Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
the Malaya Lolas Organization in the case of Vinuya vs Romulo. Atty. Herminio Harry Roque
Jr., counsel for Vinuya et al, questioned the said decision. He raised, among others, that the
ponente in said case, Justice Mariano del Castillo, plagiarized three books when the
honorable Justice twisted the true intents of these books to support the assailed decision.
These books were:
a. A Fiduciary Theory of Jus Cogens by Evan J. Criddle and Evan Fox-Descent, Yale Journal of
International Law (2009);
b. Breaking the Silence: Rape as an International Crime by Mark Ellis, Case Western Reserve
Journal of International Law (2006); and
c. Enforcing Erga Omnes Obligations by Christian J. Tams, Cambridge University Press
(2005).
As such, Justice del Castillo is guilty of plagiarism, misconduct, and at least inexcusable
negligence. Interestingly, even the three foreign authors mentioned above, stated that their
works were used inappropriately by Justice Del Castillo and that the assailed decision is
different from what their works advocated.
ISSUE: Whether or not there is plagiarism in the case at bar.
In detail:
1. Whether or not, in writing the opinion for the Court in the Vinuya case, Justice Del Castillo
plagiarized the published works of authors Tams, Criddle-Descent, and Ellis.
2. Whether or not Justice Del Castillo twisted the works of these authors to make it appear that such
works supported the Courts position in the Vinuya decision.
HELD: No. Even if there is (as emphasized by the Supreme Court in its ruling on the Motion
for Reconsideration filed by Vinuya et al in 2011), the rule on plagiarism cannot be applied to
judicial bodies.
No Plagiarism
At its most basic, plagiarism means the theft of another persons language, thoughts, or
ideas. To plagiarize, as it is commonly understood according to Webster, is to take (ideas,
writings, etc.) from (another) and pass them off as ones own.The passing off of the work of
another as ones own is thus an indispensable element of plagiarism.
According to Blacks Law Dictionary: Plagiarism is the deliberate and knowing presentation
of another persons original ideas or creative expressions as ones own.
This cannot be the case here because as proved by evidence, in the original drafts of the
assailed decision, there was attribution to the three authors but due to errors made by
Justice del Castillos researcher, the attributions were inadvertently deleted. There is
therefore no intent by Justice del Castillo to take these foreign works as his own.
Parenthetically, this is the standard scheme that computer-literate court researchers use
everyday in their work.