P200 fine slapped against homosexual
AFTER 10 years of hearing, Judge Silverio Mandalupe on Friday, May 12, sentenced Eliazar Ignoza, a gay person to pay fine of P200 having been found guilty of defamation charge that stemmed from a heated discussion with the prosecutor's husband, after a prosecutor saw him enter a ladies comfort room at Victoria Plaza Mall in 2007.
Municipal Trial Court in Cities Branch 3 on Friday issued an order declaring Ignoza guilty for slight oral defamation but not guilty for two counts of unjust vexation.
The three cases stemmed on an incident that took place at Victoria Plaza Mall last May 27, 2007, as lawyer Rocarma Nuesca, a prosecutor and the complainant saw Ignoza urinating in a ladies comfort room, which later led to a heated altercation between Ignoza and Gil Nuesca, the husband of the complainant.
Ignoza was charged with one count of unjust vexation for taking a picture of the complainant after he and the complainant’s husband had a heated argument.
Another count of the same offense was filed due to the “great annoyance and disturbance of the complainant” in seeing Ignoza, a male person, urinate inside the ladies comfort room.
He was also charged with grave slander after uttering publicly slanderous words against Gil Nuesca, husband of the complainant by allegedly saying that “Sino yung asawa mong pangit? Pangit yung asawa mo!," words which Ignoza admittedly uttered after Gil Nuesca told him that he looked like a man with a beard and looked ugly.
Ignoza posted bail to attain temporary liberty after a warrant of arrest was issued for his grave slander charge.
Based on the court ruling, Ignoza's act of taking pictures of the complainant was not totally unjustified.
“The accused only acted within his means to take note of the identity of the private complainant as he had no other way to identify the latter. Certainly the act annoyed the private complainant but is not unjustifiable,” the order read.
The court also ruled that the second charge, the act of the accused pissing inside of the ladies comfort room was not unlawful or felonious per se.
“The accused, known homosexual, admittedly has long used the comfort room while working as a stylist at the nearby Carnation Salon. On the other hand, there was no official management policy of the Victoria Plaza that prohibited such," the order read.
The ruling also read that while Nuesca claimed that she saw the face of the accused which caused her to be alarmed and to be afraid, she could not exactly say if the accused looked directly at her or worse stood in front of the cubicle she occupied.
“Clearly the intention of the accused is just to relieve himself rather than intentionally annoy and vex the women, more in particular the private complainant,” the court ruled.
Instead of grave slander which is punishable by arresto mayor (one month and one day to two months) to prison correctional (six years and one day to two years and four months), the court also ruled that what took place fall under the category of slight oral defamation adopting the High Court ruling that “uttering defamatory words in the heat of anger, with some provocation on the part of the offended part constitutes only a light felony”.
Grave slander gravity of the oral defamation depends not only upon the expressions used but also on the personal relations of the accused and the offended party, and the circumstances surrounding the case.
Lawyer Eduardo Estores, lawyer of Ignoza, in a media interview said he would still talk with the other Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT)’s move for the case.
Ignoza, in an interview, said that he was happy with the development but was quite disappointed with the length of time it took to arrive with a decision.
"Even a single case should not have been raised, but as for now Atty. Estores said that we will talk with the LGBT and with the lawyers,” Ignoza said.
He added that he is also willing to contest the court’s decision, to the Court of Appeals.