|
Philippines Judicial Department
The legal system used in the early 1990s was derived for the
most part from those of Spain and the United States. Civil code
procedures on family and property and the absence of jury trial
were attributable to Spanish influences, but most important
statutes governing trade and commerce, labor relations, taxation,
banking and currency, and governmental operations were of United
States derivation, introduced at the beginning of the twentieth
century.
Judicial power is vested in a Supreme Court and in such lower
courts as may be established by law. The 1981 Judicial
Reorganization Act provides for four main levels of courts and
several special courts. At the local level are metropolitan trial
courts, municipal trial courts, and municipal circuit trial
courts. The next level consists of regional trial courts, one for
each of the nation's thirteen political regions, including
Manila. Courts at the local level have original jurisdiction over
less serious criminal cases while more serious offenses are heard
by the regional level courts, which also have appellate
jurisdiction. At the national level is the Intermediate Appellate
Court, also called the court of appeals. Special courts include
Muslim circuit and district courts in Moro (Muslim Filipino)
areas, the court of tax appeals, and the Sandiganbayan. The
Sandiganbayan tries government officers and employees charged
with violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
The Supreme Court, at the apex of the judicial system,
consists of a chief justice and fourteen associate justices. It
has original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other
public ministers, and consuls, and over petitions for injunctions
and writs of habeas corpus; it has appellate jurisdiction over
all cases in which the constitutionality of any treaty, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order, or regulation is
questioned. The Supreme Court also may hear appeals in criminal
cases involving a sentence of life in prison. Article 3 of the
Constitution forbids the death penalty "unless, for compelling
reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides
for it."
The Supreme Court also regulates the practice of law in the
Philippines, promulgates rules on admission to the bar, and
disciplines lawyers. To be admitted to the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines, candidates must pass an examination that is
administered once annually. Professional standards are similar to
those of the United States; the Integrated Bar Association's code
borrows heavily from the American Bar Association's rules. Some
30,000 attorneys practiced law in the Philippines in the mid1980s , more than one-third of them in Manila. Counsel for the
indigent, while not always available, is provided by government
legal aid offices and various private organizations. Many of the
private groups are active in representing "social justice" causes
and are staffed by volunteers.
Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts are
appointed by the president from a list of at least three nominees
prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council for every vacancy. The
Judicial and Bar Council consists of a representative of the
Integrated Bar, a law professor, a retired member of the Supreme
Court, and a representative of the private sector. Presidential
appointments do not require confirmation. Supreme Court justices
must be at least forty years of age when appointed and must
retire at age seventy. According to Article 11 of the
constitution, members of the Supreme Court "may be removed from
office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation
of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption,
other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust." The House has
exclusive power to initiate cases of impeachment. The Senate
tries such cases, and two-thirds of the Senate must concur to
convict someone. The judiciary is guaranteed fiscal autonomy.
The armed forces maintain an autonomous military justice
system. Military courts are under the authority of the judge
advocate general of the armed forces, who is also responsible for
the prosecutorial function in the military courts. Military
courts operate under their own procedures but are required to
accord the accused the same constitutional safeguards received by
civilians. Military tribunals have jurisdiction over all activeduty members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
The traditional independence of the courts had been heavily
compromised in the Marcos era. Because the 1973 constitution
allowed Marcos to fire members of the judiciary, including
members of the Supreme Court, at any time, anyone inclined to
oppose him was intimidated into either complying or resigning.
None of his acts or decrees was declared unconstitutional. The
thirteen Marcos-appointed Supreme Court justices resigned after
he fled, and Aquino immediately appointed ten new justices.
The Philippines has always been a highly litigious society,
and the courts often were used to carry on personal vendettas and
family feuds. There was widespread public perception that at
least some judges could be bought. Public confidence in the
judicial system was dealt a particular blow in 1988 when a
special prosecutor alleged that six Supreme Court justices had
pressured him to "go easy" on their friends. The offended
justices threatened to cite the prosecutor for contempt. Aquino
did not take sides in this dispute. The net effect was to confirm
many Filipinos' cynicism about the impartiality of justice.
Justice was endlessly delayed in the late 1980s. Court
calendars were jammed. Most lower courts lacked stenographers. A
former judge reported in 1988 that judges routinely scheduled as
many as twenty hearings at the same time in the knowledge that
lawyers would show up only to ask for a postponement. One tax
case heard in 1988 had been filed 50 years before, and a study of
the tax court showed that even if the judges were to work 50
percent faster, it would take them 476 years to catch up. Even in
the spectacular case of the 1983 murder of Senator Benigno
Aquino, the judicial system did not function speedily or
reliably. It took five years to convict some middle-ranking
officers, and although the verdict obliquely hinted at then-Chief
of Staff General Fabian Ver's ultimate responsibility, the court
never directly addressed that question.
The indictment of former Minister of Defense Enrile on the
charge of "rebellion with murder" shows that the courts can be
independent of the president, but also that powerful people are
handled gently. Enrile was arrested on February 27, 1990, for his
alleged role in the December 1989 coup attempt in which more than
100 people died. Because Enrile was powerful, he was given an
air-conditioned suite in jail, a telephone, and a computer, and a
week later he was released on 100,000 pesos (for value of the
péso--see Glossary)
bail. In June 1990, the Supreme Court
invalidated the charges against him. A further test of the court
system was expected in the 1990s when criminal and civil charges
were to be brought against Imelda Marcos. In 1991 Aquino agreed
to allow the former first lady, who could not leave New York City
without the permission of the United States Department of
Justice, to return to the Philippines to face charges of graft
and corruption. Swiss banking authorities agreed to return
approximately US$350 million to the Philippine government only if
Marcos were tried and convicted. Marcos did not seem to be
reluctant to face the Philippine courts.
Data as of June 1991
|
