Being gay doesn’t mean you’re immoral, Supreme Court rules in judge’s case



A judge who admitted he was gay should not be automatically presumed to be immoral, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled.

In a decision, the Supreme Court’s Second Division dismissed the administrative cases of immorality and dishonesty filed against Judge Eliseo Campos, the now-retired presiding judge of the municipal trial court of Bayugan City, Agusan del Sur, by his estranged wife and son.

“There was no evidence that the respondent engaged in scandalous conduct that would warrant the imposition of disciplinary action against him,” the high court said in a decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio Carpio.

However, the court found Campos guilty of simple misconduct and fined him P20,000 for registering his then minor son as the owner of a piece of land that figured in the couple’s pending legal separation and annulment cases.

“In order to manipulate the situation, and taking advantage of his knowledge of the law, respondent caused the registration of the property in [his son’s] name with the intention of defrauding a possible judgment-obligee. Clearly, it was improper behavior which warrants disciplinary sanction by this court.”

The three administrative cases stemmed from the annulment case filed by Campos in July 2008, a year before he retired. In his suit he said he was a homosexual and that his wife had affairs with other men which he did not bother to stop or question.

His wife denied Campos’ accusations of infidelity and claimed her husband only wanted their marriage annulled so he could marry another woman with whom he was allegedly having a relationship. She opposed the annulment and filed for a legal separation instead.

The high tribunal affirmed the findings of the investigating judge that there was no proof that Campos had a relationship with another woman or was immoral on account of his supposedly being gay.

Hiding true sexuality

“With respect to respondent’s alleged homosexuality, such issue is for the determination of the trial court wherein the [annulment case] is pending. Thus, we also agree in absolving [him] from the charge of dishonesty. The fact that [he] got married and had children is not proof against his claim of homosexuality. As pointed out, it is possible that [he] was only suppressing or hiding his true sexuality,” the high court said.

The justices, however, ruled that Campos committed an unlawful act when he executed an affidavit of loss of a land title that was in his possession. The investigation showed Campos had his then minor son registered as the owner of the land.

After reporting the loss, Campos told the provincial register of deeds that he (Campos) was the real owner and that the title had been wrongly registered in his son’s name. The wife, however, claimed the title was never lost and that their son had it all along. She claimed the judge merely wanted the property back in the event that the annulment was granted.

Campos had said that he only wanted to protect his interest, adding that his wife and son wanted to use the property as collateral for a loan.

Based on the decision, the judge may have anticipated the breakup of his marriage and registered the title in the son’s name so the land would not become conjugal property, which would have to be split if Campos’ wife won the legal separation case.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • Iggy Ramirez

    Sec. 2. Petition. – (a) Who may and when to file. – (1) A petition for legal separation may be filed only by the husband or the wife, as the case may be within five years from the time of the occurrence of any of the following causes:
    (a) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner
    (b) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation;
    (c) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement;
    (d) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned;
    (e) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent
    (f) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;
    (g) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in or outside the Philippines;
    (h) Sexual infidelity or perversion of the respondent;
    (i) Attempt on the life of petitioner by the respondent; or
    (j) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year.

    It seems it is so easy to get separated. Can I marry again after I’ve separated? How is it different from annulment or divorce?

  • Hfxwst

    A charge f homosexuality?  Are we living in the 16th century?  oppps,  sorry I forgot, this is the Philippines and it is an extremist Catholic Country!

    All Christians (other than Catholics)  please live a Christian life of tolerance and acceptance as Jesus stated.  Do not weaken and persecute God’s people for the manner in which He chose them to be born.

    Forgive Catholics for this evil.  The rest of the world is trying to also.

    • nico fopalan


    • suroy_suroy

       I really like that:  EXTREMIST CATHOLIC COUNTRY it should also include EXTREMIST CATHOLOC CHURCH.

    • ceegonzaga

      I’m no religous man. But you’re right about the way they persecute gay people. Theres nothing wrong with being gay.

  • tekateka

    Only the Church who’s littered with gay priests say this… what an absolute irony it is..

    The Bible says: kill all  homosexuals.
    Religion is very dangerous…

    check it out:

    • w33k3nd3r

      That’s what you get for believing in a religion that originated from a desert. We had our own faith before the Spaniards came and lorded their archaic belief (which is now obsolete and snubbed in present day Spain) and majority still listen to the CBCP’s voodoo.

  • just_anotherperson

    The Supreme Court is now the expert and final arbiter of morality.

    • David

      In the Philippines, anyway. If you want someone else to be the final arbiter of morality, you’ll have to wait for the Afterlife.

      • w33k3nd3r

        Well frankly, there’re people with the clear vision of not buying the after life and solving things while alive. Aren’t we still lucky to have them?

      • David

        Yup. Disputes happen daily, which is what courts and lawyers are for.

        One doesn’t necessarily have to like the final decision if ever, but at least you can rest knowing the dispute’s over. Unless, of course, you still want to push ahead.

        And life goes on…

    • David Webb

      The Supreme Court or any division of the government is secular.

    • Rex_Ranhilio

      well, yes.

      “gross immorality” is one of the grounds for the dismissal of a government employee.

      a person may be held liable for the crime of “bigamy”, or contracting a subsequent marriage while still married to another person. this is a crime involving morals.
      a person may also be held liable for the crimes of “adultery” or “concubinage” which may loosely be defined as having sexual relations with a person other than one’s own spouse.

      but in this case, the judge was not penalized for being a homosexual. please take note that the court said that his alleged homosexuality has not yet been proven.
      there was also a case where the mother, who was alleged to be a lesbian, was not deprived of the custody of her child because it was not shown that the child was exposed to her lesbian activities.

      but these are all matters of the law. as to the religious or “moral” aspect of morality, that is another matter over which the court has no business.

    • w33k3nd3r

      Let Caesar’s be Caesar’s, let God’s be God’s. I had a feeling I’d see your close minded parables in this article again, just_anotherperson. Let’s celebrate, shall we?

  • Giorgio

    Unfortunately, the Supreme Courts decision is correct…for worldly standards, as well as many governments around the world. But,many people choose to listen to and follow the Word of God in the Holy Bible, where it states very clearly that homosexuality is an abomination to the Lord.

    • Levi Tan Ong

      Cool story, bro.

    • just_anotherperson

      The present trajectory of our social morality merits the term decadence, meaning decay. Decay has only one direction and cannot easily be halted. 

    • David Webb

      Bigots like you only have the Bible as your standard of morality but real humans like us know what real righteousness is. It’s kindness and you Giorgio don’t have it.

    • tekateka

      80% of The Holy Bible is FAKE… bro, gawa gawa lang yan… yung diyos gawa lang ng tao noon… panakot kumbaga para sumunod sa kanila… get’s mo ba????????????

    • Marlon

      kung abomination yan, bakit andaming paring bakla???

    • w33k3nd3r

      So it would make YOUR GOD very happy if we marched all homosexual human beings into gas chambers and sent them all to kingdom come, right? How moral of you and YOUR GOD.

  • Keith_P

    Bible thumpers are generally hypocrites. If they condemn homosexuality because it is immoral, then they should also condemn people who do these equally immoral acts:

    – wearing clothes made of two kinds of fabric (Lev. 19:19)
    – eating grapes and raisins (Num. 6:3)
    – working in a bank and borrowing from a bank (Deut. 23:20)
    – shaving one’s own sideburns and beards (Lev. 19:27)
    – getting tattoos (Lev. 19:28)

    • just_anotherperson

      Leviticus 19:19 Keep my decrees. Do not mate different kinds of animals. Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.

      How can this be related to morality? 

      Misleading others however is dishonesty. That is a good example of immorality.

  • be honest

    Claiming he is gay doesnt seem to hold water because he has a son.

    • just_anotherperson

      He admitted, not claimed to be a homosexual

      • Fight D Bigots

        In the legal parlance it’s a claim since it’s part of his argument why the marriage should be annulled. So the lower court needs to prove he’s gay to conclude there was indeed sexual incompatibility and grant the plea for annulment.

      • just_anotherperson

         The first sentence in the article is quite clear.

      • Fight D Bigots

        yes, as written by this reporter. but in court that remains a claim until proven to be true

        there is a huge difference between admit and claim. admit denotes truth revealed by the one directly involved that shouldn’t be contested. claim is something that can be true or not and subject for verification.

        in this case, the claim of homosexuality was filed by the judge before the lower court as ground for annulment of marriage. thus homosexuality here is never established yet to be true.

        even the wife is contesting this gay claim, saying it’s just an alibi and that the judge has another woman. that of course is also a claim. now it’s for the regional trial court to determine who is telling the truth based on presented evidence.

        don’t forget that in annulment cases, couples sometimes fabricate stories to make the court allow them to have their marriage voided. acceptable reasons in our laws are limited for courts to quash a marriage.

      • Marlon

        ganito lang yan pare.

        if you claim in court that you are a “know-it-all”, the court will not take your statement hook, line and sinker.  

        the court will require you to prove if you are indeed a “know-it-all”.

        the same way if you claim in court that you are “gay” such as what happened in the case in the news article. 

    • Fight D Bigots

      having a child is no guarantee of one person’s sexual orientation. i’ve got friends with kids and they’re gay

  • Fight D Bigots

    kinda confused. is the minor son and the son who along with the mother sued the judge (his father) the same person?

  • Ramon

    Hindi bawal ang bading sa korte. Ask Midas.

  • Jun

    in my opinion… exercising gayhood is the root cause of immorality of being gay. 

    • Jet Plain

      Jun, in my opinion, you should come out of the closet now. Obviously, you are gay!

    • w33k3nd3r

      so practicing manhood and womanhood is also immoral in a planet with a homosexual majority, is that it?

  • Tobalik

    In the same way the men give up natural sexual relations with women and burn with passion for each other. Men do shameful things with each other, and as a result they bring upon themselves the punishment they deserve for their wrongdoing.  (Rom 1:27)

  • Ernesto Castro

    pwede na palang mag rule ang supreme court about morality?  akala ko sa legal matters lang.  

  • generalproblem

    hehehe supreme talaga ang supreme court. lahat nalang eh denisisyunan. hay kakatakot talaga ang mga justice sa atin naggawan nila paraan lahat ng bagay.

    • mhertz

      tama, maniwla ka sa mga yan, lahat nalang ini-ikot ikot.. ewan ko lang kailan mahihilo ang mga yan..kita mo sa impeachment lahat bawal pag di pabor sa kanila..

  • Pio Gante

    during basic training i had classmates who were openly gay, and frequently they were the butt of jokes and racial slur due to their sexual orientation but that didn’t stop them from finishing the rigid course because they are as tough as we are. i also knew and worked with gay cops who even excelled in undercover work. 

    there’s no problem for me as long as they conduct themselves in a professional and respectable manner, what they do in their private lives is, first and foremost, none of our business.

  • w33k3nd3r

    it is the act that you do that hurts others that make you immoral. being yourself is not immoral. if they have a problem with you being gay– the solution i already in the statement itself: it’s their problem.

  • w33k3nd3r

    The fact that Ang Ladlad was already given clearance to run for party list clearly states that being gay is not immoral.

  • neverwint3r

    at last, the supreme court finally sided with pnoy. now pnoy has nothing more to fear. pwede na siya magladlad 

    • mhertz

      haha..ikaw ha masyado kang eskandalosa..joke

  • tata_boy

    OK lang kung gay sila, huwag lang silang hihingi ng tulong sa pamahalaan kung magkasakit sila. Ang kasangkapan ay dapat gamitin sa dapat pag-gamitan.  


    no one is immoral  until they commit any act of immorality.

    if gays would like to be recognized as normal people, then they should behave like normal people.  from my experience and observation,  most of the gays i know are what you call “manyakis”. they are overly aggresive sexually to the point where you can actually call their action as sexual harassment or molestation.   they even prey on young kids.    i have not met a gay person that i would  consider morally straight.

    and yet,  they want to be treated fairly.

  • Chly Torres

    it really feels good knowing that other people are IGNORANT

  • jm20_510

    We do not understand the how and why of homosexuals because many of us are poorly educated.

    It a real reflection and admittance on how stupid Filipinos are compared to other countries.

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks



latest videos