Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Submitted by:
ABMC 2A
Submitted to:
PS 211 Professor
September 2, 2013
Article VIII Judicial Department |2
Section 1. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in
such lower courts as may be established by law.
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and
enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part
of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.
Judicial power
The judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court of the Philippines and lower
courts established by law. The Supreme Court, which has a Chief Justice as its
head and 14 Associate Justices, occupies the highest tier of the judiciary. The
justices serve until the age of 70. The justices are appointed by the president
on the recommendation of the Judicial and Bar Council. The sitting Chief
Justice is Maria Lourdes Sereno, the 24th to serve in that position.
Other court types of courts, of varying jurisdiction around the archipelago, are
the following, which can also be categorized into three groups:
Court of Appeals
Court of Tax Appeals
Sandiganbayan
Regular Courts:
Court of Appeals
Regional Trial Courts
Metropolitan Trial Courts
Municipal Trial Courts
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
Municipal Trial Courts in Cities
Muslim Courts
Abuse of discretion
It is the failure to take into proper consideration the facts and law relating to a
particular matter; an Arbitrary or unreasonable departure from precedent and
settled judicial custom.
Before such materials may be introduced into the record at a legal proceeding,
the trial court must determine that they satisfy certain criteria governing the
admissibility of evidence. At a minimum, the court must find that the evidence
offered is relevant to the legal proceedings. Evidence that bears on a factual or
legal issue at stake in a controversy is considered relevant evidence.
During many civil and criminal trials, judges rule on hundreds of evidentiary
objections lodged by both parties. These rulings are normally snap judgments
made in the heat of battle. Courts must make these decisions quickly to keep
the proceedings moving on schedule. For this reason, judges are given wide
latitude in making evidentiary rulings and will not be over-turned on appeal
unless the appellate court finds that the trial judge abused his or her
discretion.
Article VIII Judicial Department |4
For example, in a Negligence case, a state appellate court ruled that the trial
court did not abuse its discretion by admitting into evidence a posed accident-
scene photograph, even though the photograph depicted a model pedestrian
blindly walking into the path of the driver's vehicle with the pedestrian's head
pointed straight ahead as if she was totally oblivious to the vehicle and other
traffic. Gorman v. Hunt, 19 S.W.3d 662 (Ky. 2000). In upholding the trial
court's decision to admit the evidence, the appellate court observed that the
photograph was only used to show the pedestrian's position relative to the
vehicle at the time of impact and not to blame the pedestrian for being
negligent. The appellate court also noted that the lawyer objecting to the
photograph's admissibility was free to remind the jury of its limited relevance
during cross-examination and closing arguments.
An appellate court would find that a trial court abused its discretion, however,
if it admitted into evidence a photograph without proof that it was authentic.
Apter v. Ross, 781 N.E.2d 744 (Ind. App. 2003). A photograph's authenticity
may be established by a witness's personal observations that the photograph
accurately depicts what it purports to depict at the time the photograph was
taken. Ordinarily the photographer who took the picture is in the best position
to provide such testimony.
Abuse of Discretion is a polite way of saying a trial judge has made such a bad
mistake ("clearly against reason and evidence" or against established law)
during a trial or on ruling on a motion and that a person did not get a fair trial.
A court of appeals will use a finding of this abuse as a reason to reverse the a
previous court result. Examples of "abuse of discretion" or judges' mistakes
include not allowing an important witness to testify, making improper
comments that might influence a jury, showing bias, or making rulings on
evidence that deny a person a chance to tell his or her side of the matter. This
does not mean a trial or the judge has to be perfect, but it does mean that the
judge's actions were so far out of bounds that someone truly did not get a fair
trial. Sometimes the appeals courts admit the judge was wrong, but not wrong
enough to have influenced the outcome of the trial, often to the annoyance of
the losing party. In criminal cases abuse of discretion can include sentences
that are grossly too harsh. In a divorce action, it includes awarding alimony
way beyond the established formula or the spouse's or life partner's realistic
ability to pay.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe, and
apportion the jurisdiction of the various courts but may not deprive the
Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Section 5
hereof.
It is vested upon the Congress the power to define, prescribe and apportion the
jurisdiction of the various or different courts. However it should not remove or
impair or by the word of the constitution "to deprive" the jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court over cases enumerated by Section 5. It's like saying that the
Congress has its powers but it must remember that it has its limitation and
that the Supreme Court has its power as well. Also no law should be passed
that involves reorganizing the Judiciary if it threatens the security of term of its
Members.
The judiciary department has the privilege of the automatic release of funds
once they are approved and appropriated by the legislature. Also, the legislative
department cant reduce the amount lower than the appropriated budget that
is provided for the judiciary department the year before. After the budget if
approved, the releasing of funds is necessary to be regular and automatic.
If the budget last year was Php 13 billion, then the budget this year will not be
lower than Php 13 billion.
Composition
The Supreme Court is composed of the Chief Justice, together with its 14
Associate Justices. The Supreme Court may sit En Banc or in panels (or
divisions) of three, five or seven members.En Banc is a French word which
literally means, on the bench. It is used to refer to the hearing of a legal case
where all judges of a court will hear the case rather than a selected few.
Since a Quorum of the Supreme Court is Eight, the votes of at least five are
needed and are enough, even if it is a question of constitutionality. Moreover,
those who did not take part in the deliberation do not have the right to vote.
In cases heard by division or panels, the cases are resolved with the
concurrence of the majority who took part in deliberation of the case. When the
required number is not obtained, the case shall be decided en banc: Provided,
that no doctrine or principle of law laid down by the court in a decision
rendered en banc or in division may be modified or reversed except by the court
sitting en banc
Article VIII Judicial Department |7
Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: (1)
Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other
public ministers and consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition,
mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.
The Supreme Court exercises original jurisdiction over petitions for the
issuance of Writs, etc.
a. Certiorari
b. Prohibition
c. Mandamus
Article VIII Judicial Department |8
d. Quo warranto
e. Habeas Corpus
Reassignment of judges:
An example of this is the transfer of Andal Jrs case to Quezon City. According
to Davanadera, they have to transfer the hearing due to security reasons. Also,
the witnesses were hesitant about the hearing conducted in Cotabato because
they were afraid for their and their families lives.
The Supreme Court has been obligated by the Constitution with full legislative
authority to promulgate the Rules of Court concerning the following:
1. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the
speedy disposition of cases;
2. They shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade;
3. They shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights.
Substantive Laws are laws which create, define, and regulate rights
concerning life, liberty, or property, or the power of agencies and
instrumentalities for the administration of public affairs. Some of these
substantive laws include the Philippine Constitution, Civil Code, Code of
Commerce, Insurance Code, Corporation Code, National Internal Revenue Code
and the Revised Penal Code.
Procedural laws are the part of law which prescribes the method of enforcing
rights or obtaining redress for their violation. Procedural law is governed by the
Rules of Court promulgated by the Supreme Court and by special laws.
Procedural rights, meanwhile, are the remedies or means by which an
aggrieved party, whose rights have been violated, may bring the case to trial.
president, through his/her alter ego in the Department of Justice. The lack of
independence in the exercise of administrative supervision by the Judiciary led
to many cases being politically influenced.
Member of the Supreme Court or any lower collegiate court must be a natural-
born citizen of the Philippines. Moreover, a member of the Supreme Court must
be at least forty years of age and must have been for fifteen years or more, a
judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.
Collegiate Courts:
Sandiganbayan
Whoever,
Qualifications for other court judges may be set by Congress, but not for
Supreme Court
According to the Judicial and Bar Council, justices and judges shall be
evaluated according to:
1. Competence, to be measured by
a. Educational preparation
b. Experience
c. Performance
A r t i c l e V I I I J u d i c i a l D e p a r t m e n t | 13
d. Other accomplishments
a. Evidence of integrity
b. Background check
c. Testimony of parties
d. Anonymous testimonies
a. Medical documents
b. Psychological/psychiatric tests
(3) The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall be the Secretary ex officio of
the Council and shall keep a record of its proceedings.
As stated in Article VIII section 8, the President appoints a Judicial and Bar
Council by a non-political process of election and appointment with the
consent of the Commission on Appointments in Congress. However, this power
A r t i c l e V I I I J u d i c i a l D e p a r t m e n t | 14
The Judicial Bar and Council is composed of the Chief Justice as ex officio
Chairman, the Secretary of Justice, and a representative of the Congress as ex
officio Members, a representative of the Integrated Bar which shall serve for
four years, a professor of law for three years, a retired Member of the Supreme
Court for two years, and a representative of the private sector for one year. The
regular members of the Council shall be appointed for a term of four years.
For every vacancy, the president shall appoint from a list of at least three
nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council. The president cannot
appoint someone whose name is not listed but he can ask for additional
nominees. Such appointments need no confirmation from the Commission on
Appointments.
Section 8 of Article 8 also states that the Clerk of the Supreme Court shall be
the Secretary ex officio of the Council and shall keep a record of its
proceedings, the regular Members of the Council shall receive such
emoluments as may be determined by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court
shall provide in its annual budget the appropriations for the Council and the
Council shall have the principal function of recommending appointees to the
Judiciary. It may exercise such other functions and duties as the Supreme
Court may assign to it.
For the lower courts, the President shall issue the appointments
within ninety days from the submission of the list.
Section 10. The salary of the Chief Justice and of the Associate
Justices of the Supreme Court, and of judges of lower courts, shall
be fixed by law. During their continuance in office, their salary shall
not be decreased.
Section 10 of Article VIII talks about the distribution of salary for the Justices
of our Supreme Court. Php 240,000.00 will initially be given annually to the
Chief Justice and Php 204,000.00 to the associate justices until the Congress
provides otherwise. According to the Prohibition against reduction, the
A r t i c l e V I I I J u d i c i a l D e p a r t m e n t | 15
compensation is fixed by law and is effective down to the lower courts. The
purpose of this prohibition is to assure judicial independence. This is to
guarantee that judges need not fear that their salary be reduced if they render
an unpopular or controversial decision.
Section 11. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower
courts shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of
seventy years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their
office. The Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to discipline
judges of lower courts, or order their dismissal by a vote of a majority of
the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in
the case and voted thereon.
Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts retires at the
age of seventy (70).
The Supreme Court has the power to discipline judges of lower courts or
order their dismissal by the vote of the majority of its members.
Security of tenure dependent upon good behavior has long been considered as
an indispensable guarantee to keep judicial independence, the cornerstone of
all systems of effective administration of justice.
The retirement age in the 1973 Constitution was reduced from the original
seventy (70) to sixty-five (65) years which is the retirement age of other non-
elective government officials and employees, and restored again to seventy (70).
The reduction was obviously intended to afford members the judiciary ample
time to enjoy the benefits of their retirement from the service and to give
opportunity to comparatively younger men to occupy the Bench. On the other
hand, it will deprive the country of the services of members of the judiciary who
have acquired experience, wisdom and expertise in their work but are still
A r t i c l e V I I I J u d i c i a l D e p a r t m e n t | 16
capable physically and mentally to discharge the duties of their office although
past the age of sixty-five (65). In fact, many retirees have remained hale and
healthy and mentally sharp years after retiement at 70.
The Constitution provides for the impeachment of the members of the Supreme
Court. (Art. XI, Sec. 2.) As for judges of lower courts, Congress has the power to
prescribe the procedure and the causes for their removal. Congress may also
validly provide for the process of determining the incapacity of a judge to
discharge the duties of his office.
This ruling does not apply to the judiciary. Section 2 expressly provides that
no law shall be passed reorganizing the judiciary when it undermines the
security of tenure. The prohibition seeks to prevent the use of such law, under
the guise of reorganization, to remove members of the judiciary who refuse to
kowtow to the powers that be.
(1) With reference to the members of the Supreme Court, it implies that they
have not committed any of the offenses which are grounds for
impeachment. (see Art. XI, Sec. 2.)
The present Constitution gives to the Supreme Court the power to discipline
judges of lower courts, including justices of the Court of Appeals and the
Sandinganbayan. By a vote of a majority of the member who actually took part
in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, it can order
their dismissal.
Section 12. The Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts
established by law shall not be designated to any agency
performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions.
This procedure has been placed to avoid the practice of assigning a case to a
justice for study and decision by him alone, and the other justices signing the
decision for formality purposes. Every justice is obliged to take part in the
consideration and decision-making process whether the court sits en banc or in
division. After which, one judge is assigned to write an opinion about the case.
Any Supreme Court or lower collegiate justice who did not take participation in
the decision (either by mere absence, or intentional abstinence) or have
opposing view shall state the reason of its act.
When a justice abstains from the decision-making process, he may cause the
results of the process be different from expected. Abstained votes could
complicate the process, especially when the tallies for the yeas and nays have
tied.
If a justice meanwhile has an opposing view from the rest, he/she must be able
to explain the bases for the view. This way, justices opinions are given regard
and merit. It gives the justices another perspective for their decision, and it
may, by value of merit, be considered as the new decision.
A r t i c l e V I I I J u d i c i a l D e p a r t m e n t | 19
In Section 14, the Constitution gives the courts the obligation that it must
clearly state the bases of its decisions: the facts, statutes and other related
documents that support their verdict.
Decisions are the judgments or verdicts of the court on cases, after the
positions of the involved parties are presented, including evidences, testimonies
and claims using existing statutes.
The Constitution requires all courts to state both the factual and legal bases of
its decisions to ensure transparency and utmost objectivity of the decision
given by court. If these bases are not strictly stated, any involved party may
raise it to a higher court, which also delays the delivery of justice.
However, with regards to petitions for review and motions for reconsideration,
only a sufficient legal basis is to be stated as to why the petition was rejected
for the courts to save time. In contrast, when a motion is approved, the courts
need not to explicitly mention how it came up with such decision.
A r t i c l e V I I I J u d i c i a l D e p a r t m e n t | 20
Section 15. (1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this
Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-four months
from date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced
by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts,
and three months for all other lower courts.
stating the reasons why a decision has not been issued within the said
period.
Section 16. The Supreme Court shall, within 30 days from the
opening of each regular session of the Congress, submit to the
President and the Congress an annual report on the operations and
activities of the Judiciary.
Annual report
The Supreme Court shall submit an annual report to the President and
Congress for the two bodies to be guided as to how the Judiciary functioned
during the past twelve months. It will also aid the president to properly allocate
the funds the Judiciary needs for the next year, and for Congress to create
more court branches for them to accommodate more cases at the same time.
The 2011 Annual Report included the names and backgrounds of the Chief
Justices and Justices and the officials of the Supreme Court. It contained the
highlights of the Calendar Year (CY) 2013 Budget Proposals of the Supreme
Court of the Philippines and the Lower Courts SCPLC). The 2011 Supreme
Court Reform Projects were also included. In 2011, the Court sought to
improve already established judicial reform programs by either adding new
components or enhancing aspects of the original programs to provide better
judicial services to the public. The attached institutions namely the Philippine
Judicial Academy, Judicial and Bar Council and the Presidential Electoral
Tribunal were discussed as well as the 2011 Supreme Court significant
decisions and rules wherein the Court flexed its constitutional rule making
A r t i c l e V I I I J u d i c i a l D e p a r t m e n t | 22
power concerning pleading, practice and procedure in all courts. The Annual
report further comprised the significant accomplishments of Supreme Court
Committees and Technical Working Groups and the significant rulings which
stated that the Supreme Court in 2011 continued to discipline the erring
members of the Bench and the Bar as well as court personnel who violated the
norms of public accountability or diminished the faith of the people in the
Judiciary. The employees welfare and benefits were even highlighted.