(Digest) Alawi V Alauya

Case Name SOPHIA ALAWI , complainant, vs. ASHARY M.
ALAUYA, Clerk of
Court VI, Shari'a District Court, Marawi City, respondent.
Topic/ Doctrine JUDICIAL ETHICS; CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICAL STANDARDS
FOR PUBLIC SERVICE (R.A. 6713); ENUNCIATES THE CONDUCT
REQUIRED OF A PUBLIC SERVANT.
Case No. | Date A.M. SDC-97-2-P. February 24, 1997
Ponente NARVASA, C .J
RELEVANT FACTS
 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 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
against my interest be annulled. I was actually fooled by your sales agent,
hence the need to annul the controversial contract."
 Alauya sent a copy of the letter to the Vice-President of Villarosa & Co. The
envelope containing it, and which actually went through the post, bore no
stamps. Instead at the right hand corner above the description of the
addressee, the words, "Free Postage — PD 26," had been typed.
 Alauya also wrote to Mr. Fermin T. Arzaga, Vice-President, Credit &

Collection Group of the National Home Mortgage Finance Corporation
(NHMFC) repudiating as fraudulent and void his contract with Villarosa & Co.;
and asking for cancellation of his housing loan in connection therewith, which
was payable from salary deductions at the rate of P4,338.00 a month.
 Alauya wrote three other letters to Mr. Arzaga of the NHMFC, in all of which,
for the same reasons already cited, he insisted on the cancellation of his
housing loan and discontinuance of deductions from his salary on account
thereof. He also wrote to Ms. Corazon M. Ordoñez, Head of the Fiscal
Management & Budget Office, and to the Chief, Finance Division, both of this
Court, to stop deductions from his salary in relation to the loan in question,
again asserting the anomalous manner by which he was allegedly duped into
entering into the contracts by "the scheming sales agent.”
 On learning of Alauya's letter to Villarosa & Co., Sophia Alawi filed with this
Court a verified complaint to which she appended a copy of the letter, and of
the above mentioned envelope bearing the typewritten words, "Free Postage -
PD 26." In that complaint, she accused Alauya of:
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. "Unauthorized enjoyment of the privilege of free postage . . .;" and
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) . . ."
 And in his comment, Alauya contended that it was he who had suffered
"undue injury, 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. He declared that there was no basis for the
complaint; in communicating with Villarosa & Co. he had merely acted in
defense of his rights. He denied any abuse of the franking privilege, saying
that he gave P20.00 plus transportation fare to a subordinate whom he
entrusted with the mailing of certain letters; that the words: "Free Postage —
PD 26," were typewritten on the envelope by some other person.
 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"
because "counsellor" is often mistaken for "councilor," "konsehal or the
Maranao term "consial," connoting a local legislator beholden to the mayor.
Withal, he does not consider himself a lawyer.
RATIO DECIDENDI/ISSUES
W/N Alauya is guilty of the 4 complaints by the petitioner? - YES
Section 4 of the Code commands that " (p)ublic offiials 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."
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."
The law requires that he exercise that right with propriety, without malice or
vindictiveness, or undue harm to anyone; in a manner consistent with good
morals, good customs, public policy, public order, supra; or otherwise stated, that
he "act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith."
As a member of the Shari'a Bar and an officer of a Court, Alawi is subject to a

standard of conduct more stringent than for most other government workers. As a
man of the law, he may not use language which is abusive, offensive, scandalous,
menacing, or otherwise improper.
As a judicial employee, it is expected that he accord respect for the person and the
rights of others at all times, and that his every act and word should be
characterized by prudence, restraint, courtesy, dignity. His radical deviation from
these salutary norms might perhaps be mitigated, but cannot be excused, by
his strongly held conviction that he had been grievously wronged.
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 full-pledged
members of the Philippine Bar, hence may only practice law before Shari'a courts.
Alauya says he does not wish to use the title, "counsellor" or "counsellor-at-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.
RULING
WHEREFORE, respondent Ashari M. Alauya is hereby REPRIMANDED for the use
of excessively intemperate, insulting or virulent language, i.e., language unbecoming
a judicial o􏰎cer, and for usurping the title of attorney; and he is warned that any
similar or other impropriety or misconduct in the future will be dealt with more
severely.

(Digest) Alawi V Alauya

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Digest) Alawi V Alauya

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Name SOPHIA ALAWI , complainant, vs. ASHARY M.

 Not long afterwards, or more precisely on December 15, 1995, Alauya

 He then proceeded to expound in considerable detail and quite acerbic

 Alauya also wrote to Mr. Fermin T. Arzaga, Vice-President, Credit &

 She deplored Alauya's references to her as "unscrupulous, swindler,

As a member of the Shari'a Bar and an officer of a Court, Alawi is subject to a

You might also like