Lawyer advocating for same-sex marriage admonished for improper attire, decorum in court

The Supreme Court has admonished the lawyer pushing for same sex marriage when he appeared improperly dressed and failed to observe the proper decorum during a preliminary conference last month.

In a five-page resolution dated July 3 but was released to media only on Monday, the SC en banc found lawyer Jesus Nicardo Falcis III guilty of direct contempt.

He was sanctioned and “sternly warned'” that a repetition of the offense will be dealt with more severely.

In a June 5 preliminary, Falcis appeared wearing a casual jacket, cropped jeans and loafers without socks. When questioned about his attire, he explained that he attended a meeting with advocates in Makati on that day.

He said he only realized that he was underdressed when he arrived at the Supreme Court’s session hall for the conference and it will be too late for him to change clothes.

“Without even uttering a word, he recklessly courted disfavor with this Court. His bearing and demeanor were a disservice to his clients and to the human rights advocacy he purports to represent,” the High Court said.

The SC noted that Falcis also failed to rise and manifest his presence when the parties to the case were called and during the initial round of questioning by the justices.

The resolution added that Falcis failed to properly address the justices “in keeping with customary courtesies” and “acted as though he was unprepared and without knowledge of the decorum typical to appearing in court.”

“Atty. Falcis is reminded of the requirement under Canon 11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility for lawyers to “observe and maintain the respect due to the Courts and to judicial officers and [to] insist on similar conduct by others. This duty encompasses appearances before courts in proper attire,” it stated.

“This Court does not insist on sartorial pomposity. It does not prescribe immutable minutiae for physical appearance. Still, professional courtesy demands that persons, especially lawyers, having business before courts, act with discretion and manifest this discretion in their choice of apparel,” it added.

The High Court noted that preliminary conferences and oral arguments are official judicial functions and its solemnities must be observed accordingly.

The SC ordered that the sanction shall be “included in the personal record” of Falcis and “entered in his file in the Office of the Bar Confidant.” /ee