? The law professors also underscored that at the height of the controversy last August, various parties — such as the Ateneo Law School and its dean, Cesar Villanueva — came out with statements expressing support for Del Castillo. In their compliance, they questioned why the court seemed to single out the UP law professors' "Restoring Integrity" statement when other groups and individuals also made public comments when the plagiarism mess broke out. Reconsider findings The professors then asked the court to "reconsider and reverse its findings" that the professors violated certain canons in the CPR. If the court refuses to grant this, the professors then requested the court to grant the following requests:

• Hold a hearing for its October 20 show-cause order; and
• Give the professors "a fair and full opportunity" to refute the findings in the show-cause resolution.

UP Law 37 The professors, now dubbed in the legal community as the “UP Law 37," are the following:

1. Dean Marvic Leonen,
2. Froilan Bacungan,
3. Pacifico Agabin,
4. Merlin Magallona,
5. Salvador Carlota,
6. Carmelo Sison,
7. Patricia Salvador Daway,
8. Dante Gatmaytan,
9. Theodore Te,
10. Florin Hilbay,
11. Jay Batongbacal,
12. Evelyn (Leo) Battad,
13. Gwen De Vera,
14. Solomon Lumba,
15. Rommel Casis,
16. Jose Gerardo Alampay,
17. Miguel Armovit,
18. Arthur Autea,
19. Rosa Maria Bautista,
20. Mark Bocobo,
21. Dan Calica,
22. Tristan Catindig,
23. Sandra Marie Coronel,
24. Rosario Gallo,
25. Concepcion Jardeleza,
26. Antonio La Viña,
27. Carina Laforteza,
28. Jose Laureta,
29. Owen Lynch,
30. Rodolfo Noel Quimbo,
31. Antonio Santos,
32. Gmeleen Faye Tomboc,
33. Nicholas Felix Ty,
34. Evalyn Ursua,
35. Raul Vasquez,
36. Susan Villanueva, and
37. Dina Lucenario.

The court said they violated Canons 10, 11, 13 and Rules 1.02 and 11.05 of the CPR. For the supposed submission of a dummy copy of the statement, Leonen violated Canon 10, Rules 10.01, 10.02 and 10.03, the court said.—JV, GMANews.TV