In Chapter 1 of his book A TRANSFORMED JUDICIARY (2005), dealing with the topic JUDICIAL RENAISSANCE, former Philippine Supreme Court Chief Justice, the most prolific Chief Justice of the Philippines in terms of book writing, took the occasion to discuss the vision of the judicial reform program under his predecessor Hilario Davide Jr., now the Philippine ambassador to the United Nations: (a) “A Judiciary that is independent, effective and efficient, and worthy of public trust and confidence” and (b) “A legal profession that provides quality, ethical, accessible and cost-effective legal service to our people and is willing and able to answer the call of public service.” He likewise discussed other issues relevant to legal education and the administration of justice in the country. May I extensively quote the same below:
X x x.
The reforms go back deep into the improvement of the law school curriculum. Our Constitution empowers our highest court to promulgate rules concerning “admission to the practice of law.”[6] Using this provision as basis, our Court adopted on
The structural and policy reforms include the appointment of a tenured Board of Bar Examiners, in lieu of ad hoc committees appointed every year; and the investigation of character and fitness as a prerequisite for taking the bar examination.[8] Along with essay test questions, objective multiple-choice questions have already been introduced in the bar examinations. Reforms are also veered toward the adoption of alternative grading methods, such as scaling, to promote test equity and to standardize the levels of difficulty of the tests; and the eventual computerization or automation of the bar examinations to facilitate application, testing and reporting procedures.
There is also an ongoing debate about the necessity of conducting bar examinations. In some neighboring countries, like
Legal Education Board
At the initiative of the Supreme Court (SC), the Legal Education Board (LEB)[10] will be formally organized shortly. Headed by a retired SC justice,[11] the Board will oversee the operation of all law colleges and reformulate their law curricula to make them more responsive to the needs of the 21st century. For that matter, the Court has approved the referral to the LEB of the inclusion in the law curriculum of a subject on clinical legal education.[12] Already, a Judicial Apprenticeship Program under the APJR has been piloted. This program is designed to train selected third and fourth year law students in Metro Manila in legal research and introduce them to actual court proceedings.[13]
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)
For those who have passed the bar examinations and have become attorneys-at-law, the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)[14] program has been strengthened by the SC to ensure that members of the bar are continuously updated on current laws and jurisprudence.[15] The MCLE requires lawyers to complete training hours in various law subjects, including legal ethics, before they can renew their licenses. In 2004, 1,527 lectures or programs were presented by accredited providers.[16]
Judicial and Bar Council (JBC)
To minimize, if not totally eliminate, partisan politics in the appointment of judges and to assure that only the most qualified are appointed, our Constitution limits the choices of the President only to those recommended by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC). The JBC is mandated to submit to the President at least three nominees for every judicial vacancy.[17] For the Supreme Court, the President is required to issue the appointment within 90 days from the occurrence of the vacancy; and for the lower courts, within 90 days from the submission of the list to the President.[18] The Council is chaired by the Chief Justice; its members are the secretary of justice; a senator; a congressman; a retired SC justice; and one representative each of the bar, the academe, and the private sector.[19]
Realizing the pivotal role of the JBC in reforming the judiciary, the Supreme Court passed on
On the other hand, its new management structure will be composed of (a) the Council en banc to be headed by the Chief Justice, as mandated by the Constitution; (b) the Office of the Ex Officio Chairman, headed by the Chief Justice and assisted by an executive officer; (c) the Office of the Secretary, headed by the clerk of court of the Supreme Court; and (d) the operating offices, each to be headed by a chief of office.[22]
Philippine Judicial Academy
At the core of continuing legal education is the Philippine Judicial Academy (Philja).[23] The Philja offers, among others, (1) training for aspirants to judicial positions under its regular pre-judicature program; (2) orientation seminar-workshops for newly appointed judges; (3) regional judicial career enhancement programs for both judges and judicial personnel who have been serving the judiciary for some time; and (4) special focus programs for judges specifically handling specialized cases.
The Philja has also launched an e-learning project to provide training through the use of the Internet. This online distance learning program allows judges from selected first- and second-level courts nationwide to learn new practices and opinions on legal issues. E-learning modules on (1) electronic evidence and (2) psychological incapacity were launched on
Another landmark judicial reform initiative of the Philja under the APJR is its Mediation Project. On
Court-annexed mediation was further energized through the Justice Reform Initiatives Support (or JURIS) Project begun in January 2003. The project teaches judges how to mediate cases after court-annexed mediation has failed.[30] Pilot testing of the project in
Results of a survey[32] conducted by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) showed that judges were highly satisfied with mediation as a means of declogging court dockets.[33] Supported by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), the Philja developed study programs at the Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute in
In a related education program and with the help of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Court has also undertaken (1) various judges’ forums on the role of courts in environmental protection; and (2) a training course in
There is more good news: the Supreme Court is in the final stages of negotiation for a P600 million grant from the Japanese government to build the
Codes of Conduct
Legal and judicial education is intended to enhance not only the intellectual ability of lawyers and magistrates, but also their ethical standards. Thus, the Court has strictly enforced the lawyer’s oath. During the last six years,[35] the SC has fined, warned, censured, admonished, reprimanded, ordered arrested, suspended or disbarred 463[36] lawyers for violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility.[37]
For the judiciary, the Supreme Court has adopted on
To give teeth to the New Code of Judicial Conduct, the Court has amended Rule 140 of the Rules of Court (on the discipline of judges). This amended Rule classifies the nature and the gravity of administrative offenses, as well as the sanctions for them, and provides for the proper conduct of administrative investigations. Earlier on, in 2002, the Court had already resolved that administrative cases against magistrates and court officials, if based on reasons that were also grounds for disciplining members of the bar, should automatically be converted to disciplinary proceedings against their very membership in the bar. Thus, they would be investigated both as magistrates and as members of the Philippine bar.[39]
Even before the new Code was adopted, the Supreme Court had already been strictly enforcing the earlier Canons of Judicial Ethics and the (old) Code of Judicial Conduct of the
Judicial ethics symposia have been held to discuss the new Code of Judicial Conduct, as well as the training of law professors in new teaching methodologies in legal and judicial ethics. Various seminars for court employees on the Code of Conduct for Judicial Personnel[41] have also been held.
Judicial Excellence Awards
While our highest court has been strict in disciplining the misfits and the errants, it has likewise been enthusiastic in honoring the faithful and the exemplary through its annual Judicial Excellence Awards. In this program, we search for, recognize and reward outstanding judges and clerks of court. The search for outstanding men and women in the judiciary was begun by the Foundation for Judicial Excellence in 1991. In 2004, however, the Supreme Court took over this annual endeavor. This year, the awarding ceremonies have been set for
Of the 2003 and the 2004 Judicial Excellence awardees, six have already been promoted to the next higher court, three of them to the Court of Appeals.[43]
For this year, the awardees are as follows:
1. For the second-level court judges category: Executive Judge Eduardo I. Tanguanco, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Bacoor,
Judge Simeon P. Dumdum Jr. of the RTC,
2. For the first-level court judges category: Judge Francisco Roberto D. Quilala, Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC), Sarrat-Vintar, Ilocos Norte, who also won the award for Best Decision in a Civil Case; Judge Antonina B. Escovilla, Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC),
3. For second-level clerks of court: Atty. Ana Candida N. Cansino, RTC,
4. For first-level clerk of court, the sole winner was Atty. Marichu Teresa Simpao-Taguilaso, MeTC,
Judicial Compensation
Equally important, the SC was able to convince Congress and the President to double the basic judicial compensation through a 25 percent increase per year for four years starting in November 2003.[44] Partly because of this additional financial benefit, many competent lawyers are now applying for the many vacant trial courts. Across the different court levels, there is still a vacancy rate of more than 31.17 percent.[45] But I am certain that this percentage will drastically go down in the next two years as the vacancies are gradually filled up.
Better retirement benefits for members of the judiciary have likewise been secured. Moreover, the High Court has authorized the grant of automatic, permanent, total disability benefits to the heirs of justices, judges, and court officials (with the rank, salary and privileges of justices and judges) who die while in the service regardless of the cause of death, except suicide or instances when it was the magistrate or official who had provoked the attack or assault that resulted in his or her death.[46] Also, to protect judges from baseless administrative charges, the SC has decided that a complaint filed within six months before the compulsory retirement of a judge, if based on a cause of action that occurred within one year prior to the filing of the complaint, should be dismissed forthwith.[47]
Committee on Legislative-Executive Relations
To improve its relationship with the Presidency and Congress, the Supreme Court has strengthened its Committee on Legislative-Executive Relations. The Committee’s expanded functions include liaising with the executive and the legislative branches of the government to get support for the constitutionally mandated fiscal autonomy of the judiciary, as well as better pay and benefits for judicial personnel. The presiding justices of the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, and the Court of Tax Appeals now sit as members of the Committee for a more coordinated and integrated preparation and presentation of the judiciary budget.[48]
Improvement of Judicial Facilities and Tools
Let me now discuss the second general area of judicial reform -- the improvement of the judicial working environment, especially the provision of adequate facilities and tools.
In-Depth Studies and Assessments
With the help of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the Court came up, as I earlier stated, with a “Blueprint of Action for the Judiciary,” to which the present APJR owes its origin. The ADB, on the other hand, funded a comprehensive study, “Strengthening the
A more focused project called “Institutional Strengthening of the Shari’a Justice System” was also undertaken. Among others, its purposes are to review the overall performance of the Shari’a justice system, identify its strengths and weaknesses, and assess the administrative structures and operating systems in the judiciary. The objective is to determine factors that promote or hinder the efficiency and effectiveness of the Shari’a courts.[50]
Computerized Case
Management and Tracking
Since the early 1990s, the Supreme Court has started computerizing its administrative, personnel and financial processes. The computerization, however, has been largely in the form of independent hardware-software components. To upgrade these existing stand-alone computerized financial, personnel, and administrative systems[51] in the Supreme Court, the APJR -- through the Committee on Computerization[52] -- has recently embarked on the total computerization of the entire judiciary.
With the support of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the Court has pilot-tested in trial courts in Pasay City, the Case Flow Management (CFM) system, a computer program designed to expedite the resolution of cases through the effective monitoring and strict observance of time limits in the conduct of case events, from filing to disposition.
A second computer project, the Court Administration Management Information System (CAMIS), which is supported by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), has also been pilot-tested in Metro Manila. CAMIS automates statistical data to improve case tracking and reporting. Through this project, the Supreme Court aims to build and strengthen the capacity of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) and the Management Information Systems Office (MISO), so as to evolve a publicly accessible automated system that would be able to provide a comprehensive database of all cases, including the current status of each.
As earlier stated, our stand-alone computer projects are being integrated with these new state-of-the-art CFM and CAMIS pilot projects.
Computer Literacy Program
To complement this hardware and software development, the Court is also undertaking a Computer Literacy Program for all the 28,000 judicial officials and employees throughout the country. Justices of the Supreme Court and the three appellate courts were first to undergo a basic computer orientation seminar-workshop. A concept paper for the Information Communication Technology (ICT) Literacy Task Force,[53] which will draw up the training programs for all judicial personnel, is now being finalized.
Consistent with our computerization program, the Supreme Court has, during the past five years, provided every courtroom in the country with at least one personal computer. A second one will be distributed within the next six months. Even more significantly, the Court has very recently approved an interest-free P1,000-per-month installment program to enable justices and judges to acquire and own their personal laptops.[54] With this development, circulars and administrative issuances for all courts shall be made by the SC through its website or through compact discs (CDs) that will be distributed nationwide from time to time.
Electronic Library
On
The e-library has many advantages: (1) it is cheap, because there is no more need to buy expensive books; (2) it is always up-to-date, because decisions of the SC are uploaded within 48 hours from the time they are promulgated; (3) it is accessible anytime seven days a week, because it never closes; (4) it does not need space -- it is available anywhere and everywhere; (5) it is fully searchable -- by word, phrase, case title, case number, subject matter, date of promulgation, name of parties, name of justice who wrote the decision, and so on.[55]
Benchbook for Trial Court Judges
Like the e-library, the Benchbook for Trial Court Judges aims to assist judges in research. Designed as an easy-to-search tool, the Benchbook enables magistrates to decide points of law quickly as they arise in the course of a trial. It comes in both digital and paper versions. To guide judges in preparing their decisions, a manual of uniform writing style has likewise been developed by the Supreme Court.
Other notable projects aimed at improving the judicial working environment are the provision of computer-aided transcription (CAT) facilities; the preparation of an infrastructure master plan; and case-decongestion and delay-reduction projects, particularly in the Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan.[56]
Model Electronic Courts
With a loan from the World Bank, the SC is building -- as a preview of a future nationwide courtroom construction program -- model electronic courts in selected areas in the country; namely, the cities of Angeles, Lapulapu and Cagayan de Oro. Soon also, the old Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) building, located on
New Rules of Procedure
To enable the members of the bench to rule immediately (on the spot) on legal issues connected with the new sciences and technologies, new rules of procedure have been promulgated by the Supreme Court.[57] These new rules cover, among others, admission of electronic evidence, infringement of intellectual property rights, corporate rehabilitation, intra-corporate controversies, and the protection of juveniles in conflict with the law. Other notable improvements in the Rules of Court involve those on violence against women and their children,[58] as well as sexual harassment cases; proper work decorum in the judiciary;[59] and death penalty cases.[60]
Relationship with Various Publics
On the third general area of reforms, let me discuss how the Supreme Court is improving its relationship with its various publics.
Public Information Office (PIO)
In this day and age of transparency, the judiciary realizes that, to be better understood and thereby to maintain public trust, it must somehow open up the judicial fortress without, however, compromising the confidentiality of its collegiate deliberations. Thus, on
The primary objective of the PIO is to bring the Court closer to the people. Its goal is simple: to tell our various publics the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Its job is not to “sanitize” or “angle” stories. Neither is it to “proselytize” and “propagandize,” much less to spin tales or embroider judicial work.[62]
In line with its primary task of disseminating news about the Court and its decisions as promptly and as widely as possible, the PIO regularly publishes the bimonthly Benchmark;[63] and the monthly Court News, a full-color four-page newsletter intended for the Court’s diverse publics, including chambers of commerce, nongovernmental organizations, the provincial press, and foreign embassies. Practically on a daily basis, the PIO also issues news bulletins through the Court News Flash. These publications are written in simple non-legalese.[64] They are available online through the PIO’s website, a sub-domain on our main website, www.supremecourt.gov.ph.
Chamber-to-Chamber Dialogues
To respond to criticisms from the business sector that the judiciary is inordinately interfering in the economic life of the country, the Court, with the assistance of The Asia Foundation, launched the Chamber-to-Chamber Dialogues. The term “chamber-to-chamber” was derived from the “chambers” of magistrates and the various “chambers” of commerce spread all over the country. For the same purpose, I recently wrote a book entitled Leveling the Playing Field,[65] which explains in detail the role of the judicial branch in economic governance.
“Justice-to-Justice”
and “Judge-to-Judge” Dialogues
As a final item under the topic of improving the judicial environment, our Supreme Court has embarked on a “Justice-to-Justice” and a “Judge-to-Judge” Program to encourage intellectual exchanges among judges of the world. These Justice-to-Justice and Judge-to-Judge Dialogues have been made possible by funding assistance from the USAID through the American Bar Association-Asia Law Initiative (ABA-Asia).
Access to Justice
As one of the six main components of the APJR, access to justice has received considerable attention in terms of projects and activities. It is of special interest to the UNDP, under whose sponsorship the Court has conducted (1) a diagnostic study of the capabilities and limitations of the Department of Justice;[66] (2) a research on how penal institutions work; and (3) a participatory program to assess the strengths and weaknesses of our jails.[67] I should add here the jail decongestion project -- undertaken by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) with UNDP funding -- in the
Another notable project is called “Access to Justice for the Poor through Information, Education and Communication (IEC).”[69] This program involves, among others, the training of the clerks of court of selected municipal courts and of barangay officials in selected parts of the country, to enable them to provide vital information on the legal rights of the poor and the disadvantaged. As implementing agency of Component 1 -- “Institutionalization of the Decentralized Information Function of the Judiciary” -- the SC will oversee the formulation of IEC guidelines, policies and standards of conduct for Municipal Court Information Officers (MCIOs); and the training of MCIOs. The Court will also sponsor a training program to sensitize municipal court judges and court personnel (in the target project areas) to the economic and social conditions of the poor.
Rehabilitating Internally Displaced
Persons and Communities
With assistance from the European Union (EU), the SC has also embarked on “strengthening the courts for internally displaced persons and communities,” which is a component of the project called “Rehabilitating Internally Displaced Persons and Communities in
Justice on Wheels
To increase the accessibility of the judicial system, especially to the poor and the disadvantaged, the Supreme Court launched its Justice on Wheels program on
Consultations with Stakeholders
and Other Sectors
Consultations have been held by the Court with stakeholders and different sectors. The bar and the bench were consulted on memoranda, recognizance, summary procedure, and affordability constraints on access to justice. These consultations have been followed through with subsequent studies on the possible expansion of recognizance and summary procedure in criminal cases, as well as an in-depth inquiry on how to make the justice system more affordable -- and, thus, accessible -- to the poor and the underprivileged. Other activities include a review of the barangay justice system in the
Public Education
on the Rule of Law
Still another innovative APJR undertaking is called “Public Education on the Rule of Law Advancement and Support” (PERLAS) project. A collaborative undertaking of the SC, the Department of Education, The Asia Foundation and the Lawyer’s League for Liberty (Libertas), the project seeks to integrate into the `curricula of elementary and high schools the value of civic-mindedness and obedience to the rule of law. Presently, teaching exemplars embodying these values are being prepared for distribution to all primary and secondary schools nationwide.
A Model Judicial Reform Program
The Supreme Court takes great pride and care in pursuing and implementing the foregoing judicial reform projects under their overall umbrella called APJR. The SC is happy to note that, already, the APJR has earned local and international acclaim. The World Bank’s chief counsel for
All in all, the APJR has brought cutting-edge technology and best management practices to the third branch of government. It has ushered the judiciary to the digital age through the piloting of electronic tools and modern facilities. By sharpening management skills, the APJR has helped the judiciary strengthen its independence and integrity and respond speedily to the 21st century’s call for more transparency and accountability. To paraphrase the Davide Watch, the APJR has enabled the judiciary to become truly “worthy of public trust and confidence.”
International Conference and
Showcase on Judicial Reforms
As a lasting testament to our judicial reform program, our Supreme Court is sponsoring on November 28-30, 2005, an International Conference and Showcase on Judicial Reforms. This gathering is divided into two parts: (1) plenary and parallel sessions to facilitate the international exchange of ideas, experiences, best practices and reform initiatives; and (2) a showcase or exhibit of the judicial reform projects I have mentioned earlier.
Expected to attend the conference-cum-showcase are around 150 foreign Chief Justices, senior magistrates and judicial educators. In addition, we are inviting our own appellate court justices and selected trial court judges to participate also. Those who have already confirmed their attendance are the Chief Justices of far-flung countries, like Russia, South Africa, Botswana, Maldives, The Netherlands and Argentina; as well as of our neighboring countries in Asia.
As conference chairperson of this international gathering, I am overwhelmed not only by the warm response of our counterpart judiciaries in the world; but also by the funding grants given by international institutions, like the United Nations Development Program, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, The Asia Foundation, and the Australian Agency for International Development. Their assistance has enabled us to sponsor this global milestone without any expense on the part of the Supreme Court and the Philippine government; and to offer free hotel accommodation, meals and local transportation to all invited delegates.
As we all know, Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr. is retiring from the judiciary on
But the APJR is not just the personal vision or project of the Chief Justice. I believe that it is also the vision and project of the entire Supreme Court and the rest of the judiciary. Thus, it will be continued even after his retirement. Those of us who will be left behind shall pursue the reform program with the same ardor and vigor as shown by our beloved leader.
Our Chief has brought the dawn of judicial renaissance to our country. We who now bask in the morning sun vow to continue his mission until our collective dream of rendering speedy, high-quality justice under a transformed judiciary will have been achieved.
Xxx.
By:
Atty. Manuel J. Laserna Jr.
