ANONYMOUS COMPLAINT AGAINST ATTY. CRESENCIO P. CO UNTIAN, JR. digest by Catherine Nicole C.

Manuel
CASE
FACTS
Background of the case

 A complaint filed anonymously requested the Court to investigate allegations of sexual harassment that Atty.
Co Untian committed against his students at Xavier University. Copies of the complaint affidavits of the
vicims and the resolution of the Committee on Decorum and Investigation were also sent in a letter sent
later.
 The Committee on Decorum and Investigation recommended the non-renewal of Atty. Co Untian’s teaching
contract due to these allegations, given that he violated the university’s guidelines against sexual
harassment
 The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) recommended to suspend Atty. Co Untian for two years; in its
resolution (XIX-2020-289), the Board of Governors affirmed this, with a modification in their resolution to
disbar Atty. Co Untian. The respondent moved for reconsideration, which reduces the penalty to two years.
An extended resolution was released, in which Director Ramon S. Esguerra (Director Esguerra) explained that
the respondent was not guilty of sexual harassment

PETITIONER
 Antoinette Toyco (Toyco) claims that Atty. Co
Untian expressed interest towards her when
he sent her flowers and messaged her
through one of her fellow law students. He
also texted her texts with a romantic tone
through his own mobile number. Aside from
this, he also invited her to accompany him on
a trip to Camiguin, which she refused. These
unwelcome advances have made her feel
degraded.
 Christina Sagarbarria (Sagarbarria) claims
that Atty Co Untial showed her a photograph
of her face on a naked woman, teasing her
within hearing range of her fellow students.
She claims that the incident caused her
depression, affecting her participation in a
moor court competition
 Lea Dal (Dal) says that in one of her
recitations, she clarified a question asked of
her by saying “Sir, come again?” Atty. Co
Untian then proceeded to respond in a
sexually charged manner, and continued to
narrate the incident to almost all his classes.
The actions of Atty. Co Untian have caused
her to feel embarrassment.
RESPONDENT
 Atty Co Untian claims that the complaints
were made by dismayed students.
 He denies sending flowers and romantic
messages to Toyco, but admits to sending
messages that said “luv u” and “miss u” as
friendly messages, evidenced by misspellings
 As for Sagarbarria, Stty. Co Untian claims
that he confiscated the photograph from
another student, which he then showed
Sagarbarria in a joking manner. He went on
to say that Sagarbarria was his niece, and
that they were close before enough to
discuss sensitive and mature matters. He
also claims that she was not humiliated, and
even gamely lowers her pants to prove it
was not her.
 As for Dal, Co Untian countered that Dal
recited in a disrespectful manner, and in a
joking manner he told her not to use
“slang”. He claims that the joke was made
towards himself.

ISSUES
Principal Issue:
W/N Atty. Co Untian is in violation of RA 7877 by his actions being sexual in nature and having offended or
humiliated his students.
Subordinate issues
1) W/N the lack of demands for sexual favours constitutes as a violation of RA 7877
2) W/N Atty. Co Untian’s close relationship with Sagarbarria justifies showing her the picture in public
3) W/N the text messages sent to Toyco were innocent and devoid of impropriety
4) W/N the remark to Dal was an innocent joke.
5) W/N Atty. Co Untian’s behaviour is a violation of the CPR
RELEVANT PROVISIONS
RA 7877, otherwise known as the “Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995.” Sec. 3(b)
“Sec. 3. Work, Education or Training-related Sexual Harassment Defined. – Work, education or training-related
sexual harassment is committed by an employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor,
professor x x x x x (b) In an education or training environment, sexual harassment is committed: (1) Against one who
is under the care, custody or supervision of the offender; (2) Against one whose education, training, apprenticeship
or tutorship is entrusted to the offender; (3) When the sexual favor is made a condition to the giving of a passing
grade, or the granting of honors and scholarships, or the payment of a stipend, allowance or other benefits,
privileges, or considerations; or (4) When the sexual advances result in an intimidating, hostile or offensive
environment for the student, trainee or apprentice.”

Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) states that a lawyer shall not engage in an unlawful,
dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct. Canon 7 indicates that lawyers shall, at all times, uphold the integrity and
dignity of the legal profession. Rule 7.03 commands lawyers to not engage in conduct that negatively reflects on
their capability to practice law, or behave in ways that discredit the legal profession.

JUDGEMENT
1) YES, the lack of demands for sexual favours still qualifies as a violation of RA 7877
a) RA 7877 does not require the victim’s acceptance of the offender’s untoward advances. Furthermore, an
explicitly made demand is not necessary because it can be discerned from the offender’s actions. Sexual
harassment is committed when actions result in a hostile, intimidating, or offensive environment.
2) NO, the close relationship does not justify showing Sagarbarria the picture in public
a) Despite Sagarbarria’s reaction, Atty. Co Untian’s actions were unacceptable. He showed her the lewd
picture in public, and the respondent could have saved Sagarbarria from embarrassment
3) NO, the messages sent to Toyco should not be considered as innocent messages.
a) The text messages are not harmless, primarily because they were unwelcome messages that caused Toyco
to feel uncomfortable. Furthermore, they were imporper as Atty. Co Untian was her professor at the time
the messages were sent.
4) NO, the statement made to Dal cannot be considered an innocent joke.
a) The remark made was crass; the words he used clearly pertained to the time it would take for him to
ejaculate again. His statement made Dal uncomfortable and humiliated her in front of her peers.
5) YES, Atty. Co Untian’s behavior is unbecoming of a member the legal profession
a) Any unacceptable behavior of a lawyer, whether in public or private capacity, is sufficient to warrant
suspension or disbarment. These responsibilities are heightened because he is a teacher of the law.
Furthermore, he fails to recognize the hurt he may have caused to Sagarbarria, Toyco, and Dal. These
students could not have expressed disgust or disapproval because he was in authority. The offender wields
power over the victim

RULING
SUSPENDED from the practive of law for 5 years, 10 years from teaching law
STERN WARNING that a repetition of the acts will be dealt with in a harsher manner.