The Philippine Supreme Court annual report (2006) gives a good view of the status of the Philippine justice system. I wish to digest it for legal research purposes of the visitors of this blog.
The 4,332 cases decided by the Supreme Court in 2005 increased to 5,302 in 2006. The Court of Appeals was able to dispose of 14,347; the Sandiganbayan, 638 cases; and the Court of Tax Appeals, 327.
The second- level courts (Regional Trial Courts and Shari’a District Courts) and first- level courts
(Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts and the Shari’a Circuit courts) all resolved a total of 289,623 cases.
Of the 2,258 judicial positions, 1,689 positions had been filled, leaving only 569 vacancies for a 25.2% vacancy rate.
The CY 2008 Supreme Court and Lower Courts budget for regular activities amounted to Php 11,252,446,000.00 or Php 3,582,696.00 (47%) more than the CY 2007 approved regular budget of Php 7,669,750,000.00. Inclusive of Retirement and Life Insurance Premium, Terminal Leave and Retirement Benefits, Locally- Funded and Foreign- Assisted Projects, the total budget proposal is Php 12,783,973,000.00 or 41% over the CY 2007 budget of Php 9,081,643,000.00.
At the end of 2005, lower courts had 744,251 pending cases. By December 31,2006, that number stood at 716,040. There was also decrease in the influx of new cases, with 346,776 cases filed in 2006, compared to 376,889 filed the previous year. All in all, in 2006. first- and second-level courts had 1,153,314 cases in their dockets, a number that includes cases that were revived or reopened, and cases transferred from other courts. Of this number, RTCs handled 545,608 cases, while our first- level courts handled 607,706 cases.
Despite the limitations brought about by the Judiciary’s limited physical, financial, and human resources, the first- level courts disposed of 437,239 cases in 2006; 289,623 cases were decided or resolved; 123,594, archived; and 24,022, transferred to other courts.
The nation’s third-level courts, not unlike lower courts, also faced a deluge
of cases. In 2006, the Court of Appeals handled 34,505 cases; the Sandiganbayan,
3,152; and the Court of Tax Appeals, 1,151.
The Supreme Court received a total of 11,810 new cases in 2006. Of this number, the High Tribunal disposed of 5,302 cases, for a case disposal rate of 44.9%
As of December 31, 2006, 284 buildings in 254 locations nationwide were constructed or renovated under the Justice System Infrastructure Program (JUSIP). Under the program, courthouses or Halls of Justice (HoJs) shall be rehabilitated or constructed for the use and occupancy of the lower courts and the National Prosecution Services, Public attorneys Office, Parole and probation Administration, and the Registries of Deeds.
In 2006, several Local Government Unit (LGU) and other agencies also turned over 28 buildings to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court approved a distinctive façade for all HoJs in the country. The façade will feature the beautiful columns similar to those of the SC Buildings along Padre Faura Street. Likewise, the Supreme Court entered into five Memoranda of Agreement with various LGUs regarding the maintenance and improvement of courthouses not built under the JUSIP.
As part of the modernization of the Judiciary, computers sets were distributed to the Supreme Court and lower courts. In 2006, 1,770 sets of computers were purchased by the Court ensuring the there is at least one computer and printer set installed in every court nationwide. Likewise, the Court, as one of its computerization efforts, has approved under AM No. 05-10-23 SC the installation of Digital Subscriber Lines (DSL) Internet connections in the lower courts, starting with all courts in Metro Manila as pilot courts. The effort aims to enable the courts to access the E- Library system and other important websites related to legal research, as well as to facilitate electronic communications between the various courts comprising the Judiciary. From April to December 2006, 169 PLDT DSL connections were installed in various courts in Metro Manila.
A brief backgrounder on the Chief Justice.
Chief Justice Puno is the 22nd Chief Justice of the Philippines. He is also the concurrent chair of the SC First Division and ex officio chair of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) and the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET).
His appointment as chief magistrate by President Gloria Macapagal – Arroyo on December 7, 2006 was a moment that many had anticipated from the time he was sworn in as then the youngest SC Justice at 53 on June 28, 1993.
Prior on to his appointment to the High Courts, he served, among others, as Associate Justice of the Intermediate Appellate Court and the Court of Appeals (CA), Deputy Minister of Justice, Assistant Solicitor General, and City of Judge of Quezon City. He holds the distinction of being the youngest appointee to the CA at the age of 40. As then Senior Associate Justice, he chaired the Court’s Second Division and the Senate Electoral Tribunal. He was a consultant of the JBC which he now heads as Ex- officio Chair. Likewise, he had chaired the Court System Journal and the Supreme Court Committee, which digests the Court’s decisions for distribution to members of judiciary. He likewise chaired the High Court’s Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court that drafted the Rule on Violence against Women and their Children, Rule on Legal Separation, Rule on Declaration of Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages, Rule on Adoption, and Rules of Criminal Procedure, among many others.
Chief Justice Puno obtained his Bachelor of Science in Jurisprudence and Bachelor of Laws Degrees from the University of the Philippines in 1962. He served as editor- in – chief of The Philippine Collegian. He pursued his post- graduate studies in the United States on full scholarship. He obtained his Master of Comparative Laws at the Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas, with high distinction and as valedictorian of his class, his Master of Laws at the University of California, Berkeley, California and finished all the academic requirements of the degree of Doctor of Juridical Science at the University of Illinois, Champaign, Urbana, Illinois. In 2005, he became the first Filipino recipient of the Distinguished Global Alumnus Award given by the Dedman School of Law, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas. He has been conferred honorary doctorate degrees by five of our universities and the Hannam University, South Korea.
Among other honors, he was chosen as one of the Ten outstanding Young Men of the Philippines in 1977, Araw ng Maynila Awardee as Outstanding Jurist in 1987, and Outstanding Alumnus, UP College of Law in 1996, and Ulirang Ama Awardee in 2005.
Apart from his juridicial responsibilities, Chief Justice Puno is actively involved in civic and church activities. He is a lay preacher of the United Methodist Church and incumbent Chairman of the Administrative Council of the Puno Memorial United Methodist Church. He is past Chairman of the Administrative Board of the Knox United Methodist Church, the biggest and oldest Methodist Church in the Philippines. A native of Manila, Chief Justice Puno was married to the late SC Clerk Court Luzviminda D. Puno with whom he has three children Reynato, Jr., Emmanuel, and Ruth.
A few words about the Judicial and Bar Council.
The creation of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), which is under the administrative supervision of the Supreme Court, was innovation in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Its principal mandate is to recommend to the President at least three nominees for every vacant judicial position as well as vacant positions of Ombudsman and Deputy Ombudsman.
The JBC performs its sacrosanct task of ensuring that the nominees possess not only the minimum constitutional qualifications but also the essential attributes of “proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.” This is in consideration of the basic principle that the quality of the members composing it, the assurance of such quality being necessarily intertwined with the selection process.
The JBC stewardship in 2006 was shared by Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban (from December 21,2005 until his retirement on December 7, 2006) and Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno (from December 7, 2006 up to the present) as JBC ex officio Chair.
In 2006, 1,689 of the 2,258 judicial positions had been filled leaving only 569 vacancies for a 25.2% vacancy rate.
Public interviews of 171 candidates for the positions of two Supreme Court Associate Justices, 10 Court of Appeals Associate Justices, Overall Deputy Ombudsman, Deputy Ombudsman for Mindanao, and Deputy Ombudsman for the Military. It also conducted provincial interviews and psychological/psychiatric examinations of 194 applicants for judicial positions in five provinces.
For the foreigners who visit this blog and who might wish to have a brief overview of the Philippine Judiciary:
First Level
Occupying the first level of the hierarchy are the first-level courts comprised of the Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTCs), which are created in each metropolitan area established by law; the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities (MTCCs), in every city which does not form part of the metropolitan area; the Municipal Trial Courts (MTCs) established in each of the other cities or municipalities; and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTCs), created in each circuit comprising such cities and/or municipalities as grouped by law.
At the same level are the Shari’a Circuit Courts (SCC). Shari’a Courts have been established in Islamic regions and provinces to interpret and apply the Code of Muslim Personal Laws (Presidential Decree No. 1083). Their decisions are appealable to the Shari’a Appellate Court, which, however, is yet to be organized.
Second Level
The second tier consists of the Regional Trial Courts (RTCs) established in each of the 13 regions in the Philippines. Each RTC is composed of several branches. RTC act as trial courts and may receive evidence from the parties of the case. They also exercise appellate jurisdiction over decisions of the MeTCS, MTCCs, MTCs, and MCTCs in their respective territorial jurisdictions.
Also at the same level are the Shari’a District Courts (SDC). Their decisions are appealable to the Shari’a Appellate Court.
Third Level
Court of Appeals
At the third level is the Court of Appeals (CA), which exercises its powers, functions, and duties through 23 Divisions of three members each. The CA’s 18th, 19th, and 20th Divisions comprise the CA Visayas, located in Cebu City; while the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd Divisions make up CA Mindanao, situated in Cagayan de Oro City. The CCA is assigned to review cases elevated to it from the RTCs as well as quasi-judicial agencies such as the Civil Service Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission, National Labor Relations Commission, and the Land Registration Authority.
The CA also reviews death penalty cases as well as decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases. The CA is a collegiate court and may en banc only for the purpose of exercising administrative, ceremonial, or other non-adjudicatory functions. Being essentially an appellate court, it generally resolves cases only on the basis of records, but in certain instances, it may also try cases, conduct hearings, and receive evidence.
The Philippine Judicial System also includes two special courts: the Sandiganbayan and the Court of Tax Appeals.
Sandiganbayan
The Sandiganbayan is an anti-graft court that tries public officers – including their co-accused private persons – charged with criminal cases involving graft and corrupt practices as well as corresponding civil cases for the recovery of civil liability. The Sandiganbayan is composed of a Presiding Justice and 14 Associate Justices who sit in five divisions of three Justices each. Like the CA, its decisions are directly appealable to the Supreme Court.
Court of Tax Appeals
The CTA is composed of a Presiding Justice and five Associate Justices, and may sit en banc or in two divisions of three justices each. Republic Act 9282, which took effect on March 30, 2004, has elevated the status of the CTA to that of the CA. It has exclusive jurisdiction to review on appeal decisions in cases involving disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees, or other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs Code, It also exercises original jurisdiction over all criminal offenses arising from violations of the Tax or Tariff Codes and other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau of Customs.
Fourth Level
Supreme Court
At the apex of the judicial hierarchy is the Supreme Court. It is composed of a Chief Justice and 14 Associate Justices who sit en banc or in three divisions of five members each. It has the power to settle actual controversies involving rights that are legally demandable and enforceable, and determine whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government.
The Supreme Court is considered “the court of last resort” since no more appeals can be made from a judgment or decision on the merits rendered by this court. A decision of Supreme Court division is considered a decision of the entire Court. Decisions of the Supreme Court are considered as part of the law of the land.
