The Philippine Judicial System

journal or Proceedings of the Roundtable Meeting Law,

publication title Development and Socio-Economic Changes in Asia
volume 1
page range 61-70
year 2001
URL http://hdl.handle.net/2344/00015241
 SESSION II
COUNTRY REPORTS ON JUDICIAL REFORM (2)
The Philippine Judicial System

Raul Pangalangan*

I. A Brief History of the Philippine Judiciary

Before the advent of legal regimes patterned after the Spanish and American
models, the Philippines had an indigenous system of laws enforced by political units
called the barangays presided over by local chieftains (datus). Settlement of disputes
was governed by both written and unwritten laws, consisting of ancient codes and oral
customs and traditions. Peace and order were maintained through these indigenous
procedures and sometimes spiritual beliefs on divine punishment and retribution guided
the communities in determining the guilt of individuals during public trials.1
Under both the Spanish and American regimes, the first courts were established
under the laws of the colonial governments. The Spaniards created a supreme court in
Manila, the Audencia Real, to check the powers of the Governor General; the Audencia
Territorial of Manila which is an appellate court; and the Courts of First Instance and
justice of the peace courts which were established in the territories where the Spaniards
exercised sovereignty.2
The above-mentioned courts were abolished during the American regime and
replaced with a new system modeled after the American judicial system. A Supreme
Court was created consisting of a Chief Justice and six associate justices who were
appointed by the Philippine Commission and held office at its pleasure. In each
province there was one court of first instance, and additional judges also served
wherever they were assigned. The 1935 Constitution provided for an independent
judiciary as the rule making power was transferred from the Legislature to the Supreme
Court, to promulgate rules concerning pleading, practice and procedure in all courts and
the admission to the practice of law.
When the Imperial Forces of Japan occupied the Philippines during the Second

*
Dean, College of Law, University of the Philippines
World War, courts remained in existence with no substantial change in their
organization and jurisdiction, with the Supreme Court able to preserve its impartiality
and legal consistency under a military administration until the restoration of normalcy
after the war.3

II. The Philippine Judiciary

Judicial power, as defined under the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines,
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.4 This power is vested in the
Supreme Court created by the Constitution and such other lower courts established
pursuant to laws enacted by Congress. 5 Appointments to the judiciary are limited to
natural-born Filipino citizens and members of the Philippine Bar, and a Member of the
Supreme Court must be at least forty years old and must have been for fifteen years or
more a judge of the lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.6 A
Judicial and Bar Council, under the supervision of the Supreme Court, was created by
the Constitution to screen and recommend applicants to judicial positions who must
possess proven competence, integrity and independence. 7 The Office of the Court
Administrator, on the other hand, assists the Supreme Court in the supervision and
administration of the lower courts and their personnel.8
At the apex of the Philippine judicial system is the Supreme Court composed of
a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices, who may sit en banc or in its discretion,
in divisions of three, five or seven members.9 The Court of Appeals is headed by a
Presiding Justice with fifty one (51) Associate Justices as members, which exercises its
functions and duties through seventeen divisions, each division composed of three
members, and sits en banc only for the purpose of exercising administrative, ceremonial
or other non-adjudicatory functions.10
Regional Trial Courts are established in the thirteen judicial regions of the
country, of which at present there are 950 existing courts, each branch presided over by
a judge. Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in
Cities, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts are the first level courts. There are presently
82 Metropolitan Trial Courts in Metro Manila for the National Capital Region; 141

2
Municipal Trial Courts in Cities; 425 Municipal Trial Courts; and 476 Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts.11 For Muslim Filipinos in Mindanao, Sharia District and Circuit Courts
were created and established in five judicial regions therein, to adjudicate disputes and
matters under the provisions of the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines.12
The Sharia Appellate Court was also created to exclusively decide appeals from cases
tried in the Sharia District Courts.13
A special court, the Sandiganbayan, was established to try and decide cases of
graft and corruption committed by certain public officers or employees in relation to
their office, as provided by law. It is composed of a Presiding Justice and fourteen
Associate Justices, and sits in divisions of three members each and the divisions may sit
at the same time.14 Another special court is the Court of Tax Appeals which adjudicates
appeals involving internal revenue and customs cases in order to assist the government
in the expeditious collection of taxes as well as provide a forum for taxpayers against
unjust and erroneous tax assessments and impositions. It is composed of a Presiding
Judge and two Associate Judges.15
In addition to the regular trial courts, Congress recently created Family Courts
which shall be established in every province and city. These courts shall exclusively try
criminal cases involving minor offenders or victims, civil cases for annulment of
marriage, marital property relations, as well as petitions for guardianship, custody,
adoption, and all other cases of domestic violence committed against women and
children. 16 Also, in the interest of a speedy and efficient administration of justice,
selected regional trial courts have been designated to try and decide exclusively
heinous crimes such as kidnapping, robbery, illegal drugs possession and sale,
violations of intellectual property laws and libel.17
Lastly, there are the quasi-judicial agencies which derive their quasi-judicial
powers either from the Constitution or their respective charters. There are three
constitutional commissions: the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Audit
and the Commission on Elections.18 Other quasi-judicial agencies are the Central Board
of Assessment Appeals, Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of the President,
Land Registration Authority, Social Security Commission, Civil Aeronautics Board,
Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and Technology Transfer, National Electrification
Administration, Energy Regulatory Board, National Telecommunications Commission,
Department of Agrarian Reform (in implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law), Government Service Insurance System, Employees Compensation

3
Commission, Agricultural Inventions Board, Insurance Commission, Board of
Investments, and Construction Industry Arbitration Commission.19
The barangay as a local government unit also fulfills an important function in
the judicial process. Disputes in certain cases have to be brought initially before the
barangay conciliation panel as a pre-condition for filing an action in court. The parties
therein may also agree in writing to submit the case for arbitration to the said panel. An
amicable settlement or arbitration award may be enforced by execution as any court
decision within the prescribed period.20

III. The Department of Justice

The Department of Justice is the governments principal law agency which
serves as its legal counsel and prosecution arm. Its functions include investigation of
crimes; prosecution of offenders; administration of the correctional system;
implementation of laws on the admission and stay of aliens, citizenship, land titling
system, and settlement of land problems involving small landowners and members of
indigenous cultural minorities; and provision of free legal services to indigent citizens.21
The Department is organized into the Department Proper and other constituent
units. The Department Proper is composed of the Office of the Secretary and the
Undersecretaries, Technical and Administrative Service, Financial Management Service,
Legal Staff and the Office of the Chief State Prosecutor. Other constituent units of the
Department are: Office of the Government Corporate Counsel, National Bureau of
Investigation, Public Attorneys Office, Board of Pardons and Parole, Parole and
Probation Administration, Bureau of Corrections, Land Registration Authority, Bureau
of Immigration, and, Commission on the Settlement of Land Problems.
The National Prosecution Service is under the supervision and control of the
Secretary of Justice, and is comprised by the Prosecution Staff in the Office of the
Secretary of Justice, the Regional State Prosecution Offices, the Provincial and City
Fiscals Offices. The Regional State Prosecution Offices, and Provincial and City
Fiscals Offices are primarily responsible for the investigation and prosecution of all
cases involving violations of penal laws.22

IV. Lawyers and Legal Education

In the Philippines, the practice of law is a privilege granted only to Filipino

4
citizens. An applicant for admission to the Philippine Bar must be a resident of the
Philippines, at least 21 years of age and of good moral character who must show that no
charges against him or her involving moral turpitude have been filed or pending in
court. 23 The required educational qualifications is a bachelors degree in arts and
sciences (pre-law course) and the four-year law course with completed courses on civil
law, commercial law, remedial law, criminal law, public and private international law,
political law, labor and social legislation, medical jurisprudence, taxation and legal
ethics.24 In addition, the applicant must obtain a passing average in the bar examinations
administered annually by the Supreme Court.25
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) is the official national organization
of lawyers and membership therein is compulsory. This compulsory membership and
financial support to the IBP is aimed at elevating the standards of the legal profession,
improving the administration of justice, and enabling the bar to discharge its public
responsibility more effectively.26 For judges, there is the Philippine Judges Association
composed of incumbent Regional Trial Court judges, which aims to improve the
administration of justice and maintain a high standard of integrity, industry, and
competence in the judiciary. Lawyers may also join voluntary bar associations such as
the Philippine Bar Association, the Philippine Lawyers Association, The Trial Lawyers
Association of the Philippines, Vanguard of the Philippine Constitution, All Asia Bar
Association, Catholic Lawyers Guild of the Philippines, Philippine Society of
International Law, and Women Lawyers Circle.
Professional ethics is governed by the rules provided in the Constitution, laws
enacted by Congress, court decisions, and rules promulgated by the Supreme Court
concerning the discipline of lawyers and judges. Lawyers holding certain public offices,
including those of the President, Members of Congress, other executive officers,
governors, city and municipal mayors, judges and other judicial officials or employees,
are prohibited by either the Constitution or legislation to engage in the practice of law
during their incumbency.27 The Supreme Court exercises disciplinary powers over all
lawyers throughout the country, about three-fourths of which are based in Metro
Manila.28 It has meted out various actions against erring members of the Philippine Bar,
ranging from fine and censure to the severe punishment of disbarment.
Lawyers are expected to fulfill their sworn duties to the public, the Court, the
Bar, and the client. They should promote respect for law, keep abreast of legal
developments, uphold the integrity of the profession, respect the court and judicial

5
officers, assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice, and serve their
clients with candor, fairness, loyalty, diligence and competence. Failure to live up to
these standards may subject the lawyer to criminal, civil or administrative liability in the
proper cases.

V. Court Procedures
On the Supreme Court is vested the power to promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading and practice and procedure
in all courts, which shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy
disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not
diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.29 Rules of procedure of special courts
and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme
Court.30
A policy of strict observance of the hierarchical organization of courts is
maintained by the Supreme Court which shall not entertain direct resort to it unless the
redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts or where exceptional and
compelling circumstances justify availment of a remedy within and calling for its
primary jurisdiction.31 Jurisdiction of the various courts are conferred by laws enacted
by Congress, without prejudice to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in those cases
enumerated in the Constitution.32
The 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure amended Rules 1-71 of the 1964 Rules of
Court, as amended, incorporating therein the new rules on venue of real and personal
actions, the additional requirement for certification under oath by the principal party
against forum-shopping in initiatory pleadings as well as petitions before the Supreme
Court and the Court of Appeals, execution of judgment pending appeal, and procedure
on appeal, among others.
The Rules of Criminal Procedure also underwent revision just recently. The
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure has been approved by the Supreme Court and
shall take effect on December 1, 2000 after its publication. Changes were made in the
provisions governing the prosecution of civil action in criminal cases by disallowing
any counter-claim, cross-claim or third party complaint of the accused which cause of
action may be litigated in a separate action, but making an exception for criminal cases
involving violations of the Bouncing Checks Law where the civil action shall always be
instituted with the criminal case. Other amendments include the incorporation of the

6
provisions of the Speedy Trial Act of 1998 under Rule 119 (Trial); the addition of a
provision under Rule 114 (Bail) which entitles the accused to challenge the validity of
his arrest or the legality of the arrest warrant, the absence of irregularity of the
preliminary investigation, despite his having applied for bail, provided he raises such
objections before entering his plea; and a new provision stating that the prosecution for
violation of special laws shall be governed by the provisions thereof (Sec. 5, Rule 110).
Rules of Family Courts are still being drafted by a Committee formed by the
Supreme Court, which are expected to effect important changes in the disposition and
handling of cases concerning child abuse, petitions for custody and adoption, summary
judicial proceedings under the Family Code, criminal cases involving children, and
domestic violence against women and children, among others.33
Judicial processes in the Philippines have been criticized as slow and delivery
of justice often delayed. The clogging of court dockets remains a formidable challenge
to the present Supreme Court leadership which has already begun implementing the
needed reforms and actions to address the problems identified. Current measures being
undertaken are geared not only at preparing the Philippine judiciary for the e-technology
global society but also at further strengthening the independence and integrity of the
judiciary as a co-equal branch of government.

VI. Current Trends and Developments

The present leadership of the Supreme Court is determined to effect genuine
and relevant reforms in the judiciary towards improving significantly its efficiency and
effectiveness. Imbued with missionary zeal, the Supreme Court under the competent
leadership of Mr. Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr., set forth the following objectives
and goals: (1) Dispose of the existing backlog of cases in all courts; (2) Study and
address the causes of failure to observe the periods to decide cases mandated by the
Constitution; (3) Vigorously implement the programs of the Philippine Judicial
Academy (PHILJA) on conducting continuing legal education on a broader basis; (4)
Engage in long-range planning, especially as regards allocation of human and other
resources, to effectively respond to changes while preserving the core values of the
Judiciary; (5) Promote alternative modes of dispute resolution; (6) Exact strict
observance of working hours; and (7) Maximize available court technology and adopt
new and appropriate forms of technology.34
The Technical Assistance (TA) to the Philippine Judiciary on Justice and

7
Development Project is being implemented by the Supreme Court with the assistance of
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the National Economic
Development Authority (NEDA). The objective of the Project is to strengthen the
quality of justice in the Philippines by enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the
Philippine Judiciary in the next millennium towards sustainable human development."
The technical assistance phase aims to enhance the efficiency and administration
capacity of the Philippine Judiciary by undertaking a system-wide institutional research
on its judicial rules, processes and operating systems focusing on how to further
increase access to justice, especially the poor and disadvantaged.35
At the forefront of judicial reforms implementation is the Philippine Judicial
Academy established and institutionalized as the educational arm of the Supreme Court.
On top of its seminars, symposia and training for judges, lawyers and court personnel
under the continuing judicial education program, PHILJA also assisted the Supreme
Court in the implementation of the Pilot Project on Mediation/Conciliation (funded by
the SC-UNDP and PHIL EXPORTS-TAPS) under the court-led alternative dispute
resolution (ADR) program in the Regional Trial Courts of Mandaluyong City and
Valenzuela City, and, in the completion of the Management Study of the Judiciary (a
component of the SC-UNDP Technical Assistance). The policy of promoting the
different modes of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) was adopted in response to the
dramatic increase in the number of cases filed in court, the growing complexity of these
cases, the need for specialized and technical knowledge in their resolution, and the
inherent limitations of litigation.
In 1999, the PHILJA conducted the following: Training the Trainors Program
for Family Courts, Gender-Sensitivity Seminar for the Philippine Judiciary, Judges
Workshop on the Anti-Domestic Violence Bill, Workshop on Video-Conferencing in
Trials of Cases Involving the Testimony of Children, and Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) Program. To strengthen the managerial capabilities of judges,
PHILJA has introduced seminars on Total Quality Management (TQM) for Trial Court
Judges and Court Personnel. In relation to this, the Supreme Court has devised the
Trial Court Performance Standards (TPCS) which set five key areas by which judges
would gauge their performance: access to justice; expedition and timeliness; equality,
fairness and integrity; independence and accountability; and public trust and
performance.
Aside from the UNDP, other private international agencies are actively

8
supporting the Philippine judicial reform program: United States Agency for
International Development (USAID) through The Asia Foundation (TAF) and the Trade
Investment Policy Analysis and Advocacy Support (TAPS). The World Bank is also
extending its support on the belief that an effective, efficient and fair judicial system
would contribute to improved economic performance.
Just recently, the Supreme Court approved the Rules on Mandatory Continuing
Legal Education (MCLE) recommended by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, which
will require lawyers to complete 36 hours of continuing legal education in legal ethics,
trial and pre-trial skills, alternative dispute resolution, updates on substantive and
procedural laws and jurisprudence, legal writing and oral advocacy, and international
law and international conventions. The MCLE program is envisioned to develop a
legal profession that provides quality, ethical, accessible and cost-effective legal service
to our people.36

Conclusion
The foregoing judicial reforms are but a necessary and integral aspect of the
current reforms in the Philippine public sector. The goal is to transform the Philippine
judiciary into a dynamic and responsive branch of government that is independent,
effective and efficient, and worthy of public trust and confidence. 37 As a democratic
and republican State, the Philippines is committed to promote social justice in all phases
of national development.38 And as a member of the community of nations seeking new
ways to strengthen and enhance their democratic institutions, it reaffirms its
commitment to the rule of law and equality of all peoples.

1
Teodoro A. Agoncillo, History of the Filipino People, pp. 41-44.
2
Jose R. bengson, The Philippine Judicial System, pp. 6-8.
3
Agoncillo, supra, p. 395; Conrado Benitez, History of the Philippines, p. 499.
4
Article VIII, Section 1, 1987 Constitution.
5
Article VIII, Section 1, 1987 Constitution.
6
Article VIII, Section 7, 1987 Constitution.
7
Article VIII, Section 8, 1987 Constitution.
8
Article III, Section 6, 1987 Constitution.
9
Article VIII, Section 4 (1), 1987 Constitution.

9
10
Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 (1980), as amended by Executive Order No. 33 (promulgated July 28, 1986) and
Republic Act No. 8246 (approved on December 30, 1996).
11
Profile of Lower Courts by Provinces as of December 31, 1999 prepared by the Court Management Office of the
Supreme Court, See Annex E of the 1999 Annual Report of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.
12
Presidential Decree No. 1083, promulgated on February 4, 1977.
13
Republic Act No. 6734, The Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, approved on
August 1, 1989.
14
Presidential Decree No. 1486, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1606 (effective December 10, 1978),
Republic Act No. 7975 (approved on March 30, 1995), and Republic Act No. 8249 (approved on February 5, 1997.
15
Republic Act No. 1125 (1954)
16
Republic Act No. 8369, The Family Courts Act of 1997.
17
Administrative Order No. 104-96, October 21, 1996.
18
Article IX, (A) Section 1, 1987 Constitution.
19
Rule 43, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
20
Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991), Book III, Title One, Chapter 7, Secs. 399-422.
21
Executive Order No. 292, Revised Administrative Code, Title III, sections 1 and 2.
22
Presidential Decree No. 1275, Section 1.
23
Article XII, Sec. 14, second paragraph, 1987 Constitution; Sec. 2, Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court.
24
Secs. 5 and 6, Rule 138.
25
Secs. 9, 10, 11 and 14, Rule 138.
26
Rule 139-A, Sec. 1.
27
Art. VII, Sec. 13, Art. VI, Sec. 14, Art. IX-A, Sec. 2, Art. XI, Sec. 8, 1987 Constitution; Rule 138, Sec. 35;
Republic Act No. 7160 (The Local Government Code of 1991), Sec. 90.
28
Manuel Flores Bonifacio and Merlin M. Magallona, Survey of the Legal Profession (1982).
29
Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5), 1987 Constitution.
30
Ibid.
31
Philnabank Employees Association v. Estanislao, 227 SCRA 804 (1993); Santiago v. Vasquez, 217 SCRA 633
(1993).
32
Art. VIII, Secs. 2 and 5, 1987 Constitution.
33
1999 Annual Report of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, p. 117.
34
Davide Watch.
35
Tradition and Transtion: The First Year of the Davide Watch, pp. 101-102.
36
Ibid, p. 100.
37
Davide Watch.
38
Art. II, Secs. 1 and 10, 1987 Constitution.

10