IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973 - 2013

August 2012
IBP moCk Poll

abad, sereno,
Brion on top

SC insiders preferred in survey

DEFINING THE BEST PERSON FOR THE POST. The July 16 IBP forum brought together law deans, Bar
leaders, heads of lawyers organizations and private practitioners.

Celebration of transparency

IBP Holds 2-day

Forum For Next Cj
Stakeholders define criteria, nominees present agenda

A week before the Judicial & Bar Council (JBC) held the first ever
live media coverage of interviews of candidates for the new Supreme
Court Chief Justice, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines sponsored the
first ever public forum on the selection process at its National Office in
Ortigas Center.
We are all part of history in the making, said IBP President Roan
Libarios, as he opened the first forum last July 16 featuring law deans,
private practitioners, a former SC associate justice, Bar leaders and a
SC watchdog group.
The IBP has taken it upon itself to help strengthen public discussion
in the search for the next Chief Justice, Libarios declared. The IBP believes that in the search for the next Chief Justice, public transparency
is the best policy.
The recently concluded Senate impeachment trial has raised the bar
of transparency in choosing the next Chief Justice. The current process
is unprecedented, featuring live media coverage of the applicants interviews at the Judicial & Bar Council, submission of waiver of confidentiality of bank accounts and the making public of the JBC scoring system.
The IBP wishes to promote transparency and accountability in public
office by engaging the public in the process of selecting the next Chief
Justice, Libarios said.

Supreme Court Associate Justices

Roberto Abad, Ma. Lourdes Sereno and
Arturo Brion topped the mock balloting for
the next Chief Justice conducted by the
IBP during its Board meeting held July
28, 2012 at the IBP National Office. Nine
members of IBPs Board of Governors
and 13 National Officers participated in
the poll.
The top 10 picks were:
1. Associate Justice Roberto Abad
2. Associate Justice Ma. Lourdes
Sereno
3. Associate Justice Arturo Brion
4. Former UP Law Dean Raul
Pangalangan
5. Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo de Castro
6. Acting Supreme Court Chief Justice
Antonio Carpio and PCGG Chairman Andres Bautista
7. Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza
8. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairperson Teresita Herbosa
and Former Representative Ronaldo
Zamora
IBP Public Information Officer Atty.
Trixie Cruz-Angeles clarified that the
votes reflect only the individual preferences of the Board of Governors and Na-

- see page 3

IBP Central Luzon

Regional Convention

CJ Nominees
Profiles

16

- see page 3

Mindanao Region
Resolutions

37

The Bar Tribune

Volume 8

Number 5

Official Publication of the

Integrated Bar of the Philippines
15 J. Vargas Ave., Ortigas Center, Pasig City
Tel. No. 63.2 6313014 Telefax No. 63.2 9100417
Website: www.ibp.ph Email: ibp_national@yahoo.com

Board of Governors
roAn i. liBArios
Chairman
denis B. hABAWel
Governor for Northern Luzon
oliViA V. JAcoBA
Governor for Central Luzon
VicenTe m. JoyAs
Governor for Southern Luzon
dominic c.m. solis
Governor for Greater Manila
leonor l. GeronA-romeo
Governor for Bicolandia
mAnuel l. enAGe, Jr.
Governor for Eastern Visayas
erWin m. forTunATo
Governor for Western Visayas
isrAeliTo P. Torreon
Governor for Eastern Mindanao
florendo B. oPAy
Governor for Western Mindanao

National Officers
roAn i. liBArios
National President
nAsser A. mArohomsAlic
National Secretary
mAriA TeresiTA c. sison Go
National Treasurer
Jose V. cABrerA
National Executive Director for Operations
rolAnd B. inTinG
National Executive Director for Administration
rosArio T. seTiAs-reyes
National Director for Legal Aid
PurA AnGelicA y. sAnTiAGo
National Director for Bar Discipline
AliciA A. risos-VidAl
National Director for Peer Assistance Program
VicTor c. fernAndez
National Director for Special Concerns
PAcifico A. AGABin
General Counsel
rose BeATriX cruz-AnGeles
Public Information Officer
merlin m. mAGAllonA
Editor-in-Chief, IBP Journal
PATriciA Ann T. ProdiGAlidAd
Assistant National Secretary
VicToriA V. loAnzon
Assistant National Treasurer
dennis B. funA
Deputy Director for Bar Discipline
rodolfo G. urBizTondo
Deputy General Counsel

Editorial Staff
AurorA G. Geronimo
JAryl Ann V. rAnchez
coronAcion P. chu
ViViAn c. cAPiznon
mArissA T. AlmocerA
mylA l. BernAl
cherryl m. ArTAJo
mArilyn B. cABulAnG
soledAd B. AfroilAn
ruBy G. elizon
Jerome m. ABellA
dondon d. sAmoy
mAriA mimosA m. rAmos

Jose e. san Diego, Jr.

Editorial Consultant

eumir C. Lambino
Layout Artist

We welcome feedback and suggestions.

Please write to ibp_national@yahoo.com

EdIToRIAL

The CJ Search Process

a deFININg momeNt
Roan I. Libarios

becomes expensive, if not inaccessible to the

vast majority of its stakeholders the poor and
underprivileged. Thus, a WB study ranked the
Philippine justice system in the lower bottom
among the countries in Asia.
The second is the scourge of corruption. An SWS survey revealed that public perception of corruption in the judiciary is pervasive. As to the sources of corruption, they are
ranked as follows 1) judges and justices ask
for bribes (39%); 2) litigants pay bribes (36%);
and 3) lawyers suggest bribes to win cases
(20%). And corruption breeds contempt of the
judicial process.
The twin evils of clogged court dockets
and corruption render our justice system inefficient, unreliable and unjust. They are the root
causes behind the low level of public trust and
Privileged membership
confidence in the judiciary. They subvert soIn a Republican system, the Supreme cial justice, hinder economic development, and
Court is designed as the highest institution weaken democracy.
of justice and the last bulwark of democracy.
The need for leadership
While the weakest of the three great branches
of government, the judiciary, headed by the
The path to judicial reform is narrow but
Chief Justice, is also the noblest. It is entrusted
with dispensing fair justice, determining what clear and compelling. The twin evils of dockthe law is, and upholding the guarantees of the et congestion and corruption must be tackled
Bill of Rights even as against the State. They head on and licked. And this requires leaderare sublime functions that constitute the cor- ship of the highest caliber. It calls for clarity of
vision, a well-crafted program of action, and
nerstones of a true and vigorous democracy.
Thus, entry to the judicial branch is high- infinite passion to communicate the reform
ly restricted and privileged. No less than the agenda to stakeholders and to galvanize supConstitution has decreed that membership is port. Massive political will and moral courage
limited only to lawyers who embody the four are also needed to implement the reform agenlofty credentials of judgeship -- competence, da and bring about the desired results.
To the next primus inter pares in the Suintegrity, moral probity and independence. And
in the entire judiciary, the Chief Justice is the preme Court, the real challenge lies in becoming the chief harbinger of judicial renewal
primus inter pares, the first among equals.
At no other time in our history has the and reform. The Constitutional credentials of
search for the primus inter pares in the Su- judgeship -- competence, integrity, probity and
preme Court generated more public attention independence -- may not suffice. To make a
than today. With the new and refreshing spirit difference, the next CJ must provide effecof transparency sweeping the JBC, the search tive, honest-to-goodness, leadership. He or
process, as aired live on media, has drawn she must be able inspire and lead the judicipublic attention to the pressing problems that ary, steer its course from the backwaters of
clogged dockets and corruption into the high
beset our justice system.
seas of judicial efficiency, integrity, independence and excellence.
The twin evils
History bears witness to periods of great
From the array of problems brought to the renewal being unleashed by cathartic events.
spotlight, two clearly stand out. And they make The search for the new CJ has brought to the
up the twin evils that gnaw at the core of the fore not only the ills of our justice system but
also the pressing need for solutions and rePhilippine justice system.
The first is the vicious menace of court forms. Coming on the heels of a cathartic imdocket congestion and case delay. With peachment trial, the historic search for the next
more cases flowing in than out, our courts are Chief Magistrate may prove to be a real gamedrowning in clogged dockets. As a result, the changer, the spark that could bring the Philipquality and delivery of justice suffer. Case de- pine justice system into a new era of renewal
lays also make our justice system anti-poor. It and renaissance.
After the cathartic impeachment trial, the
search for the next Chief Justice (CJ) is shaping up as a defining moment and a potential
game-changer for the judiciary.
Compared with the past, the selection for
the next CJ is by far the most transparent and
the most hotly contested. Spiked by live media
coverage of the selection process, public interest is also at its record peak. And the stakes
could not have been higher.
The incoming Chief Justice will preside
over a judiciary still reeling from the impeachment of its highest magistrate (for failure to
properly declare his assets) and seeking to
renew itself amid the lingering crisis of public
trust and confidence in the justice system.

The bar Tribune

IBP holds... from cover page
Meanwhile, the second forum held
July 20 featured nine of the 22 CJ candidates discussing their judicial philosophies and reform agenda.
[Note: As the Bar Tribune went to press,
the JBC has trimmed the original list to 20
applicants. Please turn to page 16-20 for
the candidates profiles and pages 21-36
for the candidates speeches delivered
during the July 20 forum.]
Libarios described the IBP events as
a celebration of transparency, declaring the IBPs JBL Reyes Hall as the new
portal of public information on the selection of the next Chief Justice. In both fora,
members of the media were joined by IBP
members, law students, concerned citizens, columnists and social media bloggers.
Libarios also announced that results
of both fora will be forwarded to the JBC
and the Office of the President to help in
the evaluation of the candidate best suited to become the next Chief Justice.
While all the speakers in the July 16
forum were unanimous on the constitutional requisites of competence, integrity,
probity and independence, many were
more specific in defining what the best
candidate for the post must possess.
A prototype Chief Justice
For Atty. Fina de la Cuesta Tantuico of the UP Women Lawyers Circle
(WILOCI), Philippine Judicial Academy
chairperson emeritus and former SC Associate Justice Ameurfina Melencio-Herrera is her prototype for the CJ post.
Tantuico started her legal career at the
SC as judicial staff head under MelencioHerrera.
She could have been the first woman
Chief Justice, Tantuico said, citing Melencio-Herreras exceptional academic record, long experience as a judge, unsullied
reputation as the epitome of industry and
integrity, and the ability to inspire others.
Tantuico also said the CJ candidate must
possess a passion for work and an innovative spirit, one that is open to explore all
possibilities to improve case management
and disposition. She cited Melencio-Herreras early initiatives in computerization

that helped improve case

management and disposition in the Supreme
Court.
Tantuico ran through
the other qualities and
skills of a Chief Justice:
Basic oral and written
communication skills
Must have practiced
law or has had experience sitting as a
judge, with the wide
perspective that goes
with it.
Leadership and the
ability to inspire others, the employees of
the court and his colleagues.
Intellectual power,
administrative acumen
and leadership
Atty. Pete Principe,
president of the Philippine
Trial Lawyers Association
(PTLA), said he hoped
that the next Chief Justice
would have probity and
independence and not be
swayed or intimidated by
those who possess the
political and fiscal powers
to impeach and remove him.
He noted that aside from qualities the
next Chief Justice must possess -- citing
provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct, the 1987 Constitution and the Canons of Judicial Ethics -- the Chief Justice
post requires intellectual power, administrative acumen and leadership.
Principe wished that the next Chief
Justice would not suffer the same fate of
the impeached Chief Justice, as he was
saddened at how the recent impeachment
trial divided our people and sapped the
time and resources of our government.
He lamented that the IBP itself was not
spared from the painful schism caused by
the impeachment process.

No more hoodlums in robes

Dean Baldomero Estenzo of the Uni-

Abad... from cover page

tional Officers and should in no way be
construed or interpreted as IBPs official
vote in the JBC deliberations.
Meanwhile, final results of an informal survey conducted among IBP chapters showed that 78% of those surveyed
preferred a Supreme Court insider to become the next Chief Justice while 22%
wanted an outsider.

versity of Cebu College of Law brought

with him the ideas and opinions of his
Cebu colleagues, whom he consulted in
the preparation of his paper.
Estenzo said the Chief Justice must
not only possess competence, integrity,
probity and independence but must be
perceived by everyone as actually possessing them.
Other strengths the Chief Justice
must have, Estenzo said, are:

Those who preferred an insider cited

experience and seniority while those who
preferred an outsider cited dynamism
and fresh perspective.
There are a total of 20 candidates vying for inclusion in the shortlist of the Judicial and Bar Council. President Aquino
will choose the next Chief Justice from
the JBC shortlist by end of August.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Managerial qualities to administer all

the courts
Great executive will in shaping judicial
leadership for corruption-free courts
Determination to remove hoodlums
in robes to regain the trust and confidence of the people in the judicial
system
Zero tolerance for the miscarriage of
justice through manipulation and bribery that have become art form
Imposition of strict values integration
for those charged with administration
of justice
Fair and compassionate to the less
privileged
Independent from political dictates
and interest
Responsive to the reforms of the Bar

Estenzo also hoped that the next

Chief Justice would consider decentral-

august 2012

Part 1 speakers: The Stakeholders

Tantuico

Principe

Olalia

Victorino

Estenzo

Espejo

Lazatin

Tamano

previous JBCs a "failure."

Lazatin has welcomed the
changes to the Chief Justice selection process instituted by the present JBC.
Lazatin identified areas where the Chief Justice
must institute reforms:
Administering and regulating law schools in coordination with the Legal
Education Board
Bar Examinations
MCLE (Mandatory Continuing Legal Education)
for practitioners
Reforms among the justices, judges, clerks of
court, stenographers, process servers, sheriffs
Reforms in accepting
cases that will go up to the
Supreme Court
Allow finality of decisions
in specialized courts like
CTA, NLRC, Sandiganbayan, COMELEC, Civil
Service Commission, etc.
He also said the Chief
Justice must know the essence of the power of judicial review and be able to
handle fiscal autonomy.

Olalia also said the Chief Justice and

the Supreme Court must confront deepseated problems within the legal and
judicial system including endemic corruption and palakasan, gapangan or lakaran with the necessary grit and determination to effect immediate as well as
long-term reforms.
Olalia also sought reforms that he
said are closer to NUPL hearts and advocacy, such as:

A dignified statesman,
not a politician

Bacungan

Mawis

Agustin

Maceda

Quimbo

Solis

izing the venue of the Bar examination to

benefit the poor but deserving law graduates who live in the provinces.
The JBC blackbox

Atty. Edre Olalia of

the the National Union of
Pe
Peoples Lawyers said the
country needs a Chief Justice who is first and foremost a master of law, who
can give straightforward
answers to complex legal
questions; who will uphold
and apply consistently
doctrines of law; fairly adjudicate conflicts between
rights and interests in society; address issues that
expose the deficiencies,
harmonize the disparities,
Martinez
and ultimately, perhaps
correct the flaws and inadequacies of the
legal and judicial system within the limit of
its role and duty.
Olalia fleshed out the other qualities
of a Chief Justice:

Vincent Lazatin, Executive Director

of Transparency and Accountability Network, used the metaphor of a blackbox"
to describe the previous selection process.
"Names came in to the blackbox and
after two weeks, names would come out,"
said Lazatin. "We never really knew the
process," he said, calling the record of the

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Paragon of independence, impartiality, fairness and objectivity.

Sensitive to the plight of the ordinary
person
Moral ascendancy and authority to be
able to inspire the trust, confidence
and respect of the bar, the bench and
the general public
Foresight and prudence

Upholding and consistently applying

the political offense doctrine by mandating the charging of proper crimes
or striking down the filing of false
charges against political dissenters
and opposition and social activists;
Disapproving the abusive practice
of mechanical substitution of real
names for generic John/Jane Does
in informations and warrants of arrest against persecuted individuals,
and dismissing cases resulting from
such practice;
Abandoning or reversing the doctrine in Ilagan v. Enrile to make the
writ of habeas corpus really effective
and useful;
Reforming and revising the remedy
of the writ of amparo to foreclose obstacles and loopholes to its effectivity for those whose lives, liberty and
security are under continuing attack;
Expediting the resolution of cases
against human rights violators to
abate continuing impunity particularly on extrajudicial killings, disappearances, and torture;
Studying the creation of Special Human Rights Courts to exclusively
try and dispose of civil and criminal
cases of human rights violations and
implementing a special procedure
for such purpose to make legal remedies simple, expeditious and accessible; and
Addressing and instituting concrete
and practical measures against unduly prolonged and cumbersome legal processes that have fossilized
many cases.
A former JBC member speaks

Dean Raul Victorino of the Philippine

Christian University College of Law, who
is a retired Sandiganbayan Justice and a
former member of the JBC (representing
the private sector), said the JBC must be
guided by constitutional ideas and strictly
adhere to the constitutional mandate for
judiciary members. He said that as a former JBC member he has been independent and accountable only to his God and
to the people he serve.
Victorino said the next Chief Justice
must be competent in the rule of law and
be of proven integrity. Among the essential qualities mandated in the Constitution, Victorino emphasized judicial inde-

The bar Tribune

pendence. He said the next Chief Justice
must be unwavering in maintaining and
defending the courts independence as
required in the Constitution while maintaining a harmonious relationship with the
other branches of the government. The
next Chief Justice must not be beholden
to the appointing power; be free from any
kind of pressure from the other branches
of government or from the parties or from
colleagues; be an exemplar or what is
good and dutiful above measure and an
upright public servant.
Aspirant must be politically neutral
For Dean Abraham C. Espejo of New
Era University College of Law, the next
Chief Justice must be able to withstand
political pressure.
The next Chief Justice must not be
afraid to take a stand for what he thinks
is right. He cannot be submissive to what
the executive branch wants him to do or
to what the legislative branch will dictate.
Espejo said the track record of aspirants must be carefully checked to prevent
situations where the Chief Justice becomes a puppet of the executive. Once
a puppet, always a puppet, Espejo believes.
If there is a presidential action that
will violate the Bill of Rights, he must declare that to be illegal and if a law is passed
that amounts to class legislation, then by
all means declare it unconstitutional, Espejo asserted. He should take care that
checks and balances will remain not just
in theory but more importantly that these
checks are actually applied in practice.
Espejo also said a Chief Justice must
have a broad view of the law, meaning
someone who has had the opportunity to
see how the law has been applied in actual disputes.
Neither should an aspirant support a
political party, group, or philosophy, Espejo declared, which he believes limits ones
view of what the law should be.
Espejo also batted for a Chief Justice
with moderate temperament. He must
be gentle and compassionate, he said.

equally and importantly a communicator

and an administrator, someone who will
win back the peoples confidence in the
judiciary.
Three constitutions in one
Former UP College of Law Dean Froilan M. Bacungan agrees with the prescriptions of those who preceded his talk and
went a step further, naming Acting Chief
Justice Antonio Carpio as his choice for
the next Chief Justice. But if Carpio is not
chosen, Bacungan said he is for Justice
Secretary Leila De Lima.
Bacungan also told his audience of
law stakeholders that the Constitution is
three constitutions in one: a constitution
of sovereignty, a constitution of law and
a constitution of rights. He said it is important to realize that it is the Supreme Court
that made the constitution the constitution
of rights.
A patriot and revolutionary
Atty. Rodrigo Quimbo of Quisumbing Torres Law Office said the Chief Justice must be a patriot. He must love our
country. A Chief Justice must have the
capacity to subordinate all interest to patriotism.
At the same time, Quimbo said, the
Chief Justice must be a revolutionary. He
must be ready use his position to institute
change. Change that will be significant not
merely to judges and court employees,
nor merely to lawyers and businessmen,

but change that impacts the marginalized

sectors of the society.
Quimbo said a Chief Justice takes on
multiple roles -- a teacher, leader, father,
CEO and moral example all at the same
time. It requires super human qualities.
One would be a true Filipino to merely accept the position and be serious about it
because the position of Chief Justice of
the Philippines requires one to be ready
to sacrifice his own life.
Quimbo recognizes the awesome
power in the position of Chief Justice. A
Chief Justice has the power and he must
use that power to change the practice of
law. Someone who will revolutionize the
practice of law in a way that it becomes
true service, a man or woman who can
work to produce a new generation of attorneys who will simply be good lawyers.
Consensus builder
Dean Perry L. Pe of Palawan State
University College of Law says the next
Chief Justice must be a consensus builder
more than anything else.
Making a pitch for legal education,
the managing partner of Romulo Mabanta
Sayoc & Buenaventura Law Firm also
said that a Chief Justice who does not understand the situation of the law schools
cannot and should not be a Chief Justice
because judicial reform should start from
the law students and the law schools.
Pe also called for reforms in the bar
examinations and in MCLE (Mandatory
Continuing Legal Education). A Chief

Part 2 speakers: The Nominees

Administrator and communicator

Dean Adel Fadel A. Tamano of Liceo de Cagayan University College of
Law and presently Vice President for
Public Affairs and Communications for
Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, said that
it is vital for a Chief Justice to have the
power to communicate and inspire confidence in the judiciary. He must be a good
administrator of justice as well as a great
communicator of the rule of law, Tamano
said.
The well-known television host said
the Chief Justice should be a leader for
the judiciary of the 21st century, someone who is transparent without fear of being accountable and someone who is also

Sereno

Bautista

Abad

Sarmiento

Morales

Pangalangan

Valdez

Siayngco

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

august 2012
Justice must know practice of law and
should be able to reform the MCLE, he
said.
Pe said a Chief Justice must be able
to impart reforms in the judiciary. Taking
a comprehensive view of the legal profession, Pe argued that a Chief Justice must
be able to understand the meaning of
what is it to become a judge; he must be
able to teach the judges through PHILJA;
he must be able to reach out to the process servers, to the sheriffs, to the stenographers and to the clerks of court. A
Chief Justice must also know what is it to
bring or what case to be brought to the
Supreme Court. And in the academe, a
Chief Justice must be able to understand
the basic questions.
Administration of justice
must be transformed

ally effective, must possess outstanding

ability and commanding stature as well as
the purity and nobility of a Sir Galahad.
Dean Agustin summed up the qualities the next Chief Justice must have:
inspired vision, excellent character, wide
legal knowledge and experience, proven
administrative skills and a burning passion to energize and transform the administration of justice into a transparent,
accountable, and effective justice system.
A profound and lasting influence
Dean Ma. Soledad Deriquito-Mawis
of the Lyceum of the Philippines College
of Law, says the public want a Chief Justice who will have a profound and lasting
influence on the daily lives of the litigants,
in the Bench and in the Bar, and in the
development of the country.
She listed the qualities the Chief Justice must possess:

Dean Antonio Agustin of the School of

Law, Manuel L. Quezon University, said
the lessons of the impeachment trial itself
can help define the best candidate for the
position of Chief Justice.
He said that while age, citizenship or
judicial experience can be documented
and verified, the constitutional requirements of competence, probity, integrity
and independence would require careful determination using the candidates
SALNs, other documents as well as the
public interview.
Agustin also discussed the benefits of
having an insider or outsider for the top
SC post. An insider, he said, is already
familiar with the internal systems, procedures and problems of the Supreme
Court. The disadvantage to an insider, he
said, is he may already be tainted with
the vices or been harboring the deadly
virus infecting the system. On the other
hand, Agustin said, an outsider, to be re-

He/she must know how to truthfully and

honestly declare his/her assets and liabilities.
He/she must know how to prepare and
defend his statements of assets and liablities.
He/she must know how to properly cite
sources lest he/she be accused of plagiarism; he/she must observe proper
court decorum.
He/she must know how to foster camaraderie among his peers without compromising the law, integrity and the independence of the Judiciary.
He/she must know how to say NO to his
family and friends.
He/she is one who must interpret the law.
He/she must not decide on or make Judicial Legislation when in the Bench.
He/she must declare his/her relatives
who will take the Bar.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

He/she must live an upright and moral

life.
He/she must be accountable and must
not be a person who has once defied the
law or even a decision of the Supreme
Court.
He/she must have Leadership and Management skills. He/She must unite, motivate and inspire people around him,
must be ready to challenge norms, a
must be reformer specially on judicial
matters.
He/she must be assertive without being
offensive.
He/she must show respect so that he
may be respected.
He/she must know when to say I am the
Chief Justice of the Philippines.
He/she must not only be learned in law
but must also be a patriot.
He/she must be willing to sacrifice his
time.
He/she must not be loyal to anyone but
to the institution he serves.
He/she must be a Role Model and inspiration to the students of law.
He/she must be able to teach law and jurisprudence with critical pride.
He/she must always be vigilant.
The moral right to judge others
Dean Ernest B. Maceda of the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila College of Law shared the definition of integrity as the moral right to judge others. He
said integrity is extremely important and
must unite with the other equally important qualifications of the candidates.
He lists the following criteria for the
position of Chief Justice:
Competence
Knowledge of the Law
Respect of Human Rights

The bar Tribune

Sensitivity to the needs of the poor
Leadership
Administrative ability
Ability to build consensus
Adherence to the rule of law
Dean Maceda also underscored
the value of independence as a security
against encroachment by other co-equal
branches of government. He clarified,
however, that independence does not
mean not being oblivious to public sentiment.
A leader and scholar
Atty. Ronald Olivar Solis, President of
the Philippine Bar Association, says the
Chief Justice must be both a leader and
a scholar.
He said a leader must understand
what the Courts problems are, and know
how to solve them. He must possess the
imagination and political skills to lead a divided and often fractious court to work in
unison towards quick and effective solutions to problems that presently confront
the judiciary.
As a Leader, Solis added, the Chief
Justice must have the concrete vision
about how to go about solving the most
pressing problems of the court today; that
is, how to decongest the clogged dockets
and offer novel and useful ways to speed
up trials and prompt resolution of cases.
To be able to do this, the LeaderChief Justice must be savvy and technologically in step with the many uses of
computers, the internet, and information
and communication technology which
make every day life more productive and
efficient in this information age.
As a Scholar, Solis pointed out that
the Chief Justice must be a giant among
intellectuals. His or her exceptional intel-

lectual capacity must be honed and tested

in the clarity of his logic and the strength
of his discourses, as shown by the decisions he has written. One who fastidiously
does his or her homework.
Solis added that a Chief Justice must
earn the awe and respect not only of his
peers but of the public that he serves;
must possess probity and independence
of mind; and must be fearless. Solis said
that in order to restore public confidence
in the judiciary, he must not only be impartial and judicious but that he must be
publicly perceived to be one and appear
impartial and judicious at all times, especially in the face of a popular Executive
and a strong Legislative Leader.

Probity & integrity

In preparing for the IBP public forum,
former SC Associate Justice and current Adamson University College of Law
Dean Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez said
she sought the views of her relatives and
friends, some of them via text messaging.
The best candidate for Chief Justice, she reiterated, must possess all the
qualities cited in the Constitution, such as
competence, integrity, probity, and independence. But since the determination of
such qualities is essentially subjective in
nature, she said the key is for the JBC to
have an accurate discernment of such
qualities.
Austria-Martinez expounded on her
criteria, ranging from the intellectual to the
spiritual:

As to competence, she said the

best candidate should have an
above average intellect in the law
so that the independence of the judiciary may be safeguarded, maintained and upheld.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

A Chief Justice must have the capability to implement resolutions

with fortitude and patience.
Probity and integrity are the most
crucial qualities that the best candidate should have. Probity means
uprightness, adherence to the
highest principles, synonymous to
honesty, integrity, morality and virtuousness.
Integrity as a firm adherence to
truth, especially moral values, synonymous to uprightness, probity,
morality, righteousness and virtuesness.
The best candidate should above
all be a GOD-FEARING individual.
The best candidate should not be
subject of control by any one. He
must be a man with wisdom and
good conscience, a man of principle and conviction, a man with
good judgment, and faithful to the
Constitution, and a man of integrity, he must have a love of the
country, one who will set aside
self-interest; a person who is able
to think independently.
A Chief Justice should be Godfearing, humble, strong build, honest and has compassion for the
poor. A person who lives a simple
lifestyle. Maka-Diyos, may sariling
desisyon, tapat sa servisyo, makatao at maka-bayan, dedicated sa
trabaho at mapagkakatiwalaan,
must have experience of all the
subject areas covered by the judiciary law.
(JESD)

august 2012

IBP CeNtral luzoN CoNveNtIoN:

rains No match for spirit and enthusiasm
By Aurora G. Geronimo

The rains that poured at the

start of the IBP Central Luzon Regional Convention failed to dampen the spirit and enthusiasm of
the 260-strong assembly that convened on June 28 at the Mimosa
Convention Hall in Clarkfield, Pampanga.
Governor for Central Luzon
Region, Atty. Olivia VelasquezJacoba, standing tall and proud
and every bit belying five decades
of law practice and advocacy,
banged the gavel to signal the start
of proceedings.
The presidents of each of the
seven chapters (Bataan, Nueva Ecija, Bulacan, Pampanga,
Pangasinan, Tarlac and Zambales)
came in full force, parading with
their chapter pennants, followed by
the Regional Officers, National Officers, Board of Governors, the National President and Central Luzon
local government executives, escorted by PNP officers. Delegates
and guests stood solemnly for the
Invocation, National Anthem and
the IBP March.

de Lima: impeachment was

about public trust

Constitution and serve the country,

the courts and the public. [The full
text of Secretary De Limas speech
appears on page 14.]
Escudero:
Kung walang itinatago,
walang dapat katakutan

The first speaker of the day

was Justice Secretary Leila M. De
Lima, who found time between official meetings in Manila to address
her colleagues in the profession.
Secretary De Lima maintained that
the recent impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona
was not about judicial transparency or judicial independence, nor
was it a struggle between branches of government. It was, she said,
about public service being a public trust.
On yet another plane, Secretary De Lima batted for a shift in
the focus of MCLE (Mandatory
Continuing Legal Education) to
teaching lawyers how to uphold the
IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Meanwhile, Senator Francis

Chiz Escudero, arriving in his signature faded jeans, said he was
deeply saddened that long after the
impeachment proceedings have
been put to rest, the issue was still
a raging topic.
Escudero, who has signed a
waiver in regard to his bank accounts, believes that the standard
that was applied to former Chief
Justice Renato Corona in the impeachment trial should be applied

The bar Tribune

to everyone in the public service,
with wide disparity between the
SALN and ones actual assets being ground for removal from office.
Kung walang itinatago, walang
dapat katakutan, he declared.
Moving forward, Escudero encouraged everyone to participate
in the selection of the new Chief
Justice, saying that the process is
not over until the next Chief Justice
is appointed.
IBPs CJ selection criteria

Meanwhile, National President

Roan Libarios told the participants that he was glad to be back
in Clarkfield. He said that with its
impressive line up of speakers,
the convention was headed for
the same success it achieved two
years ago. He also congratulated
the Pampanga Chapter for hosting
the Central Luzon Regional Convention for the second time.
President Libarios also shared
with the delegates the criteria for
the selection of the next Chief Justice which the IBP Board of Governors submitted to the Judicial

and Bar Council, namely: 1) to allow live media coverage of the applicants interviews; 2) to open the
selection process to qualified applicants from the Bar and Bench
and not just to senior members of
the Supreme Court; 3) to require
applicants to execute a waiver of
confidentiality of bank accounts, including SALN, in favor of the JBC;
and 4) to disclose to the public the
individual votes of JBC members,
including their scoring system, on
all qualified applicants.
Libarios reiterated that the recent impeachment trial has elevated the standards of transparency
and accountability and strengthened the rule of law and democracy in the country.

tive image for the legal profession

so that it may continue to be an effective and unassailable pillar of
justice and a relevant instrument
for the attainment of a just and humane society.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Pampangas native son

Another legal luminary and

guest speaker was Pampangas
native son and former Solicitor
General Estelito P. Mendoza. Atty.
Governor Umalis hope
Mendoza recounted with pride how
the late President Ferdinand Marcos had called him my loyal lawyer to illustrate the importance of
a lawyers relationship with his client. Atty. Mendoza delivered a lecture on the subject Litigation and
the Courts.
Keynoting the convention was
Senior Associate Justice Antonio
Pampanga Governor Aurelio Carpio, whose keynote speech
Umali, who was represented by centered on judicial reform. [The
Provincial Administrator Alejandro full text of Senior Associate Justice
Abesamis, said it was his hope that Carpios speech at the Central Luconvention will remind everyone of zon Convention appears on page
his sworn duty to uphold the truth 10.]
and the Rule of Law. He called on
lawyers to build a strong and posi-

august 2012

judICIal reForm IN tHe PHIlIPPINes

[Speech delivered during the Central Luzon Regional Convention of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, June 29, 2012]

Antonio T. Carpio
Senior Associate Justice, Supreme Court

President Roan Libarios, Central Luzon Governor Olivia Velasco-Jacoba, other Governors and Officers of the IBP, fellow members of the IBP, my co-workers in
the Judiciary and in Government, friends,
a pleasant morning to you all.
I wish to thank you for inviting me
this morning. Your theme in this Convention - Promoting Integrity, Transparency
and Accountability in the Justice System
- is timely considering that the Judiciary
needs to learn, and implement, the lessons from the recent impeachment of
the former Chief Justice. These lessons
pertain to integrity, transparency and accountability in the Judiciary. Of course,
the Judiciary is only one of the pillars of
the broader Justice System that includes
the community as well as agencies of the
Executive branch.
This morning allow me to express my
personal thoughts on Judicial Reform,
which inevitably touches on integrity,
transparency and accountability in the Judiciary. Judicial reform is always a work
in progress, and the Judiciary must keep
on building on past initiatives to address
intractable problems as well as emerging
ones. I shall discuss case decongestion,
integrity and independence of judges,
transparency and accountability in the Judiciary, infrastructure needs of the Judiciary, compensation of judges, court administration, and training and career path for
judges. These are my personal thoughts,
as I do not claim to speak for the entire
Court.
I. CASE dECoNGESTIoN
1. The number one problem of the Judiciary is clogged dockets, arising from
delays in trial, and delays in deciding

10

cases. Clogged dockets impair social

justice, hinder economic development,
and erode public confidence in the
Justice System and ultimately in the
entire Government.
Trials should ideally take not more
than two years to finish. At present,
21% of trials take 2 to 5 years to finish,
and 13% take more than 5 years to finish. On the other hand, cases should
ideally be decided as prescribed by the
Constitution: not more than 24 months
for the Supreme Court, not more
than 12 months for all other appellate
courts, and not more than 3 months
for all other 3 lower courts, all counted
from the date of submission for resolution of the case. At present, the Judiciary does not fully comply with these
timelines. Since public office is a public
trust, the Judiciary must account to the
public for the clogged dockets.
2. The solution to clogged dockets is a
combination of measures to address
case management, performance, procedural, case filtering, personnel, and
judge-population issues.
a. The Judiciary must adopt a computerized case management system
(CMS) for all courts, from first level
courts to the Supreme Court. The template for this CMS is the two-year old
case management system of the Court
of Appeals (CA), which is widely acknowledged worldwide as a success.
PJ Andres Reyes of the CA estimates
that by the end of this year 2012, the
CA will comply with the constitutional
directive that CA cases should be decided within 12 months from date of
submission for resolution. We have
to thank our development partner, the
USAID, for their support in developing
the software for the CMS of the CA.
b. If the CA can do it - that is, comply
with the constitutional directive - then
all other appellate courts, including the
Supreme Court, should be able to do it
also. A CMS for trial courts, similar to
the CA CMS, will be pilot-tested in all
Quezon City trial courts before the end
of this year. If successful, the trial court
CMS will be deployed nationwide.
The CMS will allow the CJ, PJ, the
Court Administrator and the Deputy
Court Administrators, to monitor online, and in real time, the caseload, aging, and the rate of disposition of cases
of any judge or justice. The public can
also find out the status of their cases

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

by simply going to the website of the

court. Right now, a litigant with a pending case in the CA can go to the CA
website, type his case number, and
instantly he will know if a decision or
resolution has been issued, and if one
has been issued, he can download a
copy. A litigant can also go to the CA
compound in Manila where there is a
computer kiosk. The litigant can find
out the status of his case by simply
typing on the touchscreen of the computer kiosk the case number or title of
his case.
c. The Judiciary must adopt a simplified trial procedure for all trial courts.
The present trial procedure, which is
obsolete, cumbersome and time consuming, is a principal factor for the
clogged dockets of the Judiciary. To
eliminate clogged dockets, there has to
be a sea change in how courts conduct
trials. Even if courts can comply with
the constitutional timelines in deciding
cases submitted for decision, the trial
of cases still drags on too long.
The way forward is to adopt a simplified trial procedure patterned after
the four existing special rules adopting
simplified trial procedures, namely: (1)
the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure which has been implemented
by first level courts in certain cases
for over ten years now, (2) the Interim
Rules of Procedure Governing IntraCorporate Controversies which have
been implemented by second level
courts also for over ten years now,
(3) the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases adopted two years
ago, and (4) the Rules of Procedure
for Intellectual Property Rights Cases
adopted last year. Sufficient jurisprudence has developed over these existing simplified trial procedures. It is high
time to expand these simplified trial
procedures to all civil cases.
Thus, in all civil cases not presently governed by special simplified
trial procedures, the direct testimony
of witnesses shall be by affidavit only
(except for hostile witnesses), subject
to cross-examination by the adverse
party. All affidavits of witnesses shall
be submitted before the start of the trial. This alone will cut down trial time by
at least one-half. Objections to questions will merely be noted by the judge,
who anyway knows what testimony is
admissible or not, unlike jurors in the
jury system. Demurrer to evidence,
motions to dismiss, motions for bill of

The bar Tribune

particulars, motions for reconsideration, motions for extension of time to
file pleadings,and petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against
interlocutory orders, shall be prohibited, as they are now prohibited in the
four existing special rules adopting
simplified trial procedures.The judge
shall take active part in questioning
witnesses. After trial, the parties shall
submit their respective memoranda
of facts and law, which the judge may
adopt, in whole or in part, in writing his
decision.
The simplified trial procedure in
these four existing special rules can
be combined with the Guidelines for
Litigation now being pilot-tested in Quezon City trial courts, which simplify
further the trial procedure in the four
existing special rules on simplified trial
procedures.
In criminal cases, the simplified
trial procedure in the Revised Rule on
Summary Procedure, which already
applies to crimes where the imposable
penalty is arresto mayor or lower, can
be applied to crimes where the imposable penalty is prision correccional.
The great majority of pending cases in first and second level courts are
criminal cases, constituting 80% of all
pending cases. Delays in the trial of
criminal cases are largely due to the
absence of prosecutors, the absence
of public defenders, or the absence
of prosecution witnesses. While these
factors are beyond the control of the
Judiciary, they contribute most to the
congestion of court dockets. The Judiciary will have to work closely with the
Executive branch to address this important issue.
d. The Judiciary must strengthen and
expand
court-annexed
mediation
(CAM) and judicial dispute resolution
(JDR), which filter cases and ensure
that only cases that cannot be amicably
settled go to trial. This means setting
up more mediation units, and training
more judges on judicial dispute resolution. The figures are very encouraging:
out of 209,165 civil cases mediated
as of May 2012, the success ratewas
63.76%; and out of 23,979 civil cases
placed under judicial dispute resolution
as of May 2012, the success rate was
39.53%. Judicial dispute resolution is a
second layer filtering mechanism as it
applies to cases where mediation has
failed. In effect, mediation and judicial
dispute resolution, which now apply to
almost 80% of all first and second level courts, can filter out 78% of all civil
cases filed with first and second level
courts. Mediation and judicial dispute
resolution are huge successes in the
battle to decongest the dockets of trial
courts.

e. The Judiciary must work for legislation that makes appointment to trial
courts by level of court, not by specific
branch. Right now, an MTC judge who
wants to transfer as an MTC judge to
a neighboring city or municipality must
go through another appointment, as if
he is applying for the first time. This
means he must again be nominated by
the JBC and appointed by the President, just to be an MTC judge again
in a neighboring city or town. Every
time a judge makes a lateral transfer like this, he accumulates political
debts, which weaken his independence.
In the Executive branch, a bureau
or regional director can simply be assigned from one station or region to
another by the department head without need of a new appointment from
the President. This should also be the
case in the Judiciary. Once appointed
a first or second level judge by the
President, the judge can be assigned
by the Supreme Court to a particular
branch within the same court level.
The Supreme Court should be able
to assign and reassign judges within
the same court level based on the
caseload of courts, and the need for
lateral advancement of judges.
f. A high vacancy rate in the position
of judges in trial courts naturally contributes to clogged dockets. At present, the overall vacancy rate in first
and second level courts is 25.6%. This
includes unfunded and unopened trial
courts. The vacancy rate in funded
and opened trial courts, or existing
trial courts, is 22.4%. These vacancy
rates are quite high, exacerbating the
already clogged dockets. The vacancy
rate in existing trial courts should ideally be less than 5%, to account only for
the time needed to fill vacancies arising
from normal retirements, promotions
and resignations. In the United States,
the vacancy rate in existing federal
district courts is currently at 10%, and
they are already talking of a judicial crisis or emergency. The JBC will have to
find ways to reduce the vacancy rates
in first and second level courts.

cases per first level judge, in Makati

1,167 cases per first level judge, and
in Taguig 1,161 cases per first level
judge. Clearly, there is a need to reengineer the distribution of courts in relation to population to insure an equitable distribution, and faster disposition,
of cases. This re-engineering requires
legislation.

II. INTEGRITY, INdEPENdENCE &

ACCoUNTABILITY
1. Equally important as case decongestion
is how to insure and maintain integrity
and independence among judges and
justices. The Constitution mandates
that judges and justices must have
integrity (probity) and independence,
aside from competence.
2. The gatekeeper of integrity and independence is the Judicial and Bar
Council (JBC), which must insure that
no one who does not possess integrity
and independence gets into the list of
nominees submitted to the President.
If the JBC deems it necessary that
nominees to the post of Chief Justice
should execute bank waivers to verify
their Statement of Assets, Liabilities
and Net Worth (SALN), and hence
determine their integrity or honesty in
declaring their assets, then the bank
waiver requirement must also apply
to all other applicants to the Judiciary.
This is not an additional qualification
for the office, but merely a tool to determine the integrity of the applicant, similar to the requirement to submit police,
Ombudsman and court clearances.

g. The number of courts in a locality

must follow a judge to population ratio.
Manila, with a population of 1,652,171,
has 30 first level courts, or a ratio of
one first level judge for every 55,072
residents. Makati, with a population of
510,383, has 7 first level courts, or a
ratio of one first level judge for every
72,911 residents.
Taguig, with a population of
644,473, has only 1 first level court, or a
ratio of one first level judge for 644,473
residents. This disparity is reflected in
the caseloads of first level courts: in
Manila, the average caseload is 242

3. Decisions of a judge or justice are the

best evidence of the competence, integrity and independence of the judge
or justice. A decision can reveal whether the judge or justice knows his law,
whether a judge or justice has favored
a litigant, and whether a judge or justice has a steely or wimpy decisional
independence. Practicing lawyers can
tell, from a collection of decisions of
a judge or justice, whether the judge
or justice has competence, integrity
and independence. In constitutional
cases,decisions or opinions of a justice can reveal whether the justice has
decisional independence vis--vis the
Executive or Legislative branches. Yet

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

11

august 2012
the JBC has not adequately evaluated
decisions of applicants in screening
nominees to the Judiciary. The JBC
must give greater weight to decisions
of applicants who seek promotion in
the Judiciary.
The IBP must make its own evaluation of the decisions of a judge or justice to assist the JBC in determining the
competence, integrity and independence of applicants seeking promotion
in the Judiciary. The IBP can submit
its own evaluation thru its permanent
representative in the JBC. In this way,
the IBP will give practical and tangible
meaning to the theme of this Convention - how IBP can help promote Integrity, Transparency and Accountability
in the Justice System.
Indeed, other groups with acknowledged competence in evaluating decisions of judges and justices, like law
school faculties and professors, should
submit to the JBC their own evaluation
of decisions of applicants seeking promotion in the Judiciary. Law professors
also have a permanent JBC representative who can articulate their evaluation.
4. Once a person is appointed judge or
justice, the gatekeeper function is
passed on to the Supreme Court,
which has the constitutional power to
discipline judges and justices of lower
courts. The Supreme Court can create permanent administrative tribunals
to handle administrative complaints
against judges and justices, instead of
the present ad hoc investigative bodies. This will expedite the resolution of
administrative complaints.
5. The leaders of the Judiciary must lead
by example. The successful organizations are those whose leaders lead
by example. The leaders of the Judiciary, and I refer to the Chief Justice
and the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, must be the embodiment
of integrity and independence for the
rest of the Judiciary to follow. Thus, the
Supreme Court Justices should lead
in complying with the law by disclosing their SALNs as mandated by the
Constitution and the law. The Supreme
Court has done this as part of the lessons learned from the recent impeachment trial.

parency and accountability policy of

the Supreme Court. This is really a nobrainer since all these financial reports
are public documents.

III. INFRASTRUCTURE
1. Adequate courthouses are necessary
for the administration of justice. All appellate courts have decent and adequate courthouses, but not the first and
second level courts. The existing Halls
of Justice can accommodate only 22%
of all existing first level courts, and only
51% of all existing second level courts.
This glaring shortage of courthouses
nationwide needs to be addressed.
The annual GAA must provide a budget for a programmed construction, over
the next decade, of more courthouses
throughout the country.
2. The City of Manila, founded more than
440 years ago, with 104 trial courts,
comprising more than of all trial
courts in Metro Manila, still does not
have a Hall of Justice today. It is really a shame that the capital city of
the Republic does not have a Hall of
Justice. The judges in the City of Manila continue to hold office and trials in
cramped and dilapidated rooms and
courtrooms. The construction of the
Manila Hall of Justice must be revived
as soon as possible. There is already
a lot for the Manila HOJ titled in the
name of the Supreme Court almost a
one hectare lot at the back of the Manila City Hall.

6. The Judiciaryshould embrace transparency and accountability in governance

by publishing its COA Audited Annual
Reports, its collections and disbursements of the Judiciary Development
Fund (JDF) and the Special Allowance
for Judges (SAJ), as well as all other
financial reports required by law. If you
go to the Supreme Court website, you
will see all these reports now posted
online. This is part of the new trans-

3. With funding from the World Bank, the

Supreme Court was able to construct
two model courthouses. The first model courthouse, located in Lapu-Lapu
City, was inaugurated in December
2007. The second model courthouse,
located in Angeles City, will be inaugurated next week, July 5, 2012. The
construction of these two model courthouses is part of the Judicial Reform
Support Program initiated by former
Chief Justice Hilario Davide in 2001.
The third and last model courthouse
should be the Manila Hall of Justice,
which should be constructed once the
funding is secured, hopefully with assistance again from our development
partner the World Bank, whom we must
thank for the first two model courthous-

12

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

es. All courthouses to be constructed

in the country should be patterned after these model courthouses, which incorporate all the design and equipment
needed for an efficient and modern
courthouse.
4. Internet connection for all courthouses
is now a necessity. Access to the Supreme Courts E-Library will put at the
fingertips of all judges nationwide all
the jurisprudence and laws they need
in writing decisions. The E-Library now
contains, in full text searchable format,
all Supreme Court decisions from 1901
to the present, as well as all laws from
1900 to the present. Supreme Court
Circulars and Manuals can also be
found in the E-Library. So are rules and
regulations of all government agencies
that are required to be filed with the
U.P. Law Center before they can take
effect. Decisions of the Supreme Court
are uploaded to the E-Library within
days from their promulgation.
Every judge and justice will be provided with a USB 3G wireless thumbdrive that, once inserted in his laptop
or desktop, will directly connect him
to the Supreme Court website where
he can access the E-Library. The trial
judge can upload his monthly report
of pending cases to the OCA section
of the Supreme Court website. When
the CMS of trial courts is deployed, the
system can automatically upload to the
OCA updates on pending cases and
other data. The USB thumbdrive cannot be used to go to any website other
than the Supreme Court website. The
Supreme Court approved two weeks
ago the procurement of the USB
thumbdrives. We have to thank again
the World Bank for its support in setting up the E-Library and in procuring
the USB thumbdrives.
Incidentally, the E-Library is a
project that I initiated one year after I
joined the Supreme Court. It involved
scanning all decisions of the Supreme
Court since 1901, as well as all laws
since 1900. We scanned, whenever
available, the original of Supreme
Court decisions and the laws printed in
the Official Gazette.
IV. CoMPENSATIoN & BENEFITS
1. There is a saying that to maintain a
good judiciary, you must choose your
judges well, but above all, you must
pay them well. To choose our judges
well, we have the JBC. But to pay our
judges well, we have the salary standardization law, which does not distinguish between judges and non-judges.
Under the SSL, judges and nonjudges have the same pay even if they
do not have the same work and responsibility. So how do we resolve this
issue of paying our judges well?

The bar Tribune

2. A new law, RA No. 9946, makes the
monthly pension of retired judges
equivalent to the salary of incumbent
judges. So when incumbent judges get
a salary increase, the monthly pension
of retired judges, which is tax-free, also
gets the same increase. There is also
the SAJ under RA No. 9227, which
entitles judges to a monthly allowance equivalent to 100% of their basic
monthly salary. While the best compensation and benefit packages are
those given to officials in government
financial institutions, judges are better
compensated compared to government officials in the regular executive
departments. Even then, the Supreme
Court must continue to find ways to
improve the compensation package of
judges and justices.
3. LGUs give judges in their areas monthly allowances. This may give rise to a
conflict of interest or weakened independence on the part of judges when
the LGU or its officials have cases before these judges. In one case, LGU
officials withheld the monthly allowance when the LGU lost a case before one of the judges. To remove this
conflict of interest issue, one province
decided to give a monthly lump sum
to the Supreme Court, for the Court
to allocate to the judges in that province. This should be the template for
all financial assistance to be given by
LGUs to judges - the financial assistance should be given direct to the Supreme Court for the Court to allocate to
judges stationed in the particular LGU.
V. AdMINISTRATIoN oF TRIAL
CoURTS
1. First and second level courts nationwide are administered by the Office of
the Court Administrator (OCA), which
is under the Supreme Court. The OCA
is centralized in Manila and there are
no decentralized offices in the regions,
other than the now defunct pilot Regional Court Administration Office
(RCAO) in Region VII. The Judiciary is probably the only government
agency, with extensive operations in
all regions nationwide, that has not
yet regionalized. You can just imagine
the problems, in terms of logistics, finance, maintenance, and personnel, in
administering all trial courts nationwide
from one central office in Manila.

the difference that instead of holding

office in Manila, the DCAs will hold office right in their areas of jurisdiction.
In short, we simply station the DCA
for Mindanao in Davao City and the
DCA for Visayas in Cebu City, along
with their immediate staff. The DCAs
can visit the trial judges more often and
know their problems better. They can
also attend to these problems faster.
Problems on maintenance of courthouses and the requisition of supplies
can be addressed immediately without
bringing the problem to Manila. Paperwork, like travel authority, leave of
absences of judges, or acceptance of
resignations of court employees, need
not be approved in Manila as what is
happening now.
3. In the future, if there is a need to decentralize further the OCA, RCAOs can be
established gradually starting in faraway regions. There is no need, however, to regionalize immediately the
OCA. We can first simply physically
locate the DCAs right in their areas of
jurisdiction. There is one vacant DCA
now and another one will be vacant before the end of the year. By changing
the job description of two DCAs, one to
be stationed in Mindanao and another
in the Visayas, we can expeditiously
decentralize the OCA into three areas
- Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.

Court appoints the clerks of court.

2. The Philja can expand the Pre-Judicature Program into a one-year masteral
degree course open even to new lawyers. You do not have to go abroad to
get a masteral degree from a prestigious institution. The Pre-Judicature
Program of Philja will be more relevant
to practicing lawyers than masteral
courses abroad. Those who complete
the course can be employed as clerks
of courts in first and second level court.
Right now, clerks of court of first level
courts do not have to be lawyers. With
this program, new lawyers can see a
clear career path in the Judiciary starting with the Pre-Judicature Program.
This will follow the practice in other
countries that provide a career path
in the judiciary for lawyers as soon as
they pass the bar.

1. There are many who have passed the

very tough Pre-Judicature Program
of the Philippine Judicial Academy
(Philja). However, they have not been
employed in the Judiciary. The JBC
rules provide that those who pass the
Pre-Judicature shall enjoy preference
in the selection of nominees for vacancies in the lower courts. But many of
them are not appointed as judges even
if they are included in the JBC list submitted to the President. The Supreme
Court can give them preference in the
appointment of clerks of court, which
will give them more preparation for
appointment later as judges. This can
easily be done since the Supreme

I said earlier that the Judiciary must

learn the lessons from the recent impeachment trial. These lessons touch on
integrity, transparency and accountability.
But beyond these, the Judiciary must also
address other pressing problems besetting the Judiciary, like clogged dockets,
inadequate infrastructure and facilities,
the need for competitive compensation for
judges, over-centralization of court administration, and the need to provide training
and career path for judges. I am happy to
share with you this morning my personal
thoughts on Judicial Reform, involving
ideas accumulated from more than a decade of service in the Supreme Court, and
from knowledge acquired in implementing, observing or studying Judicial Reform
programs, in the Philippines and in other
countries. I share these thoughts with you
because Judicial Reform is too big to be
undertaken by the Judiciary alone. Judicial Reform can happen only with the cooperation of all stakeholders in the Justice
System the Judiciary, the Executive and
Legislative Branches, the Bar and the
public. All stakeholders must work earnestly together because a well-functioning
Judiciary is essential for good governance
and for the economic development of our
country. Judicial Reform is simply too important to fail. Thank you, and once again,
a good day to all.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

13

VI. TRAINING ANd CAREER PATH FoR

JUdGES

2. The OCA used to have one DCA for

Mindanao, and another DCA for the
Visayas. Today, the DCAs are assigned to a mix of regions nationwide,
which means they travel to regions in
Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, while
holding office in Manila. The OCA
should go back to the old set-up, with

august 2012

From HuBrIs to HumBle servICe:

a lawyer's CHoICe
[Speech delivered during the convention of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Central Luzon Region,
June 28, 2012, Mimosa Convention Hall, Clark Field, Pampanga.]
Leila M. de Lima
Secretary, Department of Justice

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen!

It is an honor and a pleasure to be among
the members of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP) of Central Luzon, and
most especially to be a part of your Regional Convention during such a critical
period for all of us belonging to the legal
profession!
The past six or so months have been
characterized with conflicts so momentous they've pitched our ranks into apparent dissension, with one side pitted
against the other, seemingly championing
different causes. One side's battle cry was
for transparency and accountability, while
the other's was about judicial independence and its refusal to succumb to the alleged attempt by the Executive Branch at
subjugation, supposedly in collusion with
members of the Legislature.
I, however, never bought into the attempt to characterize the issues of the last
few months into such a dichotomy. No one
who truly understood the issues, purely
and without attempts at sensationalism,
could help but see that it was never about
factions in the legal profession. It was
never a struggle between competing principles. It was never about a constitutional
crisis or a struggle for supremacy among
the three branches of government. It was
never about choosing between transparency and accountability on the one hand,
and judicial independence on the other for truly, what good will judicial independence do for our people if it were corrupt

and compromised from within?

In truth, the issues were much more
ordinary than what they were hyped up to
be. What was at stake was personal rather than institutional. It was, and always
will be, about the integrity, transparency
and accountability of one man - his worthiness of the people's trust and confidence.
It was one person who was on trial, and it
was that same person who was adjudged
accountable.
Any attempt to make it about the independence of the judiciary, or the honor
of the Supreme Court as an institution
is to betray a lack of understanding and
respect for our Constitution, and for the
Filipino people who ordained and promulgated it. There was so much talk of the
principle of separation of powers, yet the
equally Constitutionally entrenched countervailing principle of checks and balances was conveniently forgotten. Cannot
the two other branches of government
perform the sacred duty vested in them
by the Constitution to keep one another
in check without being accused of overstepping their boundaries and of having
ill motives? To paraphrase and apply by
analogy Justice Jose P. Laurel's landmark pronouncement, when the executive and the legislature do their respective
constitutionally enshrined duty to ensure
the accountability of impeachable public
servants, they do not assert any superiority over the judiciary, but only asserts the
solemn and sacred obligation assigned to
them by the Constitution to uphold the basic and fundamental principle that public
service is a public trust.
Yes, I am well aware that we are past
that stage now, so you must be wondering
why I would start my message by recounting such events, which some may wish to
forget entirely.
I do so not to unnecessarily belabor
the fall from grace of one man, but to drive
the point that though the post he once
held, that of Chief Justice of the Republic
of the Philippines, is undoubtedly as powerful as any position can get in our system
of government, his removal from office
does not solve the problems that plague
our judicial system. The impeachment trial and the resulting verdict are not meant
to be the panacea that would, somehow,
magically make everything alright again.
However, seeing it in the proper con-

14

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

text, and moving forward with a clear understanding of why things unfolded the
way they did, is the key to restoring the
nobility and glory of our profession.
Let's face it, we may all say that the
IBP and its members are in favor of promoting integrity, transparency and accountability in the justice system - but how
many people will actually believe that we
mean what we say?
In a society that has become notoriously distrustful of lawyers and judges,
where our supposed lack of integrity as a
class underlies every punch line of virtually all lawyer jokes ever conceived, it has
become too easy for ordinary people to
believe the worst about members of the
Bench and Bar. Everyone hates dealing
with us, and everyone, especially the poor
and underprivileged, dreads having to
deal with the justice system, which they
have come to believe was labeled ironically.
Can we blame them? Unfortunately,
no. People only react to what they see,
and what they see is an ineffective system, unresponsive to their needs, and
afflicted with systemic and endemic corruption. It may be unfair, I know, but not
difficult to understand. Undoubtedly, there
are still some honest, hard-working men
and women who are dedicating their lives
to making the system work - in fact, I
would hazard to state that there are more
good than bad lawyers and judges out
there. But, as the adage goes, it takes but
one rotten apple to spoil the bushel.
We have to see and understand exactly what went wrong for us to have a
fighting chance of regaining the honor
and pride we've always associated with
our titles, whether it be "Attorney" or "Your
Honor".
Perhaps that is precisely what's wrong
in our profession. We earn our degrees,
we pass the bar, and we get those four
letters "A-T-T-Y" attached to our name
and, suddenly, we have instant stature,
rank and semblance of respectability even though we may have yet to really accomplish anything for society to truly earn
such respectability and stature. It's this
hubris and sense of entitlement that has
perhaps spoiled our perception of who
we are. We forget that when we took our
lawyer's oath, we have effectively entered
a profession that is about service and not

The bar Tribune

about being served. We get so used to the
deference shown to us by people that we
forget that a huge part of the weight that
our title brings comes from the weight of
our obligations to our country, to the Constitution, to the laws, to the courts, to the
people, whether they be our clients or not
and, yes, to God.
People have learned long ago that
just because one is called "Honorable"
and "Your Honor" does not mean that one
is necessarily so in truth and in fact. That's
probably the best known form of "legal fiction" they've come to be unwittingly familiar with. The only question is whether we,
ourselves, in the midst of all these traditions, rituals and ceremonies, have succumbed to the delusion that just because
people tend to be awed and subservient
towards us in our dealings with them in
our professional capacity, that we are,
somehow, better than we really are, or
that we are, in any way, superior to them.
Thus, the arrogance and the sense that
we are, somehow, above the law and cannot be held accountable for our faults.
Since this Regional Convention is
also about the continuing legal education
of our colleagues, I take this opportunity
to propose a paradigm shift in the ethical
and professional education of the members of the Bench and Bar.
We have to be trained to serve, not
groomed to expect reverence and deference. We have to replace professional
pride, with humble service. We have to
earn a real sense of honor, rather than
taught to expect the empty platitudes that
mean less than nothing if the recipient of
the gesture is in fact unworthy.
This applies equally to those who are
in private practice, as to those who are in
public service. It may be tempting to think
that it is those who are in public service
who have a greater responsibility; that it
is only they who have sworn to protect the
weak and innocent. True, they may be in
a better position to keep their vows best;
after all, those in the public service, like
myself, are meant to serve no interest oth-

er than the common good and the Rule of

Law. But, in truth, those in private practice - whether they belong to a big firm or
are conducting a solo practice - have the
same obligations, regardless of the fact
that they have the particular interests of
their clients to serve.
We say that the IBP is for promoting integrity, transparency and accountability in the justice system, but just how
many advocates actually come before the
courts with an earnestness to prove their
legal skills in presenting the merits of their
cause and are anxious about the verdict,
and how many come in confident of winning their clients' cause, not because of
their legal acumen, but because, some
way, somehow, they've already secured
judgment in their favor?
If there is corruption in the judiciary,
and there are judges whose integrity deserves close inspection, it is inevitable that
we will discover that there are members
of the IBP who are tolerating, condoning
and, yes, profiting from the weakness in
the system.
We can, as a body, as members of
the IBP, pronounce that we are in favor
of promoting integrity, transparency and
accountability in the justice system. But
do we all, as individuals, mean it? Sincerity is the key, which is why, even weeks
after the Senate, sitting as an Impeachment Court, rendered its verdict, we cannot truly say that this battle is behind us.
No, in fact, it is only beginning, and the
next difficult phase is to gauge the sincerity and worthiness of the candidates for
the post of Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, and to find that rare individual who
can effectively lead the embattled institution. One who has the competence, the
leadership qualities and the moral fortitude to show the world what a truly honorable Chief Justice can accomplish.
In the end, no matter who will be
chosen, it would be a leap of faith, for no
one truly knows what will happen in the
future, or read what's in the heart of the
candidates. But this brings me to the most

important point I wish to make: that is,

it doesn't matter as much as we think it
does.
Of course, it is important to choose
the right person for the post, but we have
to understand that whoever will ultimately
be hailed as the 24th Chief Justice, he or
she is not the be all and end all of the efforts to reform the judiciary.
In fact, the most effective and enduring reform efforts are those that are
built from the ranks of practicing lawyers,
whether in the public or private sector that's us. If we spent as much time reflecting on what kind of lawyers we ought to
be, not the kind that would best serve our
personal interests, as we do speculating
as to who the next Chief Magistrate would
be, then that is, by itself, going a long way
towards reforming the justice system. The
Bench will correct itself if the Bar toes the
line.
Can we do that? I do not ask this of
the IBP as a body, but of each of you as
individuals.
You do not need to answer to me, or
to your colleagues, or even to your parents, spouses, or your children.
You only need to answer to yourself.
Can you do it? Can you promise to toe
the line, respect the Rule of Law, and do
honor to the profession you chose to become a part of? Can you keep your vows,
as you yourself said, in good fidelity?
Think about it. Think long and hard
before you answer. And before you finally
do answer, know that, in the end, everybody pays his or her dues - one way or the
other; willingly or unwillingly; with or without honor. The impeachment of the Chief
Magistrate ought to be proof enough of
that.
How do you want to pay yours?
Through a fall from grace due to excessive hubris? Or with honor through humble service?
That's the question. That's the only
question.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

15

august 2012

meet tHe NomINees

ABAd, RoBERTo
AFAN

BAUTISTA, JUAN
ANdRES doNATo

BRIoN, ARTURo
dIZoN

CARPIo, ANToNIo
TIRoL

Years in the Practice of Law:

21 years

Years in the Practice of Law:

21 years

Years in the Practice of Law :

35 years

Years in the Practice of Law :

36 years

Date of Birth: May 22, 1944

Place of Birth: Tondo, Manila
Age: 68
Bar Examination Rating :
81.70 percent
Year Taken: 1968
Year admitted to the Bar :
1968

Date of Birth: Mar. 28, 1964

Place of Birth: Quezon City
Age: 48
Bar Examination Rating:
86.90 percent
Year admitted to the Bar :
1991
Admitted to New York State
Bar: 1995

Date of Birth: Dec. 29, 1946

Place of Birth: Manila
Age: 65
1st Grade Civil Service
Eligible
Bar Examination Rating:
91.65 (Topnotcher)
Year Taken: 1974
Year admitted to the Bar:
1975

Date of Birth: Oct. 26, 1949

Place of Birth: Davao City
Age: 62
Bar Examination Rating:
85.70 (6th place)
Year Taken: 1975
Year admitted to the Bar:
1976

Educational Attainment
Ateneo De Manila University
- Bachelor of Laws
(Deans Lister)
- 1964 to 1968
Manuel L. Quezon University
- AB
- 1960 to 1964
Professional Experience
Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court (Aug. 2009
to present)
Assistant Solicitor General
(July 1985 to July 1986)
Teaching / Academic
Experience
Dean of the Faculty of Civil
Law
- University of Santo
Tomas
- Taught Civil Procedure,
Criminal Procedure, Special Proceedings, Evidence and Legal Forms
Bar Reviewer for Ateneo De
Manila University and UST.
Also lectured at Pamantasan
ng Lungsod ng Maynila.

16

Educational Attainment
Educational Attainment

Harvard Law School

- LLM (1993)
- President, LLM Student
Council
- Research Assistant to
Professor Lawrence Tribe
Ateneo de Manila University
- College of Law (1986 to
1990) Valedictorian
- Gold Medal for Academic
Excellence

Osgoode Ball Law School

- Master of Laws
- 1994
Ateneo De Manila University
- College of Law
- 1970 to 1974
- Cum Laude
San Pablo Colleges
- 1969 to 1970
- AB Mathematics

Professional Experience

Professional Experience

Chairman, Presidential Commission on Good Government (Sept. 2010 to present)

President and CEO, Shang
Properties (Sept. 2006 to
June 2010)

Associate Justice of the

Supreme Court (March 18,
2008 to present)
Secretary, Department of
Labor and Employment (July
3, 2006 to Mar. 17, 2008)

Teaching / Academic
Experience

Teaching / Academic
Experience

DLSU-FEU
- MBA-JD Dual Degree
Program (RCBC Campus
- May 2003 to Present
- Dean of Law Program
- Lecturer in Constitutional
Law

Far Eastern University Institute of Law

- Faculty Member
- 2005 to 2006
- Taught Practicum: Introduction to Study of Law
(Part time)

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Educational Attainment
University of the Philippines
- College of Law
- 1970 to 1975
- Cum Laude
Ateneo De Manila University
- AB Economics
- 1965 to 1970
Professional Experience
Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court (Oct., 2001
to present)
Partner, Carpio, Villaraza &
Associates (1997 to 2001)
Teaching / Academic
Experience
University of the Philippines
College of Law
- Professional Lecturer
- 1983 to 1992
- Taught Corporation
Law, Negotiable Instruments Law, Credit
Transactions, Taxation

The bar Tribune

meet tHe NomINees

CAGAMPANGdECASTRo, SoLEdAd
MANTERoSo
Years in the Practice of Law :
43 years
Date of Birth: Dec. 15, 1944
Place of Birth: Cabadbaran,
Agusan del Norte
Age: 67
Educational Attainment
University of Michigan Law
School
- Doctor of the Jurisprudence at Science
(1976)
University of Michigan Law
School
- Master of Laws (1972)
Harvard Law School
- Master of Laws (1971)
UP College of Law
- Bachelor of Laws
- Cum Laude (Class Valedictorian)
Holy Ghost College
- AB English and History
(1960 to 1964)
- Magna Cum Laude
Professional Experience
Consultant, De Castro &
Cagampang-de Castro Law
Firm (2011 to present)
Partner, De Castro &
Cagampang-de Castro Law
Offices (2007 to 2011)
Teaching / Academic
Experience
Philippine Christian University College of Law (2010
2011)
Lyceum of the Philippines Professional Lecturer (2005
to 2009)

dE CASTRo,
TERESITA LEoNARdo
Years in the Practice of Law :
39 years
Date of Birth: Oct. 8, 1948
Place of Birth: Manila
Age : 63
Bar Examination Rating: 80.9
Year Taken: 1972
Year admitted to the Bar:
1973
Educational Attainment

dE LIMA LEILA NoRMA

EULALIA JoSEFA,
MAGISTRAdo
Years in the Practice of Law :
26 years
Date of Birth: Aug. 27, 1959
Place of Birth: Iriga City,
Camarines Sur
Age: 52
Bar Examination Rating:
87.0150
Year Taken: 1985
Year admitted to the Bar:
1986

University of the Philippines

- Bachelor of Laws
- 1968 to 1972
- Certificates of Merit for
Academic Excellence,
among the top 4 graduates
University of the Philippines
- Bachelor of Arts
- 1964 to 1968
- Cum Laude

San Beda College

- Bachelor of Laws
- 1980 to 1985
- Class Salutatorian
- Faculty Award
De La Salle University
- AB History-Political Science (1976 to 1980)

Professional Experience

Professional Experience

Associate Justice of the

Supreme Court (December,
2007 to present)
Presiding Justice, Sandiganbayan (December 15, 2004
to December 3, 2007)

Secretary of the Department of Justice (July 2010 to

present)
Chairperson, Commission on
Human Rights (May 2008 to
June 2010)

Teaching / Academic
Experience

Teaching / Academic
Experience

University of Perpetual Help

of Rizal, Las Pinas City
- 2001 to 2004
- Taught Criminal Procedure, Public International Law, Private
International Law (Conflict of Laws) and Legal
Counseling
(Part time)

Educational Attainment

San Beda College of Law

- 2006 to 2007
- Taught Election Laws
- Part-time semestral
contract
- 1992 to 1994
- Taught Transportation laws and Business
Organization
(Part-time) semestral
contract

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

dIokNo, JoSE
MANUEL ICASIANo
Years in the Practice of Law :
24 years
Date of Birth: Feb. 23, 1961
Place of Birth: Not cited
Age: 51
1st Grade Civil Service
Eligible
Bar Examination Rating: not
indicated (1987)
Educational Attainment
Northern Illinois University
- Juris Doctor of Laws
- Magna Cum Laude,
American Jurisprudence
Award for Judicial Excellence in the study of
contracts
University of the Philippines
- Bachelor of Arts in
Philosphy
Professional Experience
Dean, DLSU College of Law
2010 to 2012
Private Practitioner, Alumni
Center, University of the
Philippines Diliman (2006 to
2012)
Executive Director, Diokno
Law Center, 2006 to 2012
Teaching / Academic
Experience
De La Salle University
- Full time Professor
- 2010 to 2012
Ateneo Law School
- Part time professor
- 2003 to 2010

17

august 2012

meet tHe NomINees

HERBoSA, TERESITA
JAVIER

JARdELEZA, FRANCIS
HUISING

LEGARdA, MARIA
CARoLINA TRINIdAd

MoRALES, RAFAEL
AVELINo

Years in the Practice of Law :

33 years

Years in the Practice of Law :

35 years

Years in the Practice of Law :

32 years

Years in the Practice of Law :

37 years

Date of Birth: Sept. 26, 1949

Place of Birth: Jaro, Iloilo
Age: 62
Bar Examination Rating :
88.35 (Third Placer)
Year Taken : 1974
Year admitted to the Bar :
1975

Date of Birth: Sept. 10, 1954

Place of Birth: Manila
Age: 57
Bar Examination Rating: 84.4
percent
Year Taken: 1980
Year admitted to the Bar:
1981

Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment

Date of Birth: March 3, 1951

Place of Birth: Calbayog City
Age: 61
1st Grade Civil Service
Eligible
Bar Examination Rating:
87.79 percent
(Year Taken : 1974)
New York Bar (Admitted by
Motion - 1986)

University of Michigan Law

School
- Master of Comparative
Law Degree (1980)
University of the Philippines
College of Law
- Bachelor of Laws (1978)
- Cumlaude/Salutatorian
University of the Philippines
- 1968 to 1972
- AB Political Science

Harvard Law School

- Master of Laws (1976 to
1977)
UP College of Law
- Bachelor of Laws (1970
to 1974)
- Salutatorian / Cum
Laude
UP Iloilo College
- Political Science (1965
to 1969)
- Most outstanding graduate

University of the Philippines

- Bachelor of Laws
- 1976 to 1980
- 5th in class
University of Bristol, England
- BA History
- 1972 to 1975

Date of Birth: Oct. 28, 1950

Place of Birth: Manila
Age: 61
Bar Examination Rating:
88.1325% (18th place)
Year Taken: 1977
Year admitted to the Bar:
1978

Professional Experience
Chairperson, Securities and
Exchange Commission (May
2011 to present)
Angara Abello Concepcion
Regala & Cruz Law Offices
(ACCRALAW)
- Partner-charge of
finance January 2011 to
April 15, 2011
Teaching / Academic
Experience
Lyceum University of the
Philippines
- 2010 to 2011
- Taught Criminal Procedure and Special
Proceedings

18

Professional Experience
Solicitor-General, Office of
the Solicitor General (Feb.
2012 to present)
Deputy Ombudsman for
Luzon, Office of the Ombudsman (July 2011 to Feb. 2012)
Teaching / Academic
Experience
UP College of Law
- Professional Lecturer
(2010 - 2011)
- Taught Administrative
Law and Civil Procedure
- 1st Semester of SY
2009-2010
- Taught Constitutional
Law 1

Professional Experience
Senior Vice President-Chief
Legal Counsel, GSIS (March
2012 to present)
Project Management Team
Leader, International Justice
Mission (2012 to present)
Teaching / Academic
Experience
De La Salle University Manila
- 2009 to date
- Professional Lecturer,
College of Law
University of the Philippines
- 2003 to date - Professor, College of Law
Lyceum University of the
Philippines
- 2008 to date
- Professor, College of
Law

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Educational Attainment
University of Michigan
- Master of Laws (1977 to
1978) - DeWitt Fellow
UP College of Law
- Bachelor of Laws (1970
to 1974)
- Cum Laude, Class Valedictorian
University of the Philippines
- AB Political Science
(1966 to 1970) Cum
Laude
Professional Experience
Partner, Salazar Feliciano
Hernandez & Castillo (January 1983 to present)
Foreign Attorney, Anderson
Mori & Rabinowitz (now
known as Anderson Mori &
Tomotsune) - (1984 to 1986)
Teaching / Academic
Experience

UP College of Law
- Professional Lecturer
(1997 to present)
- Is teaching Banking and
Financial Law, Corporation Law, Legal Ethics,
Selected issues in Commercial Law

The bar Tribune

meet tHe NomINees

PANGALANGAN,
RAUL CANo

SARMIENTo, RENE
VERGARA

Years in the Practice of Law :

28 years

Years in the Practice of Law :

35 years

Date of Birth: Sept. 1, 1958

Place of Birth: Manila
Age: 53
Bar Examination Rating: 83.8
percent
Year Taken: 1983

Date of Birth: Dec. 15, 1953

Place of Birth: Bato, Catanduanes
Age: 58
Bar Examination Rating :
76.35 percent
Year Taken: 1978
Year admitted to the Bar:
1979

Educational Attainment
Harvard Law School
- 1987 to 1990 SJD
(Charles Summer Prize)
- 1985 to 1986 LLM (John
Laylin Prize)
UP College of Law
- Bachelor of Laws - 1979
to 1983
University of the Philippines
- 1974 to 1978
- AB - Cum Laude, Deans
Medal for Leadership
Excellence

UP College of Law
- Bachelor of Laws (1974
to 1978)
- President, Law Student
Government
San Beda College
- AB Political Science
(1970 to 1974)
- Magna Cum Laude, Rectors Award
Professional Experience

Chairman, Bantay Katarungan (2006 to present)

Professor of Law, UP (1984
to present)

Commissioner, COMELEC
(2006 to present)
OIC Presidential Adviser on
the Peace Process (2005 to
2006)

UP College of Law
- Professor of Law (1984
to present)
- Teaches Constitutional
Law, Public International
Law
- Taught Obligations and
Contracts, Public Officers, Labor Relations,
Social and Welfare Legislation, Human Rights
and Humanitarian Law
and Legal Theory

Years in the Practice of Law :

25 years
Date of Birth: July 2, 1960
Place of Birth: Manila
Age: 52
Bar Examination Rating: 89
Year Taken: 1984
Year admitted to the Bar:
1985
Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment

Professional Experience

Teaching / Academic
Experience

SERENo, MARIA
LoURdES PUNZALAN
ARANAL

Teaching / Academic
Experience
San Beda Law
- Faculty Member (2006 to
present)
- Teaches Political Law
Review, Constitutional
Law, Evidence, Legal
Philosophy, Election Law
PUP College of Law
- Professor (2001 to 2006)
- Taught Constitutional
Law, Human Rights
Law, Legal Ethics, Legal
Writing

University of Michigan
- Master of Laws
- 1992 to 1993
School of Economics, U.P.
- 1991 to 1992
- 18 Units in the Master
of Arts in Economics
Program
UP College of Law
- 1980 to 1984
- Valedictorian Cum Laude
Ateneo De Manila University
- 1976 to 1980
- Bachelor of Arts in Economics
Professional Experience
Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court (Aug 2010 to
present)
Exec. Director, Asian Institute of Management (Feb.,
2009 - Aug. 2010)
Teaching / Academic
Experience
Philippine Judicial Academy
- Lecturer
- 2004 to 2008
- Taught Law and Economics

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

SIAYNGCo, MANUEL
dE JESUS
Years in the Practice of Law :
not cited
Date of Birth: Oct. 30, 1949
Place of Birth: Manila
Age: 62
First Grade (Professional
exam) Rating: 95.62% - Year
Taken: 1976
Teachers Board Exam Rating: 81.92% Year Taken:
1978
Bar Examination Rating:
75.70%
Year Taken: 1986
Educational Attainment
UP College of Law
- Bachelor of Laws (1981
to 1986)
San Carlos Seminary
- Bachelor of Arts (1965 to
1969)
- Masters in Philosophy
and Theology (1969 to
1972)
Professional Experience
Presiding Judge, Regional
Trial Court - Bulacan (June
2001 to December 2011)
Presiding Judge, Metropolitan Trial Court - Malolos
(June 1995 to May 2001)
Provincial Legal Officer,
Provincial Government of Bulacan (June 16, 1988 to June
4, 1995)
Teaching / Academic
Experience
Marcelo H. Del Pilar, Professor (Nov. 2002 to Oct. 2007)
Centro Escolar University,
Professor (June 1979 to
March 1986)

19

august 2012

meet tHe NomINees

VALdEZ, AMAdo
doMINGo
Years in the Practice of Law :
42 years
Date of Birth: May 5, 1946
Place of Birth: Pangasinan
Age: 66
1st Grade Civil Service
Eligible
Bar Examination Rating:
80.65 percent
Year Taken: 1969

VELASCo,
PRESBITERo JR.,
JoSE
Years in the Practice of Law :
39 years
Date of Birth: Aug. 8, 1948
Place of Birth: Pasay City
Age: 63
Bar Examination Rating:
85.85
Year Taken: 1971
Year admitted to the Bar:
1972

ZAMoRA, RoNALdo
BAYAN

Years in the Practice of Law:

28 years

Years in the Practice of Law :

42 years

Date of Birth: May 8, 1952

Place of Birth: Angeles City
Age: 52
Bar Examination Rating:
90.15 (2nd place)
Year Taken: 1981

Date of Birth : Dec. 4, 1944

Place of Birth : Manila
Age: 67
Bar Examination Rating:
87.3 (Topnotcher)
Year Taken: : 1970

Educational Attainment

Educational Attainment

University of the Philippines

- College of Law
- 1967 to 1971
- 8th in 1971 graduating
class
University of the Philippines
- AB Political Science
- 1964 to 1967

Harvard Law School

- Master of Laws (1988 to
1989)
Ateneo De Manila University
- Juris Doctor (1977 to
1981)
- Cum Laude / Valedictorian
San Beda College
- Diplomate in Juridical
Science (2004 to 2005)

Professional Experience

Professional Experience

Associate Justice of the

Supreme Court (March 18,
2006 to present)
Chairperson, House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (June 2011 to present)
Court Administrator (September 2001 to March 2006)

Senior Founding Partner,

Villanueva Gabionza & De
Santos Law Offices (July
1990 to present)
Dean, Ateneo de Manila Law
School
Chairman, Commercial Law
Department, Philippine Judicial Academy (April 2004 to
present)
Director/Corporate Secretary,
PhilJa Dev. Corp. Inc. (July
2003 to present)

Educational Attainment
Educational Attainment
University of the East
- Bachelor of Laws
- 1966 to 1969
Manuel L. Quezon University
- 1965 to 1966
MLQU/Northeastern College
- 1963 to 1965
- 1961 to 1962

VILLANUEVA, CESAR
LAPUZ

Teaching / Academic
Experience
UE College of Law
- Part time (1993 to present)
- Civil/Polital/Remedial
Law
FEU-DLSU Dual Degree
Program
- Part time (2005 to 2008)
- Taught Legal Ethics and
Conflict of Laws

20

University of the Philippines

- Bachelor of Arts Political
Science
- 1961 to 1965, Magna
Cum Laude
Professional Experience

Professional Experience
Dean, UE College of Law,
(2005 to present)
Member, Board of Regents,
Universidad de Manila (2007
to present)
Member, Board of Regents,
Laguna State Polytechnic
University (2006 to 2010)

UP College of Law
- Bachelor of Laws
- 1965 to 1969, Magna
Cum Laude

Teaching / Academic
Experience
Raising the Bar Competence,
Integrated Bar of the Philippines 9th National Convention
Civil Disobedience, Philippine Law Journal

Teaching / Academic
Experience
Ateneo School of Law Dean
(2004)
Ateneo School of Law Associate Dean for Academic
Affairs (2000-2004)

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Chairman, Cagdianao Mining

Corporation (January 1, 2012
to present)
Chairman, Rio Tuba Nickel
Mining Corporation (July
2010 to January 2012)
Member, Board of Directors, Nickel Asia Corporation
(January 2011 to present)
Senior Partner, Zamora Poblador Vasquez and Bretaa
Law Offices (January 1987 to
present)
Representative, San Juan
City, House of Representatives (July 1, 2001 to June
30, 2010; June 30, 1998 to
June 30, 1992)

[With materials from

inquirer.net and IBP archives.]

The bar Tribune

"NoTHING LESS THAN HISToRIC," was how a social media blogger excitedly described the two-part IBP public
forum on the search for the next Supreme Court Chief Justice. For the first time ever in the history of CJ selection, the public saw the
nominees up close and listened to their judicial philosophies and reform agenda.
The Bar Tribune is pleased to publish the full text of the presentations of the nine qualified CJ nominees who participated in the July
20 IBP public forum.

tHe Need For

CHaNges IN our
legal system
Roberto A. Abad
Associate Justice, Supreme Court
I. THE MAkING oF THE LAWYER
Since the lawyer is the basic human
component of our legal system, any serious reform must begin with preparing
and qualifying him for the practice of the
profession. Everybody complains about
the legal and moral bankruptcy of our lawyers, but very little has been done about
training and screening them.
Last year, the Supreme Court took a
small step in that direction. It changed the
format of the Bar exams to attune it to our
needs. The essay kind of Bar exams that
you and I took was good when the examinees were a few hundreds. But with more
than 6,000 examinees per year, the grading of essays had become haphazard.
In 2004, the Court assisted by American experts approved the giving of the
universally accepted multiple choice
questions. But with law schools objecting, implementation failed. In late 2009,
on learning that I would chair the 2011
Bar Exams, I knew what I needed to do.
I spoke to over 1,500 law professors in
campuses all over the country and taught
them how to prepare multiple choice questions for their classroom tests. By 2011,

the graduates in that year were ready for

my multiple choice exams.
But we retained an essay portion to
test the examinees lawyering skills. We
required them to prepare one trial memorandum and one legal opinion based on
given case problems. We added a little
library of applicable laws and Supreme
Court rulings. Four examiners graded
each of the two essays, thus minimizing
subjectivity in corrections. We measured
the examinees ability to put the relevant
facts together, identify the issues in the
case, and craft persuasive arguments.
Because of the introduction of this kind
of essay exams, law schools have begun
to shift the direction of teaching students
from just learning the law to practicing it.
When we took our bar exams, we
memorized ridiculously useless things
because none of us knew from where the
questions would come. We put an end to
this senseless torture. We asked experts
from the UP Law Center to draw up in
each subject a syllabus of topics relevant
to law practice. We gave these to the examinees and asked no questions outside
the syllabus.
Our Committee on Bar matters, work-

ing with the Legal Education Board, is

considering the possibility of reducing the
number of Bar subjects from 8 to 4 so law
schools could free more units in the third
and fourth years of schooling and tune
them to specific career paths in litigation,
adjudication, and commercial practice.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

21

II. A NEW SYSTEM FoR HEARING ANd

dECIdING CASES
Studies show that 75% of our people
live in crowded cities. Consequently, the
occasions for human conflict are unavoidable.
The records show that our courts in
these cities are drowning in cases. Many
have 1,000 plus cases each. They hear
30 to 60 cases a day. Our courtrooms
are full. Some litigants have to wait outside to be called. Cases take from 3 to 5
years, at times up to 8 or 9 years or more
to hear and decide, inflicting a sense of
hopelessness over our justice system.
Because of so many ridiculously long and
repeated postponements, complainants
in criminal cases simply give up coming
to court. As a result, 40 out of every 100
persons accused of crimes walk free. Vic-

august 2012
tims of crimes find no speedy justice in our to endure beginning-to-end testimonies. ties and (2) the factual and legal issues
He knows from the pleadings the facts that he needs to resolve. At the prelimicourts.
The consequences of delays in civil that are admitted, and the facts that re- nary conference, the judge and the parties will finalize the case summary, agree
actions are dire. Few foreign business- main in issue.
We tinkered with the possibility of on the order in which the factual issues
men make long-term investments in our
country because our courts cannot pro- adopting a one-time face-to-face hearing will be heard, and identify the needed witof cases that tribunals in other countries nesses.
vide protection to their investments.
All the facts that the parties allege in
Result: we do not attain economic are employing to solve problems of delay.
But before recommending the proposal to their pleadings and affidavits, when not
growth; our people remain poor.
What causes these terrible delays in the Supreme Court, we opted to bring it to put in issue, shall be deemed admitted or
our justice system? There are many caus- those that would be affected for consulta- regarded as irrelevant.
es. Our courts are few. Prosecutors and tions. Thus, we presented the proposed
oNE FACE To FACE HEARING
public attorneys are few. Our system for change to the Integrated Bar of the Philiphearing and deciding cases is slow and pine (IBP).
The court will then set the case for
One-time, face-to-face hearing???
cumbersome. We could do nothing about
our shortage in number of courts, and the they asked. But after a study, the IBP of- one, face-to-face hearing. Actually, with
few prosecutors and public attorneys we fered to hold nationwide discussions re- the direct testimonies of witnesses emhave. But are we earnest in examining our garding it. The IBP sponsored dialogues bodied in affidavits, together with the docsystem for hearing and deciding cases to at regional and chapter levels with judges, uments, the substance of the evidence for
see if we can increase the capacity of our prosecutors, public attorneys, and private both sides are already before the judge.
At the face-to-face hearing, the judge
practitioners of all kinds. Thanks to the
judges for disposing of their cases?
In 2009, upset with the mess of de- IBP we met them in IBP Chapter centers will have all the witnesses sworn in simultaneously. She may then question the witlays in the hearing and adjudication of or campus halls.
nesses present regarding the first factual
cases, I asked the Chief Justice to create
CoNSENSUS
issue. Counsels for the parties may also
a Committee to Address Case Congestion
examine the witnesses. Then the court
in the lower courts and offered to head it.
Those who took part in the dialogues will move on to the next factual issue.
The conventional thinking was to streamUnder the new procedure, the examiline the system and pound hard on judges agree based on experience that piecemeal trials have escalated to crisis propor- nation of the witnesses by the judge and
to speed up the disposition of cases.
But Albert Einstein once said that it is tions over the years. As a result, the judge the lawyers will generally be free-flowing,
madness to do the same thing the same is unable to hear every item of fact in the shifting from one witness to another, thus
way when it is no longer working. How old context of the whole case. He is forced to promoting spontaneity in answers and
is our system for hearing and deciding rely more on the transcript than on his per- vivid contrast between opposing versions.
This gives the judge the opportunity to
cases? The Americans gave it to us over sonal recollection of what the witness said
a hundred years ago. It is a system unique and how he said it. The judge often finds observe the demeanors of the witnesses
to their history and culture. Yet we adopted no real value in paying attention to what and their reactions to each other. Nothing
face-to-face confrontait in this country and we were
We are preparing to shift from a purely adversarial system to a beats
tion in sensing what is true.
taught in our law schools the
idea that there is no way to combined adversarial and inquisitorial system patterned after Conversation, says the Bible,
hear and decide cases fairly successful European models. It consists of a preliminary confer- is the test of a man. Sirach
except the American way.
ence and one face-to-face hearing with a decision at the end of 27:5 NAB In a way, our highly successful small -claims
The American system is
the hearing.
court is a forerunner of the
adversarial and heavy in certhe witness says at the time he testifies. proposed face-to-face hearing.
emonials.
Testimonies will be taken in the verThe plaintiff and the defendant match Why should he when he would be decidskills in presenting evidence before a ing the case 3 or 5 years later. In contrast, nacular. No longer will they be interpreted
judge set high on a pedestal but, ironical- the traditional European system for try- into English. They will be electronically
ly, doomed to sit back and listen to what ing cases is inquisitorial. When a crime recorded. Testimonies will be quoted in
is reported, the judge summons the wit- pleadings in their original version with the
the parties want him to hear.
We also adopted a system designed nesses, queries them, and makes his find- English translation in parenthesis providfor both a jury trial and a Bench trial. Re- ings. He takes a direct and proactive role ed by the party, subject to counter translasult: we have a shadow jury sitting in our in searching for evidence. A subsequent tion by opposing side.
trial is largely confirmatory of the findings
Trial will no longer be treated as a
courtroom.
field of combat where the opposing lawOur judge pre-screens the questions of the investigating judge.
We are preparing to shift from a purely yers stand as champions of their clients.
to prevent a supposedly unlearned jury
from hearing inadmissible answers. But adversarial system to a combined adver- But rather, as an occasion for the judge
this is pointless since the judge is himself sarial and inquisitorial system patterned and the parties to collectively search for
the jury and, with his legal training, can after successful European models. It con- truth. As a rule, the judge will hear
disregard inadmissible answers even if he sists of a preliminary conference and one every case in one sitting. One continuous
face-to-face hearing with a decision at the hearing will enable him to see every item
hears them.
of fact in the context of the whole. In conAnother thing, since the jurors sup- end of the hearing.
trast, the piecemeal trials we have today
posedly know nothing about the facts of
PRELIMINARY CoNFERENCE
run for years. The poor judge would hardthe case, witnesses must tell their stoly remember what he heard two or three
ries from beginning to end through direct
Under the proposed rules, the judge years ago considering the volume of his
examination required under section 4 of
Rule 132. This means bearing with series will hold a preliminary conference and a cases.
of preliminary questions because, in direct one-time, face to face hearing. The parties
examination, counsel has to elicit new will submit the affidavits of witnesses and
PIECEMEAL TRIAL IS FARCE !
facts based on previously testified facts, documents already marked as exhibits.
IMMEdIATE dECISIoN
The judge will then prepare a summary of:
like placing one stone on top of another.
But our judge does not actually need (1) the conflicting factual claims of the parSince the rules require the judge to

22

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

The bar Tribune

render an immediate oral decision, she
will be forced to focus on the issues and
the testimonies and seek the facts she
needs to make a correct decision when
the hearing ends. After the hearing, the
judge will, unless the issues are exceptionally difficult, immediately announce
her decision to the parties. The judge may
ask the winning party to prepare a draft of
the decision along the lines of reasoning
she gave. She will issue the corresponding written decision within fifteen days.
What are the advantages of immediate decision after hearing?
a) the judge will decide the case when
she has the clearest picture of the dispute;
b) the judge will be deterred from rendering an unjust decision since those
present heard the evidence just as he
did;
c) knowing that he must decide the case
immediately, the judge will be forced
to pay attention to the hearing;
d) she can avoid approaches by interested parties between the trial and
judgment; and
e) the procedure makes a point for authentic speedy justice in our courts.
APPLICATIoN To CRIMINAL CASES
The same procedure will be observed
in hearing and deciding criminal cases.
Question: would this not impair the constitutional rights of the accused? It wont. It
takes into account all his rights. The face
to face hearing will be no less exhaustive.
What is more, the required proof of guilt to
support conviction remains the same.
Of course, since the accused is presumed innocent, the burden is on the prosecution to prove his guilt. The prosecution
is required before hand to lay its evidence
on the table by submitting the affidavits of
the complainant and his witnesses. Evidence not so disclosed shall be barred.
The prosecution cannot change its theory
of the case. The accused has the right to
withhold his testimony until the prosecution has done this.

When the crime charged is punishable by imprisonment in excess of six

years, the judge shall require the witnesses during the face to face hearing to
narrate their testimonies in chief, first, the
prosecution witnesses, then, those of the
defense. In this way, the judge will have
the additional benefit of observing the demeanor of the witnesses both on their testimonies in chief and on their cross.
III. CLUSTERING oF CoURTS
Our committee will shortly submit to
the Court a proposal for the clustering of
courts of neighboring cities and municipalities so that courts with small dockets
of cases could take some of the burden
of those with large dockets. This should
substantially relieve congestion of cases
in problem cities and municipalities.
IV. dECoNGESTING oUR HoLdING
JAILS
Many of us live in comfort and freedom. We go home after a days work to
our families. We have never been locked
in a small room that is crammed with
strangers and reeking with the foul smell
of dried sweat. Welcome to our city jails.
One of the great tragedies in life that
could strike you is for you to be detained
in any of them while your case is being
tried. The Constitution assures you that
you are presumed innocent until the contrary is proved. Yet, you suffer, even before you are convicted, a worse fate than
one who quickly pleads guilty and is taken
to the national penitentiary to serve sentence. Why?
First, because trial in our courts averages from 3 to 5 years and on occasions,
8 to 9 years, you spend all that time behind iron bars. Second, our city jails are
extremely overcrowded. The Manila city
jail for instance could handle no more than
1,000 detainees. Yet it has taken in more
than 4,000. As a result, those awaiting
trial live in sub-human conditions. Ventilation and sanitation are extremely poor, resulting in frequent outbreaks of boils and

other contact diseases. The food is inadequate. Gang wars are abundant, resulting in death or maiming. And since rehabilitation is for the guilty, city jail detainees
do not enjoy the benefits of sympathy or
group cure.
The irony of it is that the majority of
city jail dwellers are charged in court for
the first time. Many of them are held for
non-violent offenses. About half are involved in drugs and only need rehabilitation. Yet they are mixed with the hardy
ones for lack of space. Many detainees
are eventually released because of inadequacy of the evidence against them
or because complainants simply give up
coming to court after repeated postponements.
Such detainees leave the jail but the
scars of pain, degradation, and hopelessness remain with them. They are permanently damaged.
Working with the International Committee of the Red Cross, we are introducing the following changes which should
substantially decongest holding jails in the
next two years: 1. The creation of a pilot
task force Kalayaan at Katarungan in the
City of Manila that is currently establishing
the methods and standards for monitoring
and moving forward the cases of detained
accused persons; and 2. The correction
of the anti-poor culture dominating the
bail system for detainees who, it is often
forgotten, still enjoy the presumption of innocence.
For the same purpose, we are shortly
submitting to the Court En Banc for approval detailed guidelines for:
1. Getting back into the hands of the
courts from the Department of Justice
the fixing of the amounts of bail, taking
into account the financial ability of the
accused;
2. Releasing on recognizance poor detainees who are not involved in violent
crimes;
3. Provisionally dismissing cases where
the complainants or their witnesses
have repeatedly failed to appear and
testify despite notice; and
4. One time summary hearing of applications for bail of persons charged with
capital offenses to determine if they
can avail themselves of the right to
bail when the evidence of guilt is not
strong.
We have to do something for these
men and women who are presumed innocent but are made to suffer years of torture and deprivation. Society has no right
to punish them until they are proven guilty.
They are children of God like us, made out
of His image and entitled to dignity and respect. Yet, we may have already become
indifferent to their sufferings. Unless we
do something for them, Jesus could very
well say to us, I was in prison and you did
not care for me. (Mathew 25:43)

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

23

august 2012

vIsIoN,
Courage &
aCCouNtaBIlIty
Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno
Associate Justice, Supreme Court

Our country re-emerged in democracy following the 1987 People Power

Revolution, with high hopes for a truly
accountable government. Sadly, the fall
of one leader after another - political and
judicial - has caused the sentiments of our
countrymen to descend to a state of despair and surrender. In part, cynicism developed from the perception that the 1987
Constitution had been assaulted, manipulated, and pulled from one direction to another, even by those who are supposed
to uphold it. Some blame the Supreme
Court for having faltered in this duty and to
have likewise failed in upholding the rule
of law. To them, it is because the leaders
of the Court appear to have clay feet, and
its Members suspected to vote with mixed
motives. It is with this grave thought that
I view our nation's present search for a
new Chief Justice as a search for the remooring ofthe Filipino soul.
I have made myself available to lead
the judiciary, not from any sense of entitlement, but because those who have nominated me believe that I bring a dimension
to the debate on the kind of leadership
the judiciary needs, that has not yet been
brought forth. And to share with you why
I agreed to be nominated, I will have to
share with you my life - who I am, who I
have been, how I think, how I feel, how I
have made decisions in my 52 years.
My journey to this point has been
marked by strong challenges to the values
and principles that I hold dear. With perseverance, courage and an abiding faith in
God's sovereignty, I have prevailed over
those trials and. have come to discern my
defining public role as a humble servant of
our people - through the judiciary.
I was born to a simple family. My
mother, a native of Bae, Laguna, taught
at a public high school in the evening

and operated a cottage industry in the

daytime. My father, who hails from Siasi,
Sulu, was for the most part of his life a
small entrepreneur, whose efforts were,
like those of many small entrepreneurs,
mostly unsuccessful. Though we were of
modest means, my parents believed in
the value of books. They would scour the
newspapers to locate expatriate families
disposing of books in garage sales. Hardup as we were, they would buy us those
precious books. It was, in solitude with
those books, that I developed my skills
and habit of reflection, which served me
well in later years.
I am a proud product of the public
school system. I graduated with honors
from the Kamuning Elementary School
and the Quezon City High School. I received scholarships from the government
and from a private-foundation to obtain an
economics degree at the Ateneo de Manila and a Bachelor ofLaws Degree from
the University ofthe Philippines. In Ateneo,
the Jesuits imbibed in me the value of developing oneself to be a "man for others."
In UP, I learned from the country's leading
minds in constitutional, civil, and criminal
law; and was introduced to nonconventional approaches in legal analysis. My
philosophy of law is heavily informed by
what I learned in those great universities.
I also fully learned that poverty, far from
being an excuse to engage in self-pity,
is but a testing ground for hard work and
excellence. By God's grace, I graduated
valedictorian from the UP College of Law.
Like most married female lawyers, I
faced the challenge of choosing between
a prestigious law practice and taking care
of my family. I joined the largest law firm
in the country after graduation that offered
enormous professional challenge,' with a
lifetime of wealth and privilege. But two

24

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

years into the practice saw me struggling'

between work and caring for a young infant, with another one on the way. Deciding that my family was more important to
me, I resigned from the law firm, and took
the low-paying job of a law professor.
Some partners of the firm warned me
I would regret the decision to resign. One
even said: "You know what you are? You
are afraid of success." In their eyes, I was
degrading my family's chances in life by
leaving. I was only 26, but I thought that
their definition of success was not relevant to me. What mattered to me at the
time I left the law firm was that I should do
the right thing, and the right thing for me
was to be near my young children, and to
make my husband happy.
I immensely enjoyed the challenges
of teaching law at UP. I unfolded mental
maps in the different fields of civil and
commercial law, maps that my students
appreciatively developed further. This appreciation by young people and sufficient
time with my children convinced me that
simultaneous personal and professional
fulfillment is attainable for women.
I practiced part-time. Like any other
lawyer, I also faced temptations to take
shortcuts, to bend the law, and to look
the other way. I was not oblivious to wellmeaning encouragement from colleagues
to take the easy way out. But each time I
succeeded in resisting these enticements,
I found myself growing in the strength
to adhere to the right path. I constantly
sought to diminish the influence of these
temptations in my life, so that I would always be free to do what was right.
In 1993, after I obtained my Master
of Laws degree from the University of
Michigan in Ann Arbor, my friends urged
me to stay .in America and have our visas
converted to working visas for the sake

The bar Tribune

of our children. Friends reproached me
by asking what I was to go back to in the
Philippines - a UP professor's life and salary? I knew, however, that dishonoring my
commitment to return to my country and
serve was not the right decision. So we
returned.
I continued to write on and teach Law
and Economics and International Trade
Law. Even without the incentive of a huge
income, I persisted in making contributions to forge a new area in the practice
of law in the country. On the recommendation of Justice Florentino Feliciano, the
Supreme Court invited me (I was then 34)
to deliver a speech on International Trade
Law, the first of its kind, before the Court's
Session Hall. Years of hard work yielded
opportunities to become a legal consultant for the government in international
trade law and to be appointed as the first
Asian legal counselor of the WTO's Appellate Body Secretariat in Geneva. My
contributions to international trade law
were recognized in 1998, when I was
named one of The Outstanding Women in
the Nation's Service for law.
Organizational difficulties
also tested my grit. At 26, together with a team of professionals, I had co-written the
organizational plan of the Presidential Commission on Human
Rights. As a law professor in
UP, I had stood up for academic freedom in a professor's evaluation
of student performance and for effective
teaching, even if it had cost me great personal pain, As head of two units in UP, I
was able to productively run them despite
severely limited budgets. For my success
in causing the publication of one of the
highest numbers of journals and books, I
became a finalist in UP's search for the
Most Outstanding Research Administrator. At 35, I wrote the concept paper on
judicial reform for the UNDP. That paper
was to serve as a seed for the large-scale
donor-funded judicial reform programs
currently in place. I continued to participate in some of those programs for some
more years.
Those organizational experiences
whetted my interest in information technology. At 36, I wrote the legal infrastructure for the first paperless securities trading in the country, that for the Bureau of
Treasury. I would pursue this advocacy
for paperless, electronic transactions and
research when I co-founded Accesslaw in
1999 with former Justice Jose Campos,
Commissioner Haydee Yorac and other
UP Law professors. It was the company
that created the first annotated electronic
research system in Philippine law.

I deepened my passion for constitutional rule 'when, at age 39, I was appointed as the lone female member of the
25-Member Presidential Commission on
Constitutional Reform headed by Chief
Justice Andres Narvasa, together with
leaders as important as former Prime
Minister Cesar Virata. As Chairperson of
the Steering Committee, I shepherded
the work of the various Committees into a
framework that showed economic issues
in the context of the Constitution.
At 43, I became local co-counsel for
the Philippines in the two international arbitration cases involving NAIA Terminal 3,
a role I was to discharge for nearly five
years. I reported to Cabinet Secretaries in
Malacaang and to the Solicitor General.
I resigned in 2008 because of important
policy differences with one of my principals. The country won both cases at the
ICSID and the ICC, but the victory in the
former was to be subsequently partially diminished. Afterwards, I focused my efforts
on developing policy reforms to improve
governance and the country's economy

as head of the Asian Institute of Management's policy think-tank - the AIM Policy
Center.
Considering what I have had to face,
taking on one challenging role after another, I believe it was my consistent decision
to take the difficult road and my ability to
think "out of the box" when solving problems that opened opportunities for me to
do much pioneering and sensitive work.
It helped that I had steeled myself to become immune to the promise of ease from
compromises and had submitted myself
to the fires of adversity, in order to uphold
what was true and excellent. Little did I realize then that I was being prepared for
my present role.
In 2010, at age 50, I was appointed
by President Aquino on the basis of what
he believed I could deliver for justice and
judicial reform. Prior to my swearing in, I
had only met him twice - the first in 2008
when I gave him a briefing on the JapanPhilippines Economic Partnership Agreement; and the second in 2010, during the
anniversary celebration of GMA 7. I had
no political affiliation to rely on; there was
no influential business bloc supporting
me; I did not have well placed relatives;
and neither was I a media figure. Perhaps

there is a place under the judicial sun for

the quiet and hard-working ones.
I would face difficult choices in my new
role. A day after my assumption of office,
I took an active role in the oral argument
involving Hacienda Luisita, despite the
Chief Justice saying I was not expected to
participate. Weeks later, I raised two important policy questions for the Court: Can
a case that is already with the Supreme
Court and that has already been heard in
oral argument be subjected to mediation
as ordered by the Chief Justice? And can
the Chief Justice individually give such an
order that constitutes a major policy decision?
Three weeks after my appointment, I
would object to the issuance of a temporary restraining order for a Petition that I
and other justices had not even seen - in
the case involving the impeachment of
former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.
Five weeks later, I was to object to
the majority's characterization of the Decision in Vinuya v. Secretary of Foreign
Affairs as "honest, hard work."
Instead, I showed a chart that
compares passages from the
Decision that were lifted verbatim from other works. I endured
much adversity, because I refused to call what was black,
white. I was wrongly accused
of having committed a similar
offense, but I refused to back down from
my Dissent. In a twist of poetic justice, I
was vindicated, as it turned out that it was
my work that had been plagiarized.
I objected to any attempt to sanction
the professors decrying the Vinuya Decision. I thought that in order to gain the
moral authority to impose any disciplinary
measure on them, the Court first had to
gain the moral high ground by admitting
its own mistakes and correcting the record. This was, of course, not an easy
stance to take.
My dissents in various highly controversial cases have been written about
and quoted. I disagreed with the majority's striking down the executive order
creating the Philippine Truth Commission,
their upholding the laws creating the 16
cities, their upholding the creation of the
Province of Dinagat Island, their awarding
20% share in San Miguel Corporation in
favor of Danding Cojuangco as against
the government's claim, their grant of a
TRO.in favor of former President Gloria
Arroyo in November 2011, their grant of
a TRO against the Senate's subpoena
of the Philippine Savings Bank account
documents of then Chief Justice Renato
Corona, and their prohibition on the dis-

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

25

I believe it was my consistent decision

to take the difficult road and my ability to
think out of the box when solving problems
that opened opportunities for me to do much
pioneering and sensitive work.

august 2012
closure of material information to the SenFor what is leadership if it is not the asked a colleague who was perceived to
ate impeachment court.
willingness to fall as a grain of wheat falls be close to me who I really was, the latter
What has been not equally publicized to die, in order that more abundant life can replied: "Ganyan lang talaga yang si Jusis that I voted against the administration on spring forth? In all those years of leading tice Sereno, kung anong paniwala nya,
the grant of a TRO in favor of Bai Omera people, I have not asked anyone to make sinasabi nya."
Lucman in one of the Executive Order No. a sacrifice, to go through any hardship
I have no hidden, personal agenda,
2 (E.O. 2) cases and partially against the that I was not willing to bear myself. I have and I have no interest in creating one. I
ARMM Synchronization Law that was and not asked others to improve their work un- simply see my role as a judge as a humis a key program of the President's Lib- less my own revealed an unrelenting drive ble; yet highly edifying one. We justices
eral Party.What also seems to be forgot- for excellence. Yet, in calling for sacrifice of the court are to simply apply the law to
ten is that in July of last year, my Dissent and excellence, I have always remem- the truth that is staring us in the face, afin the first Hacienda Luisita Decision was bered that we are all human, and that our ter much searching by the mind and after
heralded by the farmers, the media and destinies ultimately lie in the hands of our much reflection by the heart. It is a humble
scholars alike, for it demolished the ma- Creator.
role because we can go no further than
jority's argument to support the holding
My leadership is to be exercised to what the Constitution, the law, and the
of a referendum on the Stock Distribution uphold the truth the way I have sought to rules of statutory construction allow us.
Option. One columnist-professor called it uphold the truth. It is to be exercised in We do not replace the shared values of
"rare and brave" for a new appointee of favor of those who are weak, in order that the community with our own. Yet, our role
the President to have written what I had.
justice in its true sense may be rendered. as judges is a highly edifying one to sociWhat the above shows is that I take It is to apply the rule of law in a way that ety. For in invoking the lofty vision of the
my oath of office very
Constitution, in painting
My view on the rule of law is concretized by two Dissent- before our people the
seriously. While tradition has witnessed juning Opinions I have written - in Paulino v. Varilla and in prospect of a more just
ior justices rarely being
in living upright
FASAP v. PAL. Rules of procedure are not to be strictly con- society,
heard, I believe that the
lives in order that we
Constitution requires all strued against the poor; and in the Paulino Resolution, not can be in a position to
Members of the Court to against the poor policemen in the case. But they are to be so tell our people "This is
apply all their strength
the truth, this is the right
and skills to understand construed against PAL vis-a-vis the illegally dismissed employ- way, this is the path," we
every case before them, ees who had won three successive Decisions affirming their po- are edifying our society
and to participate vigorbuilding for future
sition. If rules are meant to facilitate justice, then when these and
ously so that the truthgenerations a foundamight be unearthed, and rules frustrate justice especially when the system itself creates tion that is built on solid
that justice be done. I
the injustice - genuine justice must be allowed to prevail. rock - not on the passing
believe that the confancies of politics, but on
stitutional design of collegiality requires shows no favoritism for the privileged, no the more enduringvalues of our people.
the exercise of everyone's conscience existence of the "old boys club" and no
It has been asked how I can be the
in a transparent manner in en banc and need for the informal network of brokers Chief Justice if I am largely known as a
division discussions, without inhibitions and lobbyists. My view on the rule of law dissenter. Was Chief Justice Claudio
brought about by the comparative insuf- is concretized by two Dissenting Opinions Teehankee unqualified when he was so
ficiency of age or seniority. While seniority I have written - in Paulino v. Varilla and in appointed because of his reputation as a
has its rightful place in preserving tradi- FASAP v. PAL. Rules of procedure are not dissenter? Or did not his brave dissent in
tions of the Court, to believe that ' it should to be strictly construed against the poor; the face of much opposition by the estabdominate deliberations and adjudication and in the Paulino Resolution, not against lished majority in fact qualify him to lead
is not to take our oath of office seriously.
the poor policemen in the case. But they the Court in its period of renewal? Yes,
My past 52 years have been not are to be so construed against PAL vis- I was a dissenter in the highly explosive
young years; rather, they have been years a-vis the illegally dismissed employees political cases, and I will again dissent if
of adversity, and of overcoming adversity. who had won three successive Decisions there is a concerted effort to deny obvious
Years of paying the price for my convic- affirming their position. If rules are meant truth, but in a high majority of the Decitions, of inconvenience, of having to work to facilitate justice, then when these rules sions promulgated since I joined the court,
doubly hard, of avoiding shortcuts and frustrate justice especially when the sys- I have acted with the majority and penned
the easy road. Those years were also tem itself creates the injustice - genuine many important Decisions that were conyears of proving my mettle, of holding my justice must be allowed to prevail.
curred in unanimously. My colleagues in
own, and of testing by fire the quality of
If we are to uphold the rule of law, the court have sworn to the same oath of
my judgment and instincts before inter- then we in the Court must be perceived to office and are bound by the same Connational judges, chief justices and associ- be fair and predictable. There is nothing stitution. We are all professionals. And I
ate justices of the Supreme Court, cabi- mysterious about how I analyze things, believe I have gained the respect of my
net secretaries, heads of universities and how I come to a conclusion, and how I colleagues with the quality of my writing
very senior professors. I have been honed ultimately vote. There is nothing layered and analysis and with the very hard work
in the world of the wise, the elders, and about me; no context you have to imag- I have put in.
key public leaders. I have steadily - with- ine, no agenda you have to fathom. I am
The judiciary is not only the Supreme
out wasting time - forged years of gaining who I am, I vote what I think. I say what Court, but also its 1,700 other justices
wisdom, of gaining a tranquil sense of the I mean, and I mean what I say. As one and judges nationwide. It is supported by
world, of understanding the real meaning fellow justice, puzzled by my unexpected 24,000 other court officers and personof leadership and stewardship.
willingness to be upfront about things, nel. These are the public servants I am

26

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

The bar Tribune

willing to lead. Recently, two newly appointed judges sought to take their oaths
of office before me. One went up all the
way to Baguio with her entire family, so
that I could be the one to administer her
oath. The other was a Muslim judge, who
brought with him his pregnant wife, an
infant daughter and other relatives. Both
were largely unfamiliar to me, but both
said the same thing: they sought me out
to administer the oath to them, because
I am their role model, and they want to
pattern their professional lives after mine
especially the strength of my convictions
as reflected in my writings. The wife of
the male judge expressed the hope that
her daughter would grow up to be like me.
Separately, a senior judge sent me word
that newly appointed female RTC judges
had conveyed to him that they look up to
me as a role model. A colleague in the
Court has confided to me that the younger
judges are rooting for me to succeed in
bucking the system, and that he is confident I will so succeed. These incidents
have strongly convinced me of my leadership role.
If I am to lead, then my first duty is to
inspire. And I can only inspire if I understand the hopes and aspirations of every
member of the judiciary and its staff for a
better future for their families. And I think
I do understand - what it is to be part of
the struggling poor, who make up much
of the rank and file in the judiciary. But I
also understand the sense of dignity and
honor of members and staff of the judiciary, how they equally dream of justice being realized in our country, and that they
are important channels of justice. And if I
have overcome, then I say that we in the
judiciary and the legal profession can collectively overcome. We can overcome not
only our personal obstacles, but also the

cultural prejudices that have prevented us

from becoming a great judiciary, a noble
profession.
The judiciary must regain the trust
of our people, so that Congress can entrust to it the funds to make the delivery of
justice efficient and their families secure.
I hope to regain that trust by presenting
myself as a leader worthy of trust, and my
work and my life as proof that the people's
trust will not be misplaced. I am a servant
of the public, and if asked to lead the judiciary, I would also be a steward of public
treasures and of the lives of the men and
women who have made service in the judiciary their career. It would be my duty to
succeed.
To demonstrate that we in the judiciary have no skeletons to hide, if appointed, I will disclose to the public our case
disposal rate; official reports on our budget and COA's audit of our expenditures;
the state of our various funds, including
support funds from the donor community;
and I will, in consultation with the community, set key result areas with milestone
dates by which we will measure our performance.
I present 18 years of possibilities,
of being able to conduct a deep search
for the best and the brightest in our land,
who are to be set apart as a generation
of judges who will commit themselves to
lives of uprightness and excellence. I am
willing - through how I have lived, and how
I will live - by God's grace, to be the first to
be daily tested if I meet the highest standard of integrity and credibility. I am willing
to be measured by the degree of sacrifice
I make, by what I am willing to give up in
order that the vision of a judiciary that is
truly noble, upright, independent, learned
and excellent in every way can become a
reality.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

I reiterate what I had said in your national convention last year in Subic that
no friend of mine, including the IBP president, gains anything from my appointment, save for the thought that I will not
let the country down. I shall continue to be
our people's steward of justice - resolving
disputes with an even hand and an eye
towards re-establishing faith in the rule of
law. Indeed, even my husband does not
gain anything from my appointment. As
proof of this, I watched silently last year
as the Court en banc reversed the victory
that my husband and his company had already merited from an RTC in Makati. If I
will not do anything ethically wrong to advance my husband's cause by refusing to
promote it with any of my fellow justices,
neither will I do it for anybody else.
I ask you to be with us in our journey.
I ask that you measure us, that you demand of us, what is demanded by justice.
But I also ask that you support us first by
refusing to engage in practices that bring
disrepute to the judiciary; second,by helping us identify the good souls who must
populate the ranks of the judiciary, and
third, by policing your own ranks and also
our ranks. I will also ask the IBP to continue its journey with us in legal reform,
especially in procedural reform. But I will
also ask you to be as excited as I am in
exploring frontier areas of law, as life in
our country and in this century become
increasingly complex. Together, we shall
restore our people's faith in a justice system that works and responds to those who
desperately need it the most.
In the meantime, I wish you every
success and thank you for your patience.
ERRATUM

Atty. Miles Santos (left), companion of the late Atty. Leonardo

Jacinto Soriano, receives the
welfare benefit assistance check
from Atty. Alicia Risos-Vidal, IBP
Peer Assistance Director.
The Bar Tribune misidentified
this picture that was published in
the June 2012 Bar Tribune and
regrets the error.

27

august 2012

less aBout CHoosINg oNe

PersoN, more aBout
eNsurINg tHat geNuINe
reForms are truly set
Juan Andres d. Bautista
Chairman, Presidential Commission on Good Government
Being the first to be interviewed, or
in law school language to be called for
recitation, is both a burden and a blessing. It is a burden because at this point,
I have no idea what questions my JBC
professors will be asking. As the youngest
in the class, I was hoping to learn from,
perhaps even copy, some of the answers
of my older classmates.
But being the first to recite is also a
blessing because one gets the opportunity to set the tone, provide a context and
perhaps even help frame the important issues relating to these proceedings.
Indeed, choosing the next Chief Justice is a defining moment for the Philippine
legal system.
But while the importance of this
changing of the guard cannot be gainsaid,
we should not lose sight of the larger objective which is to overhaul an ineffective,
inefficient and inadequate justice system.
Indeed, this process should be less
about choosing one person but more
about ensuring that genuine reforms are
truly set in place to achieve that objective.
In the 2011 Global Competitiveness
Report released by the World Economic
Forum, the Philippines ranked the lowest
among ASEAN countries in respect of the
three main indicators of a functioning legal
system.
Back home, in the most recent SWS
survey regarding public satisfaction with
top government institutions, the Supreme
Courts net satisfaction rating dropped by
14 points from + 27 in March 2012 to +13
in May 2012. This is the lowest rating received by the Court in recent memory. The
Court also ranked the lowest as compared
to the other branches of government: the
Senate, the House of Representatives
and the Cabinet.
The first step in solving any problem
is to acknowledge that there is a problem.
And the opposite to the saying, if it is
broke, then we should fix it.
I believe that the Philippine Legal system faces four major challenges that all
begin with the letter C. Corruption, Congestion/Delay, Competence and Credibility.
Hoodlums in Robes, Its not whether
you know the law but whether you know
the judge are phrases mouthed not just
by legal practitioners but by non-lawyers

as well. With due respect to my honest

and hard working friends in the Philippine
justice system unfortunately you have
become the exception rather that the general rule.
Congestion of court dockets and delay in deciding cases are kindred problems. 25 years ago, a legal command was
made as follows:

28

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

The Supreme Court shall, within one

year after the ratification of this Constitution, adopt a systematic plan to
expedite the decision or resolution of
cases or matters pending in the Supreme Court or the lower courts prior
to the effectivity of this Constitution.
A similar plan shall be adopted for all
special courts and quasi-judicial bodies.
This command is contained in Article
XVIII, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution.
In this regard, the latest figures as
contained in the 2010 Supreme Court annual report show the following: (see table
below)
You will note that the average disposition rate for the entire Judiciary is 39%. In
other words, more than 60% of pending
cases are not decided. It is quite apparent
then what has happened to that 25 year
old Constitutional directive not much. I
shudder when I think about the financial
repercusions that this delay and congestion has caused our economy.
Unlike in the US and other developed
countries where top law school graduates vie for limited judicial clerkships, in
the Philippines, the bee line is with the
top Makati law firms. We all know that any
agency, be it in the private or public sector, is as good as the people who are in
it. Hence there must be a concerted effort
on th part of the Supreme Court to hire
Courts

and keep the best and brightest within the

judicial ranks.
Finally, on credibility. Yes, the Supreme Court has the final say on what the
Constitution and other laws mean and that
all are duty bound to obey its rulings. But
the Court should never forget it remains
accountable to the people and the higher court of public opinion. Decisions that
are perceived to be manifestly or that flip
flop, chip away at the very credibility that
the Court ultimately anchors its authority
upon.
It is only right that if we identify challenges, we must also proactively propose
solutions:
To address the issues of corruption
and competence, the first thing the Supreme Court Should do is to mount as
aggressive campaign to recruit the best
and brightest lawyers and law students.
This should be done fully realizing that its
work is only as good as the people who
do them.
The three branches of government
should work hand in hand to improve the
compensation packages, equipment and
court infrastructure taking into account the
work loads of judges as well as the physical and reputational risk that their position
entails.
While it is not practicable to fully
benchmark the judges pay versus the private sector, the Court has the luxury of appealing to a lawyers sense of patriotism.
I remember in College there was a poster
as recruiting potential Jesuits with the line
question Why sell soap, build people. In
the same spirit, perhaps the Court can entice law graduates with a line like Why
just practice law, dispense justice.
The issues relating to congestion of
court dockets(as distinguished from judicial writing) to the private sector so that the
latest technology can be used to track the

Case input Case output % of Case Disposal

RTCs / MTCs
Court of Tax Appeals
Sandiganbayan
Court of Appeals
Supreme Court

- 992,817
- 1,067
- 2,405
- 33,032
- 22,547

- 377,839
- 315
- 247
- 13,241
- 14,057

- 38 %
- 30 %
- 10 %
- 40 %
- 62 %

total

- 1,051,186

- 405,699

- 38.5 %

The bar Tribune

status of cases. This way, judicial score
cards can be developed to effectively
monitor court performance. Similarly, why
should court administration be assigned
to lawyers when other professionals could
do a better job? Now if a lawyer had an
MBA degree as well, that would be a different story.
The inter-related problems of congestion and delay stem from the inflow and
outflow of cases. The simple solution is
to reduce the inflow and increase the outflow. How do i propose to do this.
The Supreme Court should educate
the citizenry that going to court is not the
only, and more often than not, the more
cost and time efficient way of settling a
dispute. Hence, the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution techniques such as Court
Annexed Mediation and Judicial Dispute
Resolution should continue to be encouraged. This can significantly decrease the
cases that the Courts have to deal with.
On the other hand, to increase the
outflow, the Supreme Court should incentivize and properly recognize performers
both in terms of the quantity and quality
of decisions penned. In the same spirit,
it should disincentivize and penalize the
laggards who are not doing their job.
The Rules of Court should be amended so that the filing of frivolous cases
and interlocutory appeals are minimized.
There should be a limit to the motions to
postpone and seek an extension of time
to file a pleading. Judges should also be

encouraged to write shorter decisions and

use language that the non-lawyer parties
can understand.
A major culprit for delay is Article VIII,
Sec 15 (1). This section counts the period
within which to decide cases from the time
a case has been submitted for decision.
But, it can take 5,15, even 30 years before
a case is deemed submitted. So in reality,
the Constitution has not arrested but has
in fact countenanced delay. The quick fix
is to amend this section so that we count
the period not from the date of submission
but from the date of filing.
Finally, to maintain and enhance its
credibility, the Supreme Court should lead
by example. It should wipe out its own
back log. It should be more transparent

and accountable in its use of public funds.

Its about time the Gods of Faura should
realize they are more human and less divine. Every year, it should let the public
know what its goals, objectives and key
result areas are. Thereafter, it should perhaps hold its own State of the Judiciary
address to report on its performance.
In short, the Supreme Court should
exhibit not just political but judicial will in
creating a justice system that we can all
be proud of.
These are my initial thoughts on the
challenges facing our legal system. I have
a few more but i do not wish to abuse the
time given by the Council. I am now ready
for recitation.

goverNINg wIsely
aNd justly
(My Quintessential Judicial Philosophy, Vision, Mission And Work Program)

Rene V. Sarmiento
Chairman, Commission on Elections

My Judicial Philosophy is found in two

concepts most close to the hearts of Filipinos. They are Social Justice and Human
Rights.
Social Justice
Social justice is the centerpiece of
the 1987 Constitution. There is, however,
no definition of Social Justice in the 1987
Constitution. But the framers of the fundamental law share the meaning of Social
Justice articulated by the Chairman on
Committee on Social Justice, Teresa F.
Nieva, when she said that:
Social justice provides the material and social infrastructure for the

realization of basic human rights,

the enhancement of human dignity
and effective participation in democratic practices.
-- II Record 606-607.
Coming close to this meaning of Social Justice is Justice Jose P. Laurels
explanation what this concept is all about
when he wrote:
Social justice is neither communism, nor depotism, nor atomism,
nor anarchy, but the humanization of laws and the equalization of
social and economic forces by the
State so that justice in its rational

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

and objectively secular conception may at least be approximated.

Social justice means the promotion of the welfare of all the people, the adoption of the Government of measures calculated to
insure economic stability of all the
competent elements of society,
through the mainteanace of the
proper economic and social equilibrium in the interrelations of the
members of the community, constitutionally, through the adoption
of the measures legally justifiable,
or extra-consttituionally, through
the exercise of powers underlying
the existence of all governments
on the time-honored principle of

29

august 2012
salus populi est suprema lex.
-- Calalang vs. Williams
G.R. No. 47800, (1940).
Human Rights
Human Rights refer to privileges,
claims and entitlements that pertain to
man and woman because of their humanity based on the three principles of indivisibility, inter-dependence and universality
and because they are created in the image and likeness of God.
Achieving Social Justice and Human
Rights
To achieve Social Justice and Human
Rights, there must be a balance between
Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism.
Judicial Restraint means that justices and
judges must show great deference to the
legislature and previous court decisions
and therefore slow to make drastic changes in public policy. Judicial Activism holds
that justices and judges play an important
role in public policy and are open to overturn law and precedents.
To further achieve Social Justice and
Human Rights, there must be a balance
between Strict Construction and Loose
Construction. Strict Construction believes
that justices and judges should limit themselves to narrow interpretation of the
Constitutions text and avoid enlarging
the power of the government. Loose Construction maintain that the Constitution allows the government to adopt to specific
crises or to the call of times.
All these four approaches find balance in what I call Judicial Creativity. It
is harmonizing the approaches to bring
about the function of the common good
through law.
A Chief Justice who, to me, is an
epitome of judicial creativity is Roberto C.
Concepcion with his ponencias in Stonehill vs Diokno, 20 SCRA 383 and Lansang
vs. Garcia, 42 SCRA 448 and his explanation of the meaning of judicial power in
The 1987 Constitution.

A. Maximize Section 5, Par. 5, Article

X of The 1987 Constitution (Promulgate rules concurring the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice
and proceedure in all courts, the
admission to the practice of law,
the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged).
1. Promulgate rules on new writs
like writ of salvacion, writ of
paglalansag, writ of juvenis, writ
of bagong bayani, etc.
2. Creation of Special Human
Rights Courts to declog court
dockets.
3. Improve legal assistance to the
underprivileged through barefoot lawyers and senior law
students.
4. Encourage development of a
law curriculum that includes additional units on values and virtues.
5. Intensify automation of judicial
system.
B. Enhance Communication/Linkage
with the Public
1. Once-a-month or quarterly
Steps-of-the-Supreme
Court
chat with the media.
2. Connect with governmental institutions and non-governmental organizations that seek to
enable and empower the vulnerables.
3. Build bridges with Government
Organizations/Non-Governmental Organizations that are
involved in peace work. Use
the vast reservoir of peace,
goodwill, talent and expertise
of Justices, Judges and law
professors to advance conflict
resolution and transformation in
society.
C. Enhance International Networking
with Judicial Bodies and Foreign
Foundations/Organizations.

and establish ties with the Supreme Courts of other countries

and foreign foundations for the
purpose of knowledge-andtechnical sharing on best judicial practices like the epistolany
jurisdiction in India and the Judicial Conference of the United
States of America. If there are
best business, electoral and
peace practices, there are also
best judicial practices. The Philippine Supreme Court can learn
from other countries and viceversa.
D. Boost Philippine Judicial Academy
1. Establish Institute on Para-Legal Work that will train para-legals to assist lawyers in providing legal assistance to the poor.
2. Explore and study new vistas
and models in law that will make
law an all-out tool for changing
lives and institutions.
3. Study Role Models/Who Inspires You for new judges, justices, lawyers. A role model is
worth a thousand arguments.
Blaze New Trails
Amid calls to rejuvenate the Supreme
Court and make it faithful to its role as bulwark of the peoples rights, it is worth pondering the words of Chief Justice Roberto
C. Concepcion when he spoke on the occasion of his retirement from the Supreme
Court:
...the Supreme Court is now called
upon to blaze new trails, and the
Philippine Bench, as well as the
Bar and the people in general, are
looking forward to administrative
measures and precedent setting
decisions tending to bolster up the
independence of the juduciary, expedite the administration of justice
and otherwise foster the peoples
faith in our courts of justice as instrumentalities of their welfare.

Vision-Mission
My vision is a judiciary that is ethical
and moral, independent and transparent, and committed to the promotion of
common good. A judiciary that will wage
a revolution by law to touch and change
peoples lives especially the vulnerable
and marginalized.

1. The Supreme Court shall open

channels of communication

Work Program
Judicial Philosophy, Vision-Mission
shall only be meaningful if there are programmatic activities to give them breath
and feeling. To make them fully alive.
In concrete, these activities will fall under
three categories, to wit:

30

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Thank you.

The bar Tribune

tHe suPreme Court

a Quarter CeNtury
aFter edsa 1
Raul C. Pangalangan
Professor and Former Dean, UP College of Law
I am glad that the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines has asked the nominees
to focus on precisely the two key issues
that require the leadership of the Supreme
Court and its Chief Justice at this critical
point in our history.
The IBP has called upon the nominees
to discuss their judicial philosophy, which
focuses on the Supreme Courts work of
deciding cases, of writing decisions to settle actual cases and controversies that
are brought before it. Through its power
of judicial review, the SC interprets the
Constitution and can strike down the acts
of the political branches of government. In
so doing, the SC establishes judicial precedents that will guide all the courts of the
land on how to decide similar cases in the
future. This first topic thus deals with the
Courts leadership in the task of adjudication by which the Chief Justice and the
Court define justice for our time.
The IBP has also called on the nominees to present their plans for judicial reform, which deals with the Chief Justices
administrative leadership in addressing
the perennial problems of the judicial system. At the outset, let me identify these
problems as the following: delay, docket
congestion and judicial backlog; graft and
corruption; and the recruitment of the best
and the brightest into the ranks of the Bar
and of the Bench. This second topic thus
deals with the Courts leadership in judicial administration by which the Chief Justice and the Court manage the practical
mechanisms by which we deliver justice
to our people.
Judicial philosophy:
De-politicization of the courts
As to the first, the principal challenge
today is the de-politicization of the courts.
We have long struggled to ensure
that judges decide cases solely on the
basis of law and on the merits, and have
long feared the intrusion of all sorts of
improper influences that push judges to
use their decisions for political payback
to their patrons, as personal accommo-

dation for friends, family or lobbyists, or

as vendetta against personal or political
foes. That is a genuine and real problem.
Unless we address it, all the other reforms
look hollow.
I think we have unduly focused on just
one aspect of de-politicizing the courts,
namely, insulating the institution from the
political branches of government. We do
this by minimizing the role of the politicians in the appointment and promotion
of judges, and by safeguarding the judiciarys fiscal autonomy in the budgetary
process so that it can adequately reward
its judicial and support staff for jobs well
done. That is all well and good. Indeed the
Courts structural autonomy is built into
the 1987 Constitution, and it has been a
continuing struggle to preserve that autonomy in actual operation.
But this focuses merely on the administrative aspects of de-politicizing. There
is actually a judicial aspect that fosters
politicization. It is the root of politicization
which draws the politicians and lobbyists
to see the court as open season for political pressure. It opens the floodgates to
the manipulation of legal reasoning that
eventually infects and contaminates the
judiciary even in non-political cases.
That judicial aspect is the expansive
use of judicial review through which unelected judges pass judgment over what
are essentially discretionary policy decisions made by the elected branches of
government.
I will not go over the list of the many
SC decisions that have thrust the courts
into the thick of political debates, and exposed it to political attack just like any other branch of government. The best proof
in fact is that today the Supreme Court
has an official spokesman, a break from
the long tradition that a court speaks only
through its decisions, nothing more and
nothing less. That the Court has seen fit
to designate a spokesman to announce
and explain its decisions on mass media
shows that, after Edsa 1 and under the
1987 Constitution, the Filipino pubic has
made more demands upon the Court and

now holds it to account to the people.

Just to be clear. When I say this, I am
not pointing an accusing finger at anyone,
but merely pointing out how history has
brought us to this moment. In other words,
judicial overreach and the expansive exercise of judicial power is the product of
the inexorable march of history that began in the anti-Marcos struggle. Remember that when we were under martial law,
and faced with the abuses and excesses
of executive power, democracy activists
sought refuge in the courts and the rule of
law. And when we regained our democracy under Cory Aquino, the Constitutional
Commission appointed by Cory wrote that
belief into the 1987 Constitution.
The result is the expanded definition
of judicial power under Article VIII 1 of
the Constitution that enables the courts to
review just about any act of government.
The clause, coupled with increased public
expectations, has pushed the courts into
what an SC justice himself called the uncharted ocean of social and economic policy making. In doing so, the Court steps
down from its Olympian pedestal from
which applies the transcendent norms
enshrined in the Constitution, and joins
the fray with the politicians in the elected
branches whose business is to engage in
mere day-to-day politics.
I am not saying that the Court should
shy away from the most contested issues
of our time. There are many progressive
causes that have been constitutionalized
like human rights, social and economic
equality, and the protection of the environment. But there are also time-tested legal
doctrines to ensure that the judicial power
is used wisely and judiciously, and that its
legitimacy is not dissipated needlessly.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

31

A managerial approach to
judicial reform
In the past decade and a half, I have
been exposed to many judicial reform activities as Law Dean for two terms at the
U.P. College of Law, and as chair of Bantay Katarungan. I recognize the advances

august 2012
that have been accomplished. What I propose is to take these exclusively legalistic
reforms and look at them from a managerial standpoint, to see how they operate in
actual operation.
For instance, we need quality control
in the hiring of our judges but in order to
do so, we must improve recruitment and
selection at the lower levels of the courts.
I propose that, rather than just wait for applicants for judicial vacancies, rather than
just announce these vacancies in newspapers, we must more proactively encourage quality applicants to the judiciary.

Second, we must give credit to the

Court for all the reforms to streamline pro-

cedure: maximizing pre-trial and modes

of discovery, the continuous trial system
now being piloted in some courts, the use
of judicial affidavits in lieu of direct examination, etc. But we must also ask ourselves why it has been difficult to implement these reforms at ground level, and
why at times the very lawyers and litigants
who should insist on hastening the process are loathe to avail of these reforms.
We must also review the MCLE to make it
more meaningful and practice-oriented so
that lawyers become more open to these
procedural reforms.
Finally, another example will show
the need to situate legal reforms in context. Under the leadership of the Court,
through the initiatives of Justice Roberto
Abad, we have embarked on the most
radical and progressive reforms thus far
in the Philippine bar examinations. I fully
support those reforms. But I would also
add that these reforms are best institutionalized through a sitting committee of Bar
Examiners. For as long as we remember,
the bar exams have always been administered by what I call solitary Bar Examiners. But that is also the best guarantee
that the reform effort has no institutional
memory, that mistakes committed this
year will not be repeated next year, and
that over time successive Bar Examiners
will build upon the experience of those
who came before them. Otherwise our reforms are hostage to a system based on
the solitary Bar Examiner which keeps us
from benefitting from accrued wisdom.
I give these examples merely by way
of demonstrating what a managerial approach can bring to judicial reform. This is
what ties together my judicial philosophy
with my approach to judicial reform. The
common thread is that a Chief Justice, as
the leader of the judiciary, has to see the
Supreme Court in the context of history,
stand above the grayness of reality, and
define its role in the grand constitutional
design for the shaping and application of
those wise restraints that make us free.

32

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

We must begin spotting good material

for judicial posts starting with the law
schools, where we can organize seminars for students who show interest in
becoming judges.
We must work hand in hand with the
IBP in identifying potential judges from
the ranks of practitioners.
We must streamline the application
process. From my own experience,
the documentary requirements before
the JBC are really heavy. It is in fact
a practical deterrent that can otherwise discourage interested applicants,
especially if they are young lawyers
thinking of the entry-level seats in the
bench. The clearances alone from
the Ombudsman, the Bar Confidant,
the Police, the NBI, the Mandatory
Continuing Legal Education Committee, all the way to the notarized medical
certificate can be streamlined so that,
government-issued clearances can be
secured by the JBC via inter-agency
cooperation that actually merely supplements the background investigation
that the JBC already undertakes. That
will lessen the burden of applying as
a judge, so that the applicant can focus on the substantive requirement of
demonstrating merit and competence.

CHAPTER NEWS

IBP Bulacan Chapter

Round-Up of Activities

In the aftermath of the recent devastating natural calamities affecting various

regions of the country, forewarned is forearmed, which was the underlying theme
of the Bulacan Environment Summit. The
summit was organized by IBP Bulacan
Chapter in partnership with the Bulacan
Environment & Natural Resource Office
and Bulacan State University.
The summit was held last June 21
at the Hiyas Pavilion Center in Malolos,
Bulacan. The summit focused on Effective Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate
Change Adaptation.
Meanwhile, IBP Bulacan Chapter
President Atty. Ted Villanueva has released a summary of accomplishments
for the first six months of 2012. The list
includes Accidental Death Insurance coverage for IBP Bulacan Chapter members
in the amount of One Hundred Thousand
Pesos, a Legal Mission in Calumpit and
San Ildefonso and a golf tournament
dubbed Hampas Lupa para sa Inaaping
Dukha.
The chapter also sponsored the IBP
Bulacan Invitational Basketball Tournament, Jail Visitation and Holy Wednesday
Recollection.
The Chapter conducted two Legal
Fora - with the BIR in regard to the Correct Filing of Taxes, and with the DENR
on the matter of Environment Cases. The
chapter also took part in the Central Luzon Shootfest and a Regional Sportsfest.
Among the regular Chapter activities are: Legal Aid Clinics on Tuesdays
and Thursdays; Bible Study Meetings on
Tuesdays; Monthly Legal Aid Committee
Meetings; Monthly Board Meetings and
Quarterly Jail Visitations for the Jail Decongestion Program.

The bar Tribune

tHougHts oN
tHe judICIary
Amado d. Valdez
Dean, UE College of Law

There must be a thorough re-assessment of the entire legal experience from

the conference rooms of law to the courtrooms, hearing rooms of quasi-judicial
bodies, and even the chambers and offices of judges, justices, arbiters, arbitrators.
Yes, people admire the public display
or demonstration of legal procedures, but
are these not in many cases mere pretensions to show that justice is done although
the reality is that what is delivered to the
litigants are the dictates from the powerful, wealthy, or influential parties working
behind the scenes?
I am sure that during client-lawyer
conferences, many advice or suggestions
given include talks about enlisting powerful and influential persons in addition
to discussions of sound legal principles
that apply in a particular case. This gives
credence to the scuttlebutt that ones success in law practice begins at the start of
the process for judicial appointment.
The work to redeem the judiciary from
cynicism of its own members, of the legal
community and of the public as a whole,
will take a long road and the first step begins with an acceptance that the judiciary
as a community has lost the collective
consciousness of the basic function of the
law and of the courts.
The credibility of a decision is not because the judge is competent, while this
quality is equally important. The decision
must be a acceptable in the light of reason
and experience which when taken together constitute the spirit of the law. Every fair
and just decision builds peoples trust and
confidence in the long run.
The Supreme Court has a unique and
paramount responsibility when it renders
a decision. This way it participates in making the laws. It also shares governance.
It exercises a sort of legislative function
because its decision becomes part of the
law of the land. It partakes of governance
because its decision becomes precedent
that guides the implementation of the vision of the people expressed through the
laws or Constitution.
Judges must be reminded that a
case, beneath the legalese, is a contest
between right and wrong and a good decision is a story of good prevailing over
evil. A judge guides and promotes a vi-

sion, a way of life that may be desirable

even if the law cannot achieve or enforce
it. There is a public clamor for good governance, accountability and elimination
of graft and corruption. The justices must
capture these prevailing aspirations and
make them real in their decisions over and
above technicalities and avoid narrowing
of the application of judicial precedents to
suit a certain result. Describing his role as
a decision-maker, a US Supreme Court
Justice said that every time he writes a
decision he feels hes adding one more
chapter to the American saga.
Judges must understand that law is a
carrier of the nations values derived from
previous experiences. The notoriety of the
Javellana decision giving judicial imprimatur to the constitutional basis of Marcoss
martial law, gave rise to the provisions in
the 1987 Constitution on judicial inquiry
of the factual basis of the declaration of
martial law. The midnight appointment
during the last days of the Garcia administration likewise brought constitutional
prohibitions. Yet, nine (9) members of the
present Supreme Court in the case of De
Castro v. Judicial and Bar Council held
that the said constitutional ban did not apply to appointments in the Supreme Court.
They abandoned the 1998 Valenzuela
decision, saying condescendingly that it
deserves to be quickly sent to the dustbin
of the unworthy and forgettable. Reading
the Javellana and De Castro decisions in
1973 and 2010 respectively, show basic
disregard of the collective will of the people

as expressed in their Constitution. Javellana did not follow the wisdom of the 1935
Constitution requiring peoples ratification
of the proposed constitution resulted in
Martial Law, while De Castro ignoring the
evil to be avoided in the midnight ban of
the 1987 Constitution resulted in the unprecedented impeachment of the Chief
Justice. Perhaps, an important lesson to
be drilled in the consciousness is the dictum that the will of the people expressed
through their law is the will of God.
The first order of business of the
new Chief Justice, therefore, must be the
adoption of measures, in fact a vision, to
restore in the judiciary that collective consciousness of making their decision not
only consistent with the letters of the law
but the spirit expressed therein. In this
way, the judiciary will be immensely contributing in cultivating the pre-conditions
for economic development, such as political stability, peace and order, rule of law,
and disciplined people for the common
good. An Integrity Council in every region
must be installed as peer mechanism to
sustain this ideal vision.
Looking in the long term is the possibility creating a Constitutional Court that
will deal with political questions. Under
the second clause of Article VIII, Section
I, par. 2 of the 1987 Constitution, the Supreme Court is no longer the weakest of
the three departments of the government,
metamorphosing from a timid judiciary
which was prevented from looking into the
validity of martial law because of the po-

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

33

august 2012
litical questions doctrine. It can now look
into policies of the political departments of
the government if there is grave abuse of
jurisdiction amounting to lack or excess of
jurisprudence. This offers a temptation for
political partisans to win Supreme Court
justices on their side, starting with their
selection, appointment and stay in office.
The intensity of political issues will contribute to the erosion of public trust in the
Supreme Courts independence and integrity especially those cases heightened
by high public expectations.
A constitutional court shall handle
these issues. In Spain, according to Wikepedia, a Constitutional Court, other than
its Supreme Court, is the highest judicial
body with the power to determine the constitutionality of acts and statutes of the
Spanish government. It is the supreme
interpreter of the Constitution, but since it
is not part of the rest of the Spanish Judiciary for almost all other judicial matters, the
Supreme Court is the highest court. The

Spanish Constitutional Court comprises

twelve members, four are proposed by the
Chamber Deputies, four by the Senate,
two by the Government and two by the
General Council of the Judiciary. In order
to ensure continuity of the Tribunals actions, one third of its members shall be appointed every three years. The President
of the Court is elected among the member. The decisions of the Constitutional
Court cannot be appealed by anyone.
The Federal Supreme Court of the
United States is substantially a constitutional court, respecting the jurisdiction of
the State Supreme Courts.
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines
is the most dynamic professional organization in the country. Taken cumulatively,
our experiences are more than the best of
logic look into different modes to ensure
the viability of our judicial system. There
is already a successful implementation of
the mediation system as well other alternatives in disputes resolution. There are

other concepts worth looking into like trial

by jury perhaps up to less grave offenses
and in civil cases in such amounts where
paying the members of the jury will not
worth it. We can introduce the no-contest
be system of pleas and community service
as penalty for youthful offenders, instead
of exempting them from criminal liability.
The requirement of legal aid service must
be mandatory and longer for those who
aspire for judicial posts. The professionalization of the management of courts, a
course on court management for example, computerization of records, introduction of recording technology during trial,
vigorous introduction of cyber-technology
are in order. All these measures, from human engineering to technology can expedite the delivery of justice in the country.
All measures or innovations, however, will
fail if the human component, especially
those in the High Court, will fail.
Hope springs eternal with the IBP.

tHe CorreCt treatmeNt

wIll dePeNd oN dIagNosIs
oF tHe root Causes uNderlyINg tHe symPtoms
Manuel de Jesus Siayngco
Judge, RTC Branch, Malolos, Bulacan
Today we are gathered in a public forum on The search for the next Supreme
Court Chief Justice. The letter invitation
that I received from our IBP President
Atty. Roan I. Libarios stated that the twenty-two (22) candidates are being invited
to present their Judicial Philosophy and
Judicial Program or Reform Agenda.
Let me present to you right away, ladies
and gentlemen, my JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY: Mat. 25, 31 46; my JUDICIAL
PROGRAM: Lk. 4, 18 19, my REFORM
AGENDA: 2 Tim. 4, 6 8.
I believe that the IBP is interested not
so much in the personal lives or religious
beliefs of the candidates but on what answers they would give to the questions
that are in the minds of everyone specifically on the issue of how each of the
candidates would prove themselves to the
JBC and to the Filipino people on the constitutional requirement of moral integrity,
probity, competence and independence.
Bilang tayo ay mga mag-aaral ng
batas at bilang mag-aaral ng kasaysayan
mayroong mga katanungan at isyu tungkol sa ating Hudikatura na naghahanap
ng mga kasagutan. Ano ba ang kasalukuyang kalagayan ng ating mga hukuman at
mga institusyon ng katarungan sa ating
bansa? Ano kaya ang mga karanasan ng

ating mga hukom at empleyado ng mga

hukuman at gayun din ang mga abogado
at mamamayang humaharap sa ating mga
hukuman at naghahanap ng katarungan?
Matapos ang nakaraang unang limang (5) buwan ng taong 2012 ng paglilitis at paghatol ng Senado sa impeachment case number 02-2011 laban sa
dating Punong Mahistrado Renato C. Corona, ang buong bayan ay nagtatanong
at naghihintay ng mga kasagutan sa kanilang mga suliranin at hinaing tungkol
sa katarungan. Ang kasalukuyang yugto
ng kasaysayan ng ating bansa ay nahahawig sa kalagayang umiiral dito noong
mga taong 18961898, na kinakitaan din
ng pagtitiis, pag-aalsa, paglaban at pagtatagumpay ng Sambayanang Pilipino
laban sa pagmamalabis at pagpapahirap
ng mga mananakop na Kastila, at laban
sa pangangamkam ng mga lupain at
pambubuntis ng mga prayle sa kanilang
mga kadalagahan. Ang ating mga ninuno, matapos mamulat sa pamamagitan
ng mga nobelang Noli Me Tangere at El
Filibusterismo ay nag-alsa, lumaban, at
nagwagi sa kapangyarihang kolonyal ng
Espanya na pinairal ng mga prayle, guardia sibil at Huez de Paz na nagpatupad
ng mga kinamumuhiang batas at nagparusa sa mga lumalabag sa tungkulinng

34

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

magbayad ng sedula, maglimos sa mga

sermonias at sakramento ng simbahan
at lumuhod at mag-Besa-Mano sa Kura
Paroko ng tinaguriang AMONG.
The answers to the present questions and issues on corruption, delay in
the disposition cases and injustices within
the halls of justice were the same issues
confronted by our national hero Dr. Jose
Rizal in his novel Noli Me Tangere. In
more recent times, these problems have
been exposed and given a wide publicity
in the book Shadow of Doubt written by
Marites Vitug.
Sa loob ng labing-anim (16) na taon
ng pagiging hukom ng inyong lingkod
sa MTC Malolos Br. 2 (1995 2001) at
RTC Bulacan (2001 2011), ako po ay
naging saksi at nagpasan ng maraming
krus sa pakikibaka laban sa mga suliraning nabanggit maging sa mga panulat ni
Bb. Marites Vitug. Upang pangalagaan
ang mga pangalan at pagkatao ng mga
nasasangkot sa mga kasong naidulog sa
ating hukuman at naging daan para sa
kasalukuyang kawalan ng tiwala betrayal of public trust ng ating mamamayan sa
ating mga hukuman, bayaan po ninyong
aking tunghayan ang mga panulat at
karanasan ni Gat. Marcelo H. Del Pilar:
Noong binata pa si Del Pilar at mag-

The bar Tribune

aaral ng batas sa Pamantasan ng Sto.

Tomas, siyay tumayong ninong ng isang
sanggol sa isang binyagan. Napansin niyang ang lahat ay nagbabayad ng dalawang reales, ngunit sa kanya ang siningil
ay apat na reales sa dahilang ang sanggol ay isinilang sa ibang pook.
Itoy mahigpit na tinutulan ng ating
binata hanggang ang prayle ay nagbitiw
ng maalipusta at malaswang pananalita.
Pinanatili ni Del Pilar ang kanyang pagkamaginoo. Siyay magalang na nagpaalam kasabay ng pagsasabing hindi siya
maaaring maging isang ninong o kayay
mamalagi sa isang bahay dalanginan na
ang panuntunan ng mabuting edukasyon
ay hindi sinusunod.
Isinumbong ng kura ang binatang
Del Pilar sa gobernador sibil ng Maynila
bilang filibustero. Siyay nahatulang nagkasala sa hukuman ng Unang Dulugan sa
Quiapo at ikinulong sa Bilibid. Sa tulong
ng isang kapitbahay ng puno ng military
sa Maynila, si Plaridel ay pinalaya pagkaraan ng isang buwan sa bilangguan.
Ang pangyayari ang dahilan kung
bakit pinigil ng mga prayle ang kanyang
pag-aaral ng abogasya sa loob ng isang
taon.
Noong 1872, matapos maganap ang

pagbabangon sa Kabite, si Pari Toribio

del Pilar, panganay na kapatid ni Plaridel,
ay ipinadakip dahil kasabawat diumano
nina Padre Jose Burgos. Si Pari Toribio
ay pansamantalang ipiniit sa Malolos.
Pagkaraan ng ilang araw, siyay inalis
sa kulungan mula sa Malolos patungo sa
kanyang Bulakan, may piring ang mga
mata at nakatali ang mga kamay ng lubid
na nakakabit sa renda ng kabayo.
Nang matunghayan ni Plaridel ang
kalunus-kunos na kalagayan ng kanyang
kapatid, kanyang pinakiusapan ang kapitan ng mga guwardiya sibil ng mangyaring
isakay sa kanyang kabayo si Pari Toribio
at pahintulutang makapanhik kahit isang
saglit man lamang sa kanilang tahanan sa
Cupang upang mabasbasan ng kanilang
may karamdamang ina. Ang pakiusap ay
hindi dininig ng puno ng guardiya sibil sa
upat ng isang prayle.
Buhat sa kanyang baying sinilangan,
si Pari Toribio ay dinala sa Maynila upang
ipatapon sa Marianas, sa gitna ng Karagatang Pasipiko, kasama ang kanyang
kababayang si Pari Mariano Sevilla y Villena.
Whatever solutions may be proposed
and whatever reform program may be
launched by the new Chief Justice of the

Supreme Court will depend on his diagnosis of the fundamental problem affecting the judiciary and the administration of
justice. In the eyes of a doctor, the correct
treatment of any disease will depend on
what is his diagnosis of the root causes
underlying the symptoms: corruption
within the ranks, delay in the disposition
of cases, unequal justice for the rich and
the poor, selective/preferential treatment
of detention and convicted prisoners, etc.
On June 15, 1215, rebels in England
led by nobles and barons defeated King
John and compelled him to sign what
was, and is, known as the Magna Carta.
The most substantive clause of the Magna Carta was giving the subjects or the
citizens the right to be tried first and adjudged by their fellowmen and peers before they can be imprisoned or beheaded
or deprived or property or freehold or liberty. The establishment of the jury system
in England deprived the King of the Power
to judge his subjects.
Before the signing of the Magna Carta, King John was so despotic, ruthless,
corrupt and so brutal to the people he
would suspect of defaming him or simply
criticizing him. Since the day Jury System
began in England, English people lived a
peaceful life. They no longer experienced
to be hanged just because the King or
Queen decreed it so. Since the signing of
Magna Carta, no more King or Queen became despotic or abusive and those who
were punished by the jury were only those
were truly guilty. Thus, Winston Churchill later said that there can be no government that will be abusive if there is a jury
that exists.
When the United States of America
(USA) was born July 4, 1787 in Philadelphia, the leaders led by General George
Washington made it sure that the jury
systems were installed to ensure that the
Whites would not discriminate against the
Blacks and other races. Thomas Jefferson described the jury as the anchor by
which the nation can hold together.

CHAPTER NEWS

10th easterN vIsayas regIoNal CoNveNtIoN

to Be Held IN Palo, leyte

Atty. Manuel L. Enage, Jr.

Governor for Eastern Visayas

The 10th IBP Eastern Visayas

Regional Convention will be held
on September 20-22 at the Oriental Hotel & Resort, Baras, Palo,
Leyte. The convention offers 18
units of MCLE.
Registration Fees are: P6,000,
if payment is made on or before
August 20; P6,000 for lifetime
members; and P6,500, if payment
is made after August 20 or on-site.
Payments may be deposited to the
IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

following account:
Account Name: IBP Leyte
Chapter Metro Bank Zamora
Branch, Tacloban City.
Account No.: 007-007-20707-3
For more details please contact
the IBP Leyte Chapter at Tel. (053)
321-7811; IBP Cebu Chapter at
Tel. (032) 2547787 and IBP Cebu
City Chapter at (032) 2536713.

35

august 2012

a suPreme Court
IN tHe servICe oF
law aNd justICe
Rafael A. Morales
Partner, Sycip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan Law
Unlike in the United States where the
power of judicial review is not expressly
conferred in the U.S. Supreme Court and,
therefore, there was a need for Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison to
fashion and claim it for the U.S. Supreme
Court, the Supreme Court of the Philippines is expressly granted the power of
judicial review in Article VIII of the 1987
Constitution. Moreover, our Supreme
Court can handle and decide cases in the
first instance, meaning it is the first and
final judge of certain cases. I am referring
here, for instance, to the Supreme Courts
original jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.
Whether the Supreme Court is exercising judicial review or hearing a case
originally, each and every Justice (including the Chief Justice) is bound by certain
rules of conduct that shape his judicial
philosophy or decision-making process.
Rule 3.02, Canon 3, of the Code of Judicial Conduct mandates that: In every
case, a judge shall endeavor diligently to
ascertain the facts and the applicable law
unswayed by partisan interests, public
opinion or fear of criticism.
In cases where there are clear-cut legal provisions or rules applicable to a set
of facts, a judge should find no difficulty
in complying with Rule 3.02 of Canon 3.
His task here is simply to apply preexisting legal provisions or rules to the facts, in
deciding the case. However, the task becomes somewhat difficult when there are
no clear-cut legal provisions or rules applicable to the case in hand. Whether the
judge likes it or not, he must decide that
case, in the light of the instruction in Article 9 of the Civil Code that: No judge or
court shall decline to render judgment by
reason of the silence, obscurity or insufficiency of the laws. It is in this situation
that a member of the judiciary must navigate uncharted waters on his own, using
his experience and guided by his beliefs.
There is here a spectrum one end of
which is judicial restraint and the other is
judicial activism. I am somewhere in between these two extremes. I will be inclined to be an activist and rein in executive or legislative action that unreasonably
deprives a person of his life or liberty, or
even his property, or if there has been a

grave abuse of discretion amounting to

lack or excess of jurisdiction. For instance,
if I were in the Supreme Court at the time
the case of Allied Banking Corporation v.
Court of Appeals was decided, I would
have dissented, because the majority
there effectively expanded the coverage
of the Trust Receipts Law, in violation of
the fundamental tenet that penal laws
must be strictly construed in favor of the
accused and cannot be enlarged in scope
by implication. However, I would have
sided with the majority in Salvacion v.
Central Bank of the Philippines, in allowing the garnishment of the U.S. dollar deposit of a foreign national who had raped
a 12-year old Filipina and was trying to
use as a defense the prohibition in the
Foreign Currency Deposit Act against the
garnishment or attachment of foreign currency deposits. Indeed, the literal enforcement of that prohibition would have compounded the injustice to the rape victim.
On the other hand, I would have objected
to the promulgation by the Supreme Court
of the Rules of Procedure on Corporate
Rehabilitation, because this set of rules
is not only procedural but also legislative
in thrust as it effectively amended the Insolvency Law. The Supreme Court should
have exercised judicial restraint there and
avoided performing what was essentially
a legislative function.
I am aware of the criticism that to
strike down an executive order or a legislative act is to be counter-majoritarian,
since (according to the argument) the
President of the Philippines as well as
members of Congress are elected by the
majority of the people unlike the Justices
who are merely appointed. However, this
criticism overlooks the fact that the people
themselves have given that power to the
Supreme Court, as the Justices are mandated by the Constitution 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. Indeed, this quoted language of
the Constitution has eroded the politicalquestion doctrine.
Above all, the Chief Justice, like any
other judge, must be independent. He
must confine himself to the merits of the
case and have no interest except to dis-

36

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

pose of it according to law and justice.

Pursuant to Rule 2.03, Canon 2, of the
Code of Judicial Conduct, he must not allow family, social, or other relationships to
influence judicial conduct or judgment. A
judge who cannot act independently must
recuse or inhibit himself from the case. If
appointed as Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, I will observe these guidelines.
Let me turn now to my reform agenda.
Aside from institutionalizing transparency
and accountability in the judiciary, there is
an urgent need to decongest court dockets, and make the courts more accessible
to the people. In this connection, I will initially pursue the following reforms:
1. Upward adjustment of the salary
scales of judges to attract a wider
range of applicants to the judiciary.
2. Further revision of the Rules of Court
to reduce or eliminate technical requirements, and to make litigation
more affordable by reducing the filing
fees.
3. Establishment of additional divisions
of the Court of Appeals and strengthen the research staff of the judiciary
to expedite the disposition of cases
more competently.
4. Filling up vacancies in the lower courts
and improving court infrastructure.
5. Stricter enforcement of the deadlines
for the disposition of pending cases.
6. Greater support for the Philippine Judicial Academy in its mandate to enhance the professional competence
of judges.
In this regard, I will actively work for a
substantial increase in the share of the judiciary in the national budget, through the
Supreme Courts participation in the Judicial Executive and Legislative Advisory
and Consultative Council.
We have been wishing the executive
and the legislative branches to exercise
political will to implement much-needed
reforms in government. It is high time that
we ask the Supreme Court to have the judicial will to restore dignity and credibility
in the judiciary. I intend to guide the Supreme Court in this direction if I am appointed as its Chief Justice.
Thank you and good day.

The bar Tribune

IBP mINdaNao PreseNts

resolutIoNs For Board aCtIoN

At the Joint Eastern and Western Mindanao Regional Consultative Meeting (left to right): IBP President Roan Libarios, Governor for Eastern
Mindanao Israelito Torreon, Governor for Western Mindanao Florendo Opay and Zambasulta Chapter President Jose Rizalino Ortega.

The IBP Board of Governors, in its June 8-9,

2012 meeting, adopted and approved nine resolutions endorsed by the Joint Eastern and Western Mindanao Regional Consultative Meeting. .
The joint meeting was held May 18, 2012 at the
Quest Conference Hotel, Cebu City and attended
by IBP chapter presidents of Eastern and Western Mindanao. Governor for Eastern Mindanao Israelito Torreon, Governor for Western Mindanao
Florendo Opay and IBP President Roan Libarios
also attended the joint meeting.
Aside from the resolutions, the joint meeting
also discussed plans for the holding of the Mindanao Regional Convention in Zamboanga City on
October 4-6.
Following are the resolutions submitted by the
Mindanao chapters and subsequently adopted by
the IBP Board:
RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168 -- requesting the Judicial and Bar Council to
delete the 1st time bar-taker criteria in
the nominations for the Judicial Excellence Awards.
RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168A -requesting the Judicial and Bar Council
and the Office of the President to expe-

dite the filling up of vacancies in the Judiciary.

RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168B
requesting the Department of Justice
and the Office of the President to expedite the filling up of vacancies in the
Prosecution Service and in the Public
Attorneys Office (PAO).
RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168C -requesting the Supreme Court to allow
the IBP Eastern and Western Mindanao
Regions to set-up pay toilets in the Halls
of Justice within their respective areas.
RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168d -calling on the IBP Board of Governors
to prepare a comprehensive directory of
all lawyers, including a list of all IBP activities for the year, and to provide a free
copy of said directory to all attendees of
the National Convention.
RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168E -the IBP Board of Governors adopts the
policy that all IBP National and Chapter
Officers who will run for elective office

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

37

august 2012

will be deemed resigned from the date

of the start of the official campaign and
NOT from the date of filing of certificates
of candidacy.

attendance to said election meetings as

duty on official time.
RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168G -the IBP Board of Governors reconsiders the disqualification of clerks of court
from running for election as IBP officers.

RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168F -the IBP Board of Governors amends

Section 12 (a) of the IBP Chapter ByLaws to effect the change of date of
election of IBP Officers and Directors
from the last Saturday of February of
every other year to the last Friday of
February of every other year; resolving
further to request the Supreme Court
and Government Offices to authorize

RESoLUTIoN No. XX-2012-168H -the IBP Board of Governors amends

Section 12 (g) of the IBP Chapter ByLaws proscribing the ELECTION and
not the NOMINATION of a person in
more than one office during the same
election.

IBP mINdaNao CHaPter PresIdeNts

arcedel i. libarios

rustico a. peas

isidro l. Caracol

Carlo C. Borromeo

Jonathan M. Jocom

Casiano s. retardo, Jr.

alphon r. lagamon

alfonso s. Casurra

edwin M. Malazarte

noel a. Ben

alizedney M. Ditucalan

Basari D. Mapupuno

Agusan Del Norte

Misamis Oriental

Agusan Del Sur

Surigao Del Norte

rosalio C. Cario
Saranggani

38

Bukidnon

Surigao Del Sur

elvie e. albano
South Cotabato

Camiguin

rutillo B. pasok
Sultan Kudarat

Cotabato

Davao City

Lanao Del Norte

Jose rizalino l. ortega

Zambasulta

Davao Del Norte

Lanao Del Sur

Michael l. ajoc

Zamboanga Del Norte

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Cynthia C. Doromal

Gilberto M. Maduay

Daniel C. lao

Vicente C. andiano

Davao Del Sur

Misamis Occidental

edgar B. Bongalos
Zamboanga Del Sur

Davao Oriental

North Cotabato

richard B. rambuyong
Zamboanga Sibugay

The bar Tribune

duterte Pledges all out suPPort

For 14tH NatIoNal CoNveNtIoN oF lawyers
By Aurora G. Geronimo
Davao City Vice Mayor Rodrigo
Duterte has pledged the local governments all out support for the
14th National Convention of Lawyers and the IBPs 40th Anniversary Celebration, scheduled January
15-19, 2012 at the SMX Convention Center in Davao City.
Duterte attended the coordination meeting held July 13, 2012 at
the Marco Polo Hotel in Davao, together with chapter presidents of
Eastern and Western Mindanao,
the chapter officers of Davao City
and National Officers led by President Roan Libarios. The meeting
was called to firm up plans for the
biennial meeting of lawyers.
When asked for sponsorships
from the city, Duterte, a lawyer
by profession, said Aw bisan pag
pamahaw, paniudto ug panihapon
(Even breakfast, lunch and dinner.)
The organizing committee is targeting a record attendance of 5,000
IBP members and has finalized the
registration fees: P5,000.00 onsite registration and regular registration for Mindanao and Visayas

chapter delegates; P4,000.00

early bird rate (registration before
December 1, 2012), senior citizens
and lifetime members; P3,500.00
Luzon chapter delegates who will
register before December 1, 2012.
Law students get a 20 per cent discount while groups of 10 delegates
pay only for nine on lumpsum payment.
The convention schedule was
also firmed up during the meeting:
January 14 & 15, 2013 registration and sportsfest; January 15,
2013 tree planting, inauguration
of IBP Park and welcome dinner;
January 16, 2013 opening ceremonies, Bench and Bar dialogue
and grand ball; January 17, 2013
MCLE lectures, cultural and
awards night; January 18, 2013
plenary and closing session; January 19, 2013 MCLE sessions.
The coordinating body also
agreed on preparatory activities
for the convention and ruby anniversary, such as gathering of old
pictures by the chapters for possible publication in the IBP coffee
table book that will memorialize

the 40th foundation year of the

IBP; and the design of lectures on
a diverse range of topics such as
the mining industry, Scarborough
Shoal, election issues/poll automation, office management, charter
change and stress management.
The next meeting of the coordinating body will be held in October
2012.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

39

Atty. Rodrigo Duterte

Vice Mayor, Davao City

august 2012

IBP stePs uP PreParatIoNs

For Pola CoNFereNCe
By Aurora G. Geronimo

With less than a month away,

the IBP is stepping up preparations
for the 23rd Presidents of Law Associations in Asia (POLA) Conference to be held on August 27-29 at
Marriott Hotel, Pasay City.
Forty-nine foreign delegates
have already registered for the
conference, which will be attended
by presidents and key officers of
bar organizations in 25 countries in
Asia and the Pacific, including officers of international bar associations.
The conference program has
been completed, with the theme
The Legal Profession and the Renewed Challenges of Globalization. Vice President Jejomar C. Binay, the countrys highest ranking
lawyer, will deliver the keynote address at the opening ceremonies
on August 28, 2012.
Meanwhile, Executive Secretary Paquito N. Ochoa, Jr. will welcome the delegates at the opening
function on August 27, 2012, where
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and Senator Miriam Defensor
Santiago, recently elected to a
nine-year tenure as Judge of the
International Criminal Court (ICC),

are the guest speakers.

Manila Mayor Alfredo S. Lim
and Pasay City Mayor Antonino
Calixto will welcome the delegates
in separate programs to be held in
their respective cities.
The line-up of panelists for the
business sessions have been finalized:
Session I Combating Human Trafficking, Drugs and CrossBorder Crimes: Challenges and
Responses.
Moderator:
Ms.
Malathi Das, President, LAWASIA.
Panelists: Hon. Jose Vicente B.
Salazar, former IBP National President & Undersecretary of Justice;
Mr. Isomi Susuki, President-elect,
LAWASIA; Mr. Christopher Leong,
Vice President, LAWASIA & Vice
President, Bar Council of Malaysia; Ms. Catherine Gale, President,
Law Council of Australia.
Session II - The Globalized
Employment Market: Examination of Laws on Migrant Workers.
Moderator: Atty. Rosario T. SetiasReyes, IBP National Director for
Legal Aid; Panelists: Atty. Patricia
Rosalind Salvador-Daway, Associate Dean, UP College of Law; Mr.
Dieter Yih, President, Law Society

40

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

of Hong Kong; Mr. Kenji Yamagishi, President, Japan Federation of

Bar Associations.
Session III Globalization
and Its Impact on the Legal Profession. Moderator: Mr. Akira
Kawamura, President, International Bar Association. Panelists:
Mr. Youngmoo Shin, President,
Korean Bar Association; Mr. David
Liou, President, Taiwan Bar Association; Ms. Catherine Gale, President, Law Council of Australia; Mr.
Kimitoshi Yabuki, Attorney-at-Law,
Yabuki Law Offices; Ms. Alison
Hook, Managing Director, Hook International;
Session IV - Role of Lawyers
in Promoting Corporate Social Responsibility. Moderator: Mr. Jonathan Temm, President, New Zealand Law Society. Panelists: Mr.
Adish Aggarwala, Chairman, All India Bar Association; Atty. Solomon
M. Hermosura, Philippines - Legal
Counsel, Ayala Corporation; Mr.
Lok Vi Ming, Vice President, Law
Society of Singapore; Mr. Doil Son;
Vice President, Korean Bar Association.

The bar Tribune

IN Cold Blood: the case of jimmy

manlus-ag liguyon
By Maria Mimosa M. Ramos
The killing of 37-year-old indigenous
leader and village Captain Datu Jimmy
Liguyon on March 5, 2012 shocked Malaybalay City, Bukidnon. He was allegedly
shot to death by a group of armed men led
by Aldy Salusad a.k.a. Butsoy.
News of Liguyons murder spread
quickly and was featured in broadcast,
print and the internet. It was another act of
all too common impunity.
Liguyon had strongly been against the
introduction of the proposed large-scale
mining to be operated by the SANMATRIDA organization, in lieu of the existing
small-scale mining activities by which not
only residents of Barangay Dao were benefiting but also individuals coming from
other places including the so-called CNN
(military abbreviation for CPP-NPA-NDF)
operating in the area.
The killing of Jimmy M. Liguyon
(Information provided by the NGO,
KARAPATAN)
On the 5th day of March 2012, at
about 6:30 in the evening, at Purok 2,
Barangay Dao, Municipality of San Fernando, in the province of Bukidnon, Jimmy M. Liguyon was shot dead inside his
residence by paramilitary man Alde Salusad a.k.a. Butsoy using an armalite rifle.
Emelio and Arser Liguyon, brothers of the
victim, narrated that at about 5:30 p.m. in
the afternoon, they went to Jimmys house
to borrow money and rice for family consumption as well as for supplies for their
livelihood. Emelio and Arser recounted
that they were talking with Jimmy at the
terrace of his house when Salusad arrived, accompanied by fifteen (15) armed
men in military fatigues. Salusad walked
in without giving courtesy.
When Salusad was about one meter
away from Jimmy, he asked the victim
about the presence of the military in the
area. Jimmy replied that he did not notice
soldiers roving the area. Salusad then
ordered Jimmy to transfer to the opposite bench. Jimmy obeyed and stood up.
Salusad then pretended to offer his hand
to shake Jimmys, when, without a word,
Salusad shot him with his baby armalite
rifle, hitting Jimmy in the chest, instantly
killing him.
Terrified, Emelio and Aser ran in
separate directions, leaving their brother
behind.

Witnesses said that they heard Salusad saying: Akong gipatay si kapitan tungod kay wala kini mipirma sa SANMATRIDA o wala mohatag og certification sa
SANMATRIDA (I killed the captain [village chief] because he wouldnt sign the
SANMATRIDA and refused to give certification to SANMATRIDA). Salusad also
warned the people that whoever complains and fights back, especially the
Liguyon siblings, will also be killed.
The SANMATRIDA, or the San
Fernando Tribal Datus Association,
is a group of Lumads that had reportedly acquired from the government a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT)
over 52,000 hectares of land in several
villages in San Fernando, Bukidnon, including Dao. The SANMATRIDA Multipurpose Cooperative, chaired by retired
military official Herman Cris P. Estrella,
has been enticing mining investors into
their area. The tribal datu of Barangay
Dao under the SANMATRIDA is Aldes
uncle, Datu Manayab Carillo Salusad.
Jimmy strongly resisted the entry of
large-scale mining companies in his village and this made him a target of SANMATRIDA and its armed force, led by Ben
Salusad a.k.a. Nonong, who is also Aldes
father.
In October 2011, Jimmy reported a
series of harassment and attempts on his
life, particularly by Nonong Salusad, who
is associated with the Philippine Armys
8th Infantry Battalion, and from the paramilitary group TRION Force.
On October 13, 2011, Ben Salusad
called Jimmy, and threatened that should
he go back to Dao, they would kill him.
On October 16, Angge Del-anay, another leader of TRION Force, went with his
group to Jimmys house, but the Liguyon
family moved out of Dao after Salusads
threats.
On October 28, 2011, Jimmy and his
wife were coming home from a human
rights day rally in Cagayan de Oro City
when they were stopped by armed men
led by Dal-anay who led them to a vacant
house. Dal-anay told Jimmy to stop joining rallies and that he should allow mining
in Barangay Dao. Jimmy said he did not
want it.
Jimmy also reported that SANMATRIDA convinced him and everyone else
to join their organization. He also reported
receiving information that Barangay Ka-

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Jimmy M. Liguyon

gawad (village council members) Melyn

Isidro, Medy Mancilla and Fausto Bacliran
were allegedly planning to kill him through
the armed men of Nonong Salusad.
It was learned that the three Barangay
Kagawad were the local buyers of gold
in the area through their financier from
Davao City and Valencia City. It was also
reported that the three were encouraging
large-scale mining companies to operate
in their locality.
The Liguyons Fight Back
For their part, the Liguyons have continued their public awareness campaign.
They have also asked the IBP for assistance in the investigation of the killing of
Liguyon and other harassment allegedly
perpetrated by the NIPAR and other paramilitary groups in the community.
Referred to IBP on April 25, 2012
The National President of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Atty. Roan
I. Libarios held a meeting and conducted
interviews with the Liguyons at the National Office of IBP last April 25. The case
was referred to Atty. Rosario T. SetiasReyes, National Director of IBP-National
Center for Legal Aid, and Atty. Dante P.

41

august 2012
IN COLD BLOOD...

Mercado, Senior Deputy Director of IBPNational Center for Legal Aid (IBP-NCLA)
as assisting counsels.
The IBP-NCLA coordinated with the
Chief of Police of the Municipality of San
Fernando, Bukidnon thru a letter dated
April 27, 2012, requesting a copy of the
result of the police investigation, with
statements of witnesses and that of the
suspects. Also, on the same date, the
IBP-NCLA communicated with the Deputy
Provincial Prosecutor of Malaybalay City,
Bukidnon to inquire as to the status of the
case and to forward the documents or
pleadings relative to the case. The IBPNCLA has received the copies of the police investigation and documents.
The IBP-NCLA has also inquired from
Ma. Shirlene Sario, Provincial Officer of
the National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples, about the satus of the application for Certificate of Ancestral Domain
filed by SANMATRIDA.
The IBP-NCLA, in a letter to President
Benigno Noynoy Aquino III, condemned
in the strongest terms the senseless killing
of innocent civilians by military and nonmilitary personnel. The IBP-NCLA asked
the President to immediately disband
and disarm the New Indigenous Peoples
Army Reformer (NIPAR) and ordered the
immediate investigation of the killing of
Jimmy M. Liguyon and the immediate arrest of Alde Salusad and his fourteen (14)
cohorts.
The IBP-NCLA called the KARAPATAN (Alliance for the Advancement of
Peoples Rights) Chairperson Marie Hilao-Enriquez to forward the documents on
the extrajudicial killing of Jimmy Liguyon.
The KARAPATAN transmitted to IBPNCLA the profile of the case and promised to send the other pending documents
from Malaybalay City, Bukidnon.
The IBP-NCLA has also asked the
help of Lieutenant General Jessie D. Dellosa, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces
of the Philippines, to immediately disband
and disarm the NIPAR; arrest Alde Salusad and fourteen (14) John Does involved
in the said killing and conduct a thorough
investigation on the killing.

IBP NCla wINs aCQuIttal

By Dondon D. Samoy
THE IBP NATIONAL CENTER FOR
LEGAL AID recently obtained the acquittal of an accused who was wrongfully
charged with the crime of large-scale illegal recruitment by a syndicate.
The information against Elizabeth
Dumalos and two others was originally
filed before Branch 6 of the Regional Trial
Court of Baguio City. At the time she was
charged, Dumalos was a typical applicant
for overseas employment.
In its decision dated October 24,
2007, the Baguio RTC found Dumalos and
her co-accused guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of Illegal Recruitment
Committed in Large Scale by a Syndicate.
The crime is penalized under Sections 6
and 7 of R.A. 8042 (Migrant Workers and
Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995). Dumalos and her co-accused were sentenced
to life imprisonment, fined P500,000.00
each and made to shoulder the costs of
suit.
Dumalos subsequently filed a Notice
of Appeal, elevating the case to the Court
of Appeals, which appointed the IBPNCLA as her counsel de oficio.
In compliance with the CA resolution
the IBP-NCLA, through Executive Director Atty. Rosario T. Setias-Reyes, Sen-

ior Deputy Director Atty. Rosalie J. De la

Cruz and this writer, carefully reviewed
the records of the proceedings in Dumalos case and filed an Appellants Brief on
December 21, 2010. The IBP-NCLA team
was able to establish that Dumalos was
in fact an ordinary applicant for overseas
work and was not part of an alleged illegal
recruitment syndicate.
The Court of Appeals issued its judgment 14 months later on February 28,
2012, acquitting Dumalos on grounds of
reasonable doubt and modifying the decision of the Regional Trial Court.
The IBP-NCLA team visited Dumalos
on March 2, 2012 at the Correctional for
Women in Mandaluyong City to inform
her of the acquittal. An overjoyed Dumalos cried as she hugged and thanked Atty.
Rosario T. Setias- Reyes and Atty. Rosalie J. De la Cruz for the legal assistance
provided her. Dumalos has come to call
them her angels from the NCLA.
On March 08, 2012, Dumalos finally
secured her release order from the National Penitentiary and returned to her
family in Benguet, seven years after losing her freedom.

The Road Ahead

As things stand, doubts have been
raised if the case will prosper. While a
warrant of arrest has been issued, suspect Alde Salusad and his 14 cohorts
have not been arrested and continue to
remain at large, five months after they
snuffed out the life of one of their own
Jimmy Manlus-ag Liguyon.

42

Elizabeth Dumalos: free again.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Atty. Frederico M. Gapuz

The bar Tribune

(1934 - 2012)

IBP Pays trIBute to PIllar

IN PuBlIC INterest lawyerINg
By Maria Mimosa M. Ramos

de Oro City, to pay tribute to their

beloved brother in the profession.
Officers of the Chapter, headed
by its President, Atty. Alphon R.
Lagamon, led the service. Other
officers --- Attorneys Rex Raagas,
Mylene M. Durano, Carlomagno
Calingin --- read from Scripture,
while Chapter member Atty. Benber Apepe was service leader.
The mood was solemn as
heartfelt eulogies delivered by
members of the Gapuz family and
close friends, including colleagues
from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, resonated at the IFI ProCathedral. Many of Atty. Gapuzs
The IBP is deeply saddened colleagues braved the rains to
by the passing of Atty. Frederico pay their last respects, including
M. Gapuz on May 12, 2012, at his Court of Appeals Executive Justice
home in Alubijid, Misamis Oriental, Romulo V. Borja, Court of Appeals
after a long illness. He was 77.
Associate Justice Edgardo T. LlorAtty. Gapuz is remembered for en, RTC Executive Judge Evelyn
his inspiring and exemplary com- Gamotin-Nery, MTC Executive
mitment as a peoples lawyer, a Judge Eleuteria Badoles-Algodon,
nationalist, true patriot and a mod- Xavier University College of Law
ern Filipino hero.
Dean Raul R. Villanueva and other
On May 17, 2012, the Integrat- members of the judiciary. Those
ed Bar of the Philippines Misamis who attended the necrological serOriental Chapter gathered at the vice can attest to how loved and
Iglesia Filipina Independiente-Agli- admired their fallen brother was.
payan Church, in Bulua, Cagayan
Atty. Armando Kho shared fond

memories of his late boss and mentor while retired Court of Appeals
Justice Alfredo Lagamon, Sr. narrated his encounters with Gapuz,
praising him for his long and admirable career as a staunch defender
of human rights. Attorneys James
Judith and Francisco del Castillo
also offered eulogies for their dear
friend before one of Gapuzs sons,
Frederico Jr., thanked the Chapter
on behalf of the family.
IBP-National Director for Legal Aid, Atty. Rosario T. SetiasReyes also paid tribute to Atty.
Gapuz and presented a posthumous Presidential Plaque of Merit
and the IBP Death Benefit Check
in the amount of Twenty Thousand
Pesos (P20,000.00) to his widow
Mrs. Liberty Janubas Gapuz and
their children, namely: Emmanuel,
Michael, Andrew, Maria Catherine
and Fernando Frederico.
Atty. Setias-Reyes acknowledged the many achievements of
Atty. Gapuz as a true Manlalaban
ug Bayani sa Katawhan. (Warrior
and Hero for Humanity)
Atty. Gapuz was laid to rest on
May 18, 2012 at the Alubijid Cemetery.

"Poverty is a question of wealth, they say.

But poverty is a question of law, as well.
Law legitimizes this unequal, exploitative,
inhumane social order. And it is our challenge
as public interest lawyers to save what remains
of the law for the benefit of our people's human
rights, as we envision a social order where
equality is lived and does not merely exist
as a concept in legalese."
--- Atty. Federico M. Gapuz, welcome address at the 5th Conference
of Lawyers in Asia-Pacific (COLAP), November 2010

Atty. Setias-Reyes presents a posthumous Presidential Plaque of

Merit and the IBP Death Benefit Check to the Gapuz family,
led by his wife, Mrs. Liberty Janubas Gapuz.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

43

august 2012

IBP to HelP PoPularIze

alterNatIve dIsPute resolutIoN
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines has joined forces with the
Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution (OADR) to increase public
awareness of alternative dispute
resolution (ADR) as a substitute
way of resolving disputes.
ADR refers to any process or
procedure used to resolve a dispute or controversy other than by
adjudication of a presiding judge of
a court or an officer of a government agency. A neutral third party
assists in the resolution of issues
under ADR.
The OADR was created under
R.A. 9285, the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004, which
was enacted on April 2, 2004. The
OADR is an attached agency of
the Department of Justice and is
tasked to promote, develop and expand the use of ADR in the private
and public sector. ADR is a means
to achieve speedy and impartial
justice and declog court dockets.
To hasten ADR development
and public acceptance, an Advisory Council was created in March

Justice Undersecretary Jose Vicente Salazar (second from right) discusses a point with OADR
members (left to right) Atty. Ismael Khan, Mr. Francis Chua, and UST Law Dean Nilo Divina.

2010 through Department of Justice Order No. 210 issued by then

Secretary of Justice Alberto Agra.
The Advisory Council has been
formally constituted with the following pioneer members: former
SC Associate Justice Consuelo
Ynares-Santiago; Atty. Ismael
Khan, former SC Assistant Court
Administrator and Chief of the Public Information Office; Mr. Francis
Chua, Chairman Emeritus of the
Philippine Chamber of Commerce

and Industry, IBP President Roan

Libarios and Dean Nilo Divina of
the University of Santo Tomas
(UST) Faculty of Civil Law. The
Council is advisor to the OADR Executive Director on policy, operation and other relevant matters.
IBP President Libarios has
promised to actively promote ADR
and suggested including the OADR
during National Law Week activities this September. (Ma. Christina
V. Abalos)

OADR Advisory Council members (left to right): Atty. Khan, Atty. Libarios and Associate Justice Ynares-Santiago with OADR Directors.

44

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

The bar Tribune

ProPosals For
Peer assIstaNCe PusHed

Peer Assistance Program Director

Alicia A. Risos-Vidal is presenting to
the IBP Board of Governors a number
of proposals affecting legal practice
and members welfare.
Atty. Risos-Vidal is proposing the
issuance of uniform guidelines regard-

ing the propriety and / or permissibility

of lawyers publicizing their services
through various media such as print,
banners, TV, radio, broadcast and the
internet. One promotional project involves the emailing of discount cards.
The PAP Director is likewise bat-

ting for a group personal accident

insurance for IBP members. A sample plan would have 1,000 minimum
enrolees paying one hundred pesos
(P100.00) annual premium each.
Under this program, lawyers will
be entitled to P100,000.00 accidental
death benefit insurance, P50,000.00
for unprovoked murder and assault,
burial benefit for accident victims at
P10,000.00 and Daily Hospital Income
Benefit (maximum 30 days/year) at
P150.00 per day.
Atty. Risos-Vidal has also consulted the Social Security System (SSS)
on how IBP can help self-employed
law practitioners become SSS members. The SSS, through Mr. Raul Matan (Program Specialist, Professional
Sector Department) proposed that it
conduct brief presentations on SSS
membership and benefits to interested IBP Chapters.
Interested chapters are asked to
get in touch with the PAP Director at
the IBP National Office to arrange the
briefings.

IBP, NuPl dIsCuss ProteCtIoN For lawyers

Atty. Alicia A. Risos-Vidal, National Director for Peer Assistance Program with
Atty. Edre U. Olalia (right), Secretary General of NUPL

Peer Assistance Program Director

Alicia A. Risos-Vidal recently met with National Union of Peoples' Lawyers (NUPL)
Secretary General Atty. Edre U. Olalia to
discuss the surge of physical attacks and
threats on lawyers, judges and even law
students.
Based on a 28-page list of cases
prepared by the NUPL and Counsels for
the Defense of Liberties (CODAL), the
total number of judges or lawyers killed
or physically attacked since 2001 have
reached 95, 51 of them involving human

rights cases or issues.

The available data point to unidentified parties or military/intelligence personnel as alleged perpetrators. Atty. Olalia
himself has been the subject of a number
of harassment and threats in the course of
his work as a human rights lawyer.
Attorneys Risos-Vidal and Olalia have
began sharing information and identified
cases which need immediate attention.
They are also considering a possible tie
up with the Lawyers to Lawyers Program
of the Netherlands.

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

Peer Assistance Program Director Alicia A. Risos-Vidal recently discussed

with Public Attorneys Office (PAO)
Chief Persida R. Acosta (left) the concerns of the 1,500 PAO lawyers working in over 300 districts and 17 regional
offices all over the country.

45

august 2012

CHAPTER NEWS

IBP CalmaNa & rotary CluB oF

CalooCaN wow tHe CHIldreN at rsCC
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines Caloocan-Malabon-Navotas
(CalMaNa) Chapter, in partnership
with the Rotary Club of Caloocan,
held a Storytelling, Feeding and
Gift-Giving project last July 21 at
the Reception and Study Center
for Children in Bago Bantay, Quezon City.
The RSCC is a home for the
abandoned, abused, neglected,
and exploited children aged seven
years old and below.
IBP CalMaNa Chapter participants included Atty. Emiliano A.

Mackay, President; Atty. Emerson

T. Barrientos, Treasurer; Atty. Jonathan Mario D. Ibe, Auditor; Atty.
Marvin J. Urmenita, PRO; Atty.
Nancy Aurora D. Quimpo, Director;
Atty. Albert P.Revilles, Director;
and Atty. Eric C. Alajar, PAO Malabon Chief.
The Rotary Club of Caloocan
contingent was led by Eric Maranan, President; Atty. Emiliano
A. Mackay, Past President; and
members Ricky Angeles, Rey Vistro, Ronald Abrenica and Salvador
Quimpo.

The IBP Negros Occidental Legal

Aid Committee recently partnered with
the Anti-Trafficking Legal Advocates
Society (ATLAS) of Bacolod City in organizing the 2nd Quarter Legal Training For Investigation And Prosecution
of Trafficking In Persons (TIP) Cases
under Republic Act No. 9208, the An-

ti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003.

The training was held July 5 and 6,
2012 at The Ripples, LFisher Hotel,
Bacolod City.
The seminar was organized to
equip participants in handling TIP cases, covering issues related to rescue
and investigation of trafficked victims

46

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

The IBP Central Luzon Region

organized its first ever fun run
LakaRun Para Sa Katarungan -on the third day of its Regional Convention held last June at the Clark
Freeport Zone.
The event was well attended and
will henceforth become a regular
feature of every Central Luzon Regional Convention. Central Luzon
Chapters are the beneficiaries of the
fun run.
from the standpoint of law enforcement agencies and the judiciary.
Also discussed were the Department of Justice-led Inter-Agency
Council Against Trafficking (IACAT)
Philippines protocol on handling child
trafficking, the role of the Department
of Labor and Employment in TIP cases in relation to child labor and illegal
recruitment and the rights-based approach in handling TIP cases.
According to ATLAS Executive
Director Jocelle Batapa-Sigue, the
training aims to provide a strong and
skilled pool of lawyers in the private
and public sector to ensure the successful conviction of TIP cases in Negros Occidental. ATLAS was awarded
a grant by the Australian Embassy to
fund the trainings. (With a report from
iloiloNEWSTODAY.com)

The bar Tribune

18 June 2012
The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology expresses its warmest gratitude to the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines for the support and assistance during the
conduct of the National Legal Consultations Day in jail
units nationwide, as part of BJMPs celebration of the
Community Relations Service Month this June. We owe
you the great success of our community relations efforts.
This undertaking did not only bring us closer to the
community but also proved that IBP is as committed to
the corporate social responsibility of promoting community development.
With these, the Jail Bureau shall always be enthusiastic to take part in any of IBPs projects should you wish
our participation. Our CRS shall eagerly accommodate
you through its officer in charge, Jail Inspector Xavier A.
Solda at 927-6383 local 117.
Again, thank you and we look forward to more years
of partnership.
Very respectfully yours,
(Sgd.) DIONY D. MAMARIL, CES (E)
Jail Chief Superintendent
Officer-in-Charge
Bureau of Jail Management
and Penology

July 2, 2012
The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration
would like to commend the Integrated Bar of the Philippines initiative to render legal aid to Overseas Filipino
Workers through the IBPs OFW Legal Assistance Unit.
As the lead agency in the regulation of private sector
participation in recruitment and placement of workers
for overseas employment, we appreciate every effort exercised by other entities to extend help to OFWs seeking
redress from illegal recruiters and recruitment violators
who exploit the publics demand for honest labor.
In this connection, we would like to set a meeting
with you to discuss the possibilities of forging an official
partnership to come up with complementing programs for
the benefit of our Filipino Workers.
Thank you very much.

July 20, 2012

I wish to thank you for organising the first ever public
forum on the Search for the Next Chief Justice. I can confidently say it was a success!
We look forward to more media forum organised by
IBP in the future, especially on matters of national interest involving the judiciary. It's comforting to know IBP is
taking an active role in disseminating information on the
state and the future of the Judiciary!
I'm delighted to share we have created a Poll Question:
Who will be the next Chief Justice? in Pinoyexchange.
com. Currently, members can discuss their thoughts on
the ongoing JBC Live interview and on the manner the
CJ candidates answer the questions. Pinoyexchange members will start casting their vote as soon as we have the
official shortlist from the JBC. Please see http://www.
pinoyexchange.com/forums/showthread.php?t=581262
We have created a new thread Decisions - IN THE
EYE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES Please see: http://www.pinoyexchange.com/forums/showthread.php?t=580533
This thread aims to address and encourage discussions on decisions and any issues related to the Supreme
Court of the Philippines. Another thread Who is NOT
nominated to be Chief Justice? [See: http://www.
pinoyexchange.com/forums/showthread.php?t=575770]
aims to encourage discussion on the CJ nominees and possibly the selection process of the JBC. After the Impeachment trial of Former CJ Corona, there has never been a
time where the public passionately discuss the role of the
Judiciary in our society.
I'd like to take this opportunity to clarify that although
I am not a Moderator or Administrator of Pinoyexchange.
com. I took it upon myself, as a member, to disseminate
information and/or speak my mind on issues concerning
the Judiciary.
I look forward to attend the next IBP Forum! Again,
thank you for organising such a successful public-media
forum.
(Sgd.) Leugenn Alipio
Concerned Citizen

(Sgd.) HANS LEO J. CACDAC

Administrator
Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration

IBP: Celebrating 40 years, 1973-2013

47

22

FRANCIS B. CALSIYAO
ABRAHAM F. DATLAG

WILSON K. KALANGEG
EMMANuEL C. RASING

Kalinga-Apayao
La union

Mountain Province
Nueva Vizcaya

IBP Office, Magsaysay St., Tabuk, Kalinga-Apayao

IBP Office, 2/F G.E.Antonio Bldg.,
San Fernando City, La union
IBP Office, Bontoc, Mountain Province
IBP Office, Justice Hall Bldg.
Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya
IBP Office, Hall of Justice, Cabarroguis, Quirino Province

(074) 752-8322
(074) 442-8937
(078) 844-1221

IBP Office, 2/F, Hall of Justice, Bangued, Abra

IBP Office, Hall of Justice, Baguio City
IBP Office, Hall of Justice, Carig, Tuguegarao City
IBP Office, Hall of Justice, Lagawe, Ifugao
IBP Office, 2/F, Marcos Hall of Justice
Laoag City, Ilocos Norte
IBP Office, Provincial Capitol, Vigan City, Ilocos Sur
IBP Bldg. Alibagu, Ilagan, Isabela

CASIANO C. SABILE

IBP Bldg., Capitol Compound

San Fernando City, Pampanga
Pangasinan
FARAH MARIE G. DECANO
IBP Bldg., Judge Jose R. De Venecia Sr. Memorial Hall,
(075) 614-3119
Bonuan, Tondaligan, Dagupan City, Pangasinan
Tarlac
ARNALDO P. DIzON
IBP Bldg., Tarlac City
(045) 982-7813
zambales
CHRISTOPHER LAWRENCE B. MONATO IBP Bldg., Ohio St., upper Kalaklan, Olongapo City
(047) 811-1534
SOUTHERN LUZON
Aurora
SHARON T. YLANAN
IBP Office, Brgy. Suklayin, Baler, Aurora
Batangas
LOIDA C. CONTI
IBP Office, Bulwagan ng Katarungan, Pollocan West, Batangas City
Calmana
EMILIANO A. MACKAY
IBP Office, 3/F, Aurelio Bldg., 9th Avenue, Caloocan City
Cavite
RENANTE C. BIHASA
IBP Chapter Bldg., E. Aguinaldo Highway, Imus, Cavite
Laguna
VIRGILIO B. GALEON
IBP Office, Don Tomas Dizon Hall, Hall of Justice, San Pablo City
Makati
GRACE P. QuEVEDO-PANAGSAGAN IBP Office, uG 39, Cityland Dela Rosa Condominium, Dela Rosa St., Makati City
Marinduque
MA. AuRORA P. SORI-ROMANO
IBP Office, unit 5, 3K Bldg., Barangay 2, Poblacion Gasan, Marinduque
Occidental Mindoro ALFREDO A. CASTILLO
IBP Office, San Jose, Occidental Mindoro
Oriental Mindoro
CHARLOTTE F. AGuBA-GOCO
IBP Office, Capitol Square, Calapan City
PPLM
PATERNO S. LARRACAS
IBP Office, Rm. 217, Pasay City Hall, F.B. Harrison St., Pasay City
Quezon
RONALDO A. SALAMILLAS
IBP Building, near RTC, Lucena City
Rizal
JuLIAN R. TORCuATOR JR.
Rizal Provincial Jail Compound, Cabera Road, Sitio Kaytikling, Brgy. Dolores, Taytay
GREATER MANILA
Manila I
FRANCISCO A. SANCHEz III
IBP Office, 1929 Tomas Mapua Street
Manila II
ROSARIO T. SETIAS-REYES
unit 427, Madrigal Building, No. 286, Escolta, Manila
0919-8184068
Manila III
GISELA F. LOOD
IBP Office, Rm. 504, Doa Amparo Bldg.
735-7275
Catalua Street, Sampaloc, Manila
Manila IV
YOLANDO F. LIM
IBP OffiCe, L2 F1 uG Floor, Bugundy Transpacific Place
0915-1804059
2444 Taf Ave., Malate, Manila
Quezon City
VICTORIA V. LOANzON
IBP Office, Rm. 235, 2Flr, Justice Hall,
925-7183
City Hall Compound, Quezon City
BICOLANDIA
Albay
VIENTE P. DEL ROSARIO
IBP Office, RTC Hall, Rawis, Legaspi City
(052) 4820281/
4814640
Camarines Norte
ELAINE GAY R. BELEN
IBP Office, Daet, Camarines Norte
(054) 440-0902
Camarines Sur
ANTONIO C. RIVERO
IBP Building, J. Miranda Avenue, Naga City
(054) 473-2042
Catanduanes
GREGORIO M. SARMIENTO, JR.
IBP Office, Hall of Justice, Capitol Compound, Virac, Catanduanes
(052) 811-2245
Masbate
ROSALITO B. APOYA
IBP Office, Hall of Justice, Masbate, Masbate
Sorsogon
WILLIAM E. ERLANO
IBP Office, Bulwagan ng Katarungan, Sorsogon City, Sorsogon
(056) 211-3272

Pampanga

(047) 921-1085
(044) 662-4768
(044) 600-2553 /
311-2106
(045) 963-5007

(072) 888-5579 /
0905 411-0640
(078) 805-1068
(078) 805-1068 /
0908 862-5152
0917 580-7360

(077) 772-0845 /
792-3045
(077) 722-3364
(078) 622-2323 /
0939 557-8257

Tel./Mobile

Address

Quirino
EDWIN O. BETGuEN
CENTRAL LUZON
Bataan
JuLIET S. SALARIA
IBP Bldg., Capitol Compound, City of Balanga, Bataan
Bulacan
CECILIO ALEJANDRO C. VILLANuEVA IBP Office, Provincial Capitol, Malolos, Bulacan
Nueva Ecija
LYDIA BAuTO-HIPOLITO
IBP Bldg., Ramos St., Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija

JOSE ROSARIO JIMENEz

NERIzA M. DASIG-CACATIAN

Ilocos Sur
Isabela

Chapter
President
NORTHERN LUZON
Abra
CONDE CLARO C. VENuS
Baguio-Benguet
FRANKLIN B. CALPITO
Cagayan
ORLANDO D. BELTRAN
Ifugao
ROMEO u. HABBILING
Ilocos Norte
MARIANO R. NALuPTA JR.
CRISTIFIL D. BALuMA
FERDINAND A. PEPITO
EARL M. BONACHITA
JOSE VICENTE R.M. OPINION
ROY PERCIVAL M. PEREz

NESARIO G. AWAT

ISIDRO L. CARACOL
CARLO C. BORROMEO
JONATHAN M. JOCOM
CASIANO S. RETARDO, JR.
CYNTHIA CARADO DOROMAL
GILBERTO M. MADuAY
ALPHON R. LAGAMON
ALFONSO S. CASuRRA
EDWIN M. MALAzARTE

Bukidnon
Camiguin
Davao City
Davao del Norte
Davao del Sur
Davao Oriental
Misamis Oriental
Surigao del Norte
Surigao del Sur

Compiled by Aurora Geronimo, Ron-ron Chu and Roel Lepasana

Encoded by Precious Caseas

WESTERN MINDANAO
zambasulta
JOSE RIzALINO L. ORTEGA
Cotabato
NOEL A. BEN
Lanao del Norte
ALIzEDNEY M. DITuCALAN
Lanao del Sur
BASARI D. MAPuPuNO
Misamis Occidental DANIEL C. LAO
North Cotabato
VICENTE C. ANDIANO
South Cotabato
ELVIE E. ALBANO
Sultan Kudarat
RuTILLO B. PASOK
Samboanga del Norte MICHAEL L. AJOC
zamboanga del Sur EDGAR B. BONGALOS
zamboanga Sibugay RICHARD B. RAMBuYONG
Sarangani
ROSALIO C. CARIO

RuSTICO A. PEAS

Agusan del Sur

Romblon
MARK ANTHONY N. GANAN
Siquijor
ALFONSO L. SALCEDO
EASTERN MINDANO
Agusan del Norte
ARCEDEL I. LIBARIOS

Palawan

Northern Samar
ROLANDO P. DuBONGCO
Samar
CESAR T. MABANSAG
Southern Leyte
MANuEL L. ENAGE, JR.
WESTERN VISAYAS
Aklan
FLORA B. ALMERO
Antinque
CORNELIO P. ALDON
Capiz
LORENCITO B. DIAz
Guimaras
ROMMEL C. BELLONES
Iloilo
PAuLINO L. SALMON, JR.
Negros Occidental
FILOMENO B. TAN, JR.
Negros Oriental
ARTuRO M. DuPIO

Bohol
Cebu
Cebu City
Eastern Samar
Leyte

Chapter
President
EASTERN VISAYAS
Biliran
MELJOHN B. DE LA PENA

INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES

2/F, Room 201, Hall of Justice, zamboanga City

Hall of Justice, Regional Complex, Cotabato City, Cotabato
IBP Bldg., Badelles Street, Iligan City, Lanao Del Norte
IBP Building, Bongon, Marawi City, Lanao Del Sur
Hall of Justice, Ozamis City, Misamis Occidental
Public Attorneys Office, Kidapawan City, North Cotabato
IBP Room, Hall of Justice, lagao General Santos City, South Cotabato
Magsaysay Avenue, Poblacion, Tacurong City, Sultan Kudarat
2/F, Hall of Justice, Dipolog City, zamboanga Del Norte
2/F, Hall of Justice, Pagadian City, zamboanga Del Sur
Ipil, zamboanga Sibugay
Rm. 206 Arenas Building, Pioneers Ave., General Santos

IBP Office, Beside RTC, Government Center, Patin-ay

Prosperidad, Agusan Del Sur
Free Legal Aid Office, Malaybalay, Bukidnon
Poblacion, Mambajao, Camiguin
2/F, Hall of Justice, Candelaria Street, Ecoland, Davao City
Solaon Building, Quezon Street, Tagum Ciyt, Davao Del Norte
IBP Building, Hall of Justice Compound, Digos City
Mati, Davao Oriental
IBP Bldg., Provincial Capitol Compound
Cagayan De Oro City, Misamis Oriental
IBP Office, Parola P. Reyes Street, Surigao City, 8400 Surigao Del Norte
RTC IBP Law Library, Palace of Justice Building,
Capitol Hills, Tandag, Surigao Del Sur

IBP Office, Capitol Building, Capitol Site, Butuan City

IBP Office, Hall of Justice, Godofredo Ramos Street, Kalibo, Aklan

San Jose, Antique
IBP Office, 2/F, Hall of Justice, Roxas City
M. Chavez Hall, Hall of Justice, San Miguel, Jordan, Guimaras
4/F, Hall of Justice, Iloilo City
IBP Building, Nursery Compound, Gatuslao Ctreet, Bacolod City
IBP Office, Hall of Justice, Capitol Area
Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental
G/F, Capitol Building, Capitol Compound, Fernandez St.
Puerto Princesa City, Palawan
Batiano, Odiongan, Romblon
Camangki, Enrique Villanueva, Siquijor

IBP Office, 2/F, Solite Building cor.

Vicentillos & Ballesteros Sts., Naval, Biliran
RTC-IBP Law Library, Capitol Bldg.Tagbilaran City, Bohol
IBP Building, Capitol Compound, Cebu City
IBP Building, Capitol Compound, Cebu City
IBP Building, Borongan, Eastern Samar
IBP Building Leyte Sports Development Center Comp.
Sta. Cruz., Tacloban City
Allen, Northern Samar
IBP Building, Court House Compound, Catbalogan, Samar
IBP Office, Bulwagan ng Katarungan, Maasin City, southern Leyte

Address

CHAPTER DIRECTORY

(062) 993-2899
(064) 421-3841
(063) 352-0328
(063) 352-0328
(088) 521-3306
(064) 288-5429
(083) 552-3221
(064) 201-3550
(065) 212-2638
(062) 214-3953
(062) 333-5704

(086) 826-6015
(086) 211-3414

(088) 856-4209

(082) 296-0070
(084) 400-5468

(088) 221-3225

(085) 342-5224/
342-8980
(085) 343-8847

(048) 434-8411

(036) 621-1499
(033) 329-6440
(033) 337-5224
(034) 433-1611
(035) 225-2624/
225-4579

(036) 621-1499

(053) 381-2191

(053) 321-3615

(038) 235-5919
(032) 254-7787
(032) 253-6713

(053) 500-9389

Tel./Mobile

February 2012