Sei sulla pagina 1di 2

RE: Anonymous Complaint Against Atty. Cresencio P. Co Untian Jr. b.

b. She later learned that R would narrate the said incident to


AC 5900 En Banc April 10, 2019 almost all of his classes.
6. Committee on Decorum recommended: R’s teaching contract not be
Facts: renewed on account of the accusations of sexual harassment against
1. This is a complaint against R for alleged sexual harassment of him. R was guilty of violating Xavier's anti-sexual harassment
students of Xavier University, CDO guidelines.
2. One who identified himself as a “law practitioner” filed this 7. R's Position:
anonymously, re: acts committed against three female students of a. complaints for sexual harassment was made by disgruntled
the University: Antoinette Toyco, Christina Sagarbarria and Lea Dal. students who failed their classes for the 2001-2002 school
3. Toyco: year as manifested by the fact that the incidents happened
a. R initially expressed amorous interest when he sent her years apart but the complaints were made all at the same
flowers anonymously through another law student. time.
b. R would often text her through the phone of another law b. denied sending flowers and text messages with romantic
student, eventually he texted her through his own phone undertones to Toyco. It was her who gave him gifts during
where he would send romantic messages, poems, love notes Valentine's Day 2002. Texting "luv u" and "miss u" are
and sweet nothings. friendly text messages sent without malice especially
c. R also invited her to go to Camiguin with another law student considering that they were misspelled.
but she turned it down c. As to Sagarbarria's allegations, R countered that he
d. while she was never sexually assaulted, R’s unwelcome confiscated the photograph from another student and
advances made her feel degraded as she could not easily jokingly showed it to her. R noted that she is his niece and
ignore respondent for fear of reprisal. they were previously close. She was never humiliated when,
4. Sagarbarria: showed the photograph because she even gamely lowered
a. R showed her a photograph revealing only the face of a down her pants to prove that it was not her in the
woman and asked her if she knew who the woman in the photograph because unlike her, the naked woman did not
picture was. After she realized that the woman in the picture have any tattoo.
looked like her, R revealed the entire photograph revealing, d. Dal answered disrespectfully when she was called for
a naked woman and teased her within hearing distance of recitation uttering "Come again?" He posited that to inject
other law students. She denied that she was the woman humor during class. R expounded that the joke was directed
because she had a distinctive mark on her back for the past at himself and that Dal never showed any resentment or
six years. showed any sign of humiliation as she even laughed at the
b. the incident caused her depression, fearing what other law joke and continued to sit in front of the class.
students may think of her. She was unable to participate in 8. IBP Proceedings:
a scheduled moot court competition because she broke a. Initial Recommendation: R be suspended from the practice
down in the middle of practice and cried uncontrollably. of law for two years.
5. Dal: b. Integrated Bar of the Philippines-Board of Governors (IBP-
a. recounted that in one of her recitations during R’s class, she BOG) affirmed and modified: resolved to disbar respondent
clarified a question propounded to her saying "Sir, come on the ground of gross immoral conduct. Respondent moved
again?" R retorted "What? You want me to come again? I for reconsideration. Upon MR, it reduced the penalty to two
have not come the first time and don't you know that it took years suspension.
me five minutes to come, and you want me to come again?"
c. while respondent's actions do not constitute sexual underpinnings, which offends the victim or creates a hostile
harassment as defined by law, the way he interacted with his environment would suffice.
students were unbecoming of a member of the legal c. In Philippine Aeolus Automotive United Corporation v.
profession. National Labor Relations Commission, the Court explained
that the essence of sexual harassment is not the violation of
Issue w/ Ruling: the victim's sexuality but the abuse of power by the offender.
1. W/n R should be held administratively liable for his remarks and 2. W/n R violated the Code of Professional Responsibility- Yes. He
actions toward his students? Yes, R’s action constituted sexual violated Rule 1.01 of the Code of CPR which provides that a lawyer
harassment as defined by statute. R’s conduct towards Sagarbarria, shall not engage in an unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
Dal and Toyco created a hostile and offensive environment which has conduct. On the other hand, Canon 7 mandates that lawyers shall, at
no place in a learning institution. What makes respondent's act of all times, uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession.
sexual harassment even more reprehensible is the fact that he is both Further, Rule 7 .03 of the CPR commands lawyers not to engage in
a professor and a member of the legal profession. conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, or
a. R.A. No. 7877 defines education related sexual harassment behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal
as sexual harassment committed by a teacher, instructor, profession.
professor, coach, trainer or any other person who, having a. members of the bar are measured in a more demanding light
authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in an because their actions or inactions not only affect themselves,
education environment, demands, requests or otherwise but also the legal profession and the public's trust and
requires any sexual favor from the other, regardless of respect for the law. As such, any errant behavior on the part
whether the same is accepted by the object of the act. In of the lawyer, whether in a public or private capacity, which
particular, it is committed: tends to show deficiency in moral character, honesty, probity
i. Against one who is under the care, custody or or good demeanor, is sufficient to warrant suspension or
supervision of the offender; disbarment.
ii. Against one whose education, training,
apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the Dispositive:
offender; R is SUSPENDED from the practice of law for five (5) years and ten (10) years
iii. When the sexual favor is made a condition to the from teaching law in any school effective upon the finality of this
giving of a passing grade, or the granting of honors Resolution, with a STERN WARNING that a repetition of the same or
and scholarships or the payment of a stipend, similar act will be dealt with more severely
allowance or other benefits, privileges or
considerations; or
iv. When the sexual advances result in an intimidating,
hostile or offensive environment for the student,
trainee or apprentice.
b. Sexual harassment is committed in an educational
environment when the sexual advances result in an
intimidating, hostile or offensive environment. It is not
necessary that there was an offer for sex for there to be
sexual harassment as a superior's conduct with sexual