Introduction     2  Types  of  Process  Decisions:  

(1)  Importance  of  Legal  Language  and  Legal   •   Procedural  rules  –  orchestrate  the  
Reasoning  Walker,  Vern  R.  (2007)   dynamics  and  timing  of  the  decision-­  
“Discovering  the  Logic  of  Legal  Reasoning,”     making  process.    

Legal  reasoning  –  the  reasoning  involved  in   •   Evidentiary  address  –    issues  about  the  
interpreting  constitutions,  statutes,  and   evaluation  of  evidence,  such  as  the  
regulations,  in  balancing  fundamental   admissibility  of  evidence,  the  legal  
principles  and  policies,  in  adopting  and   sufficiency  of  evidence,  and  burdens  and  
modifying  legal  rules,  in  applying  those  rules  to   standards  of  proof  
cases,  in  evaluating  evidence,  and  in  making  
ultimate  decisions.   Language  Evolution  and  Logic  

3  pragmatic  dimensions  of  legal  reasoning:   •   “Thinking  like  a  lawyer”  –  knowing  how  to  
use  legal  concepts  to  formulate  those  lines  
•   Our  reasoning  is  action-­oriented.     of  reasoning  that  are  acceptable  to  lawyers  

•   It  balances  the  "epistemic  objective"  of   •   Logic  of  legal  reasoning  –  studies  the  
law  against  the  applicable  "non-­ patterns  of  legal  language  that  
epistemic  objectives.”   professionals  generally  regard  as  
appropriate  
•   Legal  decision-­making  occurs  in  real  
time,  uses  limited  resources,  and  is   •   Study  of  legal  logic  –  study  of  appropriate  
usually  based  on  incomplete   use  of  legal  language  
information.    
•   Legal  language  and  reasoning  are  evolving  
Three  types  or  areas  of  legal  reasoning:  
Friedrich  Waismann  and  the  Distinctive  
•   Rule-­based  reasoning   Logic  of  Legal  Language  

2  features:  1)  –  distinction  between  prima   •   Friedrich  Waismann  developed  the  idea  of  
facie  case  and  affirmative  defense;;  2)   open  texture.  
possibility  of  changing  the  rules  themselves  
as  the  result  of  the  reasoning   •   No  concept  and  no  term  in  any  language  
can  ever  be  definitively  precise    
•   Evidence  Evaluation  
•   Open  texture  –not  vagueness  but  rather  the  
Deciding  which  evidence  is  relevant  to   in  eliminable  possibility  of  vagueness  for  
which  issues  of  facts;;   even  those  terms  that  appear  to  be  (and  
are)  maximally  precise  (non-­vague)  at  any  
Evaluating  the  probative  value  of  the   given  time    
relevant  evidence  and  making  findings  of  
fact  based  on  that  evidence  and  principles   •   Vagueness  vs.  open  texture:  
for  the  inferential  aspects  
Vagueness  -­  Actual  vagueness    
•   Second-­order  reasoning  
Open  texture  -­    potential  vagueness    
Process  rules  allow  the  decision-­making  
process  to  be  dynamic,  participatory,  and   •   Anti-­reductionism  in  language    
interactive,  while  ensuring  that  the  process  
serves  the  rule  of  law  and  the  appropriate   Legal  language  might  have  a  logic  and  a  grammar  
balance  of  epistemic  and  non-­epistemic   of  its  own,  a  logic  and  a  grammar  derived  from  the  
objectives.     particular  functions  that  law  is  designed  to  serve  
•   The  core  of  Waismann’s  idea  is  the  claim   language  of  quantum  mechanics  is  different  
that  certain  uses  of  language  may  have   from  ordinary  language.    
rules  and  structures  –  and  not  merely  
semantics  -­-­  that  depart  from  ordinary   •   Legal  language  is,  in  most  cases,  ordinary  
language.   language,  but  that  ordinary  language,  
whether  in  law  or  elsewhere,  exists  subject  
•   Different  natural  or  ordinary  languages   to  unstated  “normal  conditions”  
have  different  grammatical,  syntactic,  or   qualifications.  
semantic  structures.    
Philippines  v.  China,  PCA  Case  No  2013-­19,  
•   Different  linguistic  communities  may  have   July  12,  2016    
not  only  different  meanings  but  also  
different  deeper  linguistic  structures,  as  with   (Note:  Focus  on  the  terminologies  used  like  
the  languages  that  treat  the  prepositional   “islands”  or  “rocks”)    
form  as  something  appended  by  way  of  
endings  to  other  words  rather  than  by   Sr.  Associate  Justice  Antonio  T.  Carpio,  
separate  words,     “The  South  China  Sea  Dispute:  Philippine  
Sovereign  Rights  and  Jurisdiction,”  Ateneo  
•   Different  professional  or  disciplinary  sub-­ de  Naga  Law,  November  24,  2017.    
communities  may  also  have  their  own  
languages,  just  as  different  geographic  or   Core  Issue  of  the  SCS  dispute:  
ethnic  or  political  communities  may  have  
their  own  languages.   •   China  claims  80%  of  PH  EEZ  

•   Question  of  technical  language,  and  of  the   •   Gravest  external  threat  to  the  PH  since  
relationship  between  technical  and  ordinary   WWII  
language  
Two  faces  of  the  SCS  dispute:  
•   Legal  language  as  a  potentially  or  
•   Legal:  Arbitration  Ruling  
partly  technical  language  
•   Physical:  Enforcement  of  the  ruling  
•   Can  law  simply  change  its  definitions  
to  meet  changed  circumstances,   Why  does  South  China  Sea  matter?  
much  as  Waismann  appears  to  
•   China:  Economic  &  military  purposes;;  to  
recommend  for  many  other  linguistic  
sustain  China’s  demand  for  fish  (largest  in  
domains?    
the  world)  &  to  build  a  base  that  will  counter  
•   Law,  is  different.  Law  speaks  to  two   attack  US  missiles  
audiences  for  lawyers  and  judges  
•   Philippines:  Economic;;  extraction  of  oil,  
and  directly  to  citizens  
gas,  methane  hydrates  supposed  to  replace  
•   The  legal  system  may  not  possess  the   for  Malampaya  gas  when  it  runs  out  in  less  
ability  to  change  its  definitions  in  the  face  of   than  10  years  
an  instance  of  manifested  open  texture,  as  
•   United  Staters  &  other  foreign  countries:  
Waismann  argued  was  and  must  be  the  
Freedom  of  overflight  and  navigation    
case  for  the  language  of  science.    
War  is  not  an  option  
•   Different  disciplinary  languages  might  have  
different  logics  and  different  structures  as   •   Our  Constitution  prohibits  [aggressive]  
well  as  (some)  different  meanings,  is  that   war.  
the  very  nature  of  law  and  legal  decision-­
•   We  do  not  have  the  military  means  to  
making  makes  the  language  of  the  law  as  
wage  war  against  China  
different  from  ordinary  language  as  the  
Real  and  practical  option  for  the  Philippines:   shall  be  in  writing    

•   Talk  with  china  while  taking  effective   personally  and  directly  prepared  by  the  
measures  to  fortify  the  arbitral  ruling   judge  

•   Talk  with  China  on  the  COC,  on  the   stating  clearly  and  distinctly  the  facts  
Code  for  Unplanned  Encounters  at  Sea   and  the  law  on  which  it  is  based  
(CUES)  for  naval  and  coast  guard  
vessels,  on  conservation  of  fish  stocks,   signed  by  him  
on  preservation  of  the  marine  
environment,  on  how  our  fishermen  can   and  filed  with  the  clerk  of  the  court.    
fish  in  Scarborough  Shoal,  and  on  
safety  at  sea.  There  are  many  other   (3)  Rule  120,  sec.  2
  
things  to  talk  with  China  on  the  South  
China  Sea  even  if  China  refuses  to   Section  2.  Contents  of  the  judgment:  
discuss  the  arbitral  ruling.    
If  the  judgment  is  of  conviction,  it  shall  state:  
•   File  an  action  for  damages  against  
(1)  the  legal  qualification  of  the  offense  
China  
constituted  by  the  acts  committed  by  the  
•   Raise  this  interest  in  the  United  Nations   accused  and  the  aggravating  or  
general  assembly  by  sponsoring  a   mitigating  circumstances  which  attended  
resolution   its  commission;;    

Strong  political  will  is  the  key:   (2)  the  participation  of  the  accused  in  
the  offense,  whether  as  principal,  
•   There  must  first  be  a  strong  political  will   accomplice,  or  accessory  after  the  fact;;    
on  the  part  of  our  government  to  
advance  our  interest.     (3)  the  penalty  imposed  upon  the  
accused;;  and    
•   Third  party  states  have  started  to  show  
their  support.     (4)  the  civil  liability  or  damages  caused  
by  his  wrongful  act  or  omission  to  be  
•   We  won  the  legal  aspect  of  this  battle;;   recovered  from  the  accused  by  the  
we  have  to  assert  our  right  or  else  we   offended  party,  if  there  is  any,  unless  
will  lose  it  through  the  Doctrine  of   the  enforcement  of  the  civil  liability  by  a  
Acquisition   separate  civil  action  has  been  reserved  
or  waived.    
A.  Legal  Basis    
In  case  the  judgment  is  of  acquittal,  it  shall  
(1)  Constitution,  Art.  VIII,  sec.  14
   state:  

No  decision  shall  be  rendered  by  any  court   1)   whether  the  evidence  of  the  
without  expressing  therein  clearly  and  distinctly   prosecution  absolutely  failed  to  
the  facts  and  the  law  on  which  it  is  based.     prove  the  guilt  of  the  accused;;  or  
2)   merely  failed  to  prove  his  guilt  
(2)  Rule  36,  sec.  1
   beyond  reasonable  doubt.    

Section  1.  Rendition  of  judgments  and  final   In  either  case,  the  judgment  shall  determine  if  
orders.  —  A  judgment  or  final  order:   the  act  or  omission  from  which  the  civil  liability  
might  arise  did  not  exist.  (2a)
  
determining  the  merits  of  the  case    
 
(4)  SC  Administrative  Circular  No.  1  dated   13,  1997
  
Jan.  28,  1988  
FACTS:  Marcelino  Bugarin  was  found  guilty  of  
IMPLEMENTATION  OF  SEC.  12,  ART.  XVIII   four  counts  of  consummated  rape  and  one  
OF  THE  1987  CONSTITUTION   count  of  attempted  rape.  He  assailed  the  trial  
court’s  decision  on  the  ground  that  the  decision  
5.  Decision-­Writing:   does  not  state  the  facts  and  law  upon  which  it  
was  based.  
5.1  All  Presiding  Judges  must  observe  
scrupulously  the  periods  prescribed  in   HELD:  The  requirement  that  the  decisions  of  
Art.  VIII,  Sec.  15  of  the  Constitution.   courts  must  be  in  writing  and  that  they  must  set  
forth  clearly  and  distinctly  the  facts  and  the  law  
5.2  All  judges  are  reminded  that  the   on  which  they  are  based  serves  many  
Supreme  Court  has  applied  the  "Res   functions.  It  is  intended,  among  other  things,  to  
Ipsa  Loquitur"  rule  in  the  removal  of   inform  the  parties  of  the  reason  or  reasons  for  
judges  even  without  any  formal   the  decision  so  that  if  any  of  them  appeals,  he  
investigation  whenever  a  decision,  on  its   can  point  out  to  the  appellate  court  the  findings  
face,  indicates  gross  incompetence  or   of  facts  or  the  rulings  on  points  of  law  with  
gross  ignorance  of  the  law  or  gross   which  he  disagrees.  More  than  that,  the  
misconduct.     requirement  is  an  assurance  to  the  parties  that,  
in  reaching  judgment,  the  judge  did  so  through  
5.3  Judges  should  make  complete  
the  processes  of  legal  reasoning.  It  is,  thus,  a  
findings  of  facts  in  their  decision,  and  
safeguard  against  the  impetuosity  of  the  judge,  
scrutinize  closely  the  legal  aspects  of  
preventing  him  from  deciding  by  ipse  dexit.  
the  case  in  the  light  of  the  evidence  
Vouchsafed  neither  the  sword  nor  the  purse  by  
presented.  They  should  avoid  the  
the  Constitution  but  nonetheless  vested  with  
tendency  to  "generalize  and  to  form  
the  sovereign  prerogative  of  passing  judgment  
conclusion  without  detailing  the  facts  
on  the  life,  liberty  or  property  of  his  fellowmen,  
from  which  such  conclusions  are  
the  judge  must  ultimately  depend  on  the  power  
deduced."    
of  reason  for  sustained  public  confidence  in  the  
(5)  Code  of  Judicial  Conduct,  Canon  3  –   justness  of  his  decision.  The  decision  of  the  
3.01  and  3.02     trial  court  in  this  case  disrespects  the  judicial  
function.  
CANON  3  
Yao  v.  Court  of  Appeals,  G.R.  No.  132428,  
A  JUDGE  SHOULD  PERFORM  OFFICIAL   October  24,  2000    
DUTIES  HONESTLY,  AND  WITH  
IMPARTIALITY  AND  DILIGENCE      

ADJUDICATIVE  RESPONSIBILITIES   Velarde  v.  SJS,  G.R.  No.  159357,  April  28,  
2004    
RULE  3.01  -­  A  judge  shall  be  faithful  to  the  law  
and  maintain  professional  competence.   FACTS:  SJS,  a  registered  political  party,  
sought  the  interpretation  of  several  
RULE  3.02  -­  In  every  case,  a  judge  shall   constitutional  provisions,  specifically  on  the  
endeavor  diligently  to  ascertain  the  facts  and   separation  of  church  and  state;;  and  a  
the  applicable  law  unswayed  by  partisan   declaratory  judgment  on  the  constitutionality  of  
interests,  public  opinion  or  fear  of  criticism.   the  acts  of  religious  leaders  endorsing  a  
candidate  for  an  elective  office,  or  urging  or  
(6)  Due  Process  and  Fair  Play     requiring  the  members  of  their  flock  to  vote  for  
a  specified  candidate.  In  its  Decision,  the  trial  
People  v.  Bugarin,  G.R.  No.  110817-­22,  June   court  failed  to  include  a  dispositive  portion.    
HELD:  A  decision  that  does  not  conform  to  the   •   Subjective  method  
form  and  substance  required  by  the   o   the  version  of  the  facts  accepted  
Constitution  and  the  law  is  void  and  deemed   by  the  judge  is  simply  narrated  
legally  inexistent.  To  be  valid,  decisions  should   without  explaining  what  the  
comply  with  the  form,  the  procedure  and  the   parties’  versions  are    
substantive  requirements  laid  out  in  the   •   In  criminal  cases,  it  is  better  to  present  
Constitution,  the  Rules  of  Court  and  relevant   both  the  version  of  the  prosecution  and  
circulars/orders  of  the  Supreme  Court.   that  of  the  defense,  in  the  interest  of  
fairness  and  due  process.    
Dispositive  part  of  the  decision  or  order  is  the   •   In  appealed  civil  cases,  the  opposing  
investitive  or  controlling  factor  that  determines   sets  of  facts  no  longer  need  to  be  
and  settles  the  rights  of  the  parties  and  the   presented.    
questions  presented  therein,  notwithstanding    
the  existence  of  statements  or  declaration  in  
the  body  of  said  order  that  may  be  confusing.   3.  Issues  or  Assignment  of  Errors    
Where  there  is  a  conflict  between  the  
dispositive  part  and  the  opinion,  the  former   •   Both  factual  and  legal  issues  should  be  
must  prevail  over  the  latter  on  the  theory  that   stated.    
the  dispositive  portion  is  the  final  order  while    
the  opinion  is  merely  a  statement  ordering  
nothing.   4.  The  Court’s  Ruling    

It  is  likewise  demanded  by  the  due  process   •   Contains  a  full  discussion  of  the  specific  
clause  of  the  Constitution.  The  parties  to  a   errors  or  issues  raised  in  the  complaint,  
litigation  should  be  informed  of  how  it  was   petition  or  appeal,  as  the  case  may  be;;  
decided,  with  an  explanation  of  the  factual  and   as  well  as  of  other  issues  the  court  
legal  reasons  that  led  to  the  conclusions  of  the   deems  essential  to  a  just  disposition  of  
court.  The  court  cannot  simply  say  that   the  case.    
judgment  is  rendered  in  favor  of  X  and  against    
Y  and  just  leave  it  at  that  without  any  
justification  whatsoever  for  its  action.     5.  The  Disposition  or  Dispositive  Portion    

Fundamental  Requirements  of  a  Decision:   •   In  a  criminal  case,  the  disposition  should  

include  a  finding  of  innocence  or  guilt,  
1.  Statement  of  the  Case     the  specific  crime  committed,  the  
penalty  imposed,  the  participation  of  the  
The  Statement  of  the  Case  consists  of  a  legal   accused,  the  modifying  circumstances  if  
definition  of  the  nature  of  the  action.     any,  and  the  civil  liability  and  costs    
 
2.  Statement  of  Fact     •   In  a  civil  case  as  well  as  in  a  special  civil  
action,  the  disposition  should  state  
•   Objective  or  reportorial  method  
whether  the  complaint  or  petition  is  
o   the  judge  summarizes,  without  
granted  or  denied,  the  specific  relief  
comment,  the  testimony  of  each  
granted,  and  the  costs.    
witness  and  the  contents  of  each  
exhibit    
•   Synthesis  method  
o   the  factual  theory  of  the  plaintiff    
or  prosecution  and  then  that  of    
the  defendant  or  defense  is    
summarized  according  to  the    
judge’s  best  light  
B.   Legal  Development  
  

(1)  Progression  of  Legal  Reasoning  

 
 •   Violates  Article  XII  Sec  2  of  the  1987  
Constitution:  

•   The  exploration,  development  and  

utilization  of  natural  resources  shall  
be  under  the  full  control  and  
supervision  of  the  State  

•   Absence  of  the  provision  in  1935  and  1973  

Consti  authorizing  the  State  to  grant  
licenses,  concession  or  leases  for  the  
exploration,  exploitation,  development  or  
utilization  of  natural  resources.  

•   By  such  omission,  the  utilization  of  

inalienable  lands  of  the  public  domain  
  through  license,  concession  or  lease  is  no  
longer  allowed  
(2)  Living  Tree  Doctrine

PANGANIBAN’S  SEPARATE  OPINION:  
A  doctrine  of  constitutional  interpretation  that  
says  that  a  constitution  is  organic  and  must   •   Petition  should  be  dismissed  by  reason  of  
be  read  in  a  broad  and  progressive  manner   MOOTNESS  
so  as  to  adapt  it  to  the  changing  times.   •   The  FTAA  is  now  implemented  by  a  Filipino  
corporation  
La  Bugal-­B’laan  Tribal  Assn.  v.  Ramos,  G.R.   •   RA  7942  is  constitutional  
No.  127882,  January  27,  2004.
 •   If  the  intention  of  the  drafters  were  strictly  to  
confine  foreign  corporations  to  financial  or  
technical  assistance  and  nothing  more,  
FACTS:     their  language  would  have  
been  unmistakably  restrictive  and  
•   RA  7942  (Philippine  Mining  Act  of  1995)   stringent.    
defines  the  modes  of  mineral  agreements   •   e.g.  Foreign  corporations  are  prohibited  from  
for  mining  operations  and  outlines  the   providing  management  or  other  forms  of  
procedures  for  their  filing  and  approval,   assistance,  or  words  to  that  effect.    
assignment,  transfer  and  withdrawal  and   •   The  conscious  avoidance  of  restrictive  
fixes  their  terms.   wording  bespeaks  an  intent  not  to  employ  -­-­
•   FTAA  with  WMCP  covering  99,387  hectares   in  an  exclusionary,  inflexible  and  limiting  
of  land  in  South  Cotabato,  Sultan  Kudarat,   manner  -­-­  the  expression  agreements  
Davao  del  Sur  and  North  Cotabato   involving  technical  or  financial  assistance.  
•   DENR  Secretary  issued  the  IRR  of  RA  7942  
•   Petitioner  demand  that  DENR  stop  the   Constitutional  Interpretation  and  the  
implementation  of  RA  7942   Vagaries  of  Contemporary  Events:  

ISSUE:  Whether  or  not  RA  7942  is   •   The  Concom  did  not  mean  to  tie  the  hands  of  
constitutional   the  President  and  restrict  the  latter  only  to  
agreements  on  rigid  financial  and  technical  
HELD:    (Panganiban’s  ponencia)   assistance  and  nothing  else.    
 
•   RA  7942  is  UNCONSTITUTIONAL   •   The  Constitution  would  have  to  be  a  living  
document  that  would  answer  the  needs  of  
 the  nation  well  into  the  future.  Thus,  the   (3)  Manifest  Dynamic
Obergefell  v.  Hodges,  
unerring  emphasis  on  flexibility  and   No.  14-­556,  June  26,  2015,  576  U.S.  ___  
adaptability.   (2015),  

•   Constitutions  are  designed  to  meet  not  
only  the  vagaries  of  contemporary   FACTS:  Groups  of  same-­sex  couples  sued  
events.  They  should  be  interpreted  to  cover   their  relevant  state  agencies  in  Ohio,  Michigan,  
even  future  and  unknown  circumstances.  It   Kentucky,  and  Tennessee  to  challenge  the  
is  to  the  credit  of  its  drafters  that  a   constitutionality  of  those  states'  bans  on  same-­
Constitution  can  withstand  the  assaults  of   sex  marriage  or  refusal  to  recognize  legal  
bigots  and  infidels  but  at  the  same  time   same-­sex  marriages  that  occurred  in  
bend  with  the  refreshing  winds  of  change   jurisdictions  that  provided  for  such  marriages.    
necessitated  by  unfolding  events    
HELD:  Due  Process  Clause  of  the  Fourteenth  
Edwards  v  A.G  Canada  [1930]  AC  123,  1   Amendment  guarantees  the  right  to  marry  as  
DLR  98  [PC]  (Canada).     one  of  the  fundamental  liberties  it  protects,  and  
that  analysis  applies  to  same-­sex  couples  in  
FACTS:  The  appellants  brought  the  case   the  same  manner  as  it  does  to  opposite-­sex  
before  the  court  to  have  the  SCC  rule  that   couples.    
based  on  s.24  women  could  be  considered  
candidates  for  the  Senate.  The  first  decision   Judicial  precedent  has  held  that  the  right  to  
was  that  women  were  excluded  from  the   marry  is  a  fundamental  liberty  because  it  is  
meaning  of  “persons.”   inherent  to  the  concept  of  individual  autonomy,  
it  protects  the  most  intimate  association  
ISSUE:  Do  the  words  “qualified  persons”  in  s.   between  two  people,  it  safeguards  children  and  
24  of  the  BNA  Act  1867  include  women?  And   families  by  according  legal  recognition  to  
therefore  are  women  eligible  to  be  called  and   building  a  home  and  raising  children,  and  it  has  
become  members  of  the  senate?   historically  been  recognized  as  the  keystone  of  
social  order.    
HELD:The  use  of  the  word  “persons”  on  s.24  
includes  both  males  and  females.  Therefore   Because  there  are  no  differences  between  a  
women  are  eligible  to  be  summoned  to  and   same-­sex  union  and  an  opposite-­sex  union  
become  members  of  the  Senate.   with  respect  to  these  principles,  the  exclusion  
of  same-­sex  couples  from  the  right  to  marry  
RATIO:  When  determining  the  meaning  of  a   violates  the  Due  Process  Clause  of  the  
particular  word  in  an  Act  of  Parliament  you   Fourteenth  Amendment.    
must  consider:  
C.   Role  of  Lawyers  
  
The  external  evidence  derived  from  extraneous  
circumstances  such  as  previous  legislation  and   (1)  UN  Basic  Principles  on  the  Role  of  
decided  cases  and  the  internal  evidence  
Lawyers

derived  from  the  Act  itself  
Adopted  by  the  Eighth  United  Nations  Congress  on  the  
The  BNA  act  planted  in  Canada  a  living  tree   Prevention  of  Crime  and  the  Treatment  of  Offenders,  
capable  of  growth  and  expansion  within  its   Havana,  Cuba,  27  August  to  7  September  1990  
natural  limits.    (paragraph  44)  –  Constitution  
should  be  given  a  large  and  liberal   •   Access  to  lawyers  and  legal  services  
meaning.  
•   Special  safeguards  in  criminal  justice  
Ambiguous  language  should  be  constructed  in   matters  
favor  of  inclusion  
 •   Qualifications  and  training   •   Judges  should  exercise  their  contempt  
powers  for  correction  and  preservation,  not  
•   Duties  and  responsibilities   for  retaliation  or  vindication.  
•   The  court  must  utilize,  to  the  fullest  extent,  
•   Guarantees  for  the  functioning  of   soundness  and  clarity  of  reasoning,  and  
lawyers   must  not  appear  to  have  been  swayed  by  
momentary  fits  of  temper.  
•   Freedom  of  expression  and  association  
(3)  “To  dare  where  even  justices  fear  to  
•   Professional  associations  of  lawyers   tread.”  


•   Disciplinary  Proceedings     •   “to  dare  when  even  angels  fear  to  tread”  

(2)  Sereno,  J.  (Dissenting  Opinion),  A.M.  No.   •   To  have  no  hesitation  in  tackling  a  
10-­10-­4-­SC,  March  8,  2011     situation  that  even  the  wisest  of  judges  
(justices)  would  avoid  
FACTS:  37  members  of  the  faculty  of  the  
University  of  the  Philippines  College  of  Law    
published  a  statement  on  the  allegations  of  
plagiarism  and  misrepresentation  relative  to    
the  Court’s  decision  in  Vinuya  v.  Executive  
Secretary.  Essentially,  the  faculty  of  the  UP  
College  of  Law,  headed  by  its  dean,  Atty.  
Marvic  M.V.F.  Leonen,  calls  for  the  resignation  
of  Justice  Del  Castillo  in  the  face  of  allegations  
of  plagiarism  in  his  work.  

HELD:  Issuance  of  show  cause  order  

resolution  to  the  respondents  (UP  Law  Faculty)  
as  to  why  they  should  not  be  disciplined  as  
members  of  the  Bar  per  issues  stated  above.  

SERENO’s  DISSENT:  

•   By  issuing  the  Show  Cause  Order,  the  Court  

puts  itself  in  the  precarious  position  of  
shackling  free  speech  and  expression.  
•   The  negative  public  exposure  caused  by  
such  acts  of  plagiarism  cannot  be  attributed  
solely  to  the  UP  Law  Faculty.  
•   The  responses  published  by  different  sectors  
constituted  nothing  more  than  an  exercise  
of  free  speech  –  critical  commentary  calling  
a  public  official  to  task  in  the  exercise  of  his  
functions.  
•   Despite  the  assertion  that  the  present  case  is  
merely  an  exercise  of  the  Court’s  
disciplinary  authority  over  members  of  the  
bar,  a  closer  look  reveals  the  true  nature  of  
the  proceeding  as  one  for  indirect  contempt