Veteran journalist Vitug answers SC justice’s libel raps

Newsbreak editor-in-chief Marites Danguilan-Vitug on Tuesday defended herself from Supreme Court Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco, who filed a P1-million libel suit against her last March in connection with an article that supposedly maligned the magistrate. In her counter-affidavit filed before the Manila Prosecutor's Office about 9 a.m., Vitug stood by the integrity of her article titled "SC justice in Partisan Politics," which was posted on ABS-CBNNews.com/Newsbreak for 13 days last December. Vitug was accompanied by lawyers Pablito and Arno Sanidad, Anton Peralta and Christian Lim. "We want Justice Velasco's complaint dismissed because it violates Ms. Vitug's freedom of speech and the right of the public to know matters of public importance," Arno Sanidad told GMANews.TV in a phone interview shortly after they filed the counter-affidavit. He added that Velasco's camp has until June 1 to respond to Vitug's rebuttal. The story explored how Velasco allegedly peddled his influence over local officials in Marinduque province to support the congressional bid of his son, Lord Allan. For an article to be deemed libelous, the Revised Penal Code says that it should contain malicious imputations to discredit and dishonor a person. But Vitug said: "The publication of the questioned article can hardly be considered as libelous, much less malicious. Its contents were not concocted. Rather, it contains sufficient details culled from multiple sources, including research and interviews, showing that the same was validated and was not circulated in reckless disregard of another’s reputation." "Neither was it a personal attack on Justice Velasco or his son, the same being limited to the interplay between the public offices that they respectively occupy and the effect of their conduct on the public interest in general," she added. Vitug said her journalistic and civic duties and sense of responsibility, not ill will or spite, motivated her to write the article. Invoking her constitutional right to free speech, she added that "to punish me for writing the questioned article would be a mockery of democracy." 13 counts Vitug claimed in her article that some residents in Marinduque had said that Velasco is actively helping his son in organizing his ticket by inviting local officials to run with his son as councilors with a promise to fund their campaign expenses. A barangay captain identified as Marife Pastrana was quoted in the article as saying that Velasco called her up to offer her to run for councilor with his son and to attend a meeting in his residence. Velasco, in his complaint affidavit last March, said Vitug’s article portrayed him negatively and attacked him personally. [See: SC justice files P1-M libel suit vs online editor] "Ms. Vitug publicly accused me in her article and portrayed me as an unethical person without delicadeza who has wantonly violated the Code of Judicial Conduct and existing laws. Said malicious imputations were plainly directed at me and had caused me, my wife and children, especially Allan, irreparable dishonor, discredit and contempt," Velasco said, denying he made an offer to Pastrana. The Supreme Court justice also said Vitug was engaged in a smear campaign against him, because the article was posted on the ABS-CBN News website for 13 days, from December 3 to 15 last year. Hence, he slapped 13 counts of libel for each day the story was run. But Vitug argued that in libel cases, the "multiple publication rule" provides that each and every publication of the same libel constitutes a distinct offense. But because the story was only published once and retained for 13 days, there was no basis for the 13 counts of libel. Further, Vitug argued that the story was only retained for the said period because "the length of time the questioned article was posted has to do with the lack of special reports at that time, there being no immediate story to replace it on www.abs-cbnnews.com’s special report section." "Clearly, there is nothing malicious about the retention of the questioned article on ABS-CBN news’ website," she added. Vitug also addressed Velasco’s allegations that she did not inform him about the article’s contents when she interviewed him on December 2, a day before the story was posted. In her counter-affidavit, she insisted that she discussed the matter with the magistrate, who she said did not want to make it appear he gave Vitug an interview. "Based on the foregoing, it is quite evident that Justice Velasco’s allegations of malice are conjectural and unfounded. The basic rule is that mere allegation is not evidence, and is not equivalent to proof. Needless to state, Justice Velasco failed to discharge his burden to prove actual malice on my part," she said. — RSJ/LBG, GMANews.TV