“Will Alice Guo’s lawyers face disbarment for alleged misconduct?”
THE Department of Justice is gearing up for a high-stakes showdown with the legal team of former Bamban, Tarlac Mayor Alice Guo, after uncovering what they claim is a ‘fake’ counter-affidavit.
At the heart of this unfolding scandal are serious allegations of trafficking and questionable legal tactics, involving one of the country’s most respected law firms. As Justice Undersecretary Nicky Ty prepares to file disciplinary charges, the Philippine legal profession braces for what could be a precedent-setting case with seismic consequences.
Guo, a former mayor, stands accused of qualified human trafficking, a serious offense under Philippine law. While human trafficking cases are inherently complex and global in nature, Guo’s case has become mired in an international dimension with her recent arrest in Indonesia. Her involvement in this crime raises questions about possible ties to larger criminal syndicates operating across borders. Guo’s ability to leave the country before her arrest—and the apparent uncertainty surrounding her whereabouts—suggests that she may have benefited from networks that transcend local legal constraints. This international component intensifies scrutiny on her legal strategies, as well as the role her lawyers played in attempting to delay justice.
The law firm defending Guo, Gana Atienza Avisado, is well-known in legal circles, with a reputation for representing high-profile clients, including Cebu Governor Gwendolyn Garcia, Senator Imee Marcos and Baguio City Mayor Benjamin B. Magalong. This firm is no stranger to contentious legal battles and possesses the experience to navigate complex cases.
Lawyer Alex Avisado, the firm’s lead counsel in Guo’s case, has aggressively defended the firm’s actions, asserting that they followed standard legal procedures in submitting the counter-affidavit. However, their reputation as a “formidable adversary” is under threat, as their handling of Guo’s case comes under intense scrutiny. Whether this defense firm can uphold its professional standing or face potential sanctions will have ramifications for their standing in the legal community.
Undersecretary Ty has adopted an assertive stance in pursuing justice in Guo’s case, signaling the DOJ’s commitment to holding all parties accountable, including the lawyers. His focus on the notarization of the counter-affidavit—which appears to have been signed without Guo’s physical presence—highlights a potential breach of ethical conduct under the Philippine Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR). Rule 10.01 of the CPR mandates that lawyers “shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct.”
The submission of a legally questionable document is a significant ethical breach that can erode public trust in the legal system. Ty’s efforts to ensure the integrity of legal proceedings align with past Supreme Court rulings that punish such misconduct, as seen in Adriano v. De Leon, A.C. No. 1518, 136 SCRA 28 (1969), where failure to adhere to professional responsibilities led to suspension.
But is justice being delayed?
A closer look at the timing and execution of legal strategies raises suspicions of intentional delay tactics. The submission of the allegedly “fake” counter-affidavit, followed by a motion to allow a video conference for Guo’s testimony, has undeniably stretched the timeline of the case. This delay is viewed by the DOJ as a clear attempt to stall justice, a strategy that could have broader consequences if it becomes a common practice. The Philippine legal system relies on timely resolutions to maintain its credibility, and any tactics that subvert this process could result in severe penalties.
(continued Friday)
