THE CASE

Facts: The client is a 27-year-old graduate student of Ateneo De Manila

University. She is currently completing her Masters of Law Degree from Ateneo
Law School. In the final 400-page manuscript of her LLM thesis that she has
submitted for printing and binding, the file version that she sent was not the final
version. As a result, there were five (5) pages of her thesis which have uncited
references. There was no in text citation, or footnotes.

Her thesis topic examines the effect of Red-Tagging in the Philippines’ obligation
under International Humanitarian Law Instruments. The missed citation was from
the International Committee on the Red Cross’ writings about Customary
International Law. The thesis panel found this, and moved to disqualify her from
her graduation. Client comes to us asking for our advice. During the initial
interview, the case of Justice Del Castillo was brainstormed.

THE DEFENSE

It is crystal clear, as recognized by the Supreme Court of the Philippines in the case
of Judge Del Castillo, that there is no well-defined, concrete, and generally
approved definition of plagiarism, not only in the Philippines but also in the
whole world. That is why different institutions all over the world, at their own
discretion, come up with their own definition of plagiarism. The debate whether or
not intent is material for the crime of plagiarism is still a hot topic but as far as
this jurisdiction is concern, intent is material.

The Supreme Court emphasized that disregarding the element of malicious intent is
evidently more in the nature of establishing that the act is committed rather than
defining the meaning of plagiarism and taking into consideration the evidence
available. We should take note that the application of law is not in the manner of
convenience, because if it is, the spirit of the law will diminish and the delivery
of justice will be impaired.

The defense would like to establish that plagiarism is the act of taking other
people’s work. Assuming arguendo that there is an intent on our client, if the court
will do check and consider the evidence, it will negate not just the intent but also
the alleged crime committed. The final manuscript submitted before the court as
the primary evidence of this case, will show that there is no act of taking other
people’s work as they are all cited and necessary attribution is made.
That is why the court is in the position that, if it is clear in the face of the student’s
work that he did not commit plagiarism but a mere and obvious mistake or clerical
error in one of hundreds of citations in his or her thesis, the school will be so
unreasonable as to cancel the student’s diploma, which portrays the case of our
client. Taking into consideration the evidence available, including the final copy of
the manuscript indicating and proving the innocence of our client, it is
unreasonable for the school to disallow her to graduate for a mere clerical and
unintentional error in the printing and binding. In addition, that printing and
binding is just a mere procedural matter in thesis writing the strict application and
observance of plagiarism in the academe should applied with leniency.

In the case of University of the Philippines Board of Regents v. Court of Appeals,

the court applied this lenient approach in determining whether or not plagiarism is
committed by giving the accused the benefit of the doubt and the chance to
rectify his mistakes, which upon completion allow him to graduate.

For the defense final point, the application of Justice Del Castillo plagiarism case,
despite the difference in the purpose and standing of the accused, will apply in the
case of our client as it shows the analogy that plagiarism is not committed by
mere mistake in printing but in the process of writing itself. The fact that
attribution is properly made and evidence will prove the same, regardless of the
mistake on procedural matters such as printing and binding, means that the act of
plagiarism is not justified.

Subsidiary Arguments:

1. It is unrealistic to claim that substantial work in any field or discipline is free

from any mistake either procedural or substantive.
2. There is no such thing as noble idea.

Drafted by:

SHEKINAH GRACE TINDUNGA – Presenter

ELLY BOY T. REATE
ALLEOH RUIZ ANDRES
DAVE JIMWEL MANZANO
JAMES PAUL BAYUCAN