Back

In Re Parazo [ SEPARATE OPINIONS, PERFECTO, J. CONCURRING AND DISSENTING ]

In re Investigation of ANGEL J. PARAZO for alleged leakage of questions in some subjects in the 1948 Bar Examinations. Felixberto M. Serrano for respondent. Enrique M. Fernando and Francisco A. Rodrigo, Abelardo Subido, and Arturo A. Alafriz (for the Philippine Lawyers' Association) as amici curiae.

Parazo | 1948-12-03

Separate Opinions

Perfecto, J., concurring and dissenting:

The facts in this case, as narrated in the decision penned by Mr. Justice Montemayor, justify conclusively the finding of the majority that respondent is guilty of contempt for his stubborn refusal to obey an order of this Court.

Section 1 of Republic Act No. 53, invoked by respondent in his defense, does not protect him. It would protect him only if we could agree with his theory that the words "interest of the state" used in the law should be read to mean security of the state or public safety. But there is nothing in the whole text of Republic Act No. 53 and/or in the intention of...