Lawyer suspended by SC over insults vs. Belo says punishment a ‘paradox’

The lawyer suspended by the Supreme Court for his remarks against celebrity surgeon Dr. Vicki Belo said Saturday that his punishment was a paradox.

In a statement posted in his Facebook account, Atty. Argee Guevarra said that while he accepts the one-year suspension by the Supreme Court, the ruling is contradictory.

"I accept the ruling of The Supreme Court on my one-year suspension from the practice of law as a matter of duty and obedience to the High Tribunal. This decision, however, creates a paradox in legal history and has far-reaching consequences on the primordial right of every Filipino’s exercise of free speech and of expression," he said.

Belo took Guevarra to the high court over his series of posts on the social networking site in 2009 in relation to the criminal cases filed by his client, Josefina Norcio, against the doctor for an allegedly botched surgical procedure on her buttocks in 2002 and 2005.

In a decision, the SC First Division found Guevarra guilty of violation of Code of Professional Responsibility and ruled that he be suspended for a year.

Guevarra recalled that 21 years ago, Imelda Marcos had filed three criminal libel cases against him before he was to take the 1996 Bar exams. In his newspaper column, he had criticized the Marcos dictatorship and "essentially branded Imelda Marcos as a kleptocrat" and "even called her a vampire."

The libel cases were dismissed after preliminary investigations, Guevarra said.

After passing the bar, Guevarra said that Imelda had commenced de-barment proceedings against him, but the Supreme Court dismissed the petition.

In his post on Saturday, Guevarra said that the standards of the Supreme Court in 1997 and 2017 should have "similarly weighed such considerations."

"If the 1997 Supreme Court standards for dismissing a disciplinary case against me filed by Imelda Marcos for calling her a “kleptocrat” and a “vampire” in a newspaper column is to be applied, then the 2017 Supreme Court must similarly weigh such considerations in applying the appropriate penalty, if at all I should be penalized, for branding Vicki Belo as Doctor Quack Quack, “Reyna ng Kaplastikan” and “Reyna ng Kapalpakan” in my 2009 Facebook posts – at a time when no law existed in the Philippines to regulate social media and when the Internet was then the refuge for Freedom Of Speech Absolutists," he said.

Guevarra added that the Supreme Court's decision immunizes Belo from any form of criticism.

"The Supreme Court decision uniquely inoculates and immunizes Vicki Belo, a public figure, from any form of criticism even as Imelda Marcos or any public figure or public official cannot and were not able to claim the same protection or even privilege under the law if and when they decide to harass members of the legal profession whenever these public figures or officials lose in their respective libel suits," he said.

"Inasmuch as the Supreme Court should discipline errant lawyers, I submit that It, too, should be the vanguard in protecting members of the legal profession from harassment suits filed by losing litigants," he added.

In his 2009 Facebook posts, Guevarra wrote, among others, that Belo “will go down in Medical History as a QUACK DOCTOR!!! QUACK QUACK QUACK QUACK" and called her "Reyna ng Kaplastikan," "Reyna ng Payola," and "Reyna ng Kapalpakan." —Jessica Bartolome/ALG, GMA News