As if it is not disturbing enough to know of a man cheated of his life’s work by his own siblings, it is even more upsetting when the government agency mandated to protect him is allegedly abetting the crime. The victim, in this case, is 94-year-old Gonzalo Co, the founder of Gonzalo Laboratories, the manufacturer of brands we all grew up with—Green Cross Rubbing Alcohol and Zonrox Bleach. Anyone who has been betrayed by people closest to them will immediately empathize with Mr. Co. The poor old man spends his last moment on earth fighting for justice that eludes him.

It all started in the ’40s when young Gonzalo worked as a salesman for an American alcohol brand, Grey Cross Rubbing Alcohol. The young and ambitious Gonzalo yearned for a better life—in 1952, he developed his own brand of alcohol called Green Cross, an ode to his alma mater, De La Salle University. Years later, he developed Zonrox Bleach as well. The young Gonzalo manufactured his products from a small garage along Taft Avenue, Manila. Like most struggling entrepreneurs, Gonzalo spent his days hawking his products from one retailer to another, his nights overseeing the manufacturing process. Gonzalo had four siblings—Anthony, Joseph, Peter and Mary—and it was for their welfare that he toiled the way he did. The Co family was not wealthy, and as the eldest of the brood, Gonzalo took it upon himself to send his siblings to school and provide for their needs. Lucky for him, two of the retailers he had established good relations with were Mariano Que and Henry Sy, the founder of Mercury Drug and SM, respectively. Needless to say, Gonzalo’s business grew in tandem with the expansion of Mercury Drug and SM, until Gonzalo Laboratories became one of the country’s top 1,000 corporations.

The Co family lived affluently because of Gonzalo’s hard work. In due time, the siblings graduated from college and each eventually joined the family business. This is where the tragedy begins.

As Gonzalo recalls it, envy and greed on the part of his siblings, particularly younger brother Joseph, was what motivated them to ease out the aging Gonzalo from the business in both equity ownership and representation in management. Gonzalo’s children were forced to eke out a living in other pursuits while watching their uncles, aunties, and cousins living the high life. As for Gonzalo, he lost his corporation, and, with it, his legacy.

The betrayal and the events that ensued pain the old man deeply. This is why he has sought the assistance of the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to assert his ownership of the Zonrox brand. (The ownership of the Green Cross brand is yet another saga). This is where a new chapter of Gonzalo’s lifelong drama unravels.

DRAMA AT THE IPO

On September 23, 1963, Gonzalo filed an application for the registry of the Zonrox trademark with the Philippine Patents Office (PPO). On November 12, 1964, the patent came through, certifying that Gonzalo was indeed the owner of the Zonrox brand. The patent was awarded under the “first to use doctrine” since Gonzalo had been using the Zonrox brand since January 15, 1960. The PPO has since been replaced by the current IPO.

Fast forward to 2004…with Gonzalo elbowed out of his own company, the siblings, using Green Cross, Inc. as their corporate vehicle, underhandedly registered the Zonrox brand with the IPO. Mystifyingly, the IPO also granted them the rights to the brand under “the doctrine of first use,” notwithstanding the fact that it had already been awarded to Gonzalo in 1964.

With the brand practically stolen from him, Gonzalo lodged a case with the IPO demanding the cancellation of the rights awarded to the siblings. The hearing officer assigned to the case is Atty. Josephine C. Alon. In due time, both parties filed corresponding pleadings, with Gonzalo presenting 28 documents as evidence.

However, during the requisite preliminary conference in January 2013, Atty. Alon ordered the exclusion of 11 of Gonzalo’s evidences, including various affidavits, a report from the NBI, and resolutions from the Department of Justice, among others. The 11 documents excluded by Atty. Alon almost ensured the victory of the siblings. Understandably, the nonagenarian was stricken with grief, fear, anxiety and depression. Not only was his life’s work stolen from him, now his legacy was slipping away, too, due to what he believed is undue bias on the part of the hearing officer.

Atty. Alon justified her decision to exclude the 11 pieces of evidences by citing Section 7(c) and Section 13 of the Rules and Regulations on Inter Partes proceedings. In essence, Atty. Alon asserts that Gonzalo should have submitted his evidences upon the filing of the petition. And while the law allows the presentation and submission of affidavits and other evidences during the preliminary conference, only the original and certified copies of the documents are allowed. I suspect that Gonzalo submitted non-original copies. Hence, the poor man fell victim to a technicality.

Gonzalo, however, senses bad faith. He feels that the act of Atty. Alon was meant to deliberately grant undeserved advantages to his powerful siblings. Gonzalo made an appeal, which fell on deaf ears. So, with whatever fight the 94-year-old man has left, he filed a case against Atty. Alon before the Ombudsman, citing corrupt practices, particularly for giving unwarranted preference in the discharge of her administrative and judicial duties in bad faith. If proven guilty, Atty. Alon faces criminal prosecution.

JUSTICE

Ultimately, the Ombudsman will have to decide on Gonzalo’s complaint against Atty. Alon. But for me, I think rules and procedures are mere tools designed to facilitate the delivery of justice, not to stand in the way of it. Let’s not forget that rules are only the means to get to the truth. If rules are enforced in such a rigid manner—so much so that it overrides the delivery of justice—then these rules defeat their purpose. Hence, I reckon Atty. Alon should have admitted the evidence. After all, to deprive the use of Gonzalo’s arsenal of evidences would inevitably paint a biased picture of the case. In which case, justice will likely not be served.

Of course, there is more to this case than meets the eye, which is why the Ombudsman has his job cut out for him. As for me, I write this piece to give Gonzalo a louder voice. The man is desperate and clinging on straws as he fights for his legacy at the twilight of his life. Let us hope those who committed crimes don’t go scot-free.