Gender-fair courtroom language, etiquette
“All justices, judges, court personnel, and even litigants are responsible for observing gender-fair language and etiquette in the courts."
Daily Tribune“All justices, judges, court personnel, and even litigants are responsible for observing gender-fair language and etiquette in the courts."
“Both women being pregnant, it became a ‘contest’ as to who would win the ‘guy.’ The petitioner appears to have won, when she got the blessing of the respondent’s parents.”
“So parang pinikot mo lang ba siya, ganun ba ang ibig mong sabihin?” (So you trapped him into marriage, is that what you want to say?)
These were the statement of a judge in his decision and the question interposed by a prosecutor, respectively, to a wife seeking to nullify her marriage to her husband, which led the Supreme Court to remind the bench and the bar to abide by A.M. No. 21-11-25-SC or the Guidelines on the Use of Gender-Fair Language in the Judiciary and Gender-Fair Courtroom Etiquette (Guidelines).
In the case of Yokogawa-Tan vs Tan and Republic (G.R. No. 254646, 23 October 2023), the trial court and the Court of Appeals both denied the wife’s Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage.
However, the Supreme Court reversed the decision and declared the wife’s marriage to her husband null and void on the ground of psychological incapacity. It ruled that the existence of grounds for legal separation such as the husband’s sexual infidelity may be a manifestation of the latter’s psychological incapacity. Thus, sexual infidelity does not foreclose the presence of psychological incapacity.
In its final words, the Supreme Court noted the use of non-gender-fair language by the lower court and the prosecutor. Aside from the afore quoted, the decision of the lower court stated: “Believing that the respondent had not been faithful to her, despite knowing fully well that the latter had another girlfriend other than her prior to their marriage, here comes the petitioner, praying to this Court that her marriage to the respondent be declared null and void on the ground of psychological incapacity of the respondent xxx.”
The Supreme Court explained that these statements and question implied that the wife was at fault and should not be afforded relief for marrying the husband knowing he has had an affair. The language used reinforces the trope that women are out to trap men into marriage and shifts the blame on the woman for marrying an unfaithful man after getting pregnant, as if society did not stigmatize single mothers, the Supreme Court said.
The Guidelines seeks to eliminate sexist language, statements that foster unequal gender relations, and those that disparage, marginalize, or diminish the stature of persons of another gender and/or people with diverse SOGIESC, with the end of giving life to the policy enshrined in our Constitution valuing the dignity of every human person and guaranteeing full respect for human rights.
The Guidelines was adopted in recognition of The Magna Carta of Women (Republic Act 9710) and the Safe Spaces Act (Republic Act 11313) which penalizes the use of words that ridicule on the basis of sex, gender, or sexual orientation, identity and/or expression such as sexist, homophobic, and transphobic statements and slurs.
All justices, judges, court personnel, and even litigants are responsible for observing gender-fair language and etiquette in the courts.
For more of Dean Nilo Divina’s legal tidbits, please visit www.divinalaw.com. For comments and questions, please send an email to cad@divinalaw.com.
