INTRODUCTION

Judicial power rests with the Supreme Court and the lower courts, as established by law (Art. VIII,
sec. 1 of the 1987 Constitution). Its duty is to settle actual controversies involving rights which
are legally demandable and enforceable (Art. VIII Sec. 1 (2)).
The judiciary enjoys fiscal autonomy. Its appropriation may not be reduced by the Legislature
below the appropriated amount the previous year (Art. VIII, Sec. 3).
RULES AND PROCEDURES
The Rules of Court of the Philippines, as amended and the rules and regulations issued by the
Supreme Court, define the rules and procedures of the judiciary. These rules and regulations are
in the form of administrative matters, administrative orders, circulars, memorandum circulars,
memorandum orders, and OCA circulars. The Supreme Court disseminates these rules and
regulations to all courts, publishes important ones in newspapers of general circulation, prints
them in book or pamphlet form, and uploads them to theSupreme Court website and
the Supreme Court E-Library website.
On June 21, 1988, the Supreme Court promulgated the Code of Professional Responsibility for the
legal profession. The draft was prepared by the Committee on Responsibility, Discipline and
Disbarment of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
APPOINTMENTS TO THE JUDICIARY
By virtue of Article VIII, Section 8, appointments to the judiciary are made by the President of the
Philippines based on a list submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council which is under the
supervision of the Supreme Court. Its principal function is to screen prospective appointees to
any judicial post. It is composed of the chief justice as ex-officio chairman, the Secretary of
Justice and representatives of Congress as ex-officio members, and a representative of the
Integrated Bar, a professor of law, a retired member of the Supreme Court and a representative
of the private sector as members.
PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY

The Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) is the training school for justices, judge, court
personnel, lawyers and aspirants to judicial posts. It was originally created by the Supreme
Court on March 16, 1996 by virtue of Administrative Order No. 35-96, and was institutionalized
on February 26, 1998 by virtue of Republic Act No. 8557. No appointee to the bench may
commence the discharge his adjudicative function without completing the prescribed court
training in the academy. Its organizational structure and administrative setup are provided for by
the Supreme Court in its en banc resolution (Revised A.M. No. 01-1-04-sc-PHILJA).
PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER
The Philippine Mediation Center was organized pursuant to the en banc Supreme Court
Resolution A.M. No. 01-10-5-SC-PHILJA, dated October 16, 2001, and in line with the objectives of
the Action Program for Judicial Reforms (APJR) to decongest court dockets, among others, the
court prescribed guidelines in institutionalizing and implementing the mediation program in the
Philippines. The same resolution designated the Philippine Judicial Academy as the component
unit of the Supreme Court for Court-Annexed Mediation and other Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) mechanisms, and established the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC).
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Office was organized to implement the rules on
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education for members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (B.M.
No. 850 Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)). It holds office in the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines main office.
KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
Presidential Decree No. 1508, or the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, took effect on December
11, 1978, and established a system of amicably settling disputes at the barangay level. This
decree and the Local Government Code provided rules and procedures, Title I, Chapter 7,
Sections 339-422. This system of amicable settlement of dispute aims to promote the speedy
administration of justice by easing the congestion of court dockets. The court does not take
cognizance of cases filed if they are not filed first with the Katarungang Pambarangay.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) SYSTEM
Republic Act No. 9285 institutionalized the use of an alternative dispute resolution system, which
serves to promote the speedy and impartial administration of justice and unclog the court
dockets. This act shall be without prejudice to the adoption of the Supreme Court of any ADR
system such as mediation, conciliation, arbitration or any combination thereof.

THE SUPREME COURT: HISTORY OF THE SUPREME COURT

Royal audencia
The royal audencia was established on May 5, 1583, composed of a president, four oidores
(justices) and a fiscal. The audencia exercised both administrative and judicial functions. Its
functions and structure were modified in 1815 when a chief justice replaced its president and the
number of justices was increased. It came to be known as the Audencia Territorial de Manila with
two branches, civil and criminal. A royal decree issued on July 24, 1861 converted it to a purely
judicial body with its decisions appealable to the Court of Spain in Madrid. A territorial audencia
in Cebu, and audencia for criminal cases in Vigan were organized on February 26, 1898.
Philippine Revolution and First Republic
In the three phases of the revolution: 1896-1897; 1898; 1899-1901, the exigencies of war
prevented the thorough organization of the administration of justice. Katipunan councils, then
the provisional governments of Tejeros, Biak-na-Bato, and the Revolutionary Republic proclaimed
in Kawit, essentially had General Emilio Aguinaldo exercising decree-making powers instituting
ad hoc courts and reviewing any appeals concerning their decisions.
In 1899, when the Malolos Constitution was ratified, it provided for a Supreme Court of Justice.
President Aguinaldo proposed the appointment of Apolinario Mabini as Chief Justice, but the
appointment and the convening of the Supreme Court of Justice never materialized because of
the Philippine-American War.
American military rule
During the Philippine-American War, General Wesley Merrit suspended the audencias when a
military government was established after Manila fell to American forces in August, 1898. Major

General Elwell S. Otis re-established the Audencia on May 29, 1899 by virtue of General Order
No. 20, which provided for six Filipino members of the audencia.
Establishment of the Supreme Court
With the establishment of civil government, Act No. 136 of the Philippine Commission abolished
the audencia and established the present Supreme Court on June 11, 1901, with Cayetano
Arellano as the first chief justice together with associate justicesthe majority of whom were
Americans.
Commonwealth: Filipinization of the Supreme Court
With the ratification of the 1935 Constitution, the membership was increased to 11 with two
divisions of five members each. The Supreme Court was Filipinized upon the inauguration of the
Commonwealth of the Philippines on November 15, 1935. The composition of the court was
reduced by virtue of Commonwealth Act No. 3. It provided for a Supreme Court, headed by a
chief justice with six associate justices.
World War II and the Third Republic
During World War II, the National Assembly passed legislation granting emergency powers to
President Manuel L. Quezon; Chief Justice Jose Abad Santos was made concurrent Secretary of
Justice and acting President of the Philippines in unoccupied areas. After his capture and
execution at the hands of the Japanese, the Commonwealth government-in-exile had no system
of courts.
Meanwhile, the Japanese organized the Philippine Executive Commission in occupied areas on
January 8, 1942, which gave way to the Second Republic in October 14, 1943. By the end of
World War II, the regular function of the courts had been restored, beginning with the
appointment of a new Supreme Court on June 6, 1945. On September 17, 1945, the laws of the
Second Republic were declared null and void; a Supreme Court decision on Co Kim Cham v.
Eusebio Valdez Tan Keh and Arsenio P. Dizon recognized this.
Martial law
The Supreme Court was retained during the martial law years under rules similar to the 1935
Constitution, but with the exception few key factors, e.g.:
1. The 1973 Constitution further increased the membership of the Supreme Court to 15, with
two divisions;
2. The process by which a chief justice and associate justices are appointed was changed
under to grant the president (Ferdinand Marcos during this time) the sole authority to
appoint members of the Supreme Court. There were five chief justices that were appointed
under this provision.
PRESENT-DAY SUPREME COURT
Pursuant to the provisions of the 1987 Constitution, the Supreme Court is composed of a chief
Justice and 14 associate justices who serve until the age of 70. The court may sit en banc or in
one of its three divisions composed of five members each. The chief justice and associate
justices are appointed by the President of the Philippines, chosen from a shortlist submitted by
the Judicial and Bar Council. The president must fill up a vacancy within 90 days of occurrence.
Article VIII, Section 4 (2) of the constitution explicitly provides for the cases that must be heard
en banc, and Section 4 (3) for cases that may be heard by divisions.
The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 transferred the administrative supervision of all courts
and their personnel from the Department of Justice to the Supreme Court. This was affirmed by
Article VIII, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution. To effectively discharge this constitutional
mandate, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) was created under Presidential Decree No.
828, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 842 (and its functions further strengthened by a
resolution of the Supreme Court en banc dated October 24, 1996). Its principal function is the
supervision and administration of the lower courts throughout the Philippines and all their
personnel. It reports and recommends to the Supreme Court all actions that affect the lower
court management. The OCA is headed by the court administrator, three deputy court
administrators, and three assistant court administrators.
According to the 1987 Constitution, Article VIII, Section 5, the Supreme Court exercises the
following powers:

1. Exercise jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and
consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and
habeas corpus.
2. Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm, on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the
Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of the lower courts in:
All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international
or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order,
instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question;
All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any
penalty imposed in relation thereto;
All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue;
All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or
higher;
All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved;
3. Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations as public interest may
require. Such temporary assignments shall not exceed six months without the
consent of the judge concerned.
4. Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.
1. Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights,
pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts; the admission to the practice of law, the
Integrated Bar; and legal assistance to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a
simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform
for all courts the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.
Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless
disapproved by the Supreme Court.
2. Appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law
(Sec. 5 , id.).
The Supreme Court has adopted and promulgated the Rules of Court for the protection and
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleadings and practice and procedure in all courts, and the
admission in the practice of law. Amendments are promulgated through the Committee on
Revision of Rules. The Court also issues administrative rules and regulations in the form of court
issuances posted on the Supreme Court E-Library website.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
THE INCUMBENT
Ma. Lourdes P. A. Sereno
Tenure as Chief Justice: August 24, 2012 present
Appointed by: Benigno S. Aquino III
Age at Appointment: 52
Full roster of chief justices
The position of chief justice was created in 1901 by virtue of the establishment of the Philippine
Supreme Court. At the time, the chief justice was appointed by the President of the United
States: the court was composed mainly of American citizens with a Filipino chief justice.
President Benigno S. Aquino III, took her oath of office on August 25, 2012. She is the first woman
to hold the position.
There were six chief justices appointed by the President of the United States. In 1935, upon the
inauguration of the Commonwealth of the Philippines, the power to appoint the chief justice was
transferred to the President of the Philippines. According to the 1935 Constitution, the President
of the Philippines shall make appointments with concurrence of the National Assembly. There
have been six Chief Justices who were appointed under the 1935 Constitution. The only chief
justice that was not appointed by a president was Chief Justice Jose Yulo, who was in office during
the Japanese occupation, from 1942 until the liberation of the Philippines in 1945. During this
time, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was appointed by the Philippine Executive
Committee headed by Jorge B. Vargas.

The 1943 Constitution provided for the members of the Supreme Court and the chief justice to be
appointed by the president with the concurrence of his cabinet. Upon the declaration of martial
law and the subsequent establishment of the 1973 Constitution, the process of selection of the
Chief Justice of the Philippines was changed. The power of Congress to veto an appointment by
the president to the office of the chief justice was removed. According to the 1973 Constitution,
The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of inferior courts shall be appointed by the
President. There were five chief justices that were appointed under this provision.
After the revolution of 1986, a new constitution was enacted and a new process of selecting a
chief magistrate was created. Former chief justice and 1986 Constitutional Commission delegate
Roberto V. Concepcion introduced the concept of the Judicial and Bar Council. The aim of the
Council is to de-politicize the judiciary by lessening the appointing power of the president. To
read more about the appointment of chief justices, members of the judiciary, and the Office of
the Ombudsman, please click here.
To date, there have been nine chief justices appointed under the conditions of the 1986
Constitution.
CHIEF JUSTICES LISTED ACCORDING TO APPOINTING PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES
Of the 15 Presidents of the Philippines, only eight have been able to appoint an individual to the
highest judicial post in the land. The following is the list of presidents who appointed chief Jjstices
and their appointees.
1. Manuel L. Quezon
o Jose Abad Santos
2. Sergio Osmea
o Manuel V. Moran
3. Elpidio Quirino
o Ricardo M. Paras
4. Carlos P. Garcia
o Cesar Bengzon
5. Ferdinand E. Marcos
o Roberto V. Concepcion
o Querube Makalintal
o Fred Ruiz Castro
o Enrique M. Fernando
o Felix V. Makasiar
o Ramon C. Aquino
6. Corazon C. Aquino
o Claudio Teehankee
o Pedro L. Yap
o Marcelo B. Fernan
o Andres R. Narvasa
7. Joseph Ejercito Estrada
o Hilario G. Davide
8. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
o Artemio Panganiban
o Reynato Puno
o Renato C. Corona
9. Benigno S. Aquino III
o Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno
Notable chief justices
Of the list of chief justices, there are a few individuals that stand out for having gone above and
beyond their duty and tenure as chief justice.
1. Cayetano Arellano: Cayetano Arellano was the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
He was appointed in 1901 when the Supreme Court was created through Act No. 136,
along with three American justices and one Filipino justice.
2. Ramon Avancea: Appointed in 1925 by U.S. President Calvin Coolidge, he is known for
ushering in an all-Filipino Supreme Court in 1935. Upon the establishment of the Philippine

Commonwealth in 1935, American justices were no longer allowed to sit in the Philippine
Supreme Courtthus, new justices were appointed, all of whom were of Filipino
citizenship.
3. Jose Abad Santos: As a wartime chief justice, Abad Santos took on two different roles; he
was the chief justice and concurrently the Secretary of Justice. When President Quezon left
the Philippines to evade capture by the Japanese, Abad Santos chose to stay in the
country as a caretaker of the government. On May 2, 1942, the Japanese military caught
Abad Santos in Cebu and invited him to become one of the members of their puppet
government. Abad Santos refused to collaborate. He died at the hands of the Japanese on
May 2, 1942. His last words to his son were, Do not cry, Pepito, show to these people that
you are brave. It is an honor to die for ones country. Not everybody has that chance.
4. Manuel V. Moran: Appointed in 1945 by President Sergio Osmea, Manuel V. Moran
would serve as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for six years. Upon his retirement in
1951, Moran was appointed as Philippine Ambassador to Spain and concurrently to the
Holy See. During President Quirinos administration, Moran was once again offered a
position in the Supreme Court in 1953, at the twilight of Quirinos presidency. Moran,
however, refused the midnight appointment.
5. Roberto V. Concepcion: He went into early retirement for refusing to grant absolute
power to Ferdinand Marcos, the president who appointed him. In the resolution
of Javellana v. Executive Secretary, Concepcion argued against the validity of the 1973
Constitution and its questionable aspects. Accordingly, he dissented, along with Justices
Teehankee, Zaldivar, and Fernando, from implementing the 1973 Constitution. Due to the
courts decision, Concepcion would enter early retirement, 50 days before his originally
scheduled retirement date.
6. Claudio Teehankee: Claudio Teehankee was known for his firm anti-martial law stance
during his tenure in the Supreme Court. Teehankee resisted multiple attempts by the
Marcos administration to garner absolute power by issuing questionable decrees. In 1973,
he was part of the bloc that dissented from the implementation of the 1973 Constitution.
In 1980, he dissented from the proposed judicial reorganization act of President Marcos. In
1986, after the EDSA Revolution, he administered the Oath of Office of President Corazon
C. Aquino in Club Filipino. He was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 1986 by
President Corazon C. Aquino
7. Hilario G. Davide: Appointed by President Joseph Ejercito Estrada in 1998, Chief Justice
Hilario G. Davide was known as the presiding judge of the first impeachment proceedings
in Asia. During the impeachment of President Estrada, he conducted proceedings with
impartiality. Following EDSA II uprising, which deposed President Estrada, Davide swore in
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as the 14th President of the Philippines.
8. Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno: Appointed by President Benigno S. Aquino III in 2012, Chief
Justice Sereno is the first woman appointed to the position.
Court of Appeals
The Court of Appeals is the second highest tribunal in the country, which was established on
February 1, 1936 by virtue of Commonwealth Act No. 3. The current form of the Court of Appeals
was constituted through Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended by Executive Order No. 33, s.
1986, Republic Act No. 7902, and Republic Act No. 8246.
The jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals are as follows:
1. Original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, and
quo warranto, and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction;
2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgements of Regional Trial
Courts; and
3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgements, resolutions, orders or awards of
Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards or commission.
The Court of Appeals shall also have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive
evidence and perform acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within its
original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials or
proceedings.

The Court of Appeals is composed of one presiding justice and 68 associate justices, all of which
are appointed by the President from a shortlist submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council. The
associate justices shall have precedence according to the dates (or order, in case of similar
appointment dates) of their respective appointments. The qualifications for the justices of the
Supreme Court also apply to members of the Court of Appeals.
The current presiding justice of the Court of Appeals is Andres Reyes Jr., who is set to retire on
May 11, 2020.
Court of Tax Appeals
The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), which is of the same level as the Court of Appeals, was created
by virtue of Republic Act No. 1125, which was signed into law on June 16, 1954. Its present-day
form was constituted through RA 1125, as amended by Republic Act No. 9282 andRepublic Act
No. 9503.
The CTA exercises jurisdiction in the following:
1. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal, as herein provided:
1. Decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue 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 or
other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue;
2. Inaction by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed
assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in
relations thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue
Code or other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, where the
National Internal Revenue Code provides a specific period of action, in which case
the inaction shall be deemed a denial;
3. Decisions, orders or resolutions of the Regional Trial Courts in local tax cases
originally decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original or appellate
jurisdiction;
4. Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for customs
duties, fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or release of property
affected, fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto, or other matters
arising under the Customs Law or other laws administered by the Bureau of
Customs;
5. Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment and taxation of real
property originally decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals;
6. Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs cases elevated to him
automatically for review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs which are
adverse to the Government under Section 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;
7. Decisions of the Secretary of Trade and Industry, in the case of non-agricultural
product, commodity or article, and the Secretary of Agriculture in the case of
agricultural product, commodity or article, involving dumping and countervailing
duties under Section 301 and 302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and
safeguard measures under Republic Act No. 8800, where either party may appeal
the decision to impose or not to impose said duties.
2. Jurisdiction over cases involving criminal offenses as herein provided:
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal offenses arising from violations of the
National Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs Code and other laws
administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau of Customs:
Provided, however, that offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph where the
principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is
less than P1 million or where there is no specified amount claimed shall be tried by
the regular courts and the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate.
2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in criminal offenses:
1. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial
Courts in tax cases originally decided by them, in their respective territorial
jurisdiction.

2. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the

Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax
cases originally decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective jurisdiction.
3. Jurisdiction over tax collection cases as herein provided:
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction in tax collection cases involving final and
executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties:
Provided, however, that collection cases where the principal amount of
taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than
P1 million shall be tried by the proper Municipal Trial Court,
Metropolitan Trial Court and Regional Trial Court.
2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in tax collection cases:
1. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the
Regional Trial Courts in tax collection cases originally decided by
them, in their respective territorial jurisdiction.
2. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders
of the Regional Trial Courts in the Exercise of their appellate
jurisdiction over tax collection cases originally decided by the
Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts, in their respective jurisdiction.
The CTA is composed of one presiding justice and 8 associate justices, all of which are appointed
by the President from a shortlist submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council. The associate justices
shall have precedence according to the dates (or order, in case of similar appointment dates) of
their respective appointments. The qualifications for the justices of the Court of Appeals also
apply to members of the CTA.
The current presiding justice of the CTA is Roman del Rosario, who is set to retire on October 6,
2025.
Sandiganbayan
To attain the highest norms of official conduct among officials and employees in the government,
the creation of a special graft court to be known as the Sandiganbayan was provided for in
Article XIII, Section 5 of the 1973 Constitution. This court was formally established
through Presidential Decree No. 1606, which was signed into law on December 10, 1978.
Through Article XI (Accountability of Public Officers), Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution, the
Sandiganbayan was carried over to the post-EDSA Revolution republic. The current form of the
Sandiganbayan was constituted through PD 1606, s. 1978, as amended by Republic Act No. 7975
and Republic Act No. 8245.
The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over the following:
1. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as
amended, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where one
or more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government
whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the
offense:
1. Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and
higher, otherwise classified as grade 27 and higher, of the Compensation and
Position Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
1. Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang
panlalawigan and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers and other
provincial department heads;
2. City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city
treasurers, assessors engineers and other city department heads;
3. Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and
higher;
4. Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of
higher rank;

5. Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of

provincial director and those holding the rank of senior superintendent or
higher;
6. City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and
prosecutors in the Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
7. Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or
-controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions or
foundations;
2. Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as grade 27 and up under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;
3. Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the constitution;
4. Chairmen and members of constitutional commissions, without prejudice to the
provisions of the constitution; and
5. All other national and local officials classified as Grade 27 and higher under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.
2. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by
the public officials and employees mentioned in subsection a of this section in relation to
their office.
3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1,
2, 14 and 14-A, s. 1986.
In addition, the Sandiganbayan exercises exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments,
resolutions or orders or regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original
jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein provided.
The Sandiganbayan also has exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of the
writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, injunctions, and other ancillary writs
and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature, including
quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases filed or which may be filed under Executive
Order Nos. 1,2,14 and 14-A issued in 1986.
In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the
public officers or employees, including those employed in govemment-owned or controlled
corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper
courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them.
The Sandiganbayan comprises of one presiding justice and 14 associate justices, all of which are
appointed by the President from a shortlist submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council. The
associate justices shall have precedence according to the dates (or order, in case of similar
appointment dates) of their respective appointments.
The qualifications to become a member of the Sandiganbayan are as follows:
1. a natural-born citizen of the Philippines;
2. at least 40 years of age
3. has been a judge of a court for at least ten years, or been engaged in the practice of law
in the Philippines or has held office requiring admission to the bar as a prerequisite for at
least ten years.
The current presiding justice of the Sandiganbayan is Amparo Cabotaje-Tang, who is set to retire
on November 8, 2024.