The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)-Bohol chapter once again released a statement in relation to an alleged “judge-businessman” described as corrupt in social media by a person known for his tirades. The statement of the lawyers’ group was released on Feb. 15, 2023.
The statement of the IBP-Bohol is being published here in toto:
“It has come to our attention and read the Facebook post of Mr. Emmanuel “Willy” Ramasola against a certain ‘judge’ insinuating that the latter is ‘corrupt’ and ‘crook’ by selling his decisions. While Mr. Ramasola did not name the ‘said’ judge, his Facebook posts disparage and put the entire judiciary in a bad light. While supposedly receiving information through text messages, Mr. Ramasola made it appear that these allegations are conclusively true by immediately posting the same on social media.
“If there is any reprehensible violation of our laws committed by this ‘judge’, Mr. Ramasola should lodge a complaint supported by evidence before the proper forum. Posting the same on social media creates the susceptibility that the reading public will immediately form a conclusion that the entire judicial system is corrupt and rotten which is not the case. Criticizing judges on social media, even anonymously, will also be prone to abuse as people may think that it is allowed and can be a norm. Again, at the risk of being redundant, there is a proper forum for gripes and grievances against judges and social media is not that forum.”
“Time and again, it has been held that the freedom of speech and of expression, like all constitutional freedoms, is not absolute. While the freedom of expression and the right of speech and of the press are among the most zealously protected rights in the Constitution, every person exercising them, as the Civil Code stresses, is obliged to act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith. As such, the constitutional right of freedom of expression may not be availed of to broadcast lies and half-truths, insult others, destroy their name or reputation or bring them into disrepute [Belo-Henares vs. Guevarra , AC No. 11394 (December 1, 2016)]”
“Our judges only speak through their decisions and are generally prohibited from speaking on mainstream and social media. As members of the legal profession and officers of the court, it is incumbent upon us and is part of our duties under the Code of Professional Responsibility to defend the judiciary when it is under attack.”
“We urge Mr. Ramasola and the public to refrain from using the social media as an avenue for gripes and grievances against our judges and lodge their complaint before the proper forum.”
THE BACKSTORY
Ramasola effected a series of posts on Facebook criticizing a male judge who allegedly sells his decisions. Ramasola called the judge a “businessman” because the latter has created allegedly an enterprise revolving on the fact that decisions are for sale.
Furthermore, Ramasola posted that allegedly the “judge businessman” has a “girlfriend” . The judge’s girlffiend allegedly is married to a police officer. The judge and the girl allegedly would often meet after lunch inside the chamber.
Ramasola even chided the “businessman judge” for charging an exorbitant fee to solemnize a marriage. The said alleged corrupt judge would charge P5,000 to P10,000 as fee. Normally, Ramasola said, the fee to solemnize a marriage is P300.
A LAWYER’S TAKE
In a radio interview (not on dyTR) on Feb. 16, 2023, Atty. Roland Inting, a former IBP national secretary, gave his position on the issue involving local male judges in Bohol.
The lawyer said he has read the statement of IBP-Bohol and said that it was more of an advice rather than a rebuke.
“Yes nake basa ko. Tambag lang na dili mana nga ingon kwan, getawag namo na ug caveat — tambag na dili na ingon nga pagbadlong.
Pasabot ana, ug duna kay igo nga kamatuoran, ikiha nimu na didto sa Korte Suprema. Looy karon ang huwes sa RTC [Regional Trial Court] kay wala man hinganli, silang tanan [judge] suspect because nobody is being mentioned. All the RTC judges there especially the males are suspect of selling decisions,” Inting said in the interview.
He continued: “And yet there is no evidence because dili mana pwede moakusar ka ug moingon ka nga matud pa… matud pa. Dili na pwede.”
“It is the solemn duty sa Integrated Bar of the Philippines under section 2 of Rule 139A, ang purpose… one of the purposes is to enable the Bar to discharge its public responsibility, more effectively so dili among pasagdan sa Integrated Bar ang mga pasangil na way tinubdan kun dili matud pa,” Inting quipped.
He went on to give a piece of advice to Ramasola: “Mocrticize gani ka. Hinganli aron dili magduda ang katawhan … kinsa kaha nila luoya sa atong mga huwes sa Regional Trial Court.”
Inting warns that “any lawyer can file a case for being alluded to without any evidence.”
The lawyer then gave an example: “Example, okay, pananglitan naay post [nga] naay huwes nga businessman matud pa ni Mr. Ramasola [nga] dunay kabit nga asawa ug pulis ug nagtrabaho sa multiple salas. Identifiable na usa ray babae diha nga asawa ug pulis. Pananglitan ako’y bana… pananglitan… dili ko motambag niini. Ayaw ni buhata, do not do this but if I were the husband I will shoot you. Unsa may akong pasangil, in defense of honor and in defense of my family. You want to destroy my family? I will destroy you first. Wala man kay basehan kun dili tsismis. So I’m giving a very honest advice. Ayaw ni buhata kinsa man galing nang pulis, kinsa man galing namg bana ayaw buhata.”
Inting continued: “Dili ko makatugot nga ang atong judicial system gub-on pinaagi sa marites, tsismis. If you have the evidence go to the proper forum.”
“If there is any corruption. Please, please file the case,” he added.
WILLY’S SIDE
Ramasola was also featured in a radio interview (not in dyTR) and revealed his sentiments about the IBP statement.
He said: “Basically, akong tan-aw ato mura to ug knee-jerk reaction ug kinahanglan gyud sila [IBP] mo issue ug reaction sa akong post. Kay mura man gud bug-at bug-at ang akong mga exposé.”
He continued: “They [IBP] are telling just me na to bring the matter to the proper forum and I believe we are talking about the Supreme Court.”
He added: “I would tell them [IBP] I never said that we will not bring this to the proper forum. Nahinumdum siguro ta sige ko ug expose about the former governor before si Art Yap. Sige ko expose, sige ko ug post but wala ta muundang didto. You all saw me ga file gyud ko mismo didto sa Office of the Ombudsman ug nikiha. Duha to ka kaso, corruption ug plunder. Although si Atty. Dan Lim ang mipirma. We walk the talk.”
“There will be legal action, there will be legal steps in connection to this because this is a serious matter,” he said.
He added: “I want to make it clear. Nga this is not an attempt to attack the judiciary. I fully respect the laws of the land and the constitutionally established institutions and government agencies that are tasked to implement it [justice].”
“Nagpost lang ko para ma inform ang mga tawo because I think it’s already an established reality nga ang social media platform [nga] akoang gipili is Facebook [which] is a powerful and effective tool to share information to the people. Dili ni pangdaot. Dili ko. Wala koy intention nga mandaot ug magkalat ug bakak,” he said. He added that he is using social media to tell the people of “what is happening.”
