The number of complaints against local Judges continue to
grow. Complaints from court users vary from slow pace of case disposal to
perception of corruption, and abuse of power on the part of those who are
supposed to be administrators of justice. Likewise, Justices from the Court of
Appeals, the Sandiganbayan and the Supreme Court are also target of complaints
from court users.
While practically all those who raise issues and complaints
are not willing to file formal charges against those whom they complain about,
we still listen to their sad and sob stories which Advocates for the
Transformation of the Justice System label as “horror stories”.
We seriously take note of certain patterns of erroneous acts
and malpractices which are reported to us that impacts the administration of
justice.
We discuss and analyze what can be done to nip and slay the
root causes of the problems. We make recommendations on what can be done to
correct the anomalous situations and repeatedly hammer and pound the same as
part of our advocacy points until the system is transformed to what it should
be.
As we have repeatedly discussed the manner of selection,
appointment and promotion of Judges and Justices in the Philippines need to be
freed from political patronage so that only those with integrity, who are truly
upright and competent are appointed to such delicate positions of dispensing
justice.
When another victim of injustice involving a case for
violation of RA 9262 on Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of
2004, reported how a Judge clearly favored the accused, whose defense were
immaterial and irrelevant to that case, the lawyers, again pointed out their
previous observation that the Judge who was with the Public Attorneys’ Office
for a really long period of time, is clearly biased in favor of the accused.
The Judge is labeled as an “Acquitting
Judge”.
Many practicing lawyers also point out similar pattern they
observe with regard to some Judges who became Public Prosecutors. They find
that most of them are biased in favor of the State; thereby, the tendency is to
convict the accused even if the State is unable to show proof of guilt of the
accused beyond reasonable doubt.
As Chair of the Transformative Justice Institute, I have
already raised this concern to some important groups particularly the Education
Sector, including the NAC CEAP, or the National Advocacy Commission of the
Catholic Educational Association of the Philippines and the Philippine
Commission on Women (PCW), so that they can help us push for the specific
recommendations as follows:
1.
There ought to be a review of the Study of Law in
our country to shorten the same. Likewise the study of law must prepare
students to become dispensers of justice. Administration of Justice must be
learned early on in law schools by those who would like to become lawyers.
It does not take nine long years for one to finish law in other
countries.
In the Philippines, one is required to study four years of college with
BS degree as a pre-requisite or pre-law, before proceeding to another four years
of law proper. After that, one needs to review for about six months and prepare
to take the bar examinations. Then again, one waits for another six months for
the result of the bar examinations.
After ten long years of preparation, a new lawyer is not necessarily
already equipped to do court trial unless the law schools they come from allowed
them to do Legal Aid while in the College of Law, and the Law Students appear
in court under the supervision of a practicing lawyer. However, not all law
schools practice this.
2.
In order to prepare lawyers to become
administrators of justice, law schools should already be able to help in
determining the career path of lawyers geared toward administration of justice.
This means that students who exhibit the desire and competence to become Judges
and Justices are already prepared to do this even in the law schools.
Students who exhibit the desire and
competence to become Public Prosecutors are also prepared in this regard. The
same goes for those who exhibit the desire and competence to become Public
Defenders. The others, would be prepared as General Practitioners.
This second recommendation is vital in preparing lawyers for the special
task of litigation of cases. The lawyers must already know the field of
specialization they want to embark on and prepare themselves accordingly.
The present practice of making both the Public Prosecution Office and the
Public Attorneys’ Office as a stepping stone for one to become a Judge is not a
good practice as pointed out in the story we shared above.
3.
The Public Prosecutors along with Public
Defenders must be given salaries and benefits similar to Judges as they stay
longer in their posts. They should be given increments every 5 years or
thereabouts so that they would no longer desire to move to the Judiciary as
they acquire the necessary expertise in their field of either prosecution or
defense.
Gaining of experience and expertise is very vital for the Prosecution so
that the cases of the People of the Philippines will not suffer defeat; which
oftentimes happen when new prosecutors handle cases for the State.
This particular concern is very hot as of today, in the light of the
observation by many that our Public Prosecutors are groping on what to do, how
to react, what to say or what moves to take as they face seasoned lawyers of the accused in the
plunder cases against powerful politicians and individuals pending before the
Sandiganbayan. It was reported in the media that the lead prosecutor lost in a
huge case involving corruption and so many are asking why he is tasked to
handle the plunder cases.
When Public Prosecutors are well paid by the government, they will not be
easily tempted to accept bribe. They then gain the right experience and
expertise to prosecute cases that can end up in conviction of violators of laws.
This set up becomes a principal deterrent in the commission of other crimes by
those with criminal minds.
The reason why crimes continue to increase in our country is partly
because the justice system is not able to respond properly in the conviction,
correction and rehabilitation of those who commit crimes.
4.
The
Public Defenders should at the same time be passionate Advocates in Upholding
Human Rights of everyone including the accused whom they represent.
The very sad situation where many of those behind bars complain that they
are languishing in jail even before they are convicted is partly caused by the
failure of Public Defenders to call the attention of the court about the clear
violation of human rights of so many accused whose cases are not speedily
disposed of as they rot in jails with dehumanizing conditions. There are many
reported suicides of detainees as I shared earlier in this blogspot.
Many accused who are poor and are unable to secure the services of
private practitioners express feeling deeply aggrieved because their lawyers
are not able to assert their rights.
Since many of them cannot afford to post bail bond they remain in prison
sometimes even beyond the period of time of the possible penalty of
imprisonment and yet their lawyers are not able to effectively do anything
about it.
Considering the low pay of PAO lawyers compared with the Judges many of
them just make PAO as a stepping stone until they qualify after a certain
number of years of say five or ten years to join the Judiciary either as a
first level court Judge or as a Regional Trial Court Judge.
In order to hold on to Public Defenders to remain as such as they gain
experience and expertise; they must be
given pay increments equivalent to Judges as they stay longer in their posts thereby
they become really good in defending their clients no matter how poor are those
accused.
7-12-14
