A new statement from Atty. Carlo Ybanez has reignited public discussion following the controversial remarks made by Bong Suntay about actress Anne Curtis.
In a Facebook post, Ybanez addressed a key question circulating online: Can Suntay be sued over his remarks, particularly his admission of “pag-init” or expressing desire? According to the lawyer, while many found the comments inappropriate and offensive, they may not automatically constitute a criminal offense.
Suntay previously stated in an interview that he would not apologize, insisting that his comments should be taken as a “compliment.” When pressed about his earlier remark that he “nag-init,” he attempted to downplay it with a joke, saying that it is naturally hot in the Philippines. He maintained that he did nothing wrong.
Ybanez clarified an important legal distinction: not everything wrong is criminal. In Philippine law, private thoughts or feelings of attraction, by themselves, are not punishable. The mere act of experiencing desire does not automatically result in criminal liability.
However, the lawyer emphasized that the issue does not end there. Public officials are bound by higher standards of conduct. He pointed to Republic Act No. 6713, also known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. This law requires government officials to demonstrate professionalism, respect for the dignity of others, and adherence to good morals and proper conduct at all times.
The controversy, therefore, shifts from a question of criminality to one of ethics and accountability. Should a lawmaker speak publicly about a woman in a manner that many perceive as objectifying? According to Ybanez, the bigger concern is not just the initial statement but the refusal to recognize why it was problematic.
Labeling objectifying remarks as a “compliment,” he suggested, reflects a misunderstanding of respect and boundaries. For critics, describing personal arousal in a public forum—especially by an elected official—crosses ethical lines, even if it does not violate criminal statutes.
Ultimately, Ybanez argued that when individuals in positions of power fail to see the line between private thoughts and public responsibility, the standards of public service begin to erode. The debate now centers not on whether a crime was committed, but on whether leaders are upholding the dignity and professionalism expected of them.