111TH INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERSTOWARDS A RESPONSIVECRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE PHILIPPINES
Judge Lilia C. Lopez*
The criminal justice system of any
society depends so much on the thorough,efficient and effective functioning of the all
the principal actors involved in thedispensation of justice. The efficient andeffective functioning of one component may
be hampered by the inefficiency andincompetence of the others. Thus
cooperation, and the coordinated andconcerted action of the police, prosecution,
the judiciary, as well as the correctional
institutions, and most importantly, thecommunity - the so-called pillars of thecriminal justice system - is necessary. Thatis, however, easier said than done,
especially in a country like the Philippines,
where the governmental agencies involved
are beset by financial, technological andinstitutional constraints, and where thecitizenry are increasingly becoming
alienated from each other. Though it may
be a daunting task, the Government hascontinually instituted measures to
responsibly address these problems.
The first part of this paper will deal
briefly with the five pillars of the criminal
justice system in the Philippines, under theframework of a republican government as
enshrined in the Philippine constitution.
This will involve discussion on the doctrineof separation of powers, the different
branches of government involved and thedelineation of their function. Particularemphasis will be placed of the police, theprosecutor and the judiciary. The second
part will be a discussion of the procedure
involved in law enforcement, prosecution
and trial of offenders, the current situation* Executive Judge, Regional Trial Court, Philippinesof and problems faced, respectively, by thepolice, prosecutors and the judiciary.

I. SEPARATION OF POWERS IN
THE PHILIPPINESThe Constitution of the Republic of thePhilippines divides the government into
three equal and co-ordinated branches,
namely, the legislative, executive and the
judiciary, each of which is supreme within
their respective spheres. Neither of them
may encroach upon the function or domainof the other. The law-making function islodged in the Philippine Congress,
composed of the Senate, whose members
are elected by the voters of the wholecountry, and the House of Representatives,
whose members come from districts chosen
by the voters therein. The executivefunction, the duty to enforce the laws, falls
on the President of the Republic. It is to
the Supreme Court and the other courts
created by law that the judicial function islodged.
Among these three branches, those thatare directly involved in the administrationof justice are the executive branch throughthe police and other numerous law
enforcement and prosecution agencies, aswell as the correctional institutions, andthe judiciary. The agency primarily incharge of law enforcement is the Philippine
National Police, which is under the controlof the Office of the President through the
Department of Interior and Local
Government. There are also specialized
agencies dealing with specialized casessuch as the Bureau of Internal Revenue,

291

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 55
in charge of matters relating to taxation,and the Immigration Department, on
immigration matters. The National
Prosecution Service, under the Departmentof Justice, is the principal agency in chargeof the prosecution of offenders. There is,
h o w e v e r, a u n i q u e a g e n c y o f t h egovernment which is the Office of the
Ombudsman, charged with the prosecutionof certain crimes involving public officials
or those connected with the performanceof public functions.

II. THE FIVE PILLARS OF THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
A. The Law Enforcement
The law enforcers are at the forefront of
the criminal justice system of the country.
They are the ones that directly deal withthe citizenry and are directly exposed tothe criminal elements. There is, therefore,
the necessity for the members of these law
enforcement agencies to be well oriented
with, and trained in the ways of, the civilsociety.
Thus, the 1987 Constitution of thePhilippines mandated the creation of apolice agency that is national in scope andcivilian in character. Pursuant to thisconstitutional provision, a law was enacted
creating the Philippine National Police outof the defunct Philippine Constabulary andits civilian component, the Integrated
National Police. The said agency is charged
with the duties of crime prevention, law
enforcement, preservation of peace andorder, as well as the internal security of
the government under the control andsupervision of the Department of Interiorand Local Government. Also performing
law enforcement functions is the National
Bureau of Investigation, which is under thecontrol of the Department of Justice. These
agencies are authorized to conduct
investigations of crimes, gather evidence292with respect thereto, arrest suspects andrefer cases to the prosecuting arms of thegovernment.
Within the police organizations, there
are departments tasked with investigatingcomplaints against erring officers, andadministrative tribunals that hear anddecide the cases lodged against them. The
efficiency and effectiveness of these bodies
help polish the image of the police
organization as a body that the people canrely on. There are also specialized agencies
whose duties are to enforce special laws
relating to highly specialized matters suchas immigration, tax, land, air and watertransport, and customs.
B. The Prosecution
The prosecution function is lodged
mainly with the National Prosecution
Service, under the Department of Justice.
It is composed of the Office of the Chief
State Prosecutor, the Regional State
Prosecutor’s Office and the Provincial andCity Prosecutor’s Offices. The Office of the
Chief State Prosecutor has the following
functions:a) Investigate and prosecute crimesb) Decide appeals from decisions of theprovincial and city prosecutorsc) Investigate administrative charges
against prosecutors
The Regional Prosecutor ’s Office ischarged with the administrative task ofsupervising and coordinating theperformance of the Provincial and City
Prosecutors within the region. The
Provincial and City Prosecutor’s Office isthe lowest in the administrative hierarchy,
and is charged with the investigation andprosecution of all violations of penal laws
and penal ordinances within theirrespective territorial jurisdictions.

111TH INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
There have been innovations institutedby the prosecution department with regard
to the handling of cases involving different
crimes. These innovations have been
geared towards a system of specializationin the handling of criminal cases. On thelevel of the Provincial or City Prosecutor’s
Office, a small number of prosecutors havebeen tasked with the prosecution of certain
crimes, particularly those involving
sensitive matters like rape. Task forces
have also been set up in the Office of the
Chief State Prosecutor like those involving
abuse of minors, those affecting the
economy, etc. This specialization hastens
the prosecution of cases, as the prosecutors
assigned are familiar with the intricacies
and strategies in the handling of suchcases.
There are also specialized agencies
charged with prosecuting special cases.
Among these is the Office of the
Ombudsman, created under theconstitution, and is independent of theexecutive branch of the government. This
office is mandated among others, toinvestigate and prosecute cases involving
public officials and employees who havecommitted crimes in relation to theiremployment. It is because of this functionthat its independence is of paramountimportance - the reason being to insulate
it from the political branches of thegovernment.
Another agency is the Commission on
Elections, charged with the enforcement
and prosecution of all election offenses.
This is also independent of the three mainbranches of the government. There are also
public defenders being paid by thegovernment to render legal services for
those who cannot afford to pay their own.
That agency of government is known as the
Public Attorney’s Office. There are also
institutions or individuals outside thegovernment that are offering legal

assistance to the needy, like the legal aid
programs of law schools recognized by theSupreme Court, and the legal aid offices of
Bar Associations in the country. There arealso lawyers who do pro bono work for theunderprivileged, aside from lawyers
provided by the court when a litigant
cannot afford the service of one.
These benevolent institutions andindividuals help immensely in theadministration of justice, as they facilitate
the disposition of cases before theprosecutors or the courts, not to mention
their very important function insafeguarding the constitutional rights of
their clients.
C. The Judiciary
The judiciary is the final arbiter ofcontroversies, of competing claims andinterests, including the determination of
the guilt or innocence of a person charged
with the commission of a crime. The
judiciary in this country is composed of one
Supreme Court, which is at the top of the
judicial hierarchy, and the other courts
created by law.
The independence of the judiciary has
been strengthened under the 1987
Constitution by giving it fiscal autonomy;administrative supervision and discipline
over its own personnel; and theappointment of the members thereof by the
President alone, thereby shielding theappointees from the pressure of party
politics which was prevalent in the past
selection process (requiring theconfirmation of the appointees by theCommission on Appointments, composed ofthe members of Congress). Further, thejustices of the Supreme Court are only
removable from office by impeachment andconviction of a culpable violation of theconstitution, treason, bribery, graft andcorruption, other high crimes, or betrayalof the public trust. This enumeration is293

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 55
exclusive and the power to impeach andconvict lie with the Senate and the Houseo f R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y.
Furthermore, the judiciary has a systemof policing its own ranks so as to rid itself
of incompetent judges and other erring
court personnel.
The other courts created by law are,amongst others, the Court of Appeals andthe constitutionally mandated
Sandiganbayan, which are collegiate courtsand exercise appellate jurisdiction over the
Regional Trial Courts; the Municipal or
Metropolitan Trial Courts; and lately, theFamily Courts in appropriate cases. The
Sandiganbayan and the Family Courts are
specialized courts that deal with offenses
involving government officials and those
involving the family and minors
respectively. These courts, due to their
specialization, expedite the proceedings
before them, because of the knowledge thatthe judges have acquired in the course of
their service, and at the same time, serving
the interests of the persons for which thosecourts were designed to protect. This iswithout prejudice, however, to theconstitutionally protected rights of theaccused.
D. The Correctional Institutions
The agencies involved in the punishmentof convicts all fall under the executive
department of the government, such as the
Bureau of Jail Management and Penology,
which is charged with the incarceration of
non-minor convicts, and the Departmento f S o c i a l We l f a r e a n d C o m m u n i t y
Development, who run correctional
institutions for youth offenders.
E. The Community
The members of the community play avery important role in the criminal justicesystem. It is from their ranks that theoffenders come and it is with them thatthey will end up. The involvement of these294

people in the programs and projects of thegovernment, even those that are notnecessarily connected with theadministration of justice, contribute to thelessening of crimes, as their efforts arediverted to more productive matters. They
can also contribute immensely in solving
crimes by assisting in police investigations,giving testimonies, providing leads and thearrest of criminals. Included as part of thecommunity are the government agencies
not involved with the administration ofjustice, as well as the members of theprivate sector.

III. PROCEDURES IN THE
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN
THE PHILIPPINESAt present, the types of crime that havegained media prominence, and thus havebeen given particular importance, are thoseso-called heinous crimes involving theimposition of the death penalty. Included
are the crimes of rape (committed undercertain circumstance specified in the law),murder and illegal drug trafficking,amongst others. Regardless however of thetype of crimes committed, be they heinous,
serious or light, the procedure for theinvestigation, prosecution and trial of thecases is more or less the same, except for
those triable under the rules of summary
procedure, whereby no trial is conducted
and the judgment is based merely on theaffidavits submitted.
A. The Law Enforcement Process
The law enforcement process begins themoment the crime is reported or acomplaint is filed before the police. The
police then conduct an investigation of thecrime, take the testimonies of thewitnesses, collect the evidence available
and take steps to apprehend the offender.
The arrest of the perpetrator does notordinarily happen without the warrant of

111TH INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
arrest, as required by the Constitution,
unless the arrest of the person suspectedof the crime falls within the exceptions fromthe necessity of a warrant recognized under
the law.
In cases where the offender is caught by
the police in the act of committing,attempting to commit or having justcommitted the crime, the suspect isdetained and is subjected to a process calledan ‘inquest’. An inquest is a procedure
whereby a prosecutor is immediately
available after the arrest of the suspect todetermine whether a crime was committed
and the person arrested is the one
responsible. This process is sometimes
called an abbreviated preliminary
investigation.
When the prosecutor finds that a crime
has been committed and the person isp r o b a b l y g u i l t y, s / h e p r e p a r e s arecommendation to the provincial or city
prosecutor for the filing of an information
against the detained person. If on the other
hand, no cause is shown to exist, or the
person detained does not appear to be theone responsible for the crime, theprosecutor directs the officer in charge ofthe detention facility to set free theprisoner.
B. The Prosecution Process
Once the police are through with theirinvestigation of the case, they forward theirfindings to the prosecutor for the proper
procedures. The prosecutor is, as a generalrule, a passive subject, with the prosecutionof the case being dependent largely on theefforts and determination of thecomplainant or the aggrieved party. The
latter may dismiss the case outright if thefacts do not warrant a prima facie case or,as is usually done, set the case forpreliminary investigation.

Preliminary investigation is defined as
the proceedings for the determination ofwhether there exists sufficient ground forbelieving that a crime, cognizable by the
Regional Trial Courts, has been committed,
and that the respondent is probably guilty
thereof. At this stage, the suspect and theprivate complainant are given theopportunity to present their case before theprosecutor. The prosecutor usually does
either of these:i) dismiss the case for lack of a prima
facie case to charge the respondent
for the alleged crime;ii) f i n d s t h a t a c r i m e h a s b e e ncommitted and that the respondent
charged with the crime is probably
the perpetrator.
When the first is done, the complainant
may seek a reconsideration of the decision,
or appeal the ruling to the Secretary ofJustice, who may direct the prosecutor to
file the case if they find merit in the petition
or affirm the decision of the prosecutor.
Under the old rules of jurisprudence, theprosecutor has much leeway in deciding tofile the case or not. The discretion lies
solely on them such that no one, not eventhe courts, can substitute their judgment
for that of the prosecutor, save on certain
occasions when the latter may have gravely
abused such discretion. This is true evenin the case of a reversal of a dismissal orderof the prosecutor by the Secretary ofJustice, where the prosecutor is of theconviction that there is insufficientevidence to warrant the filing of the casein court. What is usually done in this caseis that the Secretary of Justice appoints
another prosecutor to handle the case.
However, under the prevailing rule, as longas there is a finding of a prima facie case,the prosecutor is duty bound to prepare an
information against the accused.

295

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 55
The action of the prosecutor on a caseis, as a matter of practice, dependent
largely on the evidence presented by thecomplainant and/or the police, and thedetermination of the latter to pursue thecase. Otherwise, as is often done, the caseis dismissed even when the evidence
warrants a finding of the commission of acrime, even though it does not appear thatthe respondent charged by the complainantis the one probably guilty. It is only on rareoccasions, and most of the time whenpressured by the media, that the prosecutor
would direct the police to collect moreevidence to establish the perpetrator of thecrime. This hesitation to, or predisposition
not to, direct the police to further
investigate the case stems from the factthat under our system, the police are notsubordinate to prosecutors; not to mention
the fact that they belong to different
departments of the executive branch.
The dismissal of the case however does
not constitute a bar to the re-filing of thesame, especially when the grounds for refiling is insufficiency of evidence. The effectof a dismissal of the case by the prosecutor
is unlike that effected by a court, which
may constitute a legal bar for the filing of
the same case against the same accused what is termed as ‘double jeopardy’.
It is also at this stage that settlement of
the case is greatly encouraged between theparties involved. Furthermore, thegovernment has set up a mechanism called
the Barangay Conciliation Panel for thesettlement of cases between parties
residing in the same town or city involving
non-serious offences; specifically thosecrimes that the punishment for which does
not exceed one year imprisonment. This
program has been devised not only to limit
the cases being filed in court, but more
importantly, to preserve the good relationsof the inhabitants within the same locality.

296

C. The Judicial Process
In the Philippines, the very title of thecriminal case is frightening. It is entitled:
People of the Philippines versus [the nameof the accused person]. The moment a
prosecutor has made a determination that
there exists a prima facie case, theinformation is then prepared and filed
before the court, after which it undergoes
a case processing system and is allocatedto the proper court. Immediatelyt h e r e a f t e r, t h e c o u r t a s s e s s e s t h e
information, the record and the evidence
submitted, and the judge then makes adetermination as to whether or not theaccused is probably guilty, warranting his/her arrest. It is therefore not the duty of
the courts to issue a warrant of arrest. The
court issues a warrant for arrest which isaddressed to a peace officer. The officer
then serves the warrant on the person
named therein, and commits the latter into
prison. In our jurisdiction, all accused
persons have the right post bail, save incases of crimes punishable by reclusion
perpetua, life imprisonment and death,
where the evidence of guilt is strong.
After the filing of the information, thecourt will, without delay, set the date forarraignment of the accused, which must bewithin thirty days from the filing thereof.
At this stage, the accusation against theaccused is read before them in open court(in a language known to them) and s/he isrequired to make a plea thereon. Whenthe accused enters a plea of guilty, the court
will painstakingly explain to the accused
the consequences of their plea. If, despite
such explanation, the accused still
maintains their plea, the court directs theprosecutor to present the evidence against
the accused, which does not require a
prolonged trial. According to recent
jurisprudence involving the death penalty,
the court is duty bound to conduct a fulltrial to determine the exact participationof the accused in the crime charged. When

111TH INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
the accused pleads not guilty to the crime
charged, or refuses to enter a plea, or pleads
guilty to a lesser offence, which isequivalent to a plea of not guilty, the court
enters a plea of not guilty on the records.
Before trial of the case on its merits, it
is now mandatory that the case is set for
pre-trial conference, whereby efforts toamicably settle the dispute are exerted inorder to avert trial, or matters are agreed
upon to expedite the trial. This stage has
recently been made mandatory under the
newly enacted Speedy Trial Act of 1998
(Republic Act No. 8493). Matters forconsideration during this stage of theproceeding are:(a) Plea bargaining;(b) Stipulation of facts;(c) Marking for identification theevidence of the parties;(d) Waiver of objections to admissibilityof evidence; and(e) Such other matters that will promotea fair and expeditious trial (Sec. 2
R.A. No. 8493).
Matters agreed upon by the parties areinadmissible as evidence against theaccused, unless the same is reduced towriting and signed by the accused and theircounsel. Furthermore, non-appearance inthe pre-trial conference by the counsel forthe accused or the prosecutor will be subject
to sanctions at the discretion of the judge.
The case is then set for trial which,according to the Speedy Trial Act, must becontinuous and on a “weekly or other shortterm trial calendar at the earliest possibletime”, but within thirty days from the dateof the arraignment. There is also a time
limit for the duration of the trial which isone hundred and eighty days from the firstday of trial. These time periods have been
imposed to counter delays in thedispositions of cases. However, the said

time period is not fixed, as the law allows
certain delays that may be excluded fromthe required time limit. The circumstanceswhereby exclusions are allowed are
numerous and may ultimately defeat the
purpose of setting a time limit.
The order of trial of the case depends
upon whether the accused interposed anegative or affirmative defence. If a
negative defence is interposed, which isnormally the case, the trial begins with thepresentation by the prosecution of the caseagainst the accused. The witnesses of theprosecution, after the presentation of their
testimony, are cross-examined by the
defence. After all the evidence of theprosecution has been presented, thedefence present its case, with thepresentation of all their evidence.
When the accused interposes anaffirmative defence, the order of the trial
is slightly changed, with the defence firstpresenting their case followed by theprosecution. Such inverted procedure isnecessitated by the nature of an affirmative
defence, which essentially admits thecommission of the acts charged but
advances certain circumstances which
would serve to exculpate the accused from
criminal liability.
It is also during the trial of the case thatthe parties must present evidence which
may aggravate or mitigate the crimecommitted by the accused. Otherwise, they
are waived and may not be considered by
the judge in the sentencing of the accused.
After all the evidence has been presented,
the case is then submitted for decision,
unless the court requires the submissionof written memoranda or allows the counselof the accused and the prosecutor to present
their respective arguments orally.
It is during the trial that the rules ofevidence come into play. The rules of297

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 55
evidence however have not yet been
adapted to the possibilities opened up bytechnological advances, particularly inthe fields of computers andtelecommunications. The use of thistechnology in the courtroom would speed
up the trial of the case as there would be
no need, for example, for the persons
testifying to appear before the court
personally. Thus, delays due to theunavailability of witnesses will be avoided,and precious resources of time and money
will be saved.
During the trial of the case, a person
included in the information may bedischarged as an accused and become awitness for the State, if the testimony of
the same is indispensable to the successfulprosecution of the case against the otheraccused. The discharge must be agreed
upon by the accused themself and approvedby the court. The discharged accused thenbecomes a State witness and qualifies
under the witness protection program of
the government if s/he applies for andmeets the qualifications set by the law. In
order to be admitted to the witness
protection program, one does necessarily
have to be an accused discharged from theinformation. They may be a witness in thecommission of the crime and theirprotection is necessitated by considerations
for their safety. Those admitted to theprogram are entitled to police protection
and are most of the time, placed in a safe
house. This arrangement facilitates andmakes available the witness when called
to testify before the court.
After the trial is finished and the case issubmitted for decision, the court where thecase is pending must render judgment
within the time directed by theConstitution. Otherwise, the judge
involved will suffer sanctions. The time
limit for rendering judgment is twenty fourmonths for the Supreme Court; twelve298

months for lower collegiate courts, like the
Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan;
and three months for other lower courts.
In deciding the case, the Constitution
requires that judge set forth clearly and inwriting the facts and law on which it isbased, considering only the evidence
presented in the proceedings.
D. Remedies for the Accused
When the court finds that the evidence
against the accused is insufficient toconvict, the accused is acquitted and noaccusation based on the same act(s) can be
filed against them, nor can an appeal bemade therefrom because of the principle ofdouble jeopardy.
If, on the other hand, the court convicts
the accused because, in its view, guilt of
the crime charged has been establishedbeyond reasonable doubt, the latter may
move for a new trial or reconsideration.
The motion for a new trial may be basedon either of the following grounds:(a) That errors of law or irregularities
have been committed during the trial
prejudicial to the substantial rightsof the accused;(b) That new and material evidence has
been discovered which the accused
could not, with reasonable diligence,
have discovered and produced at thetrial, and which if introduced andadmitted, would probably change thejudgment.
The motion for reconsideration may bebased on errors of law or fact in the
judgment.
The accused may, in lieu of theaforementioned remedies, or after thedenial of the motion, appeal to the Courtof Appeals or the Supreme Court within the
period set forth in the law. In cases
involving the sentence of death, however,111TH INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
the law provides for automatic appeal of
the same to the Supreme Court. In casethe appeal is found to be without merit, andthe conviction is affirmed, the case will be
remanded to the court of origin for
execution of the judgment. The court oforigin will set a date for the accused toappear before the court for the enforcementof the judgment. The court will then issue
an order committing the convict to a penal
or correctional institution for serving theirsentence.
E. Other Functions of the Court
In our jurisdiction, adjudication is not
the sole function of the courts. It has otherpowers and duties as well.
The Supreme Court, under theConstitution, has administrative
supervision over all courts and thepersonnel of the said courts. It has thepower to discipline judges of lower courts
and order their dismissal by a vote of amajority of the members who actually took
part in the deliberation of the case andvoted thereon. In the same manner, theSupreme Court has the power to discipline
attorneys and may disbar, suspend or
impose such penalty as it may deem proper,
for violation of the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
The Court of Appeals and the Regional
Trial Court may suspend an attorney frompractice for any of the following acts oromissions: lie, deceit, malpractice, grossmisconduct in office, grossly immoral
conduct, conviction of a crime involving
moral turpitude, violation of the attorneyoath, wilfull disobedience of any lawfulorder of a superior court, or corruptly or
willfully appearing as an attorney for aparty to a case without authority so to do.
The Supreme Court of the Philippines,
under the Constitution, has the power topromulgate rules concerning the protectionand enforcement of constitutional rights,
pleadings, practice and procedure in all
courts, admission to the practice of law, theIntegrated Bar, and legal assistance to theunderprivileged. Such rules are intended
to simplify and render inexpensive theprocedure for speedy disposition, whichshall be uniform for all courts of the same
grade, and shall not diminish, increase, ormodify substantive rights.
Special courts and quasi-judicial bodies
have the same power to promulgate rules
governing their procedure, and such rules
shall remain effective unless dispproved by
the Supreme Court. Other Courts may also
lay down rules applicable to proceedings
before them, or in respect to their premises
and facilities.
F. Delay and Inefficiency in Court
Proceedings
The Honorable Chief Justice, Andres
Narvasa, in his handbook on courts, citedthe following causes for case delay, namely:(a) an increase in the number of cases
filed over the years due to theheigtened awareness of people oftheir rights and privileges, theenactment of new laws and rules, aswell as increased government actions
affecting private individuals;(b) the lack of courts, and slowness ordifficulty in filling up vacancies;(c) the small budget allocated to the
judiciary;(d) the complexity of the rules ofprocedure;(e) t h e i n a d e q u a c y o r f a i l u r e i ncooperation of court-related agencies
and officers.
These problems, according to the
Honorable Chief Justice, are being dealt
with. According to him, appeals to theCongress for increased funding have beenanswered favorably; “The Judicial and Bar

299

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 55
Council continues to meet regularly tosubmit to the President nominations forvacancies in the judiciary. Coordination of
the courts with other pillars of the CJS ispursued and fostered. The Supreme
Court’s Standing Committee on the
Revision of the Rules of Court continuously
review the procedural law with a view toamendment and refinement, so thatprocedures will be further simplified,rendered more inexpensive, and conduciveto the speedy disposition of cases.
Significant revisions to this end have been
proposed by the Committee promulgatedby the court, and are now in force,”
particularly the Rules on Civil Procedure.
Furthermore, according to him, “In thevery nature of things, litigation takes time.
Time is needed to serve the process bywhich parties are brought within thejurisdiction of the courts; to enable theparties to fully express to the court theirbasic theories of the case; to enable themto present evidence in proof of theiraverments, for the court to consider the
proof after trial and render judgment; fora party adversely affected by a judgment
to seek modification or reversal thereof byappeal or otherwise; for the appellate
tribunal to be informed of the parties
positions and proof, study the case anddecide on it. The law sets definite periods
for the various steps and processes inlitigation; and so long as litigation moves
apace with these periods, no matter how
measured the movement, there can be no
legitimate complaint about delay.’’
G. Strategies
The courts pillars have adopted thefollowing strategies under the 5-Year
Master Plan of Action for Peace and Order:(a) The dissemination of information
regarding the working andprocedures of the courts;(b) The continuing revision, amendment300

and/or modification of the Rules of
Court for the purpose of attaining
speedy administration of justice;(c) Work for the full realization of theconstitutional autonomy of the
Judiciary, in order to achieve its true
independence; and(d) T h e g r a n t o f a w a r d s a n d / o rrecognition to deserving judges andcourt personnel through the meritsystem.
The first strategy was prioritized by the
courts pillars and a series of symposia wereconducted nationwide, which were testpiloted at the University of the Philippines
Law Center in Diliman, Quezon City.
Workshops were conducted during the
symposia to find out the perception ofparticipants of the workings of the courts
and what the public could do to help in theadministration of justice. The following
recommendations were made:(a) Expansion of the jurisdiction of theMunicipal Trial Court. The distanceand travel time of litigants/
respondents who come from far-flungareas hamper the speedy resolutionof the case;(b) Provision in every municipality for a
M u n i c i p a l Tr i a l C o u r t a n dprosecutor;(c) Translation of case decisions in adialect that will be understood by theaccused/respondents;(d) Inclusion in the school curriculum
subjects regarding the criminal
justice system, particularly theoperational system and workings ofthe courts, so as to inform the public
on how the criminal justice systemin the Philippines works;(e) Institutionalization of an indigenous
system of settling disputes in the
judicial system; and(f) Creation of a committee to monitor
and determine the performance of

111TH INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
judges and the number of cases
assigned to a particular sala vis-a-vis
the number of cases acted upon.
An assessment and evaluation of thesymposia was made by the participants asfollows:(a) T h e s y m p o s i a p r o v i d e d m o r e
information and familiarization on
the operational system and workingsof the judicial system;(b) Similar symposia must be conductedfrom the provincial level down to thebarangay level. Lectures should betranslated into the dialect of the area;(c) The symposia enlightened the mindsof those with negative beliefs about
the judicial system and provided
public awareness of the criminal
justice system as a whole;(d) The symposia provided clear visionon the jurisdiction of the different
courts such as the MTC, RTC, Courtof Appeals and the Supreme Court;(e) Participants gained insights on theactual situation in the courts and thecauses of delay in the disposition ofcases; and(f) Participants from different sectors
were given a chance to voice out theiropinions and problems they areencountering in the judicial system.
Regarding the revision, amendment and/or modification of the Rules of Court forthe purpose of attaining speedy
administration of justice, the Supreme
C o u r t , a f t e r p a i n s t a k i n g s t u d y,
promulgated the New Rules on Civil
Procedure April 8, 1997, made effective last
July 1, 1997.
The Committee on the Revision of Rules,
since 1997, continued its meetings fortackling the proposed amendments to theRules on Criminal Procedure. The
Committe likewise discussed the rules andguidelines in the filing and prosecution of
criminal actions under Batas Pambansa
Bilang 22, otherwise known as the
Bouncing Checks Law, and the court
approved the circular in respect thereof.
The following recently enacted laws werealso discussed by the Committee:(a) Republic Act No. 8358, “An Act
Expanding the definition of the crimeof rape, reclassifying the same as acrime against persons”.
(b) Republic Act No. 8369, “An Act
establishing Family Courts granting
new exclusive original jurisdiction
over child and family cases.”(c) Republic Act No. 8493, “An Act toensure a speedy trial in all criminalcases before the Sandiganbayan,
RTC, MTC, MCTC, appropriating
funds thereof and for other purposes.”
For the full realization of judicial
independence, the proposal of the Judicial
Department to Congress for an increase inits budget has been favorably acted uponby the latter, and other departments of thegovernment have respected the fiscal
autonomy of the judiciary. The court willcontinue to ask the legislature for greater
allocation for the Department to enable itto put in place constructive judicial
reforms; continue judicial training andeducation programs in full operation;
implement the Family Court system;
provide more incentives to present
incumbents at all levels of the court, as wellas candidates for the bench; and for thecompletion of it computerization program.
To inspire members of the bench to excel
in their chosen fields, an annual grant ofawards for outstanding trial court judges,
prosecutors and public defenders is given
by a private foundation. The objectives ofthis merit system are to give honor and due
recognition to outstanding judges, publicprosecutors and public attorneys, and to301

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 55
encourage exemplary performance andconduct among public servants,
strengthening citizen’s faith and confidence
in the rule of law.

302