By Rey Panaligan “Plain and simple insults directed at another person cannot be elevated to the status of religious speech.” This admonition of the Supreme Court (SC) in its 2009 decision on the case of Ang Dating Daan head Eliseo “Brother Eli” Soriano was again used as basis by the High Court in affirming his guilty verdict in a libel case over his malicious and defamatory remarks in his radio program against a fellow preacher 20 years ago. In a decision released last week and written by Associate Justice Noel G. Tijam, the SC affirmed the ruling of the Iriga City regional trial court (RTC) which found Soriano guilty of libel in a case filed by Wilde Almeda, head of the Jesus Miracle Crusade International Ministry (JMCIM). The libel case for two counts arose from Soriano’s “taped broadcast” over radio station DZAL in Iriga City where he called Almeda a “Bulaang Propeta” (false phophet), “idiot” and “apostle of demons.” Bro. Eliseo "Eli" Soriano (PHOTO COURTESY OF BRO. ELI SORIANO / FACEBOOK / MANILA BULLETIN) Soriano criticized Almeda for giving his blessings to then-presidential candidate Jose de Venecia whom he (Almeda) declared as “the next President of the Philippines.” The criminal charge sheet for libel stated that Soriano’s remarks “deliberately and maliciously transmitted to the public the impression that the said Evangelist Wilde E. Almeda is a “Bulaang Propeta,” “idiot’ and ‘apostle of demons,” which statements, remarks, imputations and/or insinuations are highly and intrinsically libelous, thereby discrediting and destroying his reputation and ridiculing him before the bar of public opinion and the rest of the religious sects/denominations/congregations….” After trial, the RTC convicted Soriano and imposed on him a fine of P6,000 for each count of libel. On Soriano’s appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s verdict.  He elevated the case to the SC. Resolving the issue, the SC acquitted Soriano in one of the two counts of libel but affirmed his conviction on the other count that clearly identified Almeda. The SC said that all the elements of libel -- identification, publication, defamatory imputation and malice -- under Article 353 of the Revised Penal Code were all present when Soriano attacked Almeda in his program on July 31, 1998. It junked Soriano’s argument that he could not be held criminally liable for libel because his statements were protected by religious freedom under the Constitution. The SC said: “While We affirm petitioner's (Soriano) guilt of libel, We deem it proper to clarify that petitioner's guilt stems from his statements against pastor Almeda and not the JMCIM, or any of its pastors. “Petitioner's claim that his motive was harken to other religious leaders and pastors and members of any religious congregation not to use the institution of religion in a manner that would subject not only the pastors and ministers of any religious congregation but also the religion itself to public distrust and disdain does not make his statements justified. “His purported motive is simply not reflected in his malicious statements and insulting labels to the pastors of Jesus Miracle Crusade, International Ministry (JMCIM). “Petitioner's claim that his statements are absolutely protected by the Constitution because they are expressions of religious beliefs do not merit any consideration. As what this Court stated in Soriano v. Laguardia, et al. ‘Plain and simple insults directed at another person cannot be elevated to the status of religious speech. Even petitioner attempts to place his words in context show that he was moved by anger and the need to seek retribution, not by any religious conviction.’" In the Soriano v. Laguardia case that was decided in 2009, the SC affirmed the three-month suspension imposed by the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board against Soriano’s television program on a case filed by a minister of the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC).