Case Digest (A.C. No. 5900)
Facts:
Re: Anonymous Complaint Against Atty. Cresencio P. Co Untian, Jr., A.C. No. 5900, April 10, 2019, the Supreme Court En Banc, Reyes, Jr., J., writing for the Court.An anonymous complaint dated May 14, 2002 was filed against Atty. Cresencio P. Co Untian, Jr. (respondent) alleging sexual harassment of female students of Xavier University (Xavier), specifically Antoinette Toyco, Christina Sagarbarria and Lea Dal. The complainant identified only as “law practitioner” forwarded the complaint-affidavits and the Resolution of Xavier’s Committee on Decorum to the Court in a September 26, 2002 letter. The Committee on Decorum had issued a September 5, 2002 Resolution recommending non‑renewal of respondent’s teaching contract for violating Xavier’s anti‑sexual harassment guidelines.
The complainants’ accounts differed in detail but shared a common theme of sexually charged conduct by respondent. Toyco alleged anonymous flowers, persistent text messages culminating in romantic messages from respondent’s phone, and an unwelcome invitation to travel. Sagarbarria alleged respondent showed her a photograph initially of a woman’s face and then the full image of a naked woman in the presence of other students, causing humiliation and emotional distress that interfered with a moot‑court competition. Dal alleged that during a class recitation respondent turned her request to “come again?” into an explicit sexual innuendo which he repeated to other classes, embarrassing her.
Respondent denied wrongdoing, characterized the complainants as disgruntled failing students, and offered alternative explanations: he said Toyco sent him gifts and that his “luv u” texts were innocuous; that Sagarbarria was his niece and the photograph episode was a joking, protective interruption; and that his remark to Dal was a self‑referential joke to discourage slang in class. He asserted the incidents occurred years apart and were only complained of together later.
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) proceedings began with Commissioner Salvador B. Hababag’s January 19, 2009 Report recommending a two‑year suspension from the practice of law. The IBP‑Board of Governors (IBP‑BOG) on April 16, 2010 initially resolved to disbar respondent for gross immoral conduct, but on reconsideration reduced the penalty to a two‑year suspension in its January 27, 2017 Resolution and directed the Commission on Bar Discipline to issue an extended resolution. Director Ramon S. Esguerra’s June 9, 2017 Extended Resolution concluded respondent was not guilty under R.A. No. 7877 (Anti‑Sexual Harassment Law) because there was no proof of a demand for sexual favors, but nonetheless found respondent’s conduct unbecoming of a lawyer and r...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did respondent commit sexual harassment under R.A. No. 7877 and related administrative rules?
- If respondent is guilty, what disciplinary sanction is appropriate for his conduct as a member of the Bar and a ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)