SC reprimands 4 lawyers, fines another over 'homophobic' comments

MANILA — The Supreme Court has reprimanded 4 lawyers and fined another attorney over their "disturbing" social media comments about the LGBTQIA+ community, warning they could face more severe sanctions if they repeat a similar offense.

In a 26-page decision, the high court said it reprimanded Atty. Morgan Rosales Nicanor, Atty. Joseph Marion Peña Navarrete, Atty. Noel V. Antay, Jr., and Atty. Israel P. Calderon, and imposed a P25,000 fine on Atty. Ernesto A. Tabujara III for violating Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Rule 7.03 states that "[a] lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession."

The decision stemmed from Facebook exchanges among the lawyers that were "laced with homophobic undertones," the Supreme Court public information office said.

Screengrab from Supreme Court decision

Screengrab from Supreme Court decision

Screengrab from Supreme Court decision

"The posts... include statements that tend to propagate and enforce an unfair and harmful stereotype that are not representative of LGBTQIA+ individuals," it explained, citing the decision.

The Supreme Court reminded that members of the legal profession must respect the freedom of LGBTQIA+ individuals as part of their constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of expression.

"There is no room for such stereotypes in conversations among lawyers," it said.

The ruling, which was promulgated on April 11 but was made public only on Thursday, was concurred unanimously, including Associate Justice Marvic Leonen who issued a separate concurring opinion.

• 'Disturbing' online posts prompt SC to revise lawyers' code - Singh

PRIVACY

Atty. Antay, who initiated the Facebook post, had invoked his right to privacy when tackling the comments made by him and the other lawyers.

But the Supreme Court reiterated that restricting the privacy of one’s Facebook posts to "Friends" only does not guarantee absolute protection from the prying eyes of other people.

"His excuse—that his social media account is locked and the contents thereof cannot be accessed by outsiders—is a mere allegation at best," the court said.

"Allegations are not proof. Further, the fact that the exchanges leaked means that his social media account is not locked as he claims or that there is a rat amidst them."

• Supreme Court disbars lawyer over Facebook post
• 'TikTok wisely': Close to 4,000 new lawyers urged to uphold legal profession, seek justice

Watch more News on iWantTFC