The Judicial Branch of Government

[red_jasper]

Is the Philippine judiciary dispensing justice as it should... or has politics and corruption gotten in the way?

It cannot be denied, IMO, that in some (if not most) cases, justice in the Philippines has a corresponding price tag, be it favors or cash. I believe, however, that there is still hope for our judiciary and that the Supreme Court leadership is indeed sincere in cleaning up its backyard.

The esteemed Justice Cruz, gives us aa bite of reality with the following article:

The myth of the perfect Supreme Court
By Isagani A. Cruz
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 22:46:00 05/31/2008

ONE OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF Republicanism in this country is the aloofness of the Supreme Court from the political departments and its superior respectability compared to the accommodating availability of the President of the Philippines and Congress to the importunate electorate and their dependence on its capricious goodwill.


To the majority of our people, the Supreme Court should be regarded with special deference and even near reverence, removed from the bickerings and even cheapness of the political departments with their gaudy courtship of partisan applause and, especially now, the vulgarity, corruption, and idiocy as well, of some of their members.


You do not see Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno eating without spoon and fork at a barangay lunch like Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo demonstrating democratic equality in the rural hustings or Senate President Manuel Villar and his colleagues like Manuel Roxas II, Loren Legarda, and Panfilo Lacson advertising commercial products (and principally themselves) on television and probably receiving talent fees like Manny Pacquiao.


Ramon Revilla starring in an action movie or Lito Lapid relaxing in the Senate lounge instead of engaging in a parliamentary debate is now acceptable conduct among lawmakers even as the House of Representatives remains the kennel of GMA lapdogs under her former lieutenant, Jose de Venecia, and now under his former lieutenant, Prospero Nograles.


By contrast, the Supreme Court is properly reserved and often ignored save for occasional hallelujahs from retired Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban in his column on the other page, except when his former colleagues offer their obeisance to their other more powerful chief in Malacañang to whom they owe an obsequious gratitude more demanding than mere camaraderie with him.


The Supreme Court, as many ignorant observers suppose, is like some unapproachable Mount Olympus inhabited by demigods defining with finality the norms of conduct lesser mortals must obey. The decisions they make, as if proclaimed by Zeus with his mighty thunderbolts, cannot be reversed even if erroneous or dishonest because the Supreme Court is, according to the Constitution, supreme.


I had a colleague on the Court who during the more than eight years I sat there did not utter a single word in our deliberations en banc and consistently concurred with another member who was obviously his idol and dictator. In an unguarded moment, this taciturn justice’s wife revealed that all he did was sign (probably without even reading) the opinions prepared for him by his anonymous researchers. He subsequently retired with full honors and a generous pension for his exemplary career.


The Supreme Court of the Philippines usually dances to the music of its counterpart in the United States and dutifully embellishes its decisions with American jurisprudence not necessarily relevant or even logical. That model, for all its great traditions, is hardly flawless. In 1857, the US Supreme Court pronounced the horrendous Dred Scott doctrine that Negroes were mere chattel owned by their white masters. Even as late as in 2004, its Republican members decided the Florida electoral returns in favor of George W. Bush to defeat Al Gore, his Democratic opponent, who had won the popular vote.


The US Supreme Court sustained the forced segregation of American niseis as security risks during World War II, to its subsequent regret and repentance. But it never acted as shamelessly as our Supreme Court during the Marcos despotism when martial law reduced its members to plastic flunkies remote-controlled from Malacañang. Intimidated and bribed with ridiculous ease, they “legitimized” every wrong the dictator committed. Their cringing genuflection was unbelievable. Their cowardice and avarice indelibly blemished the sterling record of our judiciary, as enriched before and after their disgraceful stint, by the legal and moral qualities of their worthy peers.


The Supreme Court is no longer the idealized bastion of truth and justice the people could look up to before for the protection of their rights under the Rule of Law. Our liberty was more valiant yesterday, is in serious jeopardy today, and may be tomorrow only a vanished value. Many fear—and there are thousands, nay, millions of us who do—that we are now under what is deplored and detested as the perilous Rule of Arroyo. How do the honorable justices stand?


Now at least, the less impressionable among us can look at the present Supreme Court not with the old adulation and even fear before it lost its virginal rectitude. Albeit with “neither sword nor purse,” it still has the ultimate power and duty to check the abuses of the president and Congress and uphold the rights of every individual with the cold neutrality of the fearless judge.


But will it? Regretfully, we can no longer confidently predict, as during its innocent days, that its decisions will be bold and just. I hope for the best, being an optimist, but prepare for the worst, to be realistic. The Neri decision is like an apparition in the dark.

[Askal82]

Its Just Tiis System.

[jvillanueva]

this thread is important,i hope more youth will get involved!!

is our justice system broken?

does the good people of this divided country cares?

LIFE.......LIBERTY.......JUSTICE FOR THE FEW RICH?


the media dont talk much about our supreme court justices.

what's going on......WAKE UP FILIPINOS!!!!!!

[red_jasper]

the intention of the thread is indeed to discuss RP's justice system in general and not just the Supreme Court

Originally Posted by jvillanueva

is our justice system broken?

i don't think so. it has its flaws, yes, but i belive it is still functioning as it should

does the good people of this divided country cares?

i sure hope so.


i noticed that some people who fear that they would not get a fair day in court because of an influential adversary resort to seeking media coverage in the hope that the public's eye on the case would deter any hanky-panky.

not every case, however, will get the media's attention... and there is just something wrong in the belief that one can only get a fair trial with the media's help

[TJ]

Originally Posted by jvillanueva

this thread is important,i hope more youth will get involved!!

is our justice system broken?

does the good people of this divided country cares?

LIFE.......LIBERTY.......JUSTICE FOR THE FEW RICH?


the media dont talk much about our supreme court justices.

what's going on......WAKE UP FILIPINOS!!!!!!

liberty will not be secured unless criminals lose their heads.

[kiretoce]

Originally Posted by Askal82

Its Just Tiis System.

I had to think hard on that one, Louie. But when I got it....

[le Reine]

I'd rather talk about the general justice system than the Supreme Court. Independence of the SC is debatable. It's an "if-you're-not-with-us-then-you're-against-us" attitude.

[jvillanueva]

do you have faith in the jury system?

what's your position on this

do believe that the court should interpret the constitution and not legislate social policy?

[jwharch]

The government that we get is the government we deserve.

Ask any Filipino his opinion on this real-life situation:

its 8am on a workday on a busy makati street. A lady screams and is slammed to the pavement by a man trying to snatch her bag. What will YOU do?

its 7pm on a street in manila. a guy tries to grab your phone. What do YOU do?

Not surprisingly, most people i ask say the same thing: pabayaan mo na baka madamay ka pa. baka masaktan ka pa. baka may kasama.

i think it's sad. Filipinos admired for valor and bravery during World War II by winston churchill have become...yellow. No wonder goons thrive in this country because they know Filipinos will not lift a finger...always afraid.

We should cut our national anthem's last lines for it no longer applies: Aming ligaya na pag may nang-aapi, ang MAMATAY NG DAHIL SA 'YO!

Today's enemies are no longer the Spaniards, the Japanese, nor the Americans. Our enemies today are our own selves.

[spearhead]

Marami talagang problema sa ating bayan bukod sa mga salbahi nating government officials, meron ding mga rebeldeng muslim at komunista, pati mga ibang pulis at mga dating pulis din na natutuksong lumabag sa ating mga batas! Lahat na ng klaseng pinoy kriminal ata nasa pilipinas na!

Cops who are guilty of kidnappings:
http://www.gmanews.tv/largevideo/rel...escuing-victim

Cops kill 6 suspected carjackers (former cops), kidnappers in QC
http://www.gmanews.tv/largevideo/rel...dnappers-in-QC

Saksi: Gangs shift from kidnapping to bank robbery - anti-crime group
http://www.gmanews.tv/largevideo/rel...ti-crime-group

What can we do to make our justice & laws to become stronger? Since the DNA sample tests are available in the philippines, so why not as well BRING back the death penalty NOW!

[Maxxclip]

Hustisya sa Pilipinas...
parang nagtapon ka ng karayom(needle) sa mga tumpok ng dayami at ipahahanap sayo sa loob ng isang oras...

[spearhead]

It's just too much bad cops in the philippines.

Here is another video about a bad cop who were escorting a convoy of cargo trucks w/ suspected smuggled goods, and when apprehended by an MMDA Traffic enforcer, the cop even punched him and shot at him. This cop should be charged for attempted murder.

http://www.gmanews.tv/largevideo/lat...affic-enforcer

[red_jasper]

The thread was meant to discuss the ins and outs, pros and cons, etc. of RP’s present judiciary. It seems “The Philippine Justice System” is too broad for this thread
“The Philippine Judiciary” might be more apt

Anyways…
at least i can see that the Judiciary leadership is doing something to clean up its backyard...

Court Cleansing: SC Dismisses Judge, Three Personnel; Disciplines Six Others
By Anna Katrina M. Martinez

For committing various administrative offenses which run counter to the standards of competence, integrity, and diligence in public service, a first-level court judge and three court employees were dismissed by the Supreme Court.

In a 12-page per curiam decision, Judge Maxwell S. Rosete of the Metropolitan Trial Circuit Court, Branch 2, Santiago City, Isabela, was dismissed from service for dishonesty and gross misconduct. The Court found that Rosete had misappropriated the amount of PhP15,000, received from an accused in a criminal case as payment of the premium of the said accused’s bail bond.

The Court stressed that it was not the first time that Rosete had been made to account for his administrative offenses. Rosete had been previously fined PhP2,000 by the Court for gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of authority and/or discretion, and incompetence, and, in another case, PhP5,000 for dishonesty. Rosete had likewise been reprimanded for violating Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code (usurpation of authority or official functions), and had been suspended for four months for violating RA 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

“A judge who has habitually flouted judicial ethics and betrayed judicial standards does not deserve the honor of his office,” said the Court. “To him should be meted the severest of administrative penalties.”

Also dismissed from service was Maria Algabre Chico, Clerk of Court II of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC), Apalit-San Simon, Pampanga, for gross dishonesty and malversation of public funds. The High Court also ordered the Civil Service Commission to cancel Chico’s civil service eligibility, if any, and directed the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) to file criminal charges against Chico before the appropriate court.

In a financial audit conducted by the OCA in the MCTC of Apalit-San Simon, Pampanga, Chico was found to have incurred cash accountabilities related to her duties as collecting officer amounting to PhP391,100 (PhP380,000 representing refunded cash bonds and PhP11,100 representing marriage solemnization fees).

In finding Chico guilty of gross neglect of duty and grave misconduct, the Court emphasized that the safeguarding of funds and collections, the submission to the Court of a monthly report of collections for all funds, and the proper issuance of official receipts for collections are essential to an orderly administration of justice. Chico admitted that she used some of the court’s collections to pay for her personal expenses and confessed her failure to duly collect solemnization fees and to immediately deposit the cash bonds received by the court. She likewise admitted that she gave the court’s junior process server cash allowances without the necessary papers for travel expenses in the service of summons.

The Court found that Chico did not issue an official receipt for the amount of PhP8,000 she had received in connection with a criminal case. Neither did Chico detail in her monthly report of collections and deposits all true and correct cash transactions of the court, in violation of Supreme Court Circular No. 32-93. Likewise, the Court found that Chico falsely reported that certain withdrawals had been duly acknowledged by their respective claimants by means of signatures which Chico herself had forged.

In another per curiam case, the High Court also dismissed a court stenographer who consistently refused to transcribe the stenographic notes taken by her.

Ruby B. Hechanova, Court Stenographer III of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 69, Silay City, Negros Occidental, was found guilty of gross neglect of duty. Hechanova was charged by Judge Felipe G. Banzon of the same branch of court with continued refusal to transcribe stenographic notes, alleging that Hechanova still refused to perform her duties despite the memoranda and orders issued by him directing her to transcribe her stenographic notes, with a warning that she shall be held in contempt and ordered arrested should she fail to comply.

In finding Hechanova guilty of gross neglect of duty, the Court held that as a stenographer, she should have realized “that the performance of her duty is essential to the prompt and proper administration of justice, and her inaction hampers the administration of justice and erodes public faith in the Judiciary.”

Likewise dismissed from service was Crisanto T. Flora, Sheriff IV of the RTC, Office of the Clerk of Court, Baguio City, for gross neglect of duty and grave misconduct.

In a 13-page per curiam resolution, the High Court found that Flora asked for PhP5,000 from the complainants in a civil case for the enforcement of a writ of execution dated February 20, 2001 issued by Branch 4 of the RTC of Baguio City, without issuing a receipt. However, Flora submitted to the court the sheriff’s return, dated June 15, 2001, only on May 27, 2005, after the branch clerk of court had inquired about it in March 2005.

Flora claimed that he was not able to implement the writ of execution because he was suspended from office from August 1, 2001 to July 31, 2002. The Court, however, rejected his argument, stressing that the writ of execution was issued and assigned to Flora more than five months before his suspension.

The Court also found dubious the sheriff’s return submitted by Flora. “The return was supposedly dated June 15, 2001 yet it never occurred to him to submit it immediately thereafter,” said the Court. “By his own admission, the submission came only after the branch clerk of court inquired about it… It now appears that the return was ante-dated and the submission a mere afterthought.”

The other Judiciary employees who were administratively sanctioned by the High Court were Atty. Ma. Victoria A. Acidera, Clerk of Court, RTC, Branch 13 of Laoag City, who was fined PhP10,000 for gross ignorance of the law for allowing the filing of motions that do not strictly conform with the Rules of Court, the same not having been addressed to all parties concerned; Remedios Base, Clerk of Court, Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Brooke’s Point, Palawan, who was fined in an amount equivalent to her salary for two months for simple misconduct for issuing an order committing an accused in a criminal case to the Chief of Police of Brooke’s Point, thereby arrogating upon herself a judicial function; Reynaldo O. Girado, Sheriff IV, RTC, Branch 33 of Davao City, who was fined in an amount equivalent to his salary for one month for simple neglect of duty when he failed to implement the alias writ of execution and submit a sheriff’s return on execution relative to a civil case; Eriberto Sabas, former Clerk of Court and Ex Officio Sheriff of the MTC of Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, who was also fined in an amount equivalent to his salary for one month, to be deducted from his retirement pay, after he was found guilty of simple neglect of duty for executing a demolition order relative to a civil case which entailed the destruction of a property belonging to a person not a party to the said case; Eugenio Taguba, Process Server, MTCC, Branch 2 of Santiago City, who was fined PhP2,000 after he was found guilty of simple misconduct for having prepared an acknowledgment receipt for the amount of PhP15,000 received and misappropriated by the dismissed Judge Rosete, and for having offered the varying amounts to the complainants in the administrative case against him and Judge Rosete in exchange for the withdrawal of the complaint; and Dominador Monesit Sr., Court Interpreter, MTC, Tandag, Surigao del Sur, who was reprimanded after he was found guilty of willful failure to pay a just debt. (AM No. MTJ-08-1702, Lacanilao v. Rosete, April 8, 2008; AM No. 08-1-30-MCTC, Re: Financial Report on the Audit Conducted in the MCTC, Apalit-San Simon, Pampanga, April 10, 2008; AM No. P-04-1765, Banzon v. Hechanova, April 8, 2008; AM No. P-06-2169, Urbanozo v. Flora, March 28, 2008; AM No. P-08-2442, Obrero v. Acidera, March 28, 2008; AM No. P-08-2440, Carandang v. Base, March 28, 2008; AM No. P-06-2250, Estoque v. Girado, March 24, 2008; AM No. P-06-2257, Stilgrove v. Sabas, March 28, 2008; and AM No. P-08-2447, Rosales v. Monesit, Sr., April 10, 2008.)

so, instead of merely yakking about it, those who had not so good experiences with our judiciary could help by filing administrative complaints against the erring public servants (be it a judge, prosecutor, a.k.a. fix-cal , or any court personnel for that matter)

[spearhead]

Originally Posted by o[R]b'z2

The thread was meant to discuss the ins and outs, pros and cons, etc. of RP’s present judiciary. It seems “The Philippine Justice System” is too broad for this thread
“The Philippine Judiciary” might be more apt

Were you been replying to my last post? Kasi di ako naglagay ng post nayan dito, si moderator natin.

I originally started a separate thread for it (videos & photos), just to let u know in case u really replied to my post.

[amigo32]

I don't know where to post this

Arroyo critic jailed for libel in Philippines: court official
A Philippine newspaper editor and critic of President Gloria Arroyo was convicted of libel and sentenced to almost two years in jail on Thursday, court officials said.

Ninez Olivarez, editor of the Daily Tribune newspaper, said she expected the verdict but would appeal and has asked to be granted provisional liberty.

Olivarez was convicted for alleging in a 2003 article that a prominent law firm had tried to use political connections and bribes on behalf of its client in a suit over a mothballed airport terminal in Manila, court records show.

The law firm, Carpio Villaraza Cruz, charged that the article was unfounded and that it had been maligned by her article.

But Olivarez said the story was based on reliable sources. She also argued that the article is of "grave public importance" and that the Tribune had a duty to act as a media watchdog of the government.

The court however found the article to be "derogatory" adding that Olivarez "failed to exert efforts to verify the truth of the statements" against the complainants.

Aside from the jail sentence, Olivarez was also required to pay five million pesos (114,419 dollars) in damages.

"I expected to be convicted," she told AFP. "What can you do? There are so many powerful people."

She expressed determination to fight the case, vowing to take the law firm all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary, even if it took 20 years.

"Probably, in those 20 years, I will have died already," she said.

Olivarez has long been a critic of Arroyo and her presumed allies and in 2006, government troops raided her newspaper on suspicion that she was involved with military coup plotters trying to overthrow the president.

[red_jasper]

it was a general observation
obviously a mod did a merge thread here

[DoggMann]

... dapat i merge to sa "Corruption in the Philippines" thread o kaya sa "HUMOR" thread ...

[jvillanueva]

do we know our supreme court justices?

we need to tracked down their views and important rulings that affect our way of life

supreme court rulings are public records

WOULD SOMEONE POST,SUPREME COURT RULINGS

THE GOOD...THE BAD....AND THE UGLY { PLEASE LANG}

[red_jasper]

full text of decisions are not that short but i could post excerpts of some significant rulings from time to time

in the meantime, here's a link to the Supreme Court website...
should anybody want to know answers to academic () questions like these:

IS the president of a state university outside the reach of the disciplinary jurisdiction constitutionally granted to the Civil Service Commission (CSC) over all civil servants and officials?

Does the assumption by the CSC of jurisdiction over a president of a state university violate academic freedom?

btw, the Supreme Court answered both questions in the negative in this May 2008 case

[jvillanueva]

thank you for the link,big O