A previous study by consultants hired by the Philippine Supreme Court on the mass communication inadequacies of the Philippine judiciary stated what every poor Filipino already knew since time immemorial. Let me summarize them.
The image of the courts is usually described as “aloof” “unapproachable”, “mystical”, “elitist”, “isolated”, “insulated”, “low key”, “intimidating”, and “alienated.” These adjectives describe a closed communication system.
It is the duty of lawyers and judges to remove the “mystic” of lawyers and judges.
My estimate is that 2 out of 3 Filipinos feel that judges, justices and court personnel tend to react to, rather than anticipate, issues that need to be communicated to the public.
We need to overcome the Bench and the Bar’s “traditional isolation”. They should be proactive sensitive to the cause of sustainable human development.
Because of poverty and ignorance, the basic sectors have often been deprived of access to justice. We need more street law and simplified justice.
We need to open up communication with the basic sectors to improve understanding of the law and justice. Ignorance, poverty, illiteracy, and cultural bias are stumbling blocks in accessing justice.
Also, many of our laws are archaic, alien in origin, and loaded with values alien to Filipinos.
It is good that the Supreme Court has taken steps these past years to communicate with society on a proactive basis and to use the Web to do so.
The courts should speak the language of the people. Proceedings should be in Filipino and the vernacular. We must destroy the built-in bias against those who do not understand and speak English. The law should apply equally to all. But how can we do that when the laws, court procedures, manuals, and decisions are written in legal parlance which reinforces the “mystique” image of the judiciary. As a result, litigants have no recourse but to trust what their lawyers say in court even if the latter are unable to adequately explain what is happening. There can be no accountability and openness in the courts unless we use the popular language or dialect in the judiciary.
