MISLEADING: Rep. Luistro faces SC suspension, license revocation over husband’s rape case

A YouTube video claims that Batangas representative Gerville “Jinky” Luistro faces suspension and license revocation after the Supreme Court’s findings amid a probe into her statement regarding her husband’s rape case.

CLAIM 

The video states that Luistro is suspended as Chairman of the House Committee on Justice after the Supreme Court opens an investigation regarding her involvement in her husband’s rape case.

As Luistro’s remarks resurface amid the alleged probe, the video claims that the Court views this matter as ‘obstruction of justice,’ leading to her licence revocation and suspension for 3 years.

A graphic presented in a Facebook post explicitly reads, “Lawyer suspended, for 3 years after advising client to hide from arrest,” although it includes no name except a question left in the caption, pointing at Luistro.

Meanwhile, the video also presented a spliced video made by Atty. Rowena Guanzon, challenging the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) to open probe amid Luistro’s controversy.

The caption of the video mentions Vice President Sara Duterte and Atty. Guanzon’s presentation of alleged ‘top secret’ in relation to the suspension, however, such claim did not appear in the video.  

RATING: MISLEADING

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence that the Supreme Court opened a disciplinary probe into Luistro over her husband’s rape case or that it found her guilty of obstruction of justice. While Luistro acknowledged hiding her husband and Atty. Rowena Guanzon challenged the IBP to investigate her, no Supreme Court ruling shows that Luistro was suspended for three years or had her law license revoked. 

FACTS:

• There is no evidence that the Supreme Court opened a probe into Luistro over her husband’s case. Luistro is a respondent in petitions challenging the House proceedings and not as a subject of a Supreme Court disciplinary investigation. 
• Luistro did make a statement that she hid her husband amid his rape case, in which Luistro claims to be ‘fabricated.’ However, no Court decision was made finding that she committed obstruction of justice. 
• While it is true that Atty. Rowena Guanzon challenges the IBP to investigate Luistro, it is not the same as the IBP finding that person guilty, much less the Supreme Court suspending or disbarring them. 
• No disbarment claim was found during the period when the video statement resurfaced.
• No ‘three-year’ suspension or licence revocation was established by the Supreme Court for Luistro.

BOTTOMLINE

The YouTube video is misleading as it falsely presents Luistro as ‘already suspended’ or as having had her licence revoked by the Supreme Court, which may confuse the public.