There are many encouraging developments in the area of
Judicial Reform that I see other than the impressive decision of the Supreme
Court in the case involving the pork barrel funds.
A friend of mine, who very recently shared a lot of horror
stories still going on in all levels of
the courts, expressed that she does not hope that genuine Judicial Reform can
still take place during her lifetime. She is younger than me. I told her, “While
I am older than you are, I believe otherwise.”
So, despite the painful stories of injustices that continue
to happen in our midst, we shared some wishful moments about what the future
has in store for our country, particularly in the area of transformation of the
Philippine Justice System. I told her that what I cling to, is a Christian hope
which I have elaborately discussed in the books JAJA, Justice for Arbet, Justice for All and the Intertwining Culture
of Corruption Patriarchy and Impunity; Journey in the Advocacy for the
Transformation of the Justice System.
I fully believe that for as long as we continue with our
persistent advocacy and do concrete actions for the needed reform, particularly
in countering the present intertwining culture of corruption, patriarchy and
impunity; positive transformation can still happen in my lifetime. God will
surely grant our hearts’ desires. Nasa
tao ang gawa, nasa Diyos ang awa. Roughly translated that means, for as
long as we the people continue to act and do the needed things to achieve what
we aspire for, God being merciful, will bless the same.
The Transformative Justice Institute (TJI) is persistently
doing its part in working for the much needed reforms. We have several concrete
proposals that we have been discussing lately with various groups and sectors
which are fully supportive of the much needed Judicial Reform. We have prepared
a package of proposed reforms in order to be ready at anytime once amendment to
the constitution will materialize hopefully through Constitutional Convention.
One of such proposals is the creation of Judicial Commission.
Judicial Commission
is an important structure that is designed to hear cases of justices, judges
and court personnel. Only cases of the Supreme Court Justices, who are
impeachable officials, will not fall under the jurisdiction of the Judicial
Commission. All the rest of the judicial officials and personnel shall be
covered by the Judicial Commission. The Judicial Commission may consist of
twelve members, with four divisions of three commissioners for each division,
assigned in the National Capital Region, Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.
All of those who hear our proposal in this regard, totally
agree with the concept. This is because of the very weak system that we
presently have in the administration of cases of justices, judges and court
personnel due to the prevailing palakasan,
bata-bata and padrino system. People are aware that abuse and misuse of
fraternity ties is also prevalent in the administration of cases of judges,
justices and court personnel.
Many fraternity members I interviewed before I wrote the
book Intertwining Culture of Corruption
Patriarchy and Impunity; Journey In the Advocacy for the Transformation of the
Justice System admit that they place brothers in their fraternities in
strategic positions so that they would be at an advantage whenever they have
cases before them. Those strategic positions include the various levels of the
judiciary.
The present set up is, when an aggrieved party would file an
administrative case against a Justice of the Court of Appeals for instance, or
a Judge of the Regional Trial Court or a Municipal or City Trial court, the
same is lodged before the Office of Court Administrator (OCA) of the Supreme
Court. The Court Administrator conducts the investigation and makes the
recommendation to the Supreme Court on what action to take.
Many people complain that administrative cases are not
properly acted upon due to the palakasan,
padrino, bata-bata and the misuse and abuse of fraternity ties, which
sometimes start from the OCA. As a result, many people are losing faith in
the judiciary due to its inability to act with impartiality in many cases
involving one of its own. While many people air their complaints against judges
and justices, they are not keen on filing administrative cases on the notion
that nothing positive can come out of it anyway.
Partiality in the administration of cases involving judges
and justices are reflected and manifested in many cases, including those that
involve court stenographers who complain against judges who are charged of
sexual harassment.
A very good example of this situation is shown in one case
committed by a Davao City Judge against a Court Stenographer. The court
stenographers sought for the inhibition of the Court Administrator at that time,
in investigating the case because of his friendship with the respondent judge
who is his brother in the fraternity. So, the case was referred to a Court of
Appeals Justice despite the persistence of the Court stenographers for the case
to be heard by the CODI-Committee on Decorum and Investigation under Republic
Act 7877, the Anti Sexual Harassment Law.
The Supreme Court granted the Motion of the respondent judge
not to allow the CODI to hear the case. Instead, the Supreme Court directed a
Court of Appeals Justice to conduct the hearing.
The Court of Appeals Justice was fully convinced that the
stenographer told the truth and that the quantum of evidence she presented in
the administrative case is more than enough to hold the respondent judge liable
for sexual harassment. Despite the recommendation for suspension of the Judge
made by the Court of Appeals Hearing Officer, the Supreme Court en banc
disregarded the same and dismissed the case against the judge.
Many cannot believe the highly discriminatory policy which
the Supreme Court laid down in said sexual harassment case as it pronounced
that the quantum of proof that should have been presented is equivalent to that
required in criminal cases, because the respondent is a judge. It is in that
case where I heard an Executive Judge expressed embarrassment for the
judiciary. He stated that the decision makes it appear that the moral fitness
required of judges or justices is lower than the other government officials.
The court stenographers believe that the Court Administrator
who was already an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court at that time
influenced the dismissal of the case. They no longer filed a Motion for
Reconsideration as they claim that the same is just an exercise in futility.
They just lifted everything to God.
Abuse and Misuse of fraternity ties can indeed cause a lot
more embarrassment to the judiciary. It will continue to further erode the
people’s faith in the justice system.
It is in this regard that an independent Judicial Commission
becomes a necessity. With the sheer number of cases filed against judges,
justices and court personnel; the same should be taken out of the Office of the
Court Administrator.
The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) is so loaded
with a lot of other tasks. Handling cases filed against judges, justices and
court personnel must be taken out of its functions, duties and
responsibilities.
To have a truly independent Judiciary the OCA must also be
independent and not under the Supreme Court justices. This is another
recommendation that we at the TJI is proposing which is another key area for
judicial reform. This shall be the subject of our next article.
Proverbs 18 verses 3 to 5 state:
“ When wickedness comes, so does contempt, and with shame
comes disgrace.
The words of a man’s mouth are deep waters, but the fountain
of wisdom is a bubbling brook.
It is not good to be partial to the wicked or to deprive the
innocent of justice.”
Dory Cruz Avisado
10-26-14
