Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Alawi V Alauya
Alawi V Alauya
Sophia Alawi was (and presumably still is) a sales representative (or
coordinator) of E. B. Villarosa & Partners Co., Ltd. of Davao City, a real estate
and housing company. Ashari M. Alauya is the incumbent executive clerk of
court of the 4th Judicial Shari'a District in Marawi City. They were classmates,
and used to be friends.
It appears that through Alawi's agency, a contract was executed for the
purchase on installments by Alauya of one of the housing units belonging to
the above mentioned firm (hereafter, simply Villarosa & Co.); and in
connection therewith, a housing loan was also granted to Alauya by the
National Home Mortgage FINANCE Corporation (NHMFC).
Not long afterwards, or more precisely on December 15, 1995, Alauya
addressed a letter to the President of Villarosa & Co. advising of the
termination of his contract with the company. He wrote:
" ** I am formally and officially withdrawing from and notifying you of my intent to
terminate the Contract/Agreement entered into between me and your company, as
represented by your Sales Agent/Coordinator, SOPHIA ALAWI, of your company's
branch office here in Cagayan de Oro City, on the grounds that my consent was
vitiated by gross misrepresentation, deceit, fraud, dishonesty and abuse of confidence
by the aforesaid sales agent which made said contract void ab initio. Said sales agent
acting in bad faith perpetrated such illegal and unauthorized acts which made said
contract an Onerous Contract prejudicial to my rights and interests."
He then proceeded to expound in considerable detail and quite acerbic
language on the "grounds which could evidence the bad faith, deceit, fraud,
misrepresentation, dishonesty and abuse of confidence by the unscrupulous
sales agent ** ;" and closed with the plea that Villarosa & Co. "agree for the
mutual rescission of our contract, even as I inform you that I categorically
state on record that I am terminating the contract **. I hope I do not have to
resort to any legal action before said onerous and manipulated contract
allegedly duped into entering into the contracts by "the scheming sales
agent."
b
The upshot was that in May, 1996, the NHMFC wrote to the Supreme
Court requesting it to stop deductions on Alauya's UHLP loan "effective May
1996," and began negotiating with Villarosa & Co. "for the buy-back of **
(Alauya's) mortgage, and ** the refund of ** (his) payments."
c
1.
"Imputation of malicious and libelous charges with no solid grounds through
manifest ignorance and evident bad faith;"
2.
"Causing undue injury to, and blemishing her honor and established
reputation;"
3.
4.
Usurpation of the title of "attorney," which only regular members of the
Philippine Bar may properly use.
She deplored Alauya's references to her as "unscrupulous, swindler,
forger, manipulator, etc." without "even a bit of evidence to cloth (sic) his
allegations with the essence of truth," denouncing his imputations as
irresponsible, "all concoctions, lies, baseless and coupled with manifest
ignorance and evident bad faith," and asserting that all her dealings with
Alauya had been regular and completely transparent. She closed with the plea
that Alauya "be dismissed from the service, or be appropriately disciplined
(sic) ** "
The Court resolved to order Alauya to comment on the complaint.
Conformably with established usage that notices of resolutions emanate from
the corresponding Office of the Clerk of Court, the notice of resolution in this
case was signed by Atty. Alfredo P. Marasigan, Assistant Division Clerk of
Court.
[2]
[4]
[6]
[8]
[9]
Alauya justified his use of the title, "attorney," by the assertion that it is
"lexically synonymous" with "Counsellors-at-law," a title to which Shari'a
lawyers have a rightful claim, adding that he prefers the title of "attorney"
[11]
[12]
[13]
Averring in fine that his acts in question were done without malice, Alauya
prays for the dismissal of the complaint for lack of merit, it consisting of
"fallacious, malicious and baseless allegations," and complainant Alawi having
come to the Court with unclean hands, her complicity in the fraudulent
housing loan being apparent and demonstrable.
It may be mentioned that in contrast to his two (2) letters to Assistant Clerk
of Court Marasigan (dated April 19, 1996 and April 22, 1996), and his two (2)
earlier letters both dated December 15, 1996 -- all of which he signed as "Atty.
Ashary M. Alauya" -- in his Comment of June 5, 1996, he does not use the title
but refers to himself as "DATU ASHARY M. ALAUYA."
The Court referred the case to the Office of the Court Administrator for
evaluation, report and recommendation.
[14]
The first accusation against Alauya is that in his aforesaid letters, he made
"malicious and libelous charges (against Alawi) with no solid grounds through
manifest ignorance and evident bad faith," resulting in "undue injury to (her)
and blemishing her honor and established reputation." In those letters, Alauya
had written inter alia that:
1)
Alawi obtained his consent to the contracts in question "by gross
misrepresentation, deceit, fraud, dishonesty and abuse of confidence;"
2)
Alawi acted in bad faith and perpetrated ** illegal and unauthorized acts ** **
prejudicial to ** (his) rights and interests;"
3)
Alawi was an "unscrupulous (and "swindling") sales agent" who had fooled him
by "deceit, fraud, misrepresentation, dishonesty and abuse of confidence;" and
4)
Alawi had maliciously and fraudulently manipulated the contract with Villarosa
& Co., and unlawfully secured and pursued the housing loan without ** (his)
authority and against ** (his) will," and "concealed the real facts **."
Alauya's defense essentially is that in making these statements, he was
merely acting in defense of his rights, and doing only what "is expected of any
man unduly prejudiced and injured," who had suffered "mental anguish,
sleepless nights, wounded feelings and untold FINANCIAL suffering,"
considering that in six months, a total of P26,028.60 had been deducted from
his salary.
[15]
The Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees (RA 6713) inter alia enunciates the State policy of promoting a
high standard of ethics and utmost responsibility in the public service.
Section 4 of the Code commands that "(p)ublic officials and employees ** at
all times respect the rights of others, and ** refrain from doing acts contrary to
law, good morals, good customs, public policy, public order, public safety and
public interest." More than once has this Court emphasized that "the conduct
and behavior of every official and employee of an agency involved in the
administration of justice, from the presiding judge to the most junior clerk,
should be circumscribed with the heavy burden of responsibility. Their conduct
must at all times be characterized by, among others, strict propriety and
decorum so as to earn and keep the respect of the public for the judiciary."
[16]
[17]
[18]
Now, it does not appear to the Court consistent with good morals, good
customs or public policy, or respect for the rights of others, to couch
denunciations of acts believed -- however sincerely -- to be deceitful,
fraudulent or malicious, in excessively intemperate. insulting or virulent
language. Alauya is evidently convinced that he has a right of action against
Sophia Alawi. The law requires that he exercise that right with propriety,
[20]
As regards Alauya's use of the title of "Attorney," this Court has already
had occasion to declare that persons who pass the Shari'a Bar are not fullfledged members of the Philippine Bar, hence may only practice law before
Shari'a courts. While one who has been admitted to the Shari'a Bar, and one
who has been admitted to the Philippine Bar, may both be considered
"counsellors," in the sense that they give counsel or advice in a professional
capacity, only the latter is an "attorney." The title of "attorney" is reserved to
those who, having obtained the necessary degree in the study of law and
successfully taken the Bar Examinations, have been admitted to the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines and remain members thereof in good
standing; and it is they only who are authorized to practice law in this
jurisdiction.
[21]
Alauya says he does not wish to use the title, "counsellor" or "counsellorat-law," because in his region, there are pejorative connotations to the term, or
it is confusingly similar to that given to local legislators. The ratiocination, valid
or not, is of no moment. His disinclination to use the title of "counsellor" does
not warrant his use of the title of attorney.
Finally, respecting Alauya's alleged unauthorized use of the franking
privilege, the record contains no evidence adequately establishing the
accusation.
FACTS:
Sophia Alawi was a sales representative of E.B. Villarosa & Partners Co., Ltd of
Davao City, a real estate housing company. Ashari M. Alauya is the incumbent executive
clerk of court of the 4th Judicial Shari'a District in Marawi City.
It appears that through Alawis agency, a contract was executed for the purchase on
installments by Alauya of one of the housing units belonging to E.B. Villarosa. A housing
loan was eventually granted to Alauya by the National Home Mortgage
Finance Corporation (NHMFC).
Not long afterwards, Alauya sent a letter to the President of E.B. Villarosa and to
NHMFC saying that she is withdrawing the agreement as his consent was vitiated by
gross misrepresentation, deceit, fraud, dishonestly and abuse of confidence. According
to him, he was induced by Alawi to sign a blanck contract on the assurance that Alawi
would show the completed document to him later for correction, but she never did.
Alawi on her part filed a verified complaint praying that Alauya be dismissed or
disciplined, for the reason, among others that he usurped the title of attorney which only
regular members of the Philippine Bar may properly use.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Alauya violated the code of conduct and ethical standards
for public officials and employees.
HELD:
Yes, Alauya violated the code of conduct and ethical standards for
public officials and employees. Sec. 4 of RA 6713 emphasizes that public
officials and employees at all times respect the rights of others, and refrain
from doing acts contrary to law, public order, public safety and public
interest. ALAUYA, being a member of the Sharia Bar and an officer of the
Court, may not use language which is abusive, offensive, scandalous,
menacing or otherwise improper. His radical deviation from these norms
cannot be excused. Hence, indeed the said code and ethical standards
have been violated.