SC Annual 11 PDF

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES
This is a publication of the Supreme Court Public Information Office.

Prior permission is not required to reproduce its contents, in whole or in part.
An electronic copy of this publication may be downloaded from sc.judiciary.gov.ph
1
2

THE 2011 TO 2012 CORONA COURT
(Center) Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, (Left to Right) Associate Justices Bienvenido L. Reyes, Jose Catral Mendoza, Martin S. Villarama, Jr., Mariano C. del Castillo, Diosdado M. Peralta,
Teresita J. Leonardo-de Castro, Antonio T. Carpio, Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., Arturo D. Brion, Lucas P. Bersamin, Roberto A. Abad, Jose Portugal Perez, Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno, and
Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe.
• The 2011 Corona Court 2
• Message from the Acting Chief Justice 4
• 2011: Upholding the Rule of Law 6

in Face of Unprecedented Challenges
• Justices of the Supreme Court 15
• Highlights of the CY 2013 Budget Proposals 41

of the Supreme Court of the Philippines
and Lower Courts
• The State of the 2011 Judiciary 44
• 2011 Supreme Court Reform Projects 50
• Officials of the Supreme Court 55
• Attached Institutions 67
• 2011 Significant Decisions 70
• 2011 Significant Rules 76
• Significant Accomplishments 77
of SC Committees and Technical Working Groups
• Significant Fora, Conferences, 80

Seminars, and Workshops
• 2011 Significant Administrative Rulings 86
• Employee Welfare and Benefits 94
• The Philippine Judicial System 99

3
T
he Filipino people, through the 1987 Constitution, place
in the Supreme Court a duty much larger than that
enjoyed by most, if not all, the highest courts of other
countries. This duty is the duty to determine if 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. Entrusted with this expanded certiorari jurisdiction,
the Supreme Court often cannot avoid conflicts with the two
other great political branches of government, and is usually asked
to resolve many of the great issues that divide our nation.
Unlike the President or Congress, however, the

Supreme Court, or the entire Judiciary for that
matter, has neither the power of the sword nor
the power of the purse. As Alexander Hamilton
put it, the Judiciary “has no influence over
either the sword or the purse; no direction
either of the strength or of the wealth of the
society,” and has “neither FORCE nor
WILL, but merely judgment; and must
ultimately depend upon the aid of the
executive arm even for the efficacy of
its judgments.” Wielding only
judgment, the Judiciary can fulfill its
great duty only with the support of
the very people who have entrusted
to it its crucial role. Maintaining the
public’s trust in the Judiciary,
therefore, is an essential
precondition to the continued
effectiveness of courts in the
fulfillment of their role in our
representative democracy. This
trust is not something that
courts should take for granted;
it must be built, and once
built, it must be
maintained.
Continued public
faith in the Judiciary
is built and
maintained by
4 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

ensuring to the people a workable representative democracy that protects constitutional rights and guarantees the
rule of law. This can be achieved by the Judiciary only by working together with other government institutions and
nurturing its relationships with them. The principle of separation of powers does not create exclusive fiefdoms for
each of the three great departments of government. It provides merely the conceptual tools and institutional
safeguards for preventing the sort of accumulation of power that history has proven to be inimical to the public
good.
The Judiciary’s primary endeavor is its duty to decide cases, and it is here where it can better nurture its
relationships with the President, Congress, and the rest of government. This it can do by recognizing and taking
advantage of the relative competencies of the different government institutions—without of course compromising
the courts’ duty to protect constitutional values and fundamental rights. For example, it is a basic principle that
courts take into account Congress’ general purposes in enacting a statute whenever its provisions are interpreted
and applied to a case. Also, proper deference should be accorded to the specializations and expertise of
• MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE •

administrative agencies whenever their decisions are contested before the Court.
Of course, the Judiciary in nurturing these relationships must still always look to its expanded duty under our
system of government as a special obligation to the people, which it must never compromise even in the face of
the raging passions of the day. It must be resolute in its commitment to the rule of law and to fundamental rights,
even when public expediency demands otherwise. This, ultimately, is what gives weight to its judgments, and
maintains confidence in the legitimacy of its decisions.
Justice Antonio T. Carpio

5
• 2011: UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW IN FACE OF UNPRECEDENTED CHALLENGES •
2011: Upholding the Rule of Law

in Face of Unprecedented Challenges
2 011 proved to be a tumultuous year for the Supreme Court, ending with Chief
Justice Renato C. Corona being impeached by the House of Representatives
on December 12, 2011.
Nonetheless, the Court continues to do its work, specifically to discharge its constitutional duty “to settle
actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine
whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on
the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.” (Art. XVIII, sec. 1)
Its primary accomplishment is the disposition of cases imbued with public interest and of national
significance. It wrote finis to the following cases:
GR No. 159618, Bayan Muna v. Romulo, February 1, 2011 (Velasco, J.)
The Court dismissed for lack of merit the petition assailing the Non-Surrender Agreement concluded by
and between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America absent any clear contravention
of the law. The Agreement provides in pertinent part that Persons of one Party present in the territory of the
other shall not, absent the express consent of the first Party, (a) be surrendered or transferred by any means
to any international tribunal for any purpose, unless such tribunal has been established by the UN Security
Council or (b) be surrendered or transferred by any means to any other entity or third country, or expelled to
a third country, for the purpose of surrender to or transfer to any international tribunal, unless such tribunal
has been established by the UN Security Council. The decision became final on April 15, 2011.

is required because the Rules expressly mandate their

publication. Thus, it ruled that the referral of the subject
complaint against a Senator by the Committee on Ethics
and Privileges to the Senate Committee of the Whole
shall take effect only upon publication of the said Rules.
The decision became final on March 30, 2011.
GR No. 172087, Philippine Amusement and Gaming

Corporation (PAGCOR) v. BIR, March 15, 2011
(Peralta, J.)
The Court held the PAGCOR exempt from value-
added tax but not from corporate income tax. The
decision became final on August 4, 2011.
GR No. 191560, General v. Arroyo, March 29, 2011

(Brion, J.)
The Court dismissed the petition assailing the
appointment of two Nationsl Police Commission

(NAPOLCOM) Commissioners on the ground that the same
violates the constitutional ban on “midnight” appointments
as petitioner himself has not established his right to the
office to give cause of action to his petition for quo warranto.
The decision attained finality on May 5, 2011.
(Signed Res.) GR No. 164195, Apo Fruits

Corporation v. Land Bank of the Philippines,
April 5, 2011, (Brion, J.)
The Court “denied with absolute finality” Land
Bank’s second motion for reconsideration of its
(Signed Res.) GR No. 176951, League of October 12, 2010 directing the bank to pay
Cities of the Philippines (LCP) v. COMELEC; petitioners 12% interest on the amount of just
GR No. 177499, LCP v. COMELEC; and GR compensation it belatedly paid amounting to P1.3
No. 178056, LCP v. COMELEC, February 15, billion for the petitioners’ expropriated plantations.
2011 (Bersamin, J.) The said ruling became final on April 15, 2011.
After first ruling the assailed laws as
constitutional in 2008, and then holding (Signed Res.) GR No. 191618, Macalintal v.
otherwise in 2009, and then reverting to its 2008 Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), June 7,
ruling in 2010, the Court reconsidered its 2010 2011 (Nachura, J.)
ruling and instead held as not violative of the The Court denied petitioner’s motion for
Constitution and the Local Government Code reconsideration of its decision dated November 23,
the 16 Cityhood Laws converting the 2010 which held the establishment of the PET as
municipalities of Baybay in Leyte; Bogo in Cebu; constitutional. The decision became final on June
Catbalogan in Samar; Tandag in Surigao del 29, 2011.
Sur; Borongan in Eastern Samar; Tayabas in
Quezon province; Lamitan in Basilan; Tabuk in GR No. 190259, Ampatuan v. Puno, June 7, 2011
Kalinga; Bayugan in Agusan del Sur; Batac in (Abad, J.)
Ilocos Norte; Mati in Davao Oriental; The Court upheld the proclamation shortly after
Guihulngan in Negros Oriental; Cabadbaran in the Maguindanao massacre of a state of emergency
Agusan del Norte; Carcar in Cebu; El Salvador in Maguindanao, Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat by
in Misamis Oriental; and Naga in Cebu to cities. then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for failure
The aforesaid ruling became final on June 28, of petitioners to demonstrate that the proclamation
2011. lacked factual bases. The decision attained finality
on June 30, 2011.
GR No. 187714, Pimentel v. Senate
Committee of the Whole, March 8, 2011 (Min. Res.) GR No. 192935, Biraogo v. the
(Carpio, J.) Philippine Truth Commission and GR No. 193036,
The Court held that even if publication is not Lagman v. Ochoa, July 26, 2011
required under the Constitution, publication of The Court denied with finality the Solicitor
the Rules of the Senate Committee of the Whole General’s motion for reconsideration of its

7
December 7, 2010 decision declaring (Signed Res.) GR No. 171101, Hacienda

unconstitutional Executive Order No. 1 creating the Luisita, Inc. (HLI) v. Presidential Agrarian
Philippine Truth Commission tasked to investigate Reform Council (PARC), November 22, 2011
reported cases of graft and corruption allegedly (Velasco, J.)
committed during the Arroyo administration insofar In line with its finding that control over
as it is violative of the equal protection clause of agricultural lands must always be in the hands
the Constitution. The decision thus became final on of the farmers, the Court reconsidered its July
August 11, 2011. 5, 2011 ruling that the qualified farmworker-
beneficiaries (FWBs) of Hacienda Luisita
It has also decided the following significant cases in should be given an option to remain as
political and constitutional law: stockholders of HLI, inasmuch as these
qualified FWBs will never gain control given
(Signed Res.) GR No. 180050, Navarro v. Ermita, the present proportion of shareholdings in HLI.
April 12, 2011 (Nachura, J.) Instead the Court affirmed with modifications
The Court granted the motion for leave to intervene PARC Resolution No. 2005-32-01 dated
of Congressman Francisco T. Matugas, et al. due to December 22, 2005 and Resolution No. 2006-
their personal and substantial interest in the case which 34-01 dated May 3, 2006, placing the lands
became manifest only after the case had been decided subject of HLI’s stock distribution plan under
as well as the said intervenors’ motion to recall entry of
compulsory coverage on mandated land

judgment. It thus declared valid the provision in Article acquisition scheme of the Comprehensive
9(2) of the Rules and Regulations Implementing the Agrarian Reform Program.
Local Government Code of 1991 stating, “The land area
requirement shall not apply where the proposed GR No. 181704, Bureau of Customs
province is composed of one (1) or more islands”; and Employees Association v. Teves,
RA 9355 (An Act Creating the Province of Dinagat December 6, 2011 (Villarama, J.)
Islands) and the proclamation of the Province of Dinagat The Court upheld the constitutionality of RA
Islands and the election of the officials thereof. 9335, the Attrition Act of 2005, which provides
a system of rewards and sanctions through
AM No. 10-11-5-SC, Re: Petition for Radio and the creation of a Rewards and Incentives Fund
Television Coverage of the Multiple Murder Cases and a Revenue Performance Evaluation Board
Against Maguindanao Governor Zaldy Ampatuan; and covers all Bureau of Internal Revenue and
AM No. 10-11-7-SC, Re: Letter of President Benigno Bureau of Customs officials with at least six
S. Aquino III, June 14, 2011 (Carpio Morales, J.) months of service, regardless of employment
Voting unanimously, the Court partially granted pro status.
hac vice the request for live television and radio
broadcast of the trial of the Maguindanao Massacre GR No. 152375, Republic v. Sandiganbayan,
cases subject to certain guidelines. December 13, 2011 (Brion, J.)
The Supreme Court, voting 7-7, dismissed
GR No. 187167, Magallona v. Ermita, August 16, for lack of merit the government’s petition that
2011 (Carpio, J.) sought to overturn a Sandiganbayan resolution
The Court upheld the constitutionality of RA 9552 denying the admission of the deposition of
demarcating the maritime baselines of the Philippines Maurice V. Bane as part of its evidence in its
as an archipelagic state in compliance with the United ill-gotten wealth case (Civil Case No. 0009)
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. against former President Ferdinand Marcos
and his wife Mrs. Imelda R. Marcos and several
GR No. 196271, Kida v. Senate; GR No. 196305, others in connection with the purchase of the
Mapupuno v. Brillantes; GR No. 197221, Lagman v. major shareholdings of Cable and Wireless
Ochoa; GR No. 197280, Tillah v. COMELEC; GR No. Limited in Eastern Telecommunications
197282, Macalintal v. COMELEC; GR No. 197392, Philippines, Inc. (ETPI), among others.
Biraogo v. COMELEC; and GR No. 197454, October
18, 2011 (Brion, J.) Because of the tied vote in both the
The Court upheld in toto the constitutionality of RA December 6 and 13, 2011 En Banc sessions
10153 which synchronizes the Autonomous Region in of the Court, the Sandiganbayan ruling is
Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) elections, previously set on deemed sustained.
August 8, 2011, with the May 2013 regular national and
local elections as well as authorizes the President to In keeping with the principle that public
appoint Officers in Charge to replace the ARMM officials office is a public trust, the Court has rendered
whose terms were to expire on September 30, 2011. the following decisions:


GR Nos. 178701 and 178754, Respicio v. respondents Eduardo Cojuangco, et al. subject of
People, June 6, 2011 (Carpio Morales, J.) Sandiganbayan Civil Case No. 0033-F is their exclusive
The Court upheld the Sandiganbayan’s property as the Republic’s burden to establish by
conviction of a former Immigration preponderance of evidence that the said shares had
Commissioner for graft and corruption in been illegally acquired with coconut-levy funds was not
connection with the release in 1994 of 11 discharged.
Indian nations charged with drug offenses.
GR No. 176579, Gamboa v. Teves, June 28, 2011
GR No. 193677, Veloso v. Commission on (Carpio, J.)
Audit, September 8, 2011 (Peralta, J.) The Court held that the term “capital” in Article XII,
The Supreme Court affirmed the sec. 11 of the Constitution refers only to shares of stock
Commission on Audit (COA)’s disallowance of entitled to vote in the election of directors. It thus directed
the payment of a monetary reward as part of the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate
the Exemplary Public Service Award (EPSA) the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. for possible
to former three-term councilors of the City of violation of the constitutional limit on foreign ownership
Manila authorized by City Ordinance No. 8040 in utilities using the above definition of “capital.”
on the ground that it amounts to double and
GR No. 190795, National Association of Electricity
additional compensation. However, in line with
Consumers for Reforms, Inc. v. Energy Regulatory
existing jurisprudence, it did not require refund
Commission, July 6, 2011 (Sereno, J.)
of the disallowed amount “because all the
The Court dismissed the petition filed by an
parties acted in good faith.”
association of several consumer groups assailing the
26.9-centavo increase in the Manila Electric Company’s
The Court has also rendered the following
distribution rate approved by the Energy Regulatory
significant decisions in relation to business and
Commission (ERC). The Court held, among others, that
the economy:
petitioners had not been denied due process as they
were given several opportunities to attend the hearings
GR No. 166859, Republic v. Sandiganbayan;
in the ERC and present their evidence.
GR No. 169203, Republic v. Sandiganbayan;
GR No. 180702, Republic v. Cojuangco, April GR No. 193007, Diaz v. Secretary of Finance, July
12, 2011 (Bersamin, J.) 19, 2011 (Abad, J.)
The Court held that that the block of shares The Court ruled that the Bureau of Internal Revenue
in San Miguel Corporation in the names of can impose value-added tax (VAT) on tollway operators

9
as the VAT covers all kinds of services rendered in the RULE-MAKING

Philippines for a fee. The Court also flexed its constitutional rule
making power concerning pleading, practice,
GR No. 180006, Commissioner of Internal Revenue and procedure in all courts by promulgating the
v. Fortune Tobacco, September 28, 2011 (Brion, J.) following:
The Court upheld the Court of Tax Appeals ruling
granting Fortune Tobacco a P491 million tax refund. (1) AM No. 11-3-6-SC, Amendment of Section
Following the 2008 ruling in a similarly titled case, the 12, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court on Service
Court held that the revenue regulation on which the Upon Foreign Private Juridical Entity, March
excess taxes were erroneously collected was invalid 15, 2011
and moreover violated the rule of uniformity of taxation. Under this amendment, service of summons
may now be done, with the permission of the
The Court has also struck a blow for human rights court, on foreign private juridical entities that
and civil liberties in the following rulings: are either not registered or have no resident
GR No. 184461-62, Boac v. Cadapan; GR No. 184495, agent through any of the following ways:
Cadapan v. Esperon; GR No. 187109, Cadapan v. A) By personal service coursed through the
Arroyo. May 31, 2011 (Carpio Morales, J.) appropriate court in the foreign country with the
Taking judicial notice of its October 7, 2008 decision assistance of the Department of Foreign Affairs;
in Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo, the Court B) By publication once in a newspaper of

in these consolidated habeas corpus and amparo cases general circulation in the country where the
on appeal ordered military officials, including General defendant may be found and by serving a copy
Jovito Palparan, to immediately release University of of the summons and the court order by
the Philippines students Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen registered mail at the last known address of the
Empeño as well as farmer Manuel Merino from defendant;
detention. C) By facsimile or any recognized electronic
means that could generate proof of service;
GR No. 183711, Burgos v. Arroyo, GR No. 183712, D) By such other means as the court may in its
Burgos v. Arroyo, GR No. 183713, Burgos v. Chief discretion direct.
of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP),
July 5, 2011 (Brion, J.)
Issuing anew a writ of habeas corpus returnable to
the Court of Appeals Presiding Justice, the Supreme
Court directed the AFP to produce the person of the
missing political activist Jonas Joseph Burgos. The case
awaits the compliance also of the Office of the Solicitor
General and the Commission on Human Rights with
several directives from the Court.
GR No. 191805, Rodriguez v. Arroyo; GR No. 193160,

Versoza v. Rodriguez, November 15, 2011 (Sereno, J.)
The Court unanimously affirmed with modification
the grant by the Court of Appeals of the writs of amparo
and habeas data in favor of Noriel Rodriguez, a member
of a peasant organization affiliated with the Kilusang
Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP), whom it found to have
been abducted, detained, and tortured by soldiers
belonging to the 17th Infantry Battalion, 5th Infantry
Division of the military. It ordered the dismissal of the
case against former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
for lack of evidence of her responsibility or accountability
for Rodriguez’s abduction or that she should have
known about the violation of his right to life, liberty or
security, or that she had failed to investigate, punish or
prevent it.
For 2011, the Court En Banc and its three Divisions
resolved 10,879 out of 16,592 judicial cases for a
healthy disposal rate of 65%.

(2) AM No. 10-3-10-SC, Rules of Procedure grade in the Bar examinations, the results of the
for Intellectual Property Rights Cases, multiple-choice questions examinations will be given a
October 18, 2011 weight of 60 percent, while those of the essay-type
These Rules shall be observed by the examinations will be given a weight of 40 percent.
Regional Trial Courts designated as Special
Commercial Courts. These reforms resulted in the early release of the
2011 Bar exams results on February 29, 2012, a mere
BAR REFORM three months after the exams were held, with a passing
In 2011, the Court upon the initiative of 2011 percentage of 31.95% or 1,913 out 5,987 examinees,
Bar Committee Chairperson Justice Roberto A. the highest in this millennium. (BM No. 2265, Re:
Abad both approved and implemented Reforms in the 2011 Bar Examinations, January 18,
significant changes in the Bar examinations. 2011 and BM No. 1161, Re: Proposed Reforms in the
Bar Examinations, February 1, 2011)
One change is the use of multiple-choice
questions (MCQs) that are to be so constructed COURT CLEANSING
as to specifically measure the candidate’s Under its constitutional power of administrative
knowledge of and ability to recall the laws, supervision over all court personnel, the Court has
doctrines, and principles that every new lawyer imposed disciplinary action on 59 judges and 162 lower

needs in his practice, and to assess the court personnel and 45 Supreme Court employees.
candidate’s understanding of the meaning and
significance of those same laws and principles For 2011, it has disbarred four lawyers and imposed
as they apply to specific situations. The answers disciplinary action on 140 others
to the MCQs were checked through the use of
SPEEDING UP COURT OPERATIONS
optical scan machines.
AND ADJUDICATION
The Bar examinations also now include With the end in view of speeding up court operations,
essay-type questions which will not be Bar the Court in 2011 has continued to enhance the
subject specific. In computing a candidate’s final computerization of the Judiciary by rolling out to courts

11
nationwide the E-Payment after implementing the same BENCHBOOK FOR TRIAL COURTS
in the Metro Manila courts in 2010. The Court, through its education and training
arm, the Philippine Judicial Academy, continues
The E-Payment system, which is an inhouse to exert efforts to develop and enhance the
developed system of the Supreme Court Management competencies of members of the Bench through
Information Systems Office (MISO), provides litigants the conduct of various seminars and
with the convenience of having to pay for only one workshops.
receipt. Such single receipt, which already consolidates
all the required legal fees, is immediately printed out On September 12, 2011, the Supreme
from the computer upon assessment and cashiering. Court launched the revised and expanded
Benchbook for Trial Courts. The Benchbook
Under the previous manual system, litigants have is intended as primary reference for judges to
to pay for seven different receipts upon the filing of a enhance their efficiency, accountability, and
case, namely for payments to the Special Allowance transparency with the end view for them to
for the Judiciary, the Judiciary Development Fund, the become great judges.
Legal Research Fund, the Victims’ Compensation Fund,
the Philippine Mediation Center, the Sheriff’s Trust The nationwide training of judges on the
Fund, and the Land Registration Authority. effective use of the Benchbook, with funding
assistance from USAID and ABA-ROLI, also

The system also allows authorized court personnel commenced in September 2011.
to ascertain the cash on hand in their courts at any
time of the day as it already keeps a running count, RECORD DECONGESTION
which results in faster recording and accurate In 2011, for the first time in 50 years, the
reconciliation of legal fees. Reporting of cases are also Court made a serious effort to dispose of
now more efficient as the problem of lost receipts has unnecessary court records by ordering all
been addressed by the computerization of payment. judges and clerks of court of all 138 Regional
Trial Courts, and 53 Metropolitan Trial Courts
Furthermore, due to the implementation of this and Municipal Trial Courts in the cities of Manila,
system, the SC would be able to standardize the legal Makati, Quezon, and Angeles to make an
fees in all system-covered courts, and the inventory of their dockets to sort and segregate
inconsistencies in collection alleviated. inactive case records, including archived and
terminated cases, and those in the dead files,
The E-Payment system is part of the Judiciary Case to identify records for immediate destruction
Management System (JCMS), which is one of the through recycling and those for retention,
Court’s judicial reform projects aimed at declogging scanning, and digitization. (Administrative Order
congested dockets and helping solve delays in case 103-2011)
management and resolution through the use of
information technology. The other components of the Considering its budgetary constraints, the
JCMS include Electronic Raffling to facilitate distribution Court hopes to obtain funding support from
of cases across the branches of the trial courts and its development partners so that this pilot run
Case Monitoring and Tracking to organize case events will be soon replicated in all courts
showing status, schedules, statistics, reports, and other nationwide.
case–related activities.
“SPECIAL” COURTS
The JCMS is currently being pilot-tested in the 21 The OCA has likewise ordered the
courts in Lapu-Lapu City and Pasay City and 34 Office establishment of “tourist courts” or night courts
of the Clerks of Court (OCC) in the National Capital in Pasay City and Makati City to expedite the
Region, Lapu-Lapu City, and Iloilo City. resolution of cases involving tourists
(Administrative Order No. 19-2011) and the
Indeed the problem of judicial delay is such that the continuous operation of “special drugs courts”
Court is thinking out of the box. It is for instance studying across the country.
proposed changes to the Rules of Court, such as changing
the role of the courts from being a neutral referee between MODEL HALLS OF JUSTICE
opposing litigants to that of an active participant in the With support from the World Bank, the
speedy resolution of a case. Another proposed change is Lapu-Lapu City Hall of Justice in Cebu is
to change the approach to litigation from adversarial to now operational, while the Angeles City Hall
inquisitorial. It is hoped that the needed changes to the of Justice in Pampanga is set for completion
Rules will be promulgated by 2012. in 2012.


EJOW AND JUDGMENT DAY
The Court’s centerpiece program for So far the Small Claims Court Project has attained
increasing access to justice through the use of a success rate of 89.3% for which the World Bank has
a mobile court bus, the Enhanced Justice on given the Supreme Court a rating of “excellent.”
Wheels (EJOW) Program, made 22 stops in
2011. Since its launch in 2008, the EJOW has ESTABLISHING LINKAGES
resulted in the release of 6,470 detainees; Contrary to the view of some, the Court has not
giving of free medical and dental attention to set itself in splendid isolation but has reached out
13,385 inmates and of free legal aid to 3,680; to partners both in the international and domestic
the successful mobile court-annexed mediation fronts.
of 6,970 cases; and legal information
dissemination to 18,472 barangay officials. On January 13, 2011, upon invitation by the
Court, Chief Justice Robert J. Torres, Jr. of the
An offshoot of EJOW, which is Judgment Supreme Court of Guam gave the initial lecture in
Day, was launched on January 21, 2011 in Las the Chief Justice Renato C. Corona Distinguished
Piñas. The latter has the same activities as Lecture Series at the SC En Banc Session Hall.
EJOW without the mobile court bus. Chief Justice Torres spoke on “Media and the
Courts,” with focus on the impact of the social media
SMALL CLAIMS COURTS revolution on the courts.
Under the High Court’s Small Claims Project,
ordinary Filipinos are empowered to litigate on On February 22, 2011, the Court hosted the first
their own money claims of P100,000 or less by Justice Sector Coordinating Council (JSCC) meeting
providing them an inexpensive, informal, and for 2011. Composed of the Supreme Court, the
simple procedure which dispenses with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and its attached
need to have legal counsel. All 1,137 first-level agencies, the Department of Interior and Local
courts nationwide, except Shari’a courts, have Government (DILG) and its attached agencies such
been designated in 2010 to hear small claims as the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the
cases. Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP),
and the Department of Budget and Management,
In 2011, the Court developed and distributed the Justice Sector Coordinating Council (JSCC)
software, computers, and USB broadband serves as a mechanism for the effective coordination
wireless modems to the said courts for an and sharing of information in the planning and
efficient monitoring and automated monthly implementation of shared initiatives towards better
reporting of cases. administration of justice.

13
In keeping with its mandate to “offer periodic problems, and gaps in the enforcement, trial,
workshops or seminars that are designed to inform judgment, execution of penalty/corrections,
members of the media about the work of the Court and and rehabilitation/prevention in handling illegal
its procedures” (AM No. 99-4-08-SC, dated August 4, drugs cases as well as formulated strategies
1999), the Supreme Court Public Information Office and action plans among key agencies to solve
hosted on March 30, 2011 the Media Forum on Judiciary these problems.
Coverage for the reporters covering the Supreme Court.
The event has been institutionalized as an annual activity. ESSENTIAL ROLE
Facing unprecedented challenges both
With the Court as the lead agency, the JSCC held from within and without, the Court refused
on November 14, 2011, the 2011 Anti-Illegal Drugs to waver from doing its mandated duty of
Forum at the Philippine International Convention upholding the rule of law, mindful that it is
Center, CCP Complex, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City. essential to the preservation of our people’s
Participants in the Forum identified the issues, civil liberties and democratic way of life.


15
CHIEF JUSTICE
RENATO C. CORONA
(May 17, 2010-May 29, 2012)
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE
(April 9, 2002 - May 16, 2010)
Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, the

23rd Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,
is one of the youngest magistrates ever
to be appointed to the Supreme Court
of the Philippines. He was appointed to the highest
tribunal on April 9, 2002.
Chief Justice Corona finished his Bachelor of Laws

at the Ateneo Law School in 1974. Having married
right after college, he held a full-time job in the Office
of the Executive Secretary in Malacañang Palace while
attending night classes in law school. Despite the heavy
demands of work and family, he graduated no. 5 in
his class and placed 25th highest out of 1,965
candidates in the Bar Examinations. After law school,
he pursued the Master of Business Administration
course (without thesis) at the Ateneo Professional
Schools. In 1981, he was accepted to the Master of
Laws program in Harvard Law School where he focused
on foreign investment policies and the regulation of
corporate and financial institutions. He was conferred
the LL.M. degree by Harvard Law School in 1982.
Chief Justice Corona served as special counsel at

the Development Bank of the Philippines. He later
became senior vice-president and general counsel of
the Commercial Bank of Manila and later, a senior
officer of the Tax and Corporate Counseling Group of
the Tax Division of Sycip Gorres and Velayo (SGV &
Co.) In 1992, he was appointed Assistant Executive
Secretary for legal affairs and, concurrently, head of
the Malacañang Legal Office under then President
Fidel V. Ramos. In 1994, he was promoted to Deputy
Executive Secretary and later Presidential Legal
Counsel and member of the Cabinet. As legal counsel
to President Ramos, then Secretary Corona held, in
concurrent capacity, the positions of Vice-Chairman
of the Presidential Anti-Crime Commission; member
of the Presidential Committee on Bail, Release, and
Pardon, the Cabinet Consultative Committee on the
Government of the Republic of the Philippines-
National Democratic Front (GRP-NDF) Peace Talks, and
the Cabinet Committee on National Security. He
likewise chaired the Appeals Committee of the Movie
and Television Review and Classification Board
(MTRCB) as well as various other presidential
committees. While serving in Malacañang during the
Ramos Administration, he earned the rare distinction
of having solved the perennial backlog of cases in the
Legal Office. In 1998, then President Ramos awarded
him the Philippine Legion of Honor medal with the rank
of officer.

After the term of President Ramos, he was invited by then Vice-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to become her
chief of staff and spokesman. Subsequently, after Arroyo assumed the presidency on January 20, 2001, he was
appointed Presidential Chief of Staff, Presidential Spokesman, and later as Acting Executive Secretary.
He served as a member of the faculty of the Ateneo Law School for 17 years, teaching Commercial Law, Taxation, and
Corporation Law, the same subjects that became the focus of his many articles and columns in several newspapers. He
also wrote for the Ateneo Law Journal. Chief Justice Corona finished his Doctorate in Civil Law at the University of Santo
Tomas, summa cum laude and also valedictorian. He was once given the award of Most Outstanding Graduate School
Student by UST.
He was conferred the degree of Doctor of Laws honoris causa by the University of Batangas, the University of Cebu, the
University of Bohol, and the Angeles University Foundation.
He has lectured and presented scholarly papers before several international law conferences and seminars, some of
which were the Program on Intellectual Property Rights at the Academy for the Judiciary in Washington, D.C. in July 2005;
the 9th General Assembly of the Asean Law Association in Bangkok, Thailand in November 2006 at which he lectured on
class action, public interest litigation, and enforcement of environmental and ancestral domain laws; the inter-regional
meeting of a multidisciplinary group of experts on the role of sanctions in ensuring better respect for international
• JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT •

humanitarian law, sponsored by the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva, Switzerland in November 2007;
the 10th General Assembly of the Asean Law Association on the ASEAN Charter – Taking ASEAN to New Heights in Hanoi,
Vietnam in October 2009 where he delivered a speech on judicial reforms in the Philippines and the Asian Development
Bank Symposium on the occasion of the Asian Judges Symposium on Environmental Decision-Making, the Rule of Law, and
Environmental Justice held at the Asian Development Bank Headquarters, Manila in July 2010. In June 2011, he delivered
a speech on “Access to Justice” at the 14th Conference of Chief Justices of Asia and the Pacific, held in Seoul, South Korea.
In July 2011, he addressed the International Symposium on Constitutional Democratic State in Jakarta, Indonesia and
delivered a scholarly paper on “Constitutional Checks and Balances.” In September 2011, he was invited to deliver the
keynote Address at the Fifth China-Asean Forum on Legal Cooperation and Development held in Kuala Lumpur. And in
October, he was selected from among the Chief Justices from many different countries, to be the President of the
Demonstration Court of the 24th Biennial Conference of the World Jurist Association held in Prague, Czech Republic.
In 2004, the Province of Batangas conferred on him the Dangal ng Batangan award. In 2005, he was chosen as one of
the Outstanding Manilans by the capital City of Manila. On October 29, 2010, the Renmin University of China Law School,
made him Honorary Professor of Law. In November 2011, he was given the Asian Leader Award for Judicial Excellence and,
in the same month, was feted as the Inspiring Leader of the Decade by BizNewsAsia, a leading business news magazine in
the Philippines.
Born on October 15, 1948 in Tanauan City, Batangas, he is married to the former Cristina Roco. They are blessed with
three grown-up children, and grandchildren, Franco, Santino, Anika, Katrina, Natalia, Caia, and Ethan.

17
JUSTICE
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Born in Davao City, Philippines,

Justice Antonio T. Carpio was sworn in
as member of the Supreme Court on
October 26, 2001. Justice Carpio
obtained his law degree from the College of Law of
the University of the Philippines where he graduated
valedictorian and cum laude in 1975. He placed sixth
in the 1975 Bar Examinations. He earned his
undergraduate degree in Economics from Ateneo de
Manila University in 1970.
In his student days, Justice Carpio was Chairman

of the Editorial Board of the Philippine Law Journal of
the UP College of Law. He was Editor-in-Chief of The
Guidon, the school paper of Ateneo de Manila
University. He also served as Managing Editor of the
Philippine Collegian, the school paper of the University
of the Philippines.
Fresh out of law school, Justice Carpio went into

private practice until 1992. He was a Professorial
Lecturer of the UP College of Law from 1983 until 1992
when he was appointed Chief Presidential Legal
Counsel, Office of the President of the Philippines.
Justice Carpio also held other important

government positions before assuming office as
Supreme Court Justice. He was a member of the Board
of Regents of the University of the Philippines from
1993 to 1998. He was a member of the Technology
Transfer Board of the Department of Industry from
1978 to 1979. He served as Special Representative of
the Department of Trade for textile negotiations from
1980 to 1981. He also served as President of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines Pasay-Makati Chapter
(1985-1986), Director of the UP Law Alumni Association
(1984-1989), and Director of the Philippine Bar
Association (1989-1990).
For his “distinguished and exemplary service” to

the Republic, Justice Carpio was awarded in 1998 the
Presidential Medal of Merit by then President Fidel
Ramos. In 1991, Justice Carpio received the
Outstanding Achievement Award in Law from the
Ateneo de Manila Alumni Association. In 2002, he was
also the recipient of the Distinguished Alumnus Award
from the Ateneo de Davao Alumni Association. In 2009,
he was conferred a Doctorate of Laws, honoris causa,
by the Ateneo de Davao University.
Justice Carpio is the Chair of the Second Division

and Chair of the Senate Electoral Tribunal.

JUSTICE
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES
Retired: June 17, 2011
Justice Conchita Carpio Morales

joined the Judiciary in 1983 as Presiding
Judge of the Pili, Camarines Sur Regional
Trial Court. In 1986, she was transferred
to the Pasay Regional Trial Court.
In 1994, she was appointed to the Court of Appeals,

and on September 3, 2002, she was elevated as the
151st member of the Supreme Court.
Justice Carpio Morales graduated valedictorian in

elementary and in high school at Paoay Elementary
School and Paoay North Institute, respectively. She
earned her Bachelor of Arts (Economics) in 1964 and
her Bachelor of Laws in 1968, both from the University
of the Philippines.
After graduation from law school, she worked at

the Atienza Tabora and Del Rosario Law offices. In 1971,
she joined the Department of Justice as Special
Assistant to Justice Secretary Vicente Abad Santos. It
was after almost 12 years of work in the Department
of Justice that she joined the Judiciary in 1983.
A Bar Examiner in Legal Ethics in 2000, she was the

Chair of the 2010 Bar Examinations.
During the Centennary of the University of the

Philippines (UP) in 2008, the UP Alumni Association
conferred on Justice Carpio Morales the Outstanding
Award in Championing Justice/Judiciary “for delivering
justice with courage and untrammeled integrity” % “a
shining paragon to all magistrates, worthy of emulation
and respect.”
A frequent speaker/panelist in local and

international forums, she was, on the invitation of the
World Bank, an interactive panel discussant during its
2009 Celebration of Integrity Day in Washington DC.
Justice Carpio Morales holds the distinction of

being the first woman magistrate to administer the
oath of office to a President of the Republic of the
Philippines.
She was conferred one of the Ten Outstanding

Manilans Awards in June 2011.
After her retirement from the Supreme Court,

Justice Carpio Morales was appointed Ombudsman by
President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino on July 26, 2011.

19
JUSTICE
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA
Retired: June 13, 2011
Justice Nachura held two posts in the

Executive Department prior to his
appointment on February 7, 2007 as the
158th member of the Supreme Court. He
was first named by President Arroyo as Chief
Presidential Legal Counsel in 2006 and shortly later, as
Solicitor General.
Justice Nachura was the Dean of the Arellano

University School of Law for two years before he was
appointed Undersecretary of the then Department of
Education, Culture, and Sports (DECS) in 1994.
Thereafter, in 1998, he was elected as Representative
of Samar’s Second District in the House of
Representatives serving in the 11th and 12th Congress.
He was also a prosecutor during the 2001
Impeachment trial of former President Joseph E.
Estrada. While in Congress, he authored the National
Service Training Program Act, the Basic Education
Reform Act, and the Samar State University Act. He
also co-authored the Securities Regulation Code, the
Joint Resolution calling for amendments to the
Constitution, and Republic Act 9227, An Act Granting
Additional Compensation in the Form of Special
Allowances to Members of the Judiciary.
Justice Nachura graduated First Honorable Mention

from the San Beda College of Law, and placed seventh
in the 1967 Bar Examinations with a grade of 85.7%.
He served as member of the University of the
Philippines Board of Regents, and holds a Doctorate in
Public Management degree from the Pamantasan ng
Lungsod ng Maynila.
In 2001, he was named among the Bedans of the

Century by his alma mater.
He was the Chairperson of the Committee on

Internal Rules, the Committee on Legal Education and
Bar Matters, and the Sub-Committee on the Revision
of Rules on Special Proceedings. He cochaired the
Halls of Justice Coordinating Committee. He is a
member of the Committees on the Revision of the
Rules of Court and on Legislative-Executive Relations.
He was also the Chairperson of the 2009 Bar
Examinations Committee.
A native of Catbalogan, Samar, he is married to

Conchita Sison-Nachura with whom he has four
children: Hazel Annalou, Katherine Joy, Raymond, and
Antonio, Jr.

JUSTICE
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.
Born on August 8, 1948 in Pasay City,

Justice Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. is a
product of the public school system. He
went to J. Sumulong Elementary School
(First Honorable Mention) and the University of the
Philippines (UP) Preparatory School, respectively, for
his elementary and high school education.
He obtained his Bachelor of Arts degree in Political

Science from UP, finishing the course in only three
years. He went on to take up his Bachelor of Laws from
the same university. At the UP College of Law, Justice
Velasco was a member of the Order of the Purple
Feather Honor Society and served on the Editorial
Board of the Philippine Law Journal. He graduated
eighth in the class of 1971 with a grade of 1.79. He
placed sixth in the Bar Exams that same year with a
grade of 89.85%.
He engaged in private law practice for 20 years

before joining the public sector as a regular member
of the Judicial and Bar Council in 1993.
Justice Velasco served as Undersecretary of the

Department of Justice from 1995 to April 1998. He was
concurrently Commissioner of the Housing and Land
Use Regulatory Board. He was also Chairman of the
Board of Pardons and Parole, Commissioner of the
Commission on Settlement and Land Disputes, and
Member of the Committee on Privatization.
In 1998, he was appointed Court of Appeals Justice.

He was ranked eighth in disposition of cases when he
was named Court Administrator in 2001.
Justice Velasco has also served the Integrated Bar

of the Philippines (IBP) in various capacities: as its
National President in 1987, as Commissioner of the IBP
Committee on Bar Discipline, and as Honorary
Chairperson and Past National Co-Chairperson of the
IBP National Committee on Legal Aid. He was a Member
of the Board of Governors for the term 1985-87 and
Vice President for Southern Tagalog Region. He was
also the Cavite IBP Chapter President for the term 1985-
1987.
He was the President of the Quezon City “Capitol”

Jaycees for 1986-87. It was during his term that the
Capitol Jaycees was adjudged the Most Outstanding
JC Chapter in Asia-Pacific. In 1988, he was elected the
National Executive Vice President (NEVP) of the
Philippine Jaycees in charge of Metro Manila.

21
JUSTICE
TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO
Justice De Castro was appointed to

the Supreme Court on December 4,
2007. She is an alumna of the University
of the Philippines (UP) where she was a
consistent college and university scholar. She finished
in UP, Bachelor of Arts cum laude in 1968 and Bachelor
of Law in 1972 at the top four of her class. She was
Vice-Chancellor and a consistent member of the UP
College of Law honor society, the Order of the Purple
Feather. She was elected to lifetime membership in the
Phi Kappa Phi International Honor Society and Pi
Gamma Mu International Honor Society in the Social
Sciences for academic excellence in her Bachelor of Arts
and Bachelor of Laws degrees. She attended law
courses in the International Law Institute in
Washington D.C., USA and Harvard Law School’s
Program of Instruction for Lawyers in Massachusetts,
USA.
Now on her 39th year in government, Justice De

Castro’s career in public service began on February 19,
1973, when she was appointed to a law clerk position
in the Office of the Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court.
From January 1975 to November 1978, she served as
a Legal/Judicial Assistant and as member of the
technical staff of the late Chief Justice Fred Ruiz Castro.
In December 1978, she transferred to the Department
of Justice (DOJ) where she served as State Counsel I
and rose from the ranks culminating in her
appointment in 1997 as Assistant Chief State Counsel.
She was designated as one of the international and
peace negotiators of President Corazon Cojuangco
Aquino and President Fidel V. Ramos from 1988 to
1997. In 1998, she was awarded by then President Fidel
V. Ramos with the Presidential Medal of Merit for
Exceptionally Meritorious and Valuable Service
Rendered and Remarkable Accomplishments that have
served the interest of peace, unity and progress in
Southern Philippines, earning her the gratitude and
admiration of the Filipino nation and the people.
Justice De Castro rejoined the Judiciary as

Sandiganbayan Associate Justice on September 23,
1997 and became its Presiding Justice on December
15, 2004. During her incumbency, she spearheaded the
establishment of the Computerized Case Management
System and the adoption of reforms that contributed
to easing of the court docket in the Sandiganbayan and
to the professionalization of its work force. For these
accomplishments as Presiding Justice of the
Sandiganbayan, she was awarded in December 2005
the Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Judicial Reform
Award.

She now holds the position of President-elect, for the term 2012-2014, of the International Association of Women
Judges (IAWJ) pursuant to her election in May 2012 at the Biennial Convention of the IAWJ held in London, United Kingdom,
which was attended by members of the Chapters of the IAWJ from over 100 countries. She is also currently the President
of the Philippine Women Judges Association (PWJA).
In the Supreme Court, Justice De Castro is the Working Chairperson of the First Division, the Chairperson of the
Management Committee of the Judicial Reform Support Project, the Working Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on
Ethics and Ethical Standards and of the Halls of Justice Coordinating Committee, Chairperson of the Committee on
Computerization and Library, the Committee on Gender Responsiveness in the Judiciary, and the Special Committee to
Draft Rules on Sexual Harassment in the Judiciary, and Member of the Supreme Court Internal Rules Committee.

23
JUSTICE
ARTURO D. BRION
After a two-year stint as Secretary of

Labor and Employment, former Court of
Appeals (CA) Associate Justice Arturo D.
Brion came home to the Judiciary upon
taking his oath as the Highest Court’s 161st magistrate
on March 17, 2008 before Chief Justice Reynato S.
Puno.
Justice Brion’s work experience cuts a swath across

the three branches of government and showcases the
multiple facets of law practice.
He began his law career in private law practice,

mostly in labor law, with the Siguion Reyna Montecillo
& Ongsiako Law Offices from 1975 to 1982. At the same
time, he shared his legal knowledge in the academe as
a member of the Ateneo de Manila University Faculty
of Law from 1976 to 1981, and in 1986.
He entered government service in 1982 as Executive

Director of the Institute of Labor and Manpower
Studies under the Philippine Ministry of Labor. In 1984,
he was elected Mambabatas Pambansa in the
Philippine National Assembly where he was Vice-Chair
of the Labor and Employment Committee and a
member of the Committee on Revision of Laws and
Constitutional Amendments. He was also appointed
Deputy Minister of Labor for Legal and Legislative
Affairs from 1985 to 1986 under the then prevailing
semi-parliamentary system of government.
He returned to private practice as Senior Partner

of the Natividad, Delos Reyes, Maambong & Brion Law
Firm from 1986 to 1988, and subsequently of the
Siguion Reyna Law Office from 1995 to 2001. He also
worked as a consultant for the Civil Service Commission
on public sector unionism, leading to the paper “Public
Sector Unionism – a Proposed Reconfiguration,” and
returned to teach at Ateneo Law from 1995 to 1997.
He likewise taught at the University of the Philippines
School of Labor and Industrial Relations from 2001 to
2002 and the Far Eastern University Institute of Law
from 2005 to 2006.
From these forays into other areas of law, he went

back to full-time government service in 2001 as
Undersecretary of Labor for Labor Relations of the
Department of Labor and Employment, and a year
after, as Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs for Special
Projects of the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Justice Brion, the son of retired Regional Trial Court

Judge Edon B. Brion and Laura S. Dizon, crossed from
Bar to Bench when he was appointed Court of Appeals
Associate Justice in July 2003. He was a Senior Member

of the Appellate Court’s 15th Division until July 2006, when he accepted the task of leading the country’s Department of
Labor and Employment as its Secretary. He has since joined the Judiciary anew to complete the 15-member High Tribunal,
filling in the vacancy left by the retirement of Justice Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez.
Although born in Manila on December 29, 1946, Justice Brion considers himself a true son of San Pablo, Laguna, the
City of Seven Lakes, where he spent his pre-school, elementary, and high school years. He graduated with a Bachelor of
Arts in Mathematics degree from the San Pablo Colleges before taking up his law studies at the Ateneo de Manila University.
At law school, he became Editor-in-Chief of the Ateneo Law Journal, and finished his Bachelor of Laws degree with the
distinction of being Cum Laude, Class Valedictorian, and awardee of the Golden Leaf Award, Gold Medal for Academic
Excellence, and First Honors Gold Medal. He ranked first place in the Bar Examinations held that same year, with a grade
of 91.65%.
Despite his achievements, Justice Brion never ceased in his pursuit of knowledge. In the middle of his legal career, he
went to obtain his Master of Laws degree at the Osgoode Hall Law School of York University in Toronto, Canada in 1994,
with Labor Law as his main area of study. While serving as a magistrate of the appellate court, Justice Brion enrolled in
Spanish language classes at the Instituto Cervantes where he is now at Nivel (level) 13. While in his masteral studies, he
worked with the Ontario Ministry of Labor and the Management Board Secretariat, and was Editor-in-Chief of Legal Update,
a publication of the Legal Services Branch of the Ontario Ministry of Labor from 1992 to 1993.
Justice Brion is married to chemist-lawyer Atty. Antonietta C. Articona-Brion. They are blessed with two similarly multi-

skilled children: Antonella A. Brion, graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in History from York University in Toronto,
Canada, but is now both a writer and a painter after her masteral studies in fine arts; and Arturo Brion, Jr., a computer
engineering graduate of McMaster University and Bachelor of Laws degree holder from the University of New Brunswick,
now engaged in Intellectual Property Law Practice in Ottawa, Canada.
Justice Brion is a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Philippine Bar Association, and for a time, of the Law
Society of Upper Canada. He was Chapter President of the IBP, Laguna Chapter form 1981 to 1983, National President of
the YMCA of the Philippines in 1985, and a member of its National Board in 2006. He is also a Mason and is a member of
the Teodoro Kalaw Memorial Lodge No 136, Malinaw Lodge No. 25, the Manila Bodies No. 1 (A.&A.S.R.), and the Royal
Order of Scotland.

25
JUSTICE
DIOSDADO S. PERALTA
On January 13, 2009, then

Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice
Diosdado M. Peralta was named as
Supreme Court Associate Justice. He is
the third Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice to be
appointed to the High Tribunal.
Justice Peralta finished his Bachelor of Science

degree at the San Juan de Letran in 1974 before
pursuing law at the University of Santo Tomas Faculty
of Civil Law, where he graduated in 1979. On April 9,
2010, he was conferred the degree of Doctor of Laws
Honoris Causa by the Northwestern University, Laoag
City, Ilocos Norte.
His government service started in 1987, when he

was appointed Third Assistant City Fiscal in Laoag City
and, later, assigned to the Prosecutor’s Office in the
City of Manila in 1988. As trial prosecutor, he was
awarded the Outstanding Public Prosecutor of Manila
for the year 1990 – 1991 by the City of Manila on June
21, 1991, and the Most Outstanding Public Prosecutor
of the City of Manila on June 9, 1994 by the
Department of Justice. Later, he became the Assistant
Chief of the Investigation Division, Office of the City
Prosecutor.
On September 22, 1994, he was appointed Judge

of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 95, Quezon City,
which was designated as Special Criminal Court on
Heinous Crimes and, later, Drugs Cases. As trial court
Judge, he was the recipient of several commendations,
two of which were the Special Centennial Awards in
the Field of Criminal Law, given by the Integrated Bar
of the Philippines and the Supreme Court during its
Centennial Celebration on June 6, 2001, and the
Judicial Excellence Awards 2002 (Chief Justice Ramon
Avanceña Award for Outstanding Regional Trial Court
Judge), given by the Foundation for Judicial Excellence
on June 14, 2002 which, providentially, was also the
same day when he was appointed Associate Justice of
the Sandiganbayan. On March 28, 2008, he became
the Presiding Justice of the Sandiganbayan.
He was a Bar reviewer, professor, lecturer, and

resource person in Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure,
Remedial Law, and Trial Technique in notable
universities. In recognition of his vast contribution in
the field of law, his alma mater gave him several
citations, among others, the Award of Distinction and
Award in the Foundation for Judicial Excellence on
November 23, 2002 for his appointment as Associate

Justice of the Sandiganbayan, Most Outstanding Alumnus of the Year Award in 2008 for being the Presiding Justice of the
Sandiganbayan, and also The Outstanding Thomasian Alumni Awards for Law (TOTAL Awardee in Law/Justice) on August
2, 2008, which was the highest award bestowed by the University of Santo Tomas to an alumnus. Other government and
civic groups honored him with the Sectoral Ulirang Ama Awardee on Law and Judiciary given by the Ulirang Ama Foundation
on June 18, 2006, and the Outstanding Citizen in the Field of Law and Government Service on February 7, 2004 by the City
of Laoag.
He attended conferences and study programs abroad, including, among others, Senior Seminar on Financial
Underpinnings of Terrorism sponsored by the U.S. State Department in Washington, D.C., U.S.A., from August 6 to 9, 2001;
PHILJA Study Tour to Canada with the National Judicial Institute, a Juris Canada project, from June 5 to 20, 2005; Program
of Instruction for Lawyers-Program on Negotiation in Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Boston, Massachusetts, from June
9 to 13, 2008; Australasian Conference of Planning and Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ASPECT) in Sydney, Australia,
from August 31 to September 3, 2010; and Knowledge Sharing and Exchange Visit with Judiciaries of Spain, Italy, the
Netherlands, and the International Court of Justice, in Spain and the Netherlands, from July 5 to 17, 2011.
As an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, he is the Chairperson on the Committee on the Revision of the Benchbook
on the Application, Computation, and Graduation of Penalties. He is a member of the following committees: Committee
on the Revision of the Rules of Court; Committee on the Revision of the Philippine Benchbook for Trial Court Judges; Sub-
Committee on the Rule of Procedure for Environmental Cases; Judicial Reform Support Project Management Committee
and Chairperson of its Component Working Committee for Component D; Committee on Legislative-Executive Relations

(LERCOM); Sub-Committee on Evidence; Society for Judicial Excellence; Sub-Committee on the Internal Rules of the Supreme
Court; and Sub-Committee on the Rule of Procedure for Intellectual Property Rights Cases. He presently sits as a Member
of the House of Representative Electoral Tribunal.
He is a member of the Corps of Professors, Department of Criminal Law of the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) of
the Supreme Court where he is the regular lecturer and resource person in the seminars conducted for judges and Judiciary
officials and also, in the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education program for lawyers in the country and those based
abroad.
He is the second in a brood of four siblings of the late Judge Elviro L. Peralta, then Court of First Instance Judge of
Manila, and Catalina Madarang Peralta, a retired public school teacher. He is married to Court of Appeals Associate Justice
Fernanda C. Lampas Peralta, with whom he has four children, namely, Dorothy, John Christopher, Timothy John, and John
Isaac.

27
JUSTICE
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN
Justice Lucas P. Bersamin was serving

as Court of Appeals Associate Justice
since March 2003 when he was
appointed to the Supreme Court.
Prior to his CA post, he was the Presiding Judge of

the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, Branch 96. He
had engaged in private legal practice before he was
appointed as RTC judge in November 1986.
He was the recipient of the Chief Justice Jose Abad

Santos Award (Outstanding RTC Judge for 2002) during
the 11th Judicial Excellence Awards (JEA). In the 2000
JEA, he bagged the Best Decision in Civil Law and Best
Decision in Criminal Law awards, an unprecedented
achievement that has yet to be duplicated.
He finished his law studies at the University of the

East in 1973. He placed ninth in the Bar Examinations
given that same year with an average of 86.3%. He is a
fellow at the Commonwealth Judicial Education
Institute in Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada.
In 2006, he was recognized as one of UE’s 60 Most

Outstanding Alumni Awardees during UE’s Diamond
Jubilee Awards. He was UE’s Outstanding Alumnus in
the Judiciary in 2001. In 1991, he was cited as
Outstanding Alumnus in Government Service, Judiciary
and Outstanding Alumnus in the Field of Law by the
UE Alumni Association, Inc.
He was a professor at the Ateneo School of Law,

the UE College of Law, and the University of Santo
Tomas (UST) Faculty of Civil Law. He was special lecturer
at the College of Law, University of Cebu in 2006. He
continues to lecture for the Philippine Judicial
Academy.

JUSTICE
MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO
Justice Mariano C. Del Castillo

obtained his Bachelor of Arts degree
major in Political Science from the San
Beda College in 1971 and graduated
from the Ateneo de Manila University College of Law
with a degree of Bachelor of Laws in 1976. He passed
the Bar Examinations in the same year.
After practicing law, a brief stint in banking and

working with the Araneta Group of Companies, he
joined the Judiciary in 1989 as Municipal Trial Court
Judge of San Mateo, Rizal. He was promoted to
Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge of Angeles City in 1992,
and in 1995, was named RTC Judge of Quezon City
where he was appointed First Vice-Executive Judge
until his appointment as Court of Appeals (CA) Justice
in August 2001. In the CA, he was the Chairman of the
Eleventh Division. In 2005, he was conferred by the
Rotary Club of Manila the Justice George A. Malcolm
Award as best performing CA Justice. In 2006, he was
recognized by the Presiding Justice of the CA for
outstanding performance for achieving zero backlog
in the disposition of cases, which he maintained up to
his appointment to the Supreme Court. He also
became the Editor-In-Chief of the Court of Appeals
Journal from 2006 up to his promotion to the Supreme
Court on July 29, 2009. Presently, Justice Del Castillo
chairs the Enhanced Justice on Wheels and the
International Humanitarian Law Committees as
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
Justice Del Castillo has held various positions in

religious and civic organizations and in non-
government organizations and received various awards
and distinctions. He was also active in the Philippine
Judges Association where he became Director, Vice-
President for Administration, Senior Vice-President,
and Executive Vice-President. He has lectured for the
Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) and for the MCLE
(Ateneo, Center for Law Advocacy and Specialized
Studies and Chan Robles). He taught Practice Court I
and II at the Ateneo College of Law. In 2007, he was
the Governor for Legal of the Bel-Air Village
Association.
He is married to former Ateneo Law Dean Cynthia

del Castillo, with whom he has two children, who both
became lawyers. He was born on July 29, 1949.

29
JUSTICE
ROBERTO A. ABAD
Justice Abad was a Dean’s Lister at

the Ateneo de Manila University where
he earned his law degree. He first
engaged in private practice, working for
about a year at the Jose W. Diokno Law Office in 1968
before he joined the government working as Technical
Assistant (1969-1973) and Associate Attorney (1974-
1975) at the Supreme Court, supervised by then Chief
Justice Fred Ruiz Castro.
In 1975, he joined the Office of the Solicitor General

(OSG). In 1985, he was promoted to Assistant Solicitor
General, a post he held for about a year before putting
up his own law firm. He has been engaged in the private
practice of law for over 22 years.
He joined the legal academe when no less

than the late Chief Justice Roberto C. Concepcion, the
first UST law graduate to top the Bar examinations and
then Law Dean of the University of Santo Tomas,
recruited Justice Abad from the OSG in 1978 to teach
Political Law at the UST. Subsequently, he also taught
Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, Election Law,
Law on Public Corporation, and Public International
Law. And he also became a Bar Reviewer in Political
Law.
From 1988-1990, he worked as legal consultant

for the Presidential Committee on the Nuclear Power
Plant under the late Justice Secretary Sedfrey Ordoñez.
Later, he worked as counsel for the Equitable Banking
Corp. and its officers and branch managers during the
impeachment trial of former President Joseph E.
Estrada.
He authored two books, Practical Book in Legal

Writing in 2002 and Fundamentals of Legal Writing in
2004. He was a contributing staff editor in the Supreme
Court Reports Annotated (SCRA) from 1972 to 1996.
He has conducted a Seminar-Workshop in Legal

Writing and Research in 2007 for lawyers and
investigators of the Office of the Ombudsman upon
the invitation of the Philippine Judicial Academy
(PHILJA), the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID), the Rule of Law Effectiveness
(ROLE), and CD Technologies Asia, Inc. Likewise, he
lectured to the research attorneys of the
Sandiganbayan and the Court of Tax Appeals regarding
the preparation of judicial memoranda.
He has also rendered free legal aid for the Free Legal
Assistance Group (FLAG), Department of Social Welfare
and Development (DSWD), and the Angels of Hope

Orphanage, Pulong Bunga, Silang, Cavite. He occassionally conducts weekend training for lay and religious catechists for
the Archdiocese of Manila.
Justice Abad served as the Chairperson of the 2011 Bar Examinations which implemented radical reforms in the conduct
of the exams. Because of these reforms he is referred to by Dean Andres D. Bautista of the Far Eastern University Institute
of Law as the “Father of the Modern Bar Exams.”
At present, Justice Abad heads the following committees in the Supreme Court: Sub-Committee on the Revision of the
Rules on Civil Procedure, Committee on Internal Rules of the Supreme Court, Committee on Continuing Legal Education
and Bar Matters, Chief Justice Committee to Address Case Congestions and Delay in the Lower Courts, and Committee for
the Decongestion of Provincial, City and Municipal jails. He is also the Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on Human
Rights and International Humanitarian Law and a member of the Committee on Ethics and Ethical Standards and the Sub-
Committee on Rules of Procedure for Intellectual Property Rights.
Justice Abad is married to Atty. Victoria Martinez-Abad. He has four children with the late Lilia Beth B. Abad: Liliarosa,
Ma. Leila, Rex Niño, and Blessilda.

31
JUSTICE
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR.
Justice Martin S. Villarama, Jr. has

been serving as Court of Appeals Justice
for over a decade when he was
appointed on November 3, 2009 as the
166th member of the Supreme Court.
Justice Villarama obtained his Bachelor of Laws

degree from the Manuel L. Quezon University (MLQU)
after completing BS in Business Administration from
De La Salle University.
His appointment as SC Justice is a homecoming of

sorts having begun his law career in 1970 as a technical
assistant in the Legal Research Division (now Office of
the Chief Attorney) of the High Court. He then later
worked as legal counsel/corporate secretary for various
companies.
In 1986, he rejoined the Judiciary after being

appointed Regional Trial Court Judge of Pasig City. He
served as its Executive Judge from 1992 to 1996. He
was a recipient of the Ulirang Ama Award for Law and
Judiciary and the Katangi-tanging Anak ng Angat,
Bulacan Award in 2003.
On March 11, 1998, he was promoted to the CA

where he had served as chair of its Fifth Division and
supervising justice of the Judicial Records Division.
He has served as examiner of Labor and Social

Legislation in the 2004 Bar Examinations. He has also
received recognition as one of the justices with zero
or least pending cases during the 71st anniversary of
the CA in 2007.
Justice Villarama is also a member of the SC Sub-

Committee on the Revision of Rules on Criminal
Procedure and a lecturer in the School of Law of MLQU.
He has attended the 36th Program of Instruction

for Lawyers conducted by Harvard Law School’s Faculty
at Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, among others.
Born on April 14, 1946, Manila, Justice Villarama is

married to former SC En Banc Clerk of Court Atty. Ma.
Luisa Dizon-Villarama. They have two children: Dra.
Clarissa D. Villarama-Cellona, a dermatologist, and
Carlo D. Villarama, a court attorney.

JUSTICE
JOSE PORTUGAL PEREZ
Justice Perez has the distinction of

being the Supreme Court’s first
“homegrown” Justice, having spent all
the years of his professional life in the
Court’s storied halls before assuming office as SC
Associate Justice on December 26, 2009, replacing
Senior Justice Leonardo A. Quisumbing.
Born on December 14, 1946, Justice Perez

graduated in the top ten of his class in both his political
science and law studies at the University of the
Philippines. His academic achievements gained him
entry to the Phi Kappa Phi and Phi Gamma Mu Honor
Societies as well as the Order of the Purple Feather,
the UP Law Honor Society.
Fresh out of law school in 1971, the young Justice

Perez first worked in the Court as a legal assistant in
the Office of the Reporter. In 1977 he became a
confidential attorney in the Office of Chief Justice Fred
Ruiz Castro; in 1980 supervising attorney in the Office
of the Chief Attorney where he rose to the position of
Assistant Chief. In 1987, he was promoted to Deputy
Clerk of Court and Chief of the Office of the Reporter.
In 1996, he was named Assistant Court

Administrator, and in 2000, was appointed Deputy
Court Administrator. In 2008, he was promoted to
Court Administrator.
Justice Perez was valedictorian of the Batangas City

High School in 1963 and salutatorian of Saint Bridget’s
College (elementary) in 1959. He is married to Expedita
Perez (neé Sabile), a retired human resource
management officer in the Department of Assessment
of the City of Manila. They are blessed with three
children – Jerico, Zernan, and Donnabelle.

33
JUSTICE
JOSE CATRAL MENDOZA
A native of Lipa City, Justice Jose

Catral Mendoza was born on August 13,
1947 to Col. Ibarra S. Mendoza, a retired
Philippine Air Force (PAF) officer, and
Teresa Catral Mendoza, a mother engaged in poultry-
raising. He is the eldest of their eight children. Of his
seven siblings, two are priests, two are PAF generals,
one a Philippine Airlines pilot, one a parish assistant,
and the only girl, a Philippine International Trading
Corporation Vice-President.
A law degree holder from the San Beda College of

Law, he is married to the former Livia Rojas, with whom
he has a son, Barleon Rojas Mendoza.
After passing the 1971 Bar Examinations, he

engaged in private practice and served as a legal officer
of the Philippine Banking Corporation, the Manila
Electric Co., and the Gokongwei Group of Companies.
Before joining the Judiciary as Research Attorney in the
Court of Appeals in 1977, he also served as Senior
Consular Investigator in the United States Embassy.
After three years, he re-entered the private sector

and worked as an Associate of the Alampay Alvero
Alampay Law Office before rejoining the Judiciary anew
in the Supreme Court in 1985, first in the Office of
Justice Nestor B. Alampay and later, in that of Justice
Abdulwahid A. Bidin.
In 1989, Justice Mendoza became a member of the

Bench when he was appointed Presiding Judge of Branch
26, RTC, Sta. Cruz, Laguna. In 1992, he was named
Executive Judge of that station.
After almost five years in the province, in 1994, he

was transferred as the Presiding Judge of Branch 219, RTC,
Quezon City, which was designated as a special court for
heinous crimes. For his fair handling of the sensational
cases assigned to him, he was nominated by the IBP,
Quezon City, for the Judicial Excellence Award. The
Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC) and the
Crusade Against Violence (CAV) recognized and
commended him on how he was dispensing justice. In
2002, the VACC bestowed on him the Outstanding Judge
Award. In 2003, he was appointed as the RTC Quezon
City’s Executive Judge.
On July 4, 2003, he was appointed Associate Justice

of the Court of Appeals. He is most remembered for
penning the decision on the reinstatement of the criminal
charges against Dante Tan, and for writing the decision
granting the petition for a writ of amparo filed by the
families of University of the Philippines students Sherlyn
Cadapan and Karen Empeño, who were abducted
allegedly by members of the military way back in 2006.

JUSTICE
MARIA LOURDES P.A. SERENO
Lawyer-academician Maria Lourdes

P. A. Sereno was appointed on August
16, 2010 as the 169th Justice of the
Supreme Court. Born on July 2, 1960, the
then 50-year old Justice is the youngest to be appointed
to the SC in this century. She may also be one of the
longest-serving justices ever, as she is to mandatorily
retire in 2030 after serving a 20-year term.
Despite her family’s humble means, Justice Sereno’s

parents were able to nurture in her a passion for
learning and personal excellence during her formative
years. Her father, a native of Siasi, Sulu, and her mother,
a public school teacher, saved what little money they
had to buy second-hand books that she would eagerly
read. Her appetite for literature and reflection served
her well during her primary schooling and enabled her
to graduate with honors at the Kamuning Elementary
School and Quezon City High School. She was then
awarded generous scholarships by the government and
several private institutions that allowed her to earn an
Economics degree at the Ateneo de Manila University,
and a Bachelor of Laws degree at the University of the
Philippines.
After graduating valedictorian from the UP College

of Law in 1984, Justice Sereno joined the largest law
firm in the country. While she enjoyed her very
challenging work in the law firm, her family started to
grow. Choosing to spend more time with her two young
children and her husband, she opted to leave the law
firm in 1986.
She joined the UP College of Law where she was

able to mold young men and women in the principles
of Civil and Commercial law. From being one of the
youngest faculty members, she would eventually go
on to lead and administer two institutions based in
the UP Law Center – the Institute of International Legal
Studies and the Information and Publication Division.
She was a professor at the UP College of Law for nearly
20 years. At one point, she also became Deputy
Commissioner of the Commission on Human Rights and
was partly responsible for writing the organizational
plans for the Commission. She has also taught at the
Philippine Judicial Academy and several international
academies.
In 1992, Justice Sereno was awarded a De Witte

Fellowship and a Ford-Rockefeller Scholarship to
pursue her Masters of Laws at the University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, where she developed her
proficiency in law and economics and international
trade law. When she and her family returned to the
Philippines, she played a key role in developing those
fields of law.

35
At the age of 38, she was appointed as legal counsellor at the World Trade Organizations’ Appellate Body Secretariat in
Geneva. Her international experience and her pioneering achievements in the legal profession were recognized when she
was selected as one of The Outstanding Women in the Nation’s Service (TOWNS) for law.
At the age of 39, she was chosen as the only female member of the 1999 Preparatory Commission on Constitutional
Reform where she was elected Chairperson of the Commission’s Steering Committee. Here, she helped the various sectoral
committees identify key constitutional issues, and integrated their findings into a common framework for analysis of the
various constitutional provisions. In the same year, together with Justice Jose Campos, Commissioner Haydee Yorac, and
other professors from the UP College of Law, she co-founded Accesslaw, a corporation that provided the first annotated
electronic research system in Philippine law.
Access to justice is one of the centerpiece advocacies of Justice Sereno. One of her earlier works in law school included
a review of the interface between domestic laws and indigenous customary laws. The United Nations Development Program
would commission her to write a paper on judicial reform, which would eventually become the basis for the first external
reform program that was welcomed by the Supreme Court. Among the activities the project birthed was the first-ever
dialogue between the Members of the Supreme Court and representatives of the basic sectors. She also assisted in the
High Tribunal’s pilot projects on mediation and judicial case management systems, and wrote a widely-quoted survey-
based paper on justice and the cost of doing business, together with professors from the UP School of Economics.
Prior to her joining the Court, she was engaged in major international litigation as co-counsel for the Republic, after
which she joined the Asian Institute of Management as Executive Director of its think-tank - the AIM Policy Center - where
she pursued her interest in policy reform and its impact on governance and the economy.
Believing in what she could deliver for justice and judicial reform, President Benigno C. Aquino III made her his first
appointee to the Supreme Court.
She is married to Mario Jose E. Sereno. They are blessed with two children, Maria Sophia and Jose Lorenzo.

JUSTICE
BIENVENIDO L. REYES
Supreme Court Associate Justice

Bienvenido L. Reyes was born in Obando,
Bulacan on July 6, 1947 to Fidel Reyes
and Timotea Lorenzo Reyes. He is
married to Teresita Jacinta Reyes and
they are blessed with two sons —- Dennis Michael
(with whom he has a beautiful granddaughter named
Mary Dominique), and Benson Michael.
He obtained his Bachelor of Arts degree from the
University of Santo Tomas in 1967. Immediately after
college, he went to pursue his Bachelor of Laws degree
at San Beda College and finished the same in 1971. He
passed the Bar Examinations in the same year with a
rating of 81.6 percent.
During his younger years, he engaged in private

practice and became a partner at Albano Reyes and
Sansano Law Offices from 1972 to 1974. A year after,
he became a Media Specialist at the Department of
Public Information in Malacanang, Manila. Thereafter,
he held various positions in private corporations such
as Vice President for Corporate and Legal Affairs of the
R.C. Silverio Group of Companies (1976-1981)
consisting of the following: Sterling Life Assurance
Corporation, Filriters Guaranty Assurance Corporation,
Philippine Underwriters’ Finance Corporation,
Philfinance Securities Corporation, Silver Lines, Inc.,
Silvertrade Inc., and Celebrity Sports Plaza. From 1977
to 1990, he engaged in the formulation of policies,
objectives, and guidelines relative to the operations
of various firms either as Director, Corporate Secretary
and Legal Counsel in the following firms: Core Finance
& Leasing Corporation, Triple One Management and
Development Corporation, Intra Strata Assurance
Corporation, Best Security Agency, Sterling Properties,
Inc., Intent Pacific Management Corporation, Dupels,
Inc., Aurorama, Inc., and Railwayana, Inc.
Justice Reyes also became Managing Partner at the

Reyes Daway Lim Bernardo Lindo and Rosales Law
Offices in 1981 to 1990; He was Board Secretary and
Vice President of the National Home Mortgage Finance
Corporation from 1988 to 1990, and Chairman of the
Board of the Celebrity Sports Plaza (1990-1996).
In 1990, he took on the challenge of public service

and began his career in the Judiciary as Presiding Judge
of the Regional Trial Court, Malabon City. On August
8, 2000, he was appointed Associate Justice of the
Court of Appeals.
While treading his way towards his remarkable

career as a lawyer, Justice Reyes was a recipient of
various awards and recognitions from different
organizations and institutions which stood witness to
his enduring commitment to the profession. In 1998,

37
he was awarded the Most Outstanding Alumnus by his high school alma mater, Colegio de San Pascual Baylon. Two years
after, he was given the Plaque of Distinction for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Law and Jurisprudence by the Lex
Talionis Fraternitas Inc. and a Certificate of Recognition by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Calmana Chapter for his
exemplary achievement as an RTC Judge of Malabon. He was also given a Certificate of Recognition in the field of Law and
Jurisprudence by the San Beda College of Law in July 2002. In 2003, he was recipient of Gawad Dangal ng Obando,
Natatanging Obandeòo Award for being the Most Outstanding Citizen of Obando, Bulacan in the field of law.
In 2011, he received the following: Gawad Bilang Kasaping Pandangal (IBP Gat Marcelo H. del Pilar Bulacan Chapter);
Fraternal Scroll of Distinction (Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc.); Pagkilala - Sangguniang Panlalawigan ng Bulacan; and the
Outstanding Bedan Law Alumni Award. The most recent award he received is the 2012 Distinguished Bedan Award.
During his stint as Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals, he received a recognition for having achieved Zero Backlog
in his docket as of November 2010. Ninety five percent of his decisions which were elevated to the Supreme Court were
affirmed. He left the Court of Appeals on August 23, 2011 when he was appointed Associate Justice of the Supreme Court
by His Excellency President Benigno Aquino III with a very clean docket.

JUSTICE
ESTELA M. PERLAS-BERNABE
On September 16, 2011, the

appointment of then Court of Appeals
Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe as
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court
completed the 15-member High Tribunal before the
year ended.
Justice Perlas-Bernabe replaced Justice Conchita

Carpio Morales who, after retiring in June 2011, has
since been named Ombudsman.
The 59-year old native of Plaridel, Bulacan

completed her pre-law studies, Bachelor of Science in
Commerce, at St. Paul College Manila graduating
magna cum laude in 1972. After earning her law degree
from the Ateneo College of Law, graduating
salutatorian, and passing the Bar in 1976, she
immediately joined the Judiciary as Technical Assistant
in the office of then Justice Lorenzo Relova. From 1978
to 1993, she engaged in private legal practice working
for China Banking Corp., Paramount Finance Corp., and
the National Home Mortgage Finance Corporation. She
later became a senior partner in Bernabe Perlas Morte
& Associates from 1993 to 1996.
The year 1996 signaled her return to the Judiciary

as she was named Metropolitan Trial Court Judge of
the Makati City, Branch 66. In 2000, she was promoted
to Regional Trial Court, Makati City, Branch 142. She
was promoted to the CA on March 15, 2004.
She has been teaching Practice Court and Evidence

at the Ateneo College of Law since 2009. Among her
many awards are the Court of Appeals Award for
Exemplary Performance, CA Award of Recognition for
Outstanding Performance in Case Disposition; Best
Written Decision-Municipal/Metropolitan Trial Court
from the Philippine Women Judges Association;
Natatanging Babaeng Hukom-Municipality of Plaridel,
Bulacan; and Gawad Parangal 2008 as Outstanding
Alumna for Dedicated Service to Country and People-
St. Paul University Manila; and Huwaran Anak ng
Bulakan and Gat Marcelo H. del Pilar Awards in 2011.
She was the Bar Examiner in Mercantile Law in

2007.
She is married to Ricardo C. Bernabe, Jr. with whom

she has two children, namely Ericia and Ricardo III.

39
• MEMBERS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES 2011 •
Source: SC-OAS

• HIGHLIGHTS OF THE CY 2013 BUDGET PROPOSALS •

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE CY 2013 BUDGET PROPOSALS
SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES AND THE LOWER COURTS (SCPLC)
The national government requires accountability and transparency in spending. Accountability is to performance
as transparency is to infnrmation. A sound information and performance can only be to the extent possible and within
the limits of authority and resources an agency has. It is on this pn.:mise that the budget proposals of the Supreme
Court is crafted. Every effort made in the coui”se of the administration ofjustice is worth the resources to be spent.
The Budget Proposal of the Supreme Court of the Philippines and the Lower Courts (SCPLC) for Calendar Year
(CY) 2013 requires an estimated P18,444,154,000.00 (Net of Retirement and Life Insurance Premiums) or an increase
amounting to P5,088,390,000.00 or 38.10% over CY 2011 Approved Appropriations of P 13,355,764,000.00. Inclusive
of Retirement and Life Insurance Premiums, The proposed budget will amount to P 19,239,215,000.00 or an increase
of P5,309,643,000.00 with 38.12% increase over the CY 2012 budget of P13,929,572,000.00. The proposed budget
will ensure the continuity of major projects as follows:
1. Improvement of case administration and access to justice

2. Enhancement of institutional integrity
3. Strengthening of institutional
capacity
4. Support to stakeholders of
reforms.
The Fiscal Program

In comparison with the budgets
of CY 2011 and CY 2012, the
Court hereby
proposes:

41


REVENUES
For CY 201 I, total collections stood at P1,943,700,000.00 but is estimated to decrease in CY 2012 with a total
income of P1,891,381,000.00. Projection for CY 2013 is P1,968,317,000.00. Income is self-administered and is
being dispensed in accordance with the provisions of PD 1949 and RA 9227.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The Supreme Court is saddled by problems and challenges and is, therefore, determined to craft a budget that
is transparent of its actions with accomplishments accounted for every step of the way. Our fiscal program deals
not only with what we receive but more of what we can offer in service. Actual accomplishments for CY 2011 in
terms of cases disposed of is 267,393 cases while estimates for CY 2012 is 302,197 cases. This will gradually
grow to 335,151 disposed cases by CY 2013.
The above premises considered, the Court will continue to take concrete steps to establish a strong foundation
for improvement and development.
RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice

43
• The state of the 2010 Judiciary •
The State of the 2011 Judiciary

Budget Overview
For 2011, the President signed a P1.645T bud-
get1 that committed the 11th largest amount to
the Judiciary. A total of P13.621B2 went to the
Supreme Court, the third-level and lower courts,
and the Presidential Electoral Tribunal or 0.83%
of the total national budget (total obligations).3
1. RA 10147, 2011 General Appropriations Act.
2. Id.
3. From the Total New Appropriations of P1.001T, the share of the
budget for the Judiciary is 1.36%.

By agency, the biggest recipient of government spending was the Department of Education (P192.3B)
followed by the Department of National Defense (P104.5B); Department of Public Works and Highways
(P100.8B); Department of Interior and Local Government (P86.9B); Department of Agriculture (P34.8B);
Department of Social Welfare and Development (P34.3B); Department of Health (P32.4B); Department of
Transportation and Communications (P31.2B); State Universities and Colleges (P22B); and the Department
of Agrarian Reform (P16.4B).

While the allotted P13,621,518,000.00 to the Judiciary for 2011 represented a one million peso increase from
the prior year, the allocation for the Judiciary remained below one percent of the national budget pie at 0.83%.
Though the budget for the Judiciary increased from 2010 to 2011 in line with Article VII, Section 3 of the
Constitution which prohibits Congress from reducing appropriations for the judicial branch below the amount
appropriated for the previous year, the past years have seen only minimal increases for the judicial budget and,
at one point, even a reduction, as what happened in 2010 and can be seen in the following table:

45
Thus in 2011, the Supreme Court sought anew to get at least a 1% share in the national budget proposing an
increase of P4,200,989.00 or 32.86% in the 2012 total budget estimate of P16,984,333,000.00 (inclusive of
retirement and life insurance premiums). This proposed budget for the Judiciary would sustain reforms and
activities by the Court such as rehabilitation of Halls of Justice nationwide and completion of pilot model courts;
designation of more trial courts as family courts and, if possible, the formal creation of such courts to answer for
the rising number of family cases; upgrading and development of Information and Communication Technology;
decentralization of courts; strengthening the integrity of the Judiciary; accessibility of the poor to justice; ensuring
the safety of the Court’s environment through the rehabilitation of the electrical and alarm system; and the best
effort to increase the compensation of the members of the bench and those with judicial ranking. Unfortunately,
the 2012 General Appropriations Act4 allocated to the Judiciary only P15,075,891,000.00 or almost P2B short of
the funds it needed.
4. RA 10155, 2012 General Appropriations Act.
Personnel and Budget Breakdown

At the end of 2011, the Supreme Court, together with the lower courts it supervises—Metropolitan Trial Courts
(MeTCs), Municipal Trial Courts in Cities (MTCCs), Municipal Trial Courts (MTCs), Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
(MCTCs), Shari’a Circuit Courts (SCCs), Regional Trial Courts (RTCs), and Shari’a District Courts (SDCs)—
employed a total of 26,433 people, including judges and non-judicial staff. Personal Services accounted for 75%
of the SC and lower courts budget, with a total allotment of P9.13B, while Maintenance and Other Operating
Expenses represented 25% at P3.03B. There was no allocation, however, for Capital Outlay.
5. Data from the Office of Administrative Services, Supreme Court.

6. Data from the Office of Administrative Services, Office of the Court Administrator.

Vacancy Rates
At the end of 2010, the vacancy rate of the positions for judges and justices was at 25.26% with 586 vacancies
among the 2,320 positions available.7
In 2011, the JBC En Banc processed 2,969 applications for 195 judicial positions in the Supreme Court, the
third-level courts, and the lower courts.8
7. 2010 Judicial and Bar Council Report.
8. 2011 Judicial and Bar Council Report.

While there had been a huge volume of applications for judgeship positions, the JBC balanced the need to fill
the gap and the need to find quality magistrates. By the end of 2011, the vacancy rate was at 27%, with 595
vacancies out of 2,198 judicial positions.9
9. Data from the Court Management Office, Office of the Court Administrator.
BREAKDOWN OF 2011 JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS
ADJUDICATION: Caseload and Disposition

While the same problems such as insufficient number of judges and limited facilities continued to create
difficulties in the adjudication of cases, our trial courts posted gains in reducing the number of pending cases.
The Lower Courts

In 2011, 348,355 new cases were filed with the lower courts, an increase of 23,629 from the previous year.
Overall, the case input for 2011 increased, reaching a total of 995,178 cases. Despite this huge number, however,
the lower courts were able to dispose of 384,296 cases, posting a slight increase in its case disposal rate at 39%.
By December 31, 2011, there were 605,397 pending cases with the lower courts.10
10. Summary Report of Cases from January to December 2011, Statistical Reports Division, Court Management Office, Office of the Court Administrator.

47
LOWER COURTS’ CASE INFLOW 2011
PENDING CASES NEWLY FILED REVIVED /REOPENED RCVD FROM

COURTS
AS OF 12/31/10 OTHER SALAS
RTCs 376,947 181,787 12,833 7,609

MeTCs 82,209 56,561 9,409 2,983
MTCCs 72,537 67,661 8,043 2,352
MTCs 35,237 23,801 8,043 2,352

MCTCs 28,611 18,069 1,428 442
SDCs 56 57 0 0
SCCs 494 419 8 1

TOTAL 596,091 348,355 34,052 16,680
LOWER COURTS’ CASE OUTFLOW 2011
DECIDED / ARCHIVED TRANSFERRED PENDING CASES

COURTS
RESOLVED TO OTHER SALAS AS OF 12/31/09
RTCs 125,378 45,059 10,092 372,025

MeTCs 44,221 26,570 2,648 89,974
MTCCs 48,593 21,431 2,582 63,207
MTCs 20,817 7,816 848 44,143

MCTCs 17,670 3,220 551 45,001
SDCs 29 0 0 167
SCCs 207 105 2 371

TOTAL 257,005 104,201 16,729 614,888
With the continuation of administrative and judicial reforms such as the Enhanced Justice on Wheels Program,
the Small Claims Project, and the Judiciary Case Management System with its components eAssessment and
eCashing system, Electronic Raffling, and Case Monitoring and Tracking, it is hoped that further improvement
in the lower courts’ case disposal rate will be achieved in 2012.
LOWER COURTS’ CASE DISPOSAL 2011
COURTS Case Input11 CASE OUTPUT12 % OF CASE DISPOSALS
RTCs 582,206 190,187 33%

MeTCs 149,847 66,862 45%
MTCCs 151,045 76,539 53%
MTCs 61,797 26,483 40%
MCTCs 49,244 23,564 32%
SDCs 113 33 15%
SCCs 926 628 68%
TOTAL 995,178 384,296 39%

11. Total number of pending cases as of December 31, 2010 (beginning balance), newly filed cases, revived/reopened cases, and cases received from other salas.
12. Total number of decided/resolved cases, archived cases, and cases transferred to other salas

The Third-Level Courts

The Court of Appeals posted an output of 13,054 cases disposed in 2011. The Court of Tax Appeals for its part
disposed of 358 cases by the end of 2011, adjudicating in favor of the government and the taxpayers a total of
Php12B in taxes and duties litigated in 2011. The Sandiganbayan, on the other hand, disposed of 430 cases
within the same period, an increase of 183 from the previous year.
CASE INPUT13 % OF CASE

CASE OUTPUT14 DISPOSAL
Court of Appeals 33,320 13,054 37%
Sandiganbayan 2,658 430 16%
Court of Tax Appeals 1,183 358 30%
TOTAL 39,161 13,842 35%
13. Case Input for Judicial Matters includes pending judicial matters as of December 31, 2010 (beginning balance), new cases,
transferred cases, referred cases, and reinstated cases.
14. Case Output for Judicial Matters includes petitions denied/dismissed by minute/extended resolutions, denied motions for exten-
sion of time to file petitions, transferred cases to En Banc/Divisions or other courts, and cases disposed of by decisions/signed
resolutions.
The Supreme Court

More cases were filed in the Supreme Court in 2011 than in the previous year. A total of 23,509 cases were
filed in the High Tribunal in 2011. Of these, 16,952 were judicial cases or cases invoking the SC’s adjudicative
power, while 6,107 were administrative cases, or those decided under the Court’s power of administrative

supervision. In the same year, 4,676 judicial cases and 2,028 administrative cases were disposed, for a total of
6,704 disposed cases. The High Court thus posted a 42% judicial case disposal rate and a 46% administrative
case disposal rate.15
15. Summary of Statistics on Judicial and Administrative Matters, January - December 2011, Clerk of Court En Banc.
JUDICIAL MATTERS
CASE INPUT16 CASE OUTPUT17 % OF CASE DISPOSAL
EN BANC 564 226 40%

First Division 3,628 1,455 40%
Second Division 3,382 1,674 50%
Third Division 3,446 1,321 38%
TOTAL 11,020 4,676 42%
16 . Case Input for Judicial Matters includes pending judicial matters as of December 31, 2010 (beginning balance), new cases, and reinstated cases.
17. Case Output for Judicial Matters includes petitions denied/dismissed by minute/extended resolutions, denied motions for extension of time to file petitions,
transferred cases to other courts, and cases disposed of by decisions/signed resolutions.
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
% OF CASE
CASE INPUT18 CASE OUTPUT19 DISPOSAL
EN BANC Administrative Matters 615 446 73%
First Division Administrative Matters 991 574 58%
Second Division Administrative Matters 1,672 555 33%
Third Division Administrative Matters 1,115 453 41%
TOTAL 4,393 2,028 46%
18. Case Input for Administrative Matters includes pending administrative cases as of December 31, 2010 (beginning balance), new administrative matters, and
reinstated cases.
19. Case Output for Administrative Matters includes minute/extended resolutions disposing of complaints against justices, judges, and court personnel, matters
on their retirement, and other miscellaneous administrative matters, complaints against lawyers and other bar matters; and administrative matters disposed of by
decisions/signed resolutions.

49
• JUDICIAL REFORM PROJECTS •
JUDICIAL REFORM PROJECTS

INTRODUCTION
In 2011, the Court sought to improve already established judicial reform programs
by either adding new components or enhancing aspects of the original programs to
provide better judicial services to the public.
DECONGESTING COURTS AND JAILS, Deputy Court Administrators, and Assistant Court
INCREASING ACCESS TO JUSTICE Administrators to implement the EJOW program
in a more effective and efficient manner.
ENHANCED JUSTICE ON WHEELS PROGRAM
The Enhanced Justice on Wheels (EJOW) Program Another development was the addition of the
remains one of the Court’s innovative measures to further Team Building for Lower Court Employees
speed up the administration of justice. Inspired by the component. This new component also helps in jail
mobile courts of Guatemala, the EJOW now deploys nine decongestion, the main purpose of the EJOW
buses nationwide. Six of them have been procured with Program, by providing the court employees
financial assistance from the World Bank, while three were information and values which help them to be more
donated by the Sarangani Province, the Filipino-Chinese efficient, and thus provide better services to the
Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc. (FCCCII), and public.
the local government of Santiago City, respectively.
By the end of 2011, the EJOW Program has
To further develop the Program, the Office of the Court facilitated the release of 6,470 inmates; settled
Administrator, under OCA Memorandum Order No. 07- 6,970 cases through court-annexed mediation; and
2011 dated March 2, 2011, created the Technical Working provided free legal aid to 3,680 detainees. A total
Group for the Enhanced Justice on Wheels, composed of of 13,385 inmates were provided free medical and
representatives from the Office of the Court Administrator, dental assistance, while 18,472 barangay officials

SMALL CLAIMS
COURTS PROJECT
The Rule of Procedure for Small
Claims Cases provides an
inexpensive and expeditious means
to settle actions before first-level
courts for money claims not exceeding P100,000.00. No
attorneys are allowed and user-friendly forms are provided
for every step of the proceeding. On average, cases are
heard four months after a litigant files a small claims case,
while the hearing and the decision itself takes only one
day. In comparison, traditional courts normally need three
to four years to resolve incoming civil cases.
This Project was launched in 44 first-level courts in

selected urban areas of the Philippines in October 2008.
In 2010, all 1,137 first-level courts nationwide, except

Shari’ah Circuit Courts, were designated to hear small
claims cases.
In September 6, 2011, the Supreme Court launched

the Small Claims Case Monitoring System (SC2MS), which
seeks to enable the Judiciary to better integrate its
processes by shifting from manual to faster electronic
processes. The SC2MS, a project of the Supreme Court
and the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative

(ABA ROLI) and funded by USAID, aims to make it easier
for small claims courts to provide the High Court with
detailed, consistent, and integrated case information. It will
also improve data systems across localities and regions.
The new system will save staff time, streamline the
participated in the information dissemination reporting process, reduce human errors, and thus increase
seminars by lecturers from the Philippine Judicial the Judiciary’s accountability. Its key features include an
Academy. automatic display of daily tasks, programmed custom
reports, real-time case tracking, and an audit log that
In 2011, the EJOW Program was nominated captures the case history.
to the Liberal Project of the Friedrich Naumann
Foundation (FNF). The Liberal Project aims to The Court, through USAID and World Bank funding,
recognize outstanding initiatives that promote the distributed software, computers, and USB Broadband
liberal values of good governance, human rights wireless modems to the said courts to facilitate the
and free trade. electronic submission of monthly small claims reports. The
Office of the Court Administrator issued OCA Circular No.
JUDGMENT DAY 78-2011 relative to the guidelines and pertinent instructions
Judgment Day, a pilot project and an off-shoot on the said distribution and use of computers and printers
of the Court’s EJOW Program, was launched on in all first-level courts with the pre-installed SC2MS
January 21, 2011 at the Las Piñas City Hall of software. These computers and printers shall be used
Justice. exclusively for small claims cases. So far the Project has
attained an 89.3% success rate for which the World Bank
An initiative of the Las Pinas City judges and has given the Supreme Court a rating of “excellent.”
local government officials in coordination with the
Supreme Court, Judgment Day is the COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION
simultaneous disposition of cases in one day. This The Philippine Mediation Center Office (PMCO) is
pilot project replicates the EJOW Program without committed to assist the Court in decongesting dockets by
the mobile court buses to further speed up the way of expansion, development, implementation,
administration of justice. monitoring, and sustainability of the Supreme Court
Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms through court-
The Judgment Day launch resulted in the annexed mediation. In 2011, a series of training programs
release of five inmates, acquittal of 46 accused, and activities for the local PMCO unit employees were
conviction of eight accused, and hearing of civil conducted in Samar, Southern Leyte, Biliran, and Isabela.
31 civil cases. The Court also rolled out three EJOW mobile court buses

51
to be utilized by PMCO units in Cavite, Rizal, and Lanao for Environmental Cases covering Region 11 held
del Norte. from July 27-29, 2011 at the East Asia Royal Hotel
in General Santos City. The printing of the book
JUDICIARY CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Access to Environmental Justice: A Sourcebook
In March 2011, the Committee on Computerization and on Environmental Rights and Legal Remedies was
Library directed the assessment of the Judicial Court completed in May 2011 and launched during the
Management System (JCMS) to determine the suitability Court’s 113th Anniversary celebration the following
of the technical development and implementation vis-à- month. The Rule of Law exemplars were officially
vis the operational procedures of the three existing turned over to the Department of Education
modules, namely: (1) electronic assessment and (DepEd) in March 2011 for adoption in the
cashiering (eAssesment and eCashiering Systems), (2) elementary and high school curricula.
electronic raffling, and (3) case monitoring and tracking.
KNOWLEDGE SHARING
The JCMS aims to (1) manage cases effectively, (2) AND ESTABLISHING LINKAGES
standardize and streamline processes while maintaining
data integrity, (3) monitor case-related activities, (4) make CJ CORONA
information available to various offices involved in the DISTINGUISHED LECTURE SERIES
process, (5) maintain confidentiality of sensitive information On January 13, 2011, upon invitation by the
through security features, and (6) provide public access Court, Chief Justice Robert J. Torres, Jr. of the
and transparency through online publishing of selected Supreme Court of Guam gave the initial lecture in
information. the Chief Justice Renato C. Corona Distinguished
Lecture Series at the SC En Banc Session
The system is currently being pilot-tested in the 21 Hall. Chief Justice Torres spoke on “Media and
courts in Lapu-Lapu City and Pasay City, while the the Courts,” with focus on the impact of the social
eAssesment and eCashiering Systems are implemented media revolution on the courts.
in the National Capital Region, Lapu Lapu City, Iloilo City,
Baguio City, Malolos City, Cagayan de Oro City, and Davao JUSTICE SECTOR
City. COORDINATING COUNCIL (JSCC)

The Justice Sector Coordinating Council was
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND ENHANCING organized by justice sector agencies in recognition
ACCESS TO THE PILLARS OF JUSTICE of the interdependence of their functions and a
The Enhancing Access to the Pillars of Justice Project
is a sub-component of the Fostering Democratic
Governance Programme of the Government of the
Philippines (GOP)-United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) Country Programme Action Plan
(CPAP) from 2009 to 2011. The Programme is in its final
year of implementation.
While the Supreme Court has been extensively involved

in justice reform projects with the UNDP for many years, it
was only in February 2009 that it has accepted the invitation
of the National Economic and Development Authority
(NEDA) and the UNDP to assume a greater role as
Implementing Partner of the Project. The Project aims to
contribute to the CPAP Governance Outcome of “The poor
especially the disadvantaged women and indigenous
peoples are able to exercise their human rights, engage in
governance processes, empowered to have greater access
to justice, and enjoy the benefits of basic services through
more transparent, accountable and rights-based
democratic institutions.”
During its 3rd year of implementation in 2011, the Project

continued to build on the strategic initiatives and gains in
the previous years, with emphasis on increasing access
to justice by the poor and the marginalized with the
elements of gender equality, human rights, and
environment protection integrated therein. Among others,
the Project supported the 7th Multi-Sectoral Capacity
Building on Environmental Laws and Rules of Procedures

wide range of shared interests, as well as cross- STRENGTHENING INTEGRITY AND JUDICIAL
cutting and sector-wide issues and concerns. On INDEPENDENCE
April 30, 2010, a Joint Declaration was signed by
the heads of justice sector agencies. Such FORMULATION OF THE RULE ON
contains the Sector’s guiding principles, WHISTLEBLOWING AND DEVELOPMENT
approaches to policy making, planning and OF THE HUMAN RESOURCE MANUAL
operations, together with the JSCC’s composition,
Taking off from the outputs developed under
functions and implementation arrangements.
the Strengthening the Integrity of the Judiciary (SIJ) Project
during the stewardship of ret. Chief Justice Reynato S.
Composed of the Supreme Court, the
Puno, the Sub Committee B of the Judicial Reform Support
Department of Justice and its attached agencies,
Project (JRSP) chaired by Justice Arturo D. Brion produced
the Department of Interior and Local Government
the draft Rule on Whistleblowing and the Human Resource
and its attached agencies (the Philippine National
(HR) Manual of the Supreme Court. The HR Manual has
Police and the Bureau of Jail Management and
been approved by the Supreme Court En Banc on January
Penology), and the Department of Budget and
31, 2012 (A.M. No. 00-6-1-SC), while the Rule is still
Management, the JSCC serves as a mechanism
pending review by the Court En Banc.
for the effective coordination and sharing of
information in the planning and implementation
SUPPORTING GOVERNANCE IN JUSTICE SECTOR
of shared initiatives towards better administration
REFORM IN THE PHILIPPINES (TA 7210-PHI)
of justice.
Designated as TA 7210-PHI, this technical assistance
The justice sector agencies, through this grant from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) aims to
Council, have successfully planned and organized support the implementation of the Governance in Justice
a number of fora and other Sector-wide activities Sector Reform Program (GJSRP) of the ADB and the
such as the 2011 Forum on Illegal Drugs held on Philippine Government. The GJSRP, a $300 million
November 14, 2011 at the Philippine International program loan from the ADB for budget support for justice
Convention Center, CCP Complex, Roxas sector agencies, is aimed at strengthening judicial fiscal

Boulevard, Pasay City and the National Criminal autonomy, improving justice sector accountability and
Justice Summit held on December 5-6, 2011 at access to resources, enhancing justice sector integrity,
the historic Manila Hotel. and improving justice sector efficiency. The TA is worth
$1.5 million with an additional $500,000 earmarked for
gender and development-related activities.
To realize these Program objectives, the TA grant has

supported various activities intended to prepare the justice
sector agencies, particularly the Judiciary, by enhancing
its capacity and improving its operations.
To enhance justice sector integrity, the Judicial and

Bar Council (JBC) for its part has adopted clear and
objective criteria that measure integrity, probity, and
independence of judicial nominees and applicants, which
criteria are publicly announced during the shortlisting of
nominees; and developed and is operating its own website
which displays the rules on transparency on judicial
vacancies and appointments. The JBC sends out
questionnaires to persons who have knowledge of the
qualifications or character of the applicants to vacant
judicial posts. The feedback or information gathered from
the public are held with utmost confidentiality and are
tabulated and calculated based on a set criteria and
formula. The survey results are then submitted to the JBC
Council and serve as a guide in the evaluation of
candidates.
BENCHBOOK FOR PHILIPPINE

TRIAL COURTS (REVISED AND EXPANDED)
The Benchbook for Philippine Trial Courts (Revised and
Expanded) was launched on September 12, 2011 at the
Session Hall, New Supreme Court Building by the High Court

53
and its education arm, the Philippine Judicial Academy Research, Glossary of Legal Terms Index, and
(PHILJA), in partnership with the United States Agency for Index), SC Justice Lucas P. Bersamin (Decision
International Development (USAID) through the American Writing), and Judge Marivic Daray (Trial Court
Bar Association—Rule of Law Initiative (ABA-ROLI). The Performance and Management Systems).
Benchbook is intended as primary reference for judges to
enhance their efficiency, accountability, and transparency MAINTAINING THE HALLS OF JUSTICE
with an end view for them to become great judges. The
On June 28, 2011, the High Court and R.R.
launching was subsequently followed by the nationwide
Encabo Constructors and Traders inked a
training of judges on the effective use of the Benchbook,
contract for the construction of the annex building
with funding assistance from USAID and ABA-ROLI.
and repair and rehabilitation of the model Hall of
The Benchbook Committee is composed of the Justice, the Angeles City HOJ in Angeles City,
following for Volume 1: Court of Appeals Justice Magdangal Pampanga, including a Materials Recovery
M. De Leon (Outline of Jurisdiction and Civil Procedure), Facility (MRF). The project completion was
Atty. Rita Linda Jimeno (Provisional Remedies and Special originally scheduled on December 31, 2011 but
Civil Actions), (+) Deputy Court Administrator Nimfa C. was later moved to May 31, 2012 following some
Vilches (Special Proceedings), Sandiganbayan Justice changes in the scope of works.
Alexander G. Gesmundo (Evidence), former National
Amnesty Commission Chairperson Alfredo F. Tadiar In CY 2011, various goods were also procured
(Summary Procedures and The Katarungang including computers and equipment for the
Pambarangay Law and Alternative Dispute Resolution), different offices of the High Court and for the
and Professor Myrna S. Feliciano (Index); and for Volume Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA)
2: SC Justice Diosdado M. Peralta (Criminal Procedure), Development Center in the total amount
Dr. Antonio G.M. La Viña (Environmental Law and of P39,905,062.
Procedural Rules), retired CA Justice Hilarion L. Aquino
(Judicial Ethics), Professor Myrna S. Feliciano (Legal


55
ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| |SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COURT

The Office of the Clerk of Court (OCC) En Banc is the core of the administrative
machinery of the Court. Its function is to assist the Court in its delicate task of
adjudicating with finality all justiciable disputes, both public and private. Its primary
task is the preparation of the agenda for the Court En Banc weekly sessions. This
office is headed by the Clerk of Court whose main responsibilities include the
implementation of policies formulated and the work programs set by the Court through
the Chief Justice; the general supervision over personnel and administrative matters;
and the recommendation of courses of action on various matters ranging from personnel
to non-judicial concerns. Besides these, the Clerk of Court also acts as the custodian
of the Court’s funds, revenues, properties, and premises and is usually the liaison
officer in all official matters in relation to other government agencies.
ATTY. ENRIQUETA E. VIDAL

• OFFICIALS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES •
Clerk of Court En Banc
ATTY. FELIPA B. ANAMA ATTY. ROMEO M. SALAZAR ATTY. LIBRADA C. BUENA

Assistant Clerk of Court En Banc SC Executive Officer SC Executive Officer
(December 4, 2007-July 11, 2012)
OFFICES OF THE DIVISION CLERKS OF COURT

The three Offices of the Division Clerk of Court perform the same functions as the Office of the Clerk of Court
En Banc in providing technical support to the Court’s First, Second, and Third Divisions.
ATTY. EDGAR O. ARICHETA ATTY. MA. LUISA L. LAUREA ATTY. MA. LOURDES C. PERFECTO ATTY. LUCITA A. SORIANO
Division Clerk of Court Division Clerk of Court Division Clerk of Court Division Clerk of Court
First Division Second Division Second Division Third Division
(Aug. 28, 2009 – Dec. 31, 2011) (July 9, 2012 – present)
ATTY. GORGONIO B. ELARMO, JR. ATTY. LIBRADA C. BUENA ATTY. TERESITA A. TUAZON ATTY. WILFREDO V. LAPITAN
Acting Deputy Division Clerk of Court Deputy Division Clerk of Court Deputy Division Clerk of Court Deputy Division Clerk of Court
First Division First Division Second Division Third Division
(Jan. 27, 2011 – July 1, 2011) (July 12, 2012 – present)
56 ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| | SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

The Office of Administrative Services (OAS) plans, recommends,
and implements personnel management and development
programs, and handles the administrative service functions of the
Supreme Court, including the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET),
Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), the Philippine Judicial Academy
(PHILJA), the PHILJA Development Center, Maintenance Sections
of the Halls of Justice, and the Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education Office (MCLEO).
The OAS has nine divisions, namely the Personnel Division,

Training Division, Leave Division, Employee Welfare and Benefits
Division, Complaints and Investigation Division, Records Control
Division, Security Division, Maintenance Division, and Property
Division.
ATTY. MA. CARINA
In 2011, the OAS conducted 83 training activities for SC M. CUNANAN
Assistant Chief
employees, with a total of 2,261 participants. The OAS also received
26 administrative cases against SC employees, which were
eventually resolved by the Court.
ATTY. EDEN T. CANDELARIA
CHIEF

FISCAL MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET OFFICE
The Fiscal Management and Budget Office (FMBO) takes charge of the fiscal,
budget, accounting, and cashiering activities of the Court. This includes planning the
budget, accounting work methods and procedure, preparing the estimates of the
expenditures of the Judiciary, managing the court expenditures, and submitting budget
estimates and financial reports. It is tasked with all financial transactions of the Supreme
Court including those of the JBC, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), all
Halls of Justice, PHILJA, PET, and the MCLEO.
In the year 2011, the FMBO prepared and processed vouchers to cover payment
of salaries, allowances, office supplies, equipment, and other sundry expenses, utilities,
janitorial and security services and maintenance and other operating expenses and
issues the corresponding checks therefore. It also prepared and submitted to the
Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and the House of Representatives
and Senate the proposed budget of the Supreme Court and lower courts including
pertinent schedules for 2012. ATTY. RUBY ESTEBAN-
GARCIA
Payrolls with corresponding salary checks were processed bi-monthly. Salary Assistant Chief
and policy loans from the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) and Pag-
Ibig were coursed through the FMBO. The FMBO also prepared and submitted
consolidated financial statements and reports to the Commission on Audit (COA),
ATTY. CORAZON G. FERRER- FLORES
DBM, Bureau of Treasury, and the Congress of the Philippines.
CHIEF
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ATTORNEY

The Office of the Chief Attorney (OCAT) is the legal research arm of the
Supreme Court. It performs adjudicative support functions, such as planning and
coordinating, including reviewing, research, and case studies. When the need
arises, it performs tasks specifically assigned by the Court, the Chief Justice, the
Associate Justices, and the Clerks of Court. In aid of legal research, the Office
has an information retrieval system, both electronic and traditional, for
jurisprudence, laws, and issuance of other government agencies.
The OCAT is currently engaged in the continuing project to digitize its records
of studies, memoranda, and reports, as well as the indices of cases typewritten in
index cards that have been on file since the 1960s. The digitization project is
designed to achieve quick retrieval of information, and to address lack of storage
space for cabinets containing index cards.
In 2011, the OCAT prepared 53 reports, comments, and memoranda; and 40 ATTY. MERCEDES
official letters and other communications, and indexed 1,815 decisions, laws, and G. MOSTAJO
issuances Assistant Chief
ATTY. EDNA E. DIÑO
CHIEF
ANNUAL REPORT 2011 || SUPREME
SUPREME COURT
COURT OF
OF THE
THE PHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
57
ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| |SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
OFFICE OF THE REPORTER
The Office of the Reporter is tasked with the publication of the

Philippine Reports, containing the decisions of the Supreme Court. It
also prepares syllabi for the same, and also comes out with the Office
of the Reporter’s Case Index.
In 2011, the Office submitted 20 volumes of the Philippine Reports

for publication to the Printing Services, and 118 significant decisions
for publication in the Official Gazette to the National Printing Office.
The Office also sorted out 1,172 decisions promulgated from
November 2010 to December 2011, and prepared 940 syllabi.
The Office’s income generating activities include issuance of

certifications and collection of research fees amounting to Php97,700,
photocopies of loose-leaf decisions amounting to Php129,869, sale
of Philippine Reports amounting to Php96,800, and sale of case indices
amounting to Php119,200, totaling Php443,569. ATTY. DOUGLAS F. ANAMA
Assistant Chief
(June 29, 2012 - present)
ATTY. EDNA B. CAMBA

CHIEF
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS OFFICE

The Management and Information Systems Office (MISO) is
the information technology arm of the Supreme Court. It provides
the technical expertise behind the formulation of systems design
studies and application system development as well as support
services on hardware maintenance. Its goal is to support and guide
the Court in establishing state-of-the-art information technology
infrastructure to further its modernization program. It coordinates
with the Committee on Computerization on policies and
implementation of new technology and the improvement of systems
already used in the Supreme Court and in the lower courts.
For the year 2011, the MISO developed new systems such
as the 2010 Bar Examination Topics Generator, a databank of
different topics per subject that generates a list of randomly-
selected items based on a given set of criteria which was used by
the examiners as basis for the formulation of multiple choice
questions (MCQs); 2010 Bar Examinations Multiple Choice
Questionnaire Databank, a databank of MCQs formulated by the
examiners based on a list of topics generated by the Bar Exams
Topic Generator; Supreme Court Health and Welfare Plan System,
COL. ALEXANDER M. AREVALO which facilitates the processing of claims of lower court personnel ATTY. EMMANUEL L. CAPARAS
Chief Justice Staff Head for burial assistance and for reimbursement of hospitalization and CHIEF
(March 24, 2011-present) (March 17, 2008 - June 1, 2011)
other medical expenses; and the Office of the Court Administrator-
Court Management Office (OCA-CMO) Court Issuance Archiving
System, a searchable database of court issuances originally in
paper form which digitized and archived through scanning.
The MISO was also actively involved in the Small Claims Case
Monitoring System (SC2MS) in all first level courts in the country.
The MISO installed the computers being used during the conduct
of the nationwide SC2MS training programs, provided personnel
as trainors and facilitators during the training, and provided
technical assistance to end-users through the helpdesk system.
In 2011, the ePayment System was implemented in the

Metropolitan Trial Courts of Manila, Malolos City, Baguio City,
Cagayan de Oro City, and Davao City. Further, the system is now
being used in all Officers of the Clerks of Court in Metro Manila.
With the successful roll-out, the system may now be implemented
in selected key cities in other regions.
58 ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| | SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
OFFICE OF THE BAR CONFIDANT

The Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) manages the conduct of the annual Bar examinations and
takes custody of the Bar records and personnel record of lawyers. It helps the Court in disciplining
lawyers by directly supervising the investigation of complaints against Bar candidates. The OBC is also
tasked to monitor, update, and maintain Court statistical data pertaining to the Bar examinations and
related matters, as well as to update the list of the members of the Bar.
In the year 2011, the OBC received 2,614 administrative cases for disbarment, and 818 Bar matters,
which are complaints against Bar examinees and successful examinees.
A total of 6,210 applications of Bar candidates to take the 2011 Bar Examinations were processed
and reported by the OBC. A total of 6,200 candidates were admitted to take the Bar Examinations.
However, only 5,987 took the examinations.
The OBC administered and supervised the 2011 Bar Examinations held at the University of Santo
Tomas on November 13, 17, 20 and 27. The officials and staff were actively involved in the preparations
and operations of the examinations from the start of the filing of the petitions to take the examinations up
to the signing of the roll of attorneys.
The 2011 Bar Examinations composed of two types of examinations, namely: the Multiple Choice
Questions (MCQ) and Essay-Type Questions. The results of the MCQ and the Essay-Type Examinations
were given weights of 60% and 40%, respectively, in the computation of the candidate’s final grade. ATTY. MA. CRISTINA B. LAYUSA
CHIEF
Statistics by subject and school, the committee report, and other pertinent data were compiled by the

OBC. The final report of the 2011 Committee on Bar Examinations was submitted to the Court. Upon
order of the Court, the names of the 1,913 out of 5,987 examinees passed the 2010 Bar Examinations,
representing a 31.95% passing percentage, were released and published on February 29, 2012.
Prior to their oath-taking, clearances were issued to the successful Bar examinees who were required
to pay admission fees to the Bar and membership dues to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. A total of
1,899 successful Bar candidates took their oath on March 21, 2012 at the Plenary Hall of the Philippine
International Convention Center. However, only 1,897 were able to sign the Roll of Attorneys at the SC
and thereafter, were issued their oaths and certificates of membership to the Bar.
Officials and staff of the OBC likewise attended to queries and requests concerning administrative
cases and Bar matters, the Bar examinations, and other miscellaneous matters.
ATTY. AMOR P. ENTILA

Assistant Chief
(June 29, 2012 - present)
JUDICIAL RECORDS OFFICE

The Judicial Records Office (JRO) manages and
superintends activities in connection with the judicial process from
the filing of cases to the promulgation of decisions, entry of
judgment, and the remand of records of cases disposed of. It
also controls the receipt, processing, reporting, and distribution
of pleadings filed before the Court. Besides this, the JRO takes
custody of the rollos and records of cases, including transcript
and exhibits; and prepares and keeps data or statistics on judicial
cases.
In the year 2011, the JRO received a total of 46,529 pleadings,

consisting mostly of motions for reconsideration, comments,
replies, rejoinders, sur-rejoinders, motions for extension, and
manifestations.
ATTY. CORAZON T. DE LOS REYES
Assistant Chief
ATTY. MA LOURDES C. PERFECTO

CHIEF
(March 10, 2008-July 8, 2012)

SUPREME COURT
COURT OF
OF THE
THE PHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
59
ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| |SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
LIBRARY SERVICES
The Supreme Court Library Services continuously evolves towards maintaining the highest standard of
collection and services for the mission/ vision of the Supreme Court and whole Judiciary and for judicial
reform. It has maintained and further improved its standards of being the a state of the art law library.
The Library’s DSL cable connection enables the researchers from the court legal staff and other court
employees quick access to the WESTLAW subscription, and other important local websites in the Internet.
The SC Library is now wireless.
As of 2011, the collection of the Library Services has increased by 2,833 volumes divided as follows:
1,952 books, 839 donations, and 43 pamphlets. The total collection of the library is 99,839 volumes consisting
of 76,631 books, 2,552 bound legal periodicals, 9,061 pamphlets, and 12,331 volumes of book donations.
The Library continuously distributes quarterly E-Library CDs for the entire judiciary due to their request
and pressing needs, especially from the lower courts. The content of the E-Library, namely jurisprudence,
laws, executive issuances, and court circulars, is up-to-date and may be used by the Library’s clientele. The
new version of the E-Library will be up in 2012 together with the OPAC—online catalogue of books found in
the Library. The newspaper clipping database containing images of newspaper clippings relevant to the
Judiciary is searchable by author, title, and subject.
MS. MILAGROS S. ONG

CHIEF
MEDICAL AND DENTAL SERVICES

The Medical and Dental Services attends to the medical and dental needs of Supreme Court justices,
judges, officials, and employees as well as its component bodies such as the Office of the Court Administrator
(OCA), Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA), Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education Office (MCLEO), and the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET). It also provides medical services
during official court activities, such as the Bar examinations and provincial seminars. The primary form of
service is by consultation and treatment. Other services rendered are pre-employment and annual physical
examinations, laboratory testing, psychological testing, and physical therapy.
The service also conducted lectures on diabetes, hypertension, pulmonary tuberculosis, and nutrition;
facilitated anti-flu and anti-pneumonia vaccinations; and initiated voluntary blood-letting activities.
For the year 2011, consultations at the SC Clinic totaled to 15,630. Such consultations include, among
others, blood pressure monitoring, request for medical certificates, and availment of medications at the
Clinic pharmacy. As for dental consultations, the number reached 2,763. Such consultations involve simple
extraction, tooth filling, and gum treatment.
DR. PRUDENCIO P. BANZON, JR.

CHIEF
PRINTING SERVICES
The Printing Services Office addresses the printing
requirements of different offices of the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax Appeals, and the
lower courts, including attached institutions such as the Philippine
Judicial Academy, Judicial and Bar Council, and the Mandatory
Continuing Legal Education Office.
For the year 2011, the Printing Services Office printed out
various regular and non-regular publications. For the regular
publications, the service printed out hardbound volumes, such as
the Philippine Reports in 4,096 copies and the Notarial Register in
4,693 copies, and paperbacks, such as the Monthly Case Digest of
Supreme Court Decisions in 15,750 copies, PHILJA Journal in 5,689
copies, and the Case Index in 12,435 copies. The service also
printed out 12 issues of the Benchmark, three issues of the PHILJA
Bulletin, and two issues of the Court of Appeals Journal.
For the non-regular publications, the service printed out 1,938

copies of nine sets of hardbound books, 3,482 copies of six sets of MS. LETICIA G. JAVIER
MR. EDMUNDO M. MOREDO
paperbacks, and various pamphlets totaling to 3,226 copies. SC Senior Chief Staff Officer
SC Senior Chief Staff Officer
(August 25, 2005 - April 16, 2011) (June 29, 2012 – present)
60
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE

The Public Information Office (PIO)’s primary task is to promptly disseminate
as widely as possible, news and jurisprudence from the Supreme Court. The
primary objective of the PIO is to bring the Court closer to the people. It is an
information-based office which cultivates the Court’s good relations with the
media and the general public. It provides photo and video coverage of oral
arguments and other important Court activities, conducts court tours, and
produces information, education, and communication (IEC) materials about the
Judiciary.
The PIO produces and disseminates press releases and briefings which are
subsumed under the heading Court News Flash. In 2011, the PIO issued a total
of 113 Court News Flash reports. The PIO Chief also regularly holds press
briefings to explain landmark decisions of the Court or announce important Court
activities.
In 2011, the PIO provided photo coverage of 354 Court Activities and events,
and video coverage for 125 of the same. The PIO also provided court tours for
62 groups from foreign and local organizations and schools.
HON. JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ
The PIO has also prepared materials for magazines, journals, and periodicals Court Administrator
(January 26, 2010 - present)
which are customized according to a specific publication’s editorial policies and Acting PIO Chief
styles; and wrote to publishers and editors of the major broadsheets to correct (January 26, 2010 - May 29, 2012)
inaccurate information about the Court or to provide additional information that Deputy Court Administrator
can help readers arrive at an informed decision about an issue concerning the and Acting PIO Chief
(August 11, 2009 - January 25, 2010)
Judiciary. Assistant Court Administrator
and PIO Chief
In the year 2011, the PIO produced the Benchmark, a monthly newspaper (March 20, 2007 - August 10, 2009)
on judicial events and important Court issuances; the Supreme Court Annual
Report; the 2012 Court Calendar; and the 2012 Supreme Court Planner.
The PIO also continued with the administration of the SC website

(sc.judiciary.gov.ph), and regularly uploaded promulgated decisions, issuances,
and announcements of the Court; Bar results; online Benchmark and Court
News Flash reports and photo releases; and updated lists of accredited bonding
companies for civil and criminal cases and special proceedings.
The PIO also spearheads or assists in organizing and managing several

Court activities and events. In 2011, it spearheaded the holding of the Forum for
Media on Judiciary Coverage at the Baguio Country Club, Baguio City on March
30, pursuant to its mandate under A.M. No. 99-4-08-SC to offer periodic
workshops or seminars that are designed to inform members of the media about
the work of the Court and its procedures. The Forum was attended by 22
participants who are Manila-based print, radio and television broadcast and
online media persons who are members of the Justice and Court Reporters ATTY. MARIA VICTORIA
Association (JUCRA) and the Justice Reporters Organization (JUROR). The GLEORESTY SP. GUERRA
topics during the Forum include an analysis of significant Court decisions and Director IV and Acting PIO Chief
issuances on libel, contempt, and the right to privacy; court reporting do’s and (May 30, 2012 - present)
Director IV and Assistant Chief
don’ts; and court-media relations issues. (June 1, 2005 - May 29, 2012)

SUPREME COURT
COURT OF
OF THE
THE PHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
61
ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| |SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICE

The Program Management Office (PMO) was created by
the Supreme Court to coordinate and manage the
implementation of the technical and administrative aspects
of the Judicial Reform Program. Its activities focus on project
development, resource mobilization, advocacy for reform,
procurement and contract management, project
implementation, and monitoring, financial management, as
well as administrative management.
In 2011, the PMO has been instrumental in the Supreme

Court’s numerous reform initiatives relating to environmental
justice, informal and formal justice systems, and access to
justice for the poor. The PMO also actively participated in
projects geared towards decongesting courts and improving MR. EDILBERTO A. DAVIS
their physical facilities, and promoting integrity and Deputy Judicial Reform
professionalism in the Judiciary. Various knowledge sharing Program Administrator
activities with the judiciaries of other countries have also been
spearheaded by the PMO.
JUDGE GERALDINE FAITH A. ECONG
The PMO was also instrumental in the procurement of
Judicial Reform Program Administrator
• OFFICIALS OF THE SUPREME COURT •
838 units of desktop computers and 851 dot matrix printers

under the Judicial Reform Support Project (JRSP) for the
development of the Small Claims Case Monitoring System
(SC2MS). It also provided support for the activities of the
Justice Sector Coordinating Council (JSCC).
62 ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| | SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
Pursuant to Article VIII, section 6 of the 1987 Constitution, the

Supreme Court exercises administrative supervision over all lower
courts. To properly discharge the constitutional mandate, the Court
is assisted by the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), which
was created under PD 828, as amended by PD 842, and further
strengthened in a Resolution of the Supreme Court dated October
24, 1996. The OCA is tasked with the supervision and administration
of the lower courts all over the country and all of their personnel. It
likewise reports and recommends to the Supreme Court all actions
that affect lower court management, personnel and financial
administration, and administrative discipline. Jose Midas P. Marquez
heads the OCA.
The mission of the OCA is to ensure that judges shall administer

justice in a manner truly compatible with the independence, impartiality,
integrity, competence, and promptness required of them. The OCA
likewise aims to provide these judges with the sustained appropriate
working environment that would fully enable them to discharge their
adjudicative and administrative responsibilities efficiently and effectively.
HON. JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ The OCA is assisted by five line offices: the Office of the
Court Administrator Administrative Services (OAS), the Court Management Office (CMO),
(January 26, 2010 - present)
Acting PIO Chief
the Financial Management Office (FMO), the Legal Office (LEGO), and
(January 26, 2010 - May 29, 2012) the Office on the Halls of Justice (OHOJ).
Deputy Court Administrator
and Acting PIO Chief The primary role of the OAS is to provide prompt, efficient, effective,
(August 11, 2009 - January 25, 2010)
Assistant Court Administrator
and economical delivery of essential support services to all the lower
and PIO Chief courts. These support services encompass the management of
(March 20, 2007 - August 10, 2009) personnel, leave matters, employees’ welfare and benefit as well as
property and records management, among others.
The CMO provides services relating to judicial supervision and

monitoring, judicial audit and inspection, judicial assignments and
placements, circuitization or decircuitization of courts, and delineation
of the territorial areas of lower courts. It is also responsible for the
compilation, analysis and validation of case data gathered, fiscal
monitoring, audits, and reconciliation of books of accountable officers.
It also reviews work systems, procedures and processes, and formulates
plans and strategies for the OCA and the lower courts.
The FMO essentially performs the following functions: (1) budget

preparation, allotment, and control for lower courts; (2) processing and
control of staff salaries and other financial concerns; (3) accounting and
monitoring of all lower court financial transactions, revenues, collections,
and remittance; (4) cash disbursement, checks preparation, issuance of
official receipts for various funds; and (5) check releasing, records of
miscellaneous matters and transactions.
The LEGO receives, processes, and evaluates administrative

complaints filed against Justices of the Court of Appeals and the
Sandiganbayan, judges of the first and second level courts, and lower
court personnel. This office submits its findings to the SC by way of
Agenda Reports. It also takes charge of the reports and recommendations

SUPREME COURT
COURT OF
OF THE
THE PHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
63
for administrative complaints referred by the Court to the OCA for evaluation, report, and recommendation.
Whenever warranted, the LEGO likewise initiates and prosecutes administrative complaints against judicial
officers and employees.
The OHOJ is in charge of the inspection and assessment of the repair or renovation requirements of
the HOJs all over the country. It supervises civil works projects, and provides office furniture and
equipment to the courts, and maintenance tools and supplies to the maintenance units in the HOJs.
The OHOJ also supervises security and janitorial service contracts; processes utilities, securities, and
janitorial bills; and attends to the monthly bills for payments of rentals of temporary HOJs.
• OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR •

ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| SUPREME
| SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THE PHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
DEPUTY AND ASSISTANT COURT

OCA CHIEFS OF OFFICE
ADMINISTRATORS

HON. NIMFA C. VILCHES + HON. JESUS EDWIN A. VILLASOR ATTY. CARIDAD A. PABELLO ATTY. WILHELMINA D. GERONGA
Deputy Court Administrator Deputy Court Administrator CHIEF CHIEF
(Aug. 6, 2008 - December 14, 2011) (October 27, 2009 -March 30, 2011) OCA Office of Administrative Services OCA Legal Office
HON. RAUL B. VILLANUEVA HON. ANTONIO M. EUGENIO, JR. ATTY. LILIAN BARRIBAL - CO ATTY. REGINA ADORACION
Deputy Court Administrator Deputy Court Administrator CHIEF FILOMENA M. IGNACIO
(February 28, 2012 - present) OCA Fiscal Management Office CHIEF
OCA Office on Halls of Justice
HON. THELMA C. BAHIA HON. JENNY LIND A. DELORINO ATTY. NICANDRO A. CRUZ + ATTY. MARINA B. CHING
Assistant Court Administrator Assistant Court Administrator OIC CHIEF
OCA Court Management Office OCA Court Management Office
(September 23, 2008 - August 15, 2011) (August 16, 2011 – present)
ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011 | SUPREME
2011 COURT
| SUPREME OFOF
COURT THE PHILIPPINES
THE PHILIPPINES
65
ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| |SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
Other Offices
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION OFFICE
The Mandatory Continuing Legal Office carries out the objectives of the
mandatory continuing legal education program of the Court aimed to keep lawyers
abreast with the developments in law and jurisprudence, maintain the ethics of
the profession, and enhance the standards of the practice of law. It also sets the
schedule of MCLE fees in consultation with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
Board of Governors, with the approval of the Supreme Court.
In the year 2011, 46 out of 187 accredited MCLE providers were able to
conduct MCLE activities. These 46 accredited MCLE providers presented a total
of 1,775 activities or programs in Metro Manila and other major cities in the
Philippines. In terms of number of activities or programs presented since the
start of the MCLE program in 2001, the year 2011 ranked sixth among the number
of activities conducted all over the Philippines and abroad.
(RET.) JUSTICE CAROLINA
C. GRIÑO-AQUINO The number of programs presented in 2011 focused on the following subject
Chairperson areas, updates on substantive and procedural laws and jurisprudence, legal
ethics, alternative dispute resolution, legal writing and oral advocacy, trial and
pre-trial skills, international law and conventions, and MCLE-prescribed subjects.
Aside from monitoring the numerous MCLE activities nationwide, the MCLEO
continued to perform its function of receiving, evaluating and processing the
Attorney’s MCLE Compliance Reports; applications for exemption, accreditation
of MCLE Providers, approval of seminar programs, and credit units; and requests
for reconsideration of earned credit units. The MCLEO also attended to the queries
of lawyers regarding their MCLE requirements, subject areas and the credit units,
schedules of accredited legal education seminars and providers, grounds for
exemption and the required attachments to the application, non-participatory
ATTY. JESUSA JEAN D. REYES credit units, and their compliance status.
Assistant Executive Officer
(June 29, 2012 – present)
SOCIETY FOR JUDICIAL EXCELLENCE

The Society for Judicial Excellence (SJE) is in charge of the annual Judicial
Excellence Awards for outstanding members of the Judiciary. In choosing the
awardees, the Society, though its Board of Judges, considers the nominees based
on criteria that determines their efficiency and effectiveness in carrying out their
duties and responsibilities; their initiative, innovativeness, and resourcefulness
in meeting the exigencies of the service; public perception in upholding judicial
integrity and independence; their noteworthy contributions to the administration
of justice; and leadership in the Judiciary and the community.
The 2011 Awarding Ceremonies for Outstanding Judges and Clerks of Court,
organized by the SJE, were held on September 19, 2011 at the Manila Hotel.
Gracing the occasion were the Justices of the Supreme Court, members of the
Board of Judges and the Screening Committees, benefactors, donors and
members of the SJE as well as the families and friends of the awardees.
The awardees of the 2011 Search for Judicial Excellence are Judge Jeoffre
Willkom Acebido, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Br. 41, Cagayan De Oro City,
ATTY. MA. LUISA L. LAUREA Chief Justice Cayetano Arellano Award; Judge Dante Luz Nayra Viacrusis,
Executive Director RTC, Br. 6, Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur, Chief Justice Jose Abad-Santos
Award; Judge Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro, RTC, Br. 158, Pasig City,
Chief Justice Ramon Avanceña Award; and Atty. Nelison U. Pajarillo-Salcedo,
RTC, Br. 41, Cagayan De Oro City, Outstanding Clerk of Court. All of the
awardees are from the second level courts.
66
66 ANNUALREPORT
ANNUAL REPORT2011
2011|| SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
Attached Institutions
The Philippine Judicial Academy
The Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) was created under the auspices of
Administrative Order No. 35-96 dated March 12, 1996 during the term of former Chief Justice
Andres Narvasa. However, its existence and continued functioning were officially mandated
two years after, or on February 26, 1998, by virtue of RA 8557, which law institutionalized
PHILJA as a “training school for justices, judges, court personnel, lawyers, and aspirants
to judicial posts.”
The regular programs of the PHILJA include the newly appointed clerks of court in order to prepare them for
following: Pre-Judicature Program (PJP); Orientation assumption of office and for the discharge of their duties. It also
Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Judges; organizes and hosts various convention seminars, development
Regional Career Enhancement Program (RJCEP); and programs for court personnel, programs for quasi-judicial
Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Court Personnel. agencies, professorial competency programs, and discussion
The Academy also has special focus programs for sessions.
PHILJA also regularly releases several publications such

as the PHILJA Bulletin, the PHILJA Judicial Journal, and monthly
Online Fax and Electronic Alerts on recent Court issuances and
decisions on selected administrative cases, and occasionally
comes out with special publications tackling PHILJA-conducted
programs on timely issues, compiling PHILJA lectures, and
focusing on relevant jurisprudence and other legal materials that
can be used as valuable references by judges and other
members of the judiciary.
• ATTACHED INSTITUTIONS •
The Academy kicked off the year 2011 with a Roundtable
Discussion on Anti-Trafficking in Persons in January. It then
began a series of Career Development Programs for Court Legal
Researchers and concluded its Seminar on Speedy Trial and
Disposition of Cases both in August of the same year. Lastly,
following the launch of its Benchbook for Philippine Trial Courts,
the Academy successfully completed its Seminar on Increasing
Judicial Efficiency in December of 2011.
(RET.) JUSTICE ADOLFO S. AZCUNA (RET.) JUSTICE JUSTO P. TORRES, JR These programs were organized and conducted along with
Chancellor Vice Chancellor and Chief, Finance Office 82 special focus programs dealing with the topics of
environmental law protection and enhancement, agrarian justice,
CEDAW and gender sensitivity, alternative dispute resolution,
and the rules of procedure for small claims cases, among others.
The Academy also continued its court-annexed mediation

programs and mobile court-annexed mediation in various the
provinces of the country, along with its regular activities on
Appeals Court Mediation, Judicial Dispute Resolution, and Court
of Tax Appeals Mediation.
This year also saw the first batch of participants ever to use
the newly-constructed PHILJA Training Center in Tagaytay City
(RET.) JUSTICE MARINA L. BUZON (RET.) JUSTICE DELILAH as the Academy held its 60th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for
Executive Secretary and Acting Chief, Philippine VIDALLON MAGTOLIS Newly Appointed Judges on a 12-day training in October of 2011.
Mediation Center Office Chief, Academic Affairs Office
PHILJA Chancellor and Retired Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna
also represented the Academy at the end of the year in the
International Organization for Judicial Training (IOJT)
Conference in Bourdeaux, France, where he delivered a talk on
“Media and the Courts” and on the “Personal Security of
Philippine Judges,” sharing with the foreign delegates the
PHILJA’s Manual Guide for the Judiciary in Dealing with the
Media and the highlights of the Academy’s Personal Security
Training Programs for Judges.
All these the Academy has done as part of its efforts to

consistently maintain and progressively enhance judicial
competence and efficiency in the Philippine Judiciary.
(RET.) JUDGE THELMA A. PONFERRADA PROF. SEDFREY M. CANDELARIA
Chief, Administrative Office Chief, Research, Publications,
and Linkages Office
67
ANNUAL
ANNUALREPORT
REPORT2011
2011| |SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
Judicial and Bar Council third preliminary evaluation of candidates, and final
evaluation and selection of nominees.
An innovation of the 1987 Philippine Constitution “in In 2011, the JBC was able to finalize 710
response to the public clamor in favor of eliminating politics nominations out of 1, 859 applicants for 151
from the appointment of judges,” the Judicial and Bar positions in various courts, boards, and offices in
Council (JBC) was created and charged with the principal the Judiciary. From January to December 2011, a
function of nominating appointments to the Judiciary. It is total of 105 judicial appointments have been issued
composed of the Chief Justice as ex officio Chairman, the by the Office of the President: two in the Supreme
Secretary of Justice, and a representative of Congress as Court, eight in the Court of Appeals, two in the
ex officio members. A representative of the Integrated Bar, Sandiganbayan, 50 in the Regional Trial Courts,
a professor of law, a retired member of the Supreme Court, one in the Metropolitan Trial Courts, 16 in the
and a representative of the private sector completes the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, 13 in the Municipal
composition as regular members. Trial Court, 13 in the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts,
two in the Office of the Ombudsman, and one in
In 2011, the Council was composed of the following: the Legal Education Board.
Chief Justice Renato C. Corona as ex officio Chairman,
and Secretary Leila M. De Lima and Congressman Niel The Council held its annual Strategic and
C. Tupas, Jr. as ex officio members; and Retired Justice Operations Planning Workshop on August 11,
Regino C. Hermosisima, Jr., Atty. Jose V. Mejia, Justice 2011, participated in by no less than the Chief
Aurora Santiago-Lagman, and Atty. Maria Milagros Justice. Further, it adopted a Manual for JBC
Fernan-Cayosa as regular members. Officials and Employees, second only to its
internal rules in guiding the Council’s members
The Council’s regular activities include the following: and staff towards efficiency in operations and in
inventory and assessment of judicial vacancies, the discharge of their functions. It also held public
publication, and dissemination of announcements of the consultations on the proposed amendments to
• JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL •
opening of vacancies, processing of applications, the JBC Disqualification Rule as embodied in

preliminary screening of applications of recommendations, Sec. 5 Rule 4 of the JBC Rules. Lastly, it
publication and dissemination of lists of judicial applicants, undertook the restructuring of the institution’s
conduct of background check on applicants, conduct of website to make the latter more accessible and
psychological and psychiatric tests, conduct of interviews, user-friendly.
(RET.) JUSTICE REGINO C. (RET.) JUSTICE AURORA ATTY. JOSE V. MEJIA ATTY. MARIA MILAGROS N.
HERMOSISIMA, JR. SANTIAGO LAGMAN Academe Representative FERNAN-CAYOSA
Retired SC Justices Representative Private Sector Representative ( May 5, 2011 - present) IBP Representative
(May 5, 2011 - present)
ATTY. ANNALIZA S. ATTY. FLORDELIZ C. FARGAS ATTY. RICHARD O. PASCUAL MS. URSULA EDITHA
TY-CAPACITE Chief Chief O. SAN PEDRO
JBC Executive Officer Office of Policy and Office of the Recruitment, Chief
Selection and Nomination
Development Research (July 9, 2012 – present) Office of Administrative
Acting Chief and Financial Services
(May 20, 2010 – July 8, 2012)
68 ANNUALREPORT
ANNUAL REPORT2011
2011| | SUPREME
SUPREMECOURT
COURTOF
OFTHE
THEPHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
Presidential Electoral Tribunal

The question as to who had jurisdiction to hear Meanwhile, BP 884, promulgated on December 3, 1985,
and resolve election controversies concerning the created an independent Presidential Electoral Tribunal to
President and Vice-President first arose under the try, hear, and decide election contests in the Office of the
1935 Philippine Constitution. In the landmark case President and the Vice-President. The adoption of the 1987
of Lopez vs. Roxas (No. L-25716, July 28, 1966), Constitution finally and definitively gave legal justification
the Supreme Court held that the silence of the for the creation and continued existence of the tribunal.
Constitution on the matter the absence of a statute Section 4, Article VII thereof states that “the Supreme Court,
empowering a judicial body to act as the judge sitting En Banc, shall be the sole judge of all contests
over such election contests means that “any relating to the elections, returns and qualifications of the
candidate for President or Vice-President who President or Vice-President, and may promulgate its rules
believed that he was the candidate who obtained for the purpose.”
the largest number of votes for either office, despite
the proclamation by Congress of another In Macalintal vs. PET (G.R. No. 191618, September
candidate as the President- or Vice-President- 23, 2010), the Court had the occasion to rule on the
elect, had no legal right to demand by election constitutionality of the PET. Holding in the affirmative, the
protest a recount of the votes cast for the office Court upheld the tribunal’s plenary power to judge
concerned, to establish his right thereto.” The presidential and vice-presidential election contests and to
Court thus decreed controversies of this nature promulgate the rules of procedure in connection thereto.
as “not justiciable.” “The establishment of PET simply constitutionalized what
was statutory before the 1987 Constitution,” it held. Thus,
To remedy the situation, Congress passed RA the Supreme Court was re-established and re-affirmed as
• PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL •

1793 on June 21, 1957 which categorically pointed the decisive tribunal with jurisdiction over all contests
to the Supreme Court as the electoral tribunal for pertaining to the positions of President and Vice-President
and sole judge of all presidential and vice- of the Philippines.
presidential contests. However, this law was
implicitly repealed with the adoption of the 1973 The PET is composed of the Chief Justice of the
Constitution, the former’s postulates being Supreme Court as Chairperson and the 14 Associate
incompatible with a parliamentary system of Justices as members, with the Clerk of Court of the
government, and was still not restored under the Supreme Court supervising and administering the tribunal’s
reconstituted presidential system. activities.

69
2011 Significant Decisions

In 2011, the Supreme Court wrote finis to the following cases:
GR No. 159618, Bayan Muna v. Romulo, February 1, 2011 (Velasco, J.)

The Court dismissed for lack of merit the petition assailing the Non-Surrender Agreement concluded by and
between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America absent any clear contravention of the
law. The Agreement provides in pertinent part that Persons of one Party present in the territory of the other shall
not, absent the express consent of the first Party, (a) be surrendered or transferred by any means to any
international tribunal for any purpose, unless such tribunal has been established by the UN Security Council or
(b) be surrendered or transferred by any means to any other entity or third country, or expelled to a third country,
for the purpose of surrender to or transfer to any international tribunal, unless such tribunal has been established
by the UN Security Council. The decision became final on April 15, 2011.
(Signed Res.) GR No. 176951, League of Cities of the Cityhood Laws converting the municipalities of
Philippines (LCP) v. COMELEC; GR No. 177499, LCP Baybay in Leyte; Bogo in Cebu; Catbalogan in
v. COMELEC; and GR No. 178056, LCP v. COMELEC, Samar; Tandag in Surigao del Sur; Borongan in
February 15, 2011 (Bersamin, J.) Eastern Samar; Tayabas in Quezon province;
After first ruling the assailed laws as constitutional in Lamitan in Basilan; Tabuk in Kalinga; Bayugan in
2008, and then holding otherwise in 2009, and then Agusan del Sur; Batac in Ilocos Norte; Mati in
reverting to its 2008 ruling in 2010, the Court reconsidered Davao Oriental; Guihulngan in Negros Oriental;
• 2011 SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS •
its 2010 ruling and instead held as not violative of the Cabadbaran in Agusan del Norte; Carcar in Cebu;
Constitution and the Local Government Code the 16 El Salvador in Misamis, Oriental and Naga in Cebu

to cities. The aforesaid ruling became final on June the same violates the constitutional ban on “midnight”
28, 2011. appointments as petitioner himself has not established his
right to the office to give cause of action to his petition for
GR No. 187714, Pimentel v. Senate Committee quo warranto. The decision attained finality on May 5, 2011.
of the Whole, March 8, 2011 (Carpio, J.)
The Court held that even if publication is not (Signed Res.) GR No. 164195, Apo Fruits Corporation v.
required under the Constitution, publication of the Land Bank of the Philippines, April 5, 2011, (Brion, J.)
Rules of the Senate Committee of the Whole is The Court “denied with absolute finality” Land Bank’s
required because the Rules expressly mandate second motion for reconsideration of its October 12, 2010
their publication. Thus, it ruled that the referral of directing the bank to pay petitioners 12% interest on the
the subject complaint against a Senator by the amount of just compensation it belatedly paid amounting
Committee on Ethics and Privileges to the Senate to P1.3 billion for the petitioners’ expropriated plantations.
Committee of the Whole shall take effect only upon The said ruling became final on April 15, 2011
publication of the said Rules. The decision became
final on March 30, 2011. GR No. 190259, Ampatuan v. Puno, June 7, 2011 (Abad, J.)
The Court upheld the proclamation shortly after the
GR No. 172087, Philippine Amusement and Maguindanao massacre of a state of emergency in
Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) v. BIR, March Maguindanao, Cotabato, and Sultan Kudarat by then
15, 2011 (Peralta, J.) President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for failure of petitioners
The Court held the PAGCOR exempt from to demonstrate that the proclamation lacked factual bases.
value-added tax but not from corporate income The decision attained finality on June 30, 2011.
tax. The decision became final on August 4, 2011.
(Signed Res.) GR No. 191618, Macalintal v. Presidential
GR No. 191560, General v. Arroyo, March 29, Electoral Tribunal (PET), June 7, 2011 (Nachura, J.)
2011 (Brion, J.) The Court denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration
of its decision dated November 23, 2010 which held the

The Court dismissed the petition assailing the
appointment of two National Police Commission establishment of the PET as constitutional. The decision
(NAPOLCOM) Commissioners on the ground that became final on June 29, 2011.

71
GR No. 156556-57, Betoy v. the Board of Directors, appoint Officers in Charge to replace the ARMM
National Power Corporation (NPC), October 4, 2011 officials whose terms were to expire on September
(Peralta, J.) 30, 2011.
The Court dismissed for lack of merit the petition for
certiorari and the supplemental petition for mandamus (Signed Res.) GR No. 171101, Hacienda Luisita,
assailing, among others, the privatization of the NPC. The Inc. (HLI) v. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council
decision attained finality on November 15, 2011. (PARC), November 22, 2011 (Velasco, J.)
In line with its finding that control over
It has also decided the following significant cases in agricultural lands must always be in the hands of
political and constitutional law: the farmers, the Court reconsidered its July 5,
2011 ruling that the qualified farmworker-
(Signed Res.) GR No. 180050, Navarro v. Ermita, April beneficiaries (FWBs) of Hacienda Luisita should
12, 2011 (Nachura, J.) be given an option to remain as stockholders of
The Court granted the motion for leave to intervene of HLI, inasmuch as these qualified FWBs will never
Congressman Francisco T. Matugas, et al. due to their gain control given the present proportion of
personal and substantial interest in the case which became shareholdings in HLI. Instead the Court affirmed
manifest only after the case had been decided as well as with modifications PARC Resolution No. 2005-32-
the said intervenors’ motion to recall entry of judgment. It 01 dated December 22, 2005 and Resolution No.
thus declared valid the provision in Article 9(2) of the Rules 2006-34-01 dated May 3, 2006, placing the lands
and Regulations Implementing the Local Government Code subject of HLI’s stock distribution plan under
of 1991 stating, “The land area requirement shall not apply compulsory coverage on mandated land
where the proposed province is composed of one (1) or acquisition scheme of the Comprehensive
more islands”; and RA 9355 (An Act Creating the Province Agrarian Reform Program.
of Dinagat Islands) and the proclamation of the Province
of Dinagat Islands and the election of the officials thereof. GR No. 181704, Bureau of Customs Employees
Association v. Teves, December 6, 2011
AM No. 10-11-5-SC, Re: Petition for Radio and (Villarama, J.)

Television Coverage of the Multiple Murder Cases The Court upheld the constitutionality of RA
Against Maguindanao Governor Zaldy Ampatuan; AM 9335, the Attrition Act of 2005, which provides a
No. 10-11-7-SC, Re: Letter of President Benigno S. system of rewards and sanctions through the
Aquino III, June 14, 2011 (Carpio Morales, J.)
Voting unanimously, the Court partially granted pro hac
vice the request for live television and radio broadcast of
the trial of the Maguindanao Massacre cases subject to
certain guidelines.
GR No. 187167, Magallona v. Ermita, August 16, 2011

(Carpio, J.)
The Court upheld the constitutionality of RA 9552
demarcating the maritime baselines of the Philippines as
an archipelagic state in compliance with the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea.
GR No. 192147 and 192149, Vilando v. House of

Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET), August 23,
2011 (Mendoza, J.)
The Court affirmed the decision of the HRET declaring
that Jocelyn Sy Limkaichong is a natural-born Filipino
citizen and not disqualified as member of the House of
Representatives representing the First District, Negros
Oriental.
GR No. 196271, Kida v. Senate; GR No. 196305, Mapupuno

v. Brillantes; GR No. 197221, Lagman v. Ochoa; GR No.
197280, Tillah v. COMELEC; GR No. 197282, Macalintal v.
COMELEC; GR No. 197392, Biraogo v. COMELEC; and
GR No. 197454, October 18, 2011 (Brion, J.)
The Court upheld in toto the constitutionality of RA
10153 which synchronizes the Autonomous Region in
Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) elections, previously set on
August 8, 2011, with the May 2013 regular national and
local elections as well as authorizes the President to

creation of a Rewards and Incentives Fund and a (Signed Res.) GR No. 190529, Philippine Guardians
Revenue Performance Evaluation Board and Brotherhood Inc. v. COMELEC, March 22, 2011 (Brion, J.)
covers all Bureau of Internal Revenue and Bureau The Court severely reprimanded the COMELEC Chair
of Customs officials with at least six months of and Members for indirect contempt of court for their
service, regardless of employment status. disobedience to the Court’s Status Quo Order dated
February 2, 2010 which would have included the Philippine
GR No. 152375, Republic v. Sandiganbayan, Guardians Brotherhood, Inc. (PGBI) in the list of registered
December 13, 2011 (Brion, J.) and accredited party-list organizations vying for
The Supreme Court, voting 7-7, dismissed for congressional seats in the May 10, 2010 elections pending
lack of merit the government’s petition that sought adjudication of the case.
to overturn a Sandiganbayan resolution denying
the admission of the deposition of Maurice V. Bane GR Nos. 178701 and 178754, Respicio v. People, June
as part of its evidence in its ill-gotten wealth case 6, 2011 (Carpio Morales, J.)
(Civil Case No. 0009) against former President The Court upheld the Sandiganbayan’s conviction of a
Ferdinand Marcos and his wife Mrs. Imelda R. former Immigration Commissioner for graft and corruption
Marcos and several others in connection with the in connection with the release in 1994 of 11 Indian nations
purchase of the major shareholdings of Cable and charged with drug offenses.
Wireless Limited in Eastern Telecommunications
Philippines, Inc. (ETPI), among others. GR No. 193677, Veloso v. Commission on Audit,
September 8, 2011 (Peralta, J.)
Because of the tied vote in both the December The Supreme Court affirmed the Commission on Audit
6 and 13, 2011 En Banc sessions of the Court, (COA)’s disallowance of the payment of a monetary reward
the Sandiganbayan ruling is deemed sustained. as part of the Exemplary Public Service Award (EPSA) to
former three-term councilors of the City of Manila
In keeping with the principle that public office authorized by City Ordinance No. 8040 on the ground that

is a public trust, the Court has rendered the it amounts to double and additional compensation.
following decisions: However, in line with existing jurisprudence, it did not

73
require refund of the disallowed amount “because all the violation of the constitutional limit on foreign
parties acted in good faith.” ownership in utilities using the above definition of
“capital.”
The Court has also rendered the following significant
decisions in relation to business and the economy: GR No. 190795, National Association of
Electricity Consumers for Reforms, Inc. v.
GR No. 166859, Republic v. Sandiganbayan; GR No. Energy Regulatory Commission, July 6, 2011
169203, Republic v. Sandiganbayan; GR No. 180702, (Sereno, J.)
Republic v. Cojuangco, April 12, 2011 (Bersamin, J.) The Court dismissed the petition filed by an
The Court held that that the block of shares in San association of several consumer groups assailing
Miguel Corporation in the names of respondents Eduardo the 26.9-centavo increase in the Manila Electric
Cojuangco, et al. subject of Sandiganbayan Civil Case No. Company’s distribution rate approved by the
0033-F is their exclusive property as the Republic’s burden Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC). The Court
to establish by preponderance of evidence that the said held, among others, that petitioners had not been
shares had been illegally acquired with coconut-levy funds denied due process as they were given several
was not discharged. opportunities to attend the hearings in the ERC
and present their evidence.
GR No. 164321, Skechers, USA v. Inter Pacific
Industrial Trading Corp., March 28, 2011 (Peralta, J.) GR No. 193007, Diaz v. Secretary of Finance,
Reconsidering its earlier decision, the Court, applying July 19, 2011 (Abad, J.)
the “dominancy test” ruled that there was infringement of The Court ruled that the Bureau of Internal
petitioner’s trademark by the Strong rubber shoes of the Revenue can impose value-added tax (VAT) on
respondents. tollway operators as the VAT covers all kinds of
services rendered in the Philippines for a fee.
GR No. 176579, Gamboa v. Teves, June 28, 2011
(Carpio, J.) GR No. 179593, UE v. UEEA, September 14,
The Court held that the term “capital” in Article XII, sec. 2011 (Mendoza, J.)
11 of the Constitution refers only to shares of stock entitled The Supreme Court upheld the revised scheme
to vote in the election of directors. It thus directed the of the University of the East (UE) in distributing,
Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate the among its employees, the 70% incremental
Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. for possible

proceeds from tuition fee increases for the school students Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen Empeño as well as
year (SY) 1994-1995, as there was no diminution farmer Manuel Merino from detention.
of benefits in changing the previous equal sharing
scheme to percentage of salaries scheme. GR No. 183711, Burgos v. Arroyo, GR No. 183712,
Burgos v. Arroyo, GR No. 183713, Burgos v. Chief of
GR No. 180006, Commissioner of Internal Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP),
Revenue v. Fortune Tobacco, September 28, July 5, 2011 (Brion, J.)
2011 (Brion, J.) Issuing anew a writ of habeas corpus returnable to the
The Court upheld the Court of Tax Appeals Court of Appeals Presiding Justice, the Supreme Court
ruling granting Fortune Tobacco a P491 million directed the AFP to produce the person of the missing
tax refund. Following the 2008 ruling in a political activist Jonas Joseph Burgos. The case awaits
similarly titled case, the Court held that the the compliance also of the Office of the Solicitor General
revenue regulation on which the excess taxes and the Commission on Human Rights with several
were erroneously collected was invalid and directives from the Court.
moreover violated the rule of uniformity of
taxation. GR No. 191805, Rodriguez v. Arroyo; GR No. 193160,
Versoza v. Rodriguez, November 15, 2011 (Sereno, J.)
The Court has also struck a blow for human The Court unanimously affirmed with modification the
rights and civil liberties in the following rulings: grant by the Court of Appeals of the writs of amparo and
habeas data in favor of Noriel Rodriguez, a member of a
GR No. 184461-62, Boac v. Cadapan; GR No. peasant organization affiliated with the Kilusang
184495, Cadapan v. Esperon; GR No. 187109, Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP), whom it found to have
Cadapan v. Arroyo. May 31, 2011 (Carpio been abducted, detained and tortured by soldiers belonging
Morales, J.) to the 17th Infantry Battalion, 5th Infantry Division of the
Taking judicial notice of its October 7, 2008 military. It ordered the dismissal of the case against former
decision in Secretary of National Defense v. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for lack of evidence

Manalo, the Court in these consolidated habeas of her responsibility or accountability for Rodriguez’s
corpus and amparo cases on appeal ordered abduction or that she should have known about the
military officials, including General Jovito Palparan, violation of his right to life, liberty or security, or that she
to immediately release University of the Philippines had failed to investigate, punish or prevent it.

75
2011 Significant Rules

The Court also flexed its constitutional rule making power concerning pleading,
practice, and procedure in all courts by promulgating the following:
(2) AM No. 10-3-10-SC, Rules of Procedure
(1) AM No. 11-3-6-SC, Amendment of Section 12, Rule for Intellectual Property Rights Cases, October
14 of the Rules of Court on Service Upon Foreign Private 18, 2011, published in the October 24, 2011 issue
Juridical Entity, March 15, 2011; published in the March of the Philippine Star and the Philippine Daily
24, 2011 issue of the Philippine Star, effective April 8, 2011 Inquirer on October 24, 2011, effective November
8, 2011
Under this amendment, service of summons may now
These Rules shall be observed by the Regional
be done, with the permission of the court, on foreign private
Trial Courts designated by the Supreme Court as
juridical entities that are either not registered or have no
Special Commercial Courts. They shall govern all
resident agent through any of the following ways:
civil and criminal actions for violations of
A) By personal service coursed through the appropriate intellectual property rights provided for in RA 8293,
court in the foreign country with the assistance of the The Intellectual Property Code (IPC), as amended.
Department of Foreign Affairs;
When the court determines that the civil or
B) By publication once in a newspaper of general circulation criminal action involves complex issues, it shall
in the country where the defendant may be found and by issue a special order that the regular procedure
• 2011 SIGNIFICANT RULES, GUIDELINES, AND ORDERS •
serving a copy of the summons and the court order by prescribed in the Rules of Court shall apply,
registered mail at the last known address of the defendant; stating the reason therefor. Where applicable, the
C) By facsimile or any recognized electronic means that Rules of Court shall aplly suppletorily to
could generate proof of service; proceedings under these Rules.
D) By such other means as the court may in its discretion Under the Rules, authority is given to Special
direct. Commercial Courts in Quezon City, Manila,
Makati, and Pasig to act on applications for search
Per former President and CEO and Director of the and seizure warrants in actions for violations of
Philippine Stock Exchange Atty. Francis Ed. Lim, “The new the IPC which shall be enforceable nationwide.
rule makes our long arm statute more sensible and Any order under the new Rules shall be
practical, designed as it is to prevent injustice to local immediately executory, unless restrained by a
plaintiffs who are disadvantaged vis-a-vis their foreign superior court.
counterparts in terms of seeking redress against foreign
entities in the courts of their own country.”

• 2011 SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF SC COMMITTEES AND TECHNICAL WORKING GROUPS •

Significant Accomplishments of SC Committees
and Technical Working Groups
The Standing and Ad Hoc Committees, and 4, 2011. This additional special award is intended for the
Technical Working Groups of the Court continued employees in the lowest echelon of the organizational
to make substantial contributions to the chart, who may have little chance against employees
dispensation of its constitutionally mandated performing more intricate tasks.
responsibilities in 2011.
There were also 29 Service Awards given to
The SC Program on Awards and Incentives compulsory and optional retirees of the Court. The
for Service Excellence (PRAISE) gave the service award conferred on compulsory and optional
following employees recognition for their service retirees is composed of (1) 30,000 cash award: (2)
to the Court: Auralyn V. Veloso, Supervisory Level; memorabilia; and (3) a certificate of appreciation. The
Olivia S. A. Buhion, Non-Supervisory Level; Atty. awardees were Teresita V. Nuevo, Silverio F. Benologa,
Eduardo C. Tolentino, Professional Level; Vito R. Remedios L. Patricio, Veronica I. Anciano, Susana E.
Raquid, Commitment to Service Award; Romulo Agulto, Exequiel C. Rojas, Edmundo N. Moredo,
M. Abancio, Jr., Communications Excellence Carmelito G. Sityar, Raquel S. Dimabuyu, Emilia L.
Award; Atty. Zenaida D. Perucho, Leadership Sityar, Hon. Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura, Hon. Conchita
Award; Benjamin T. Anonuevo, Joseph Arvin S. Carpio Morales, Danilo E. Songlingco, Aladin C. Paño,
Cruz, and Atty. Jo-Ann Marie G. Nulud, Innovation Gloria P. Kasilag, Senando G. Calapati, Rosita P.
Award; and Excelino S. Bautista, Kasipagan Jacinto, Jose D. Aquino, Cosme F. Corpuz, Elsa S.
Award. Agito, Gabriel P. Figuracion, Bernardo P. Cajandig,
Flordeliza S. Cruz, Evelyn C. Lim, Ma. Luisa L. Laurea,
The Kasipagan Award was included pursuant Reynaldo M. Arguelles, Pedro B. Jorolan, Jr., Mila T.
to Administrative Circular No. 17-2011 dated March Ballicud, and Buenaventura D. De Keyser.

77
In keeping with the Supreme Court’s mission for To extend additional economic benefits to court
excellence in service, various court offices participated in employees, the Shuttle Bus Committee provided
the 2011 SC Christmas Outreach, in which court officials 10 shuttle buses which help Court personnel save
and employees distributed relief goods to the typhoon on transportation expenses. Each shuttle bus has
victims in various towns in Bulacan, and conducted fun a fixed route in the areas of Las Pinas, Cainta,
activities for the children housed in charitable institutions. Valenzuela, Novaliches, Fairview, Laguna, Cavite
On December 2, 2011, the Public Information Office (PIO), and Marikina.
Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ), Offices of the Associate
Justices, Office of the Clerk of Court, Judicial Records The shuttle buses were also utilized to ferry
Office, Printing Services, Mandatory Continuing Legal court officials and personnel to and from different
Education Office, Medical and Dental Services, and the official events of the Court. This year, the buses
Judicial and Bar Council conducted outreach activities in have been utilized for several outreach programs,
Sapang Bayan, Bulacan. On the same date, the Philippine team building activities, and other events in the
Judicial Academy went to Frances, Bulacan; the Office of Judiciary such as inaugurations and oath takings.
the Chief Attorney, Management and Information Systems
Office, Office of the Bar Confidant, and the Office of the The Personnel Development Committee
Reporter to Meyto, Bulacan; and the Fiscal Management (PDC) approved 53 requests for the availment of
and Budget Office to Panducot, Calumpit, Bulacan. On study leaves, local trainings and seminars, foreign
December 7, 2011, the Office of the Administrative scholarships, and foreign short-term trainings.
Services and the Office of the Court Administrator went to
the towns of San Miguel and Meysulao in Bulacan The Grievance Committee received two
respectively. And on December 9, 2011, the Office of the complaints for the year, and was able to resolve
Chief Justice cluster (composed of the OCJ, PIO, Project one of such complaints.
Management Office, Internal Audit Division, and the For the year 2011, the Committee on Gender
Financial Services Division) went to the Sisters of Mary Responsiveness in the Judiciary (CGRJ) was
Girlstown and Boystown in Silang, Cavite. able to collate the following gender statistics.
GENDER STATISTICS OF JUSTICES/JUDGES IN THE JUDICIARY

as of December 31, 2011
Source: Statistical Reports Division, Court Management Office, Office of the Court Administrator

GENDER STATISTICS OF EMPLOYEES OF THE SUPREME COURT AND

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL
SUPREME COURT:
Permanent Coterminous Temporary Casual Full Time Part Time Contractual

Male 669 252 0 215 2 1 5
Female 728 252 0 77 0 0 7
TOTAL 1,497 504 0 292 2 1 12
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL:

Permanent Coterminous Casual Contractual
Male 1 33 0 0
Female 0 31 0 0
TOTAL 1 64 0 0
Source: Office of Administrative Services, Supreme Court
GENDER STATISTICS OF MALE AND FEMALE PERSONNEL OF FIRST

AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS
Source: Office of Administrative Services, Office of the Court Administrator
SEX-DISAGGREGATED DATA FOR JUSTICES, JUDGES AND LAWYERS

For the Academic Year 2011
• with allowance for duplication of participants
• pax composed of incumbent and retired/resigned judges/lawyers.
Source: Philippine Judicial Academy

79
• 2011 SIGNIFICANT FORA, CONFERENCES, SEMINARS, AND WORKSHOPS •
2011 Significant Fora,

Conferences, Seminars, and Workshops
CHIEF JUSTICE RENATO C. CORONA by the 24/7 internet and social networking sites
DISTINGUISHED LECTURE SERIES, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. He then
January 13, 2011, SC New Session Hall, Manila cited the Florida Judicial Ethics Advisory
Committee’s prohibition against judges adding
Titled Media and the Courts, the first of the Chief Justice lawyer who appear before them as “friends” in
Renato C. Corona Lecture Series, was given by Supreme social networking sites. On the other hand, he
Court of Guam Chief Justice Robert J. Torres Jr. on mentioned how social networking can be used to
January 13 at the SC New Session Hall in Manila. enhance accessibility to court information, as in
the case of the Tennessee court system which
Guam Chief Justice Torres underscored the has 900 followers on Twitter.
responsibility of court representatives, such as court
spokespersons and media/community relations officers, Attending the lecture were Philippine Chief
“to reach out and interact with all aspects of the community Justice Renato C. Corona, other jurists, law
to enhance and reinforce the public perception of and trust practitioners, and developmental aid partners.
in the system of justice.” He gave general guidelines for Participating in the proceedings through video-
media interviews and tips for crisis communication. conferencing were judges in Cebu City and in
Cagayan de Oro City.
Guam Chief Justice Torres described the impact the
social media revolution has had on judicial ethics and on The event was held under the auspices of the
the dissemination of court information. The public’s SC, the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA),
methods for accessing information have been transformed and the SC Program Management Office.


FIRST JUSTICE SECTOR COORDINATING to 17), and Camp Alfredo Montelibano Sr. Firing
COUNCIL FIRST MEETING FOR 2011, Range, Camingawin, Bacolod City (August 18), Negros
February 22, 2011, New Session Hall, Manila Occidental; December 6 to 8, 2011, General Santos
City; East Asia Royale Hotel, General Santos City
The Supreme Court played host to several (December 6 to 7); and Camp Fermin G. Lira, Jr. Firing
high-ranking officials of all three branches of Range, General Santos City (December 8)
government and various development partners to
discuss issues of common interest on the Fifty-six judges from the first- and second-level courts
performance of the justice sector in the Justice in the 3rd and the 4th Judicial Regions, as well as from the
Sector Coordinating Council First Meeting for 2011 National Capital Judicial Region, attended the Personal
on February 22, 2011 at the SC New Session Hall Security Training for Judges on March 22 to 24, 2011 at
in Manila. the Imperial Palace Suites, Quezon City.
The Justice Sector Coordinating Council The judges were oriented on, among other topics, basic
(JSCC) is composed of the SC, the Department first aid, and actual instructions on firearms and
of Justice and its attached agencies, the marksmanship through both lectures and marksmanship
Department of Interior and Local Government and training.
its attached agencies, such as the Philippine
National Police and the Bureau of Jail Moreover, 47 judges from the first- and second-level
Management and Penology, and the Department courts from the 6th, 7th, and 8th Judicial Regions attended
of Budget and Management. The Council also the Personal Security Training for Judges from August 15
serves as a mechanism for the effective to 18, 2011 at the Grand Regal Hotel, Bacolod City (August
coordination and sharing of information in the 16 to 17), and Camp Alfredo Montelibano Sr. Firing Range,
planning and implementation of shared initiatives Camingawin, August 18), both in Bacolod City, Negros
towards better administration of justice. Occidental.
PERSONAL SECURITY TRAINING FOR On December 6 to 8, 2011, a total of 44 first- and

JUDGES, March 22 to 24, 2011, Imperial Palace second-level court judges from the 11th and 12th Judicial
Suites, Quezon City; August 15 to 18, 2011, Regions were oriented on threats assessments, crime
Grand Regal Hotel, Bacolod City (August 16 prevention, facts on firearms, and personal security

81
measures during the Personal Security Training for Judges a summary and analysis of significant Court
in General Santos City. The training was held at the East decisions and issuances on libel, contempt, and
Asia Royale Hotel, (December 6 to 7); and Camp Fermin the right to privacy. Manila Bulletin senior reporter
G. Lira, Jr. Firing Range (December 8), both in General Reynaldo G. Panaligan, on behalf of Manila
Santos City. Bulletin Managing Director Fil C. Sionil, discussed
the do’s and don’ts of court reporting. Mr.
The Training, which gave the judges a clearer Panaligan added valuable personal inputs and
understanding of the basic precepts of safety and security insights anchored in his 34 years of experience in
precautions, was conducted by the SC through the PHILJA, covering the justice and courts beat.
and the SC-Committee on Security, and the Office of the
Court Administrator, in coordination with the National Philippine Judicial Academy Professor
Bureau of Investigation. (PHILJA) retired Assistant Court Administrator
Atty. Ismael G. Khan, Jr. gave a lecture on court-
The Trainings are being conducted in accordance with media relations issues, such as the lack of
the Memorandum of Agreement on Judicial Security understanding of the judicial process and the use
between the SC and the National Bureau of Investigation of legalese in court decisions. Atty. Khan is the
signed in January 2008. first Chief of the PIO.
2011 FORUM FOR MEDIA ON JUDICIARY COVERAGE, PIO Chief and Court Administrator Jose Midas
March 30, 2011, Baguio Country Club, Baguio City P. Marquez spoke on the roles of the Court and
its Justices, highlighting the procedural traditions
To “demystify” the SC and its procedures, the Public involved in the appointment and in the discharge
Information Office (PIO), with support from the Program of functions of the 15-strong high tribunal.
Management Office, conducted the 2011 Forum for Media
on Judiciary Coverage on March 30, 2011, at the Baguio INCREASING JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY:
Country Club in Baguio City. SEMINAR-WORKSHOP FOR JUDGES ON THE
EFFECTIVE USE OF THE BENCHBOOK FOR
The Forum was participated in by Manila-based print, PHILIPPINES TRIAL COURTS (REVISED AND
radio, television, and online media personnel, who are EXPANDED), September 20, 2011, Traders
members of the Justice and Court Reporters Association Hotel, Pasay City; November 17, 2011, Traders
and of the Justice Reporters Organization. Hotel, Pasay City; November 21, 2011, Garden
Orchid Hotel, Zamboanga City; December 2,
Atty. Maria Victoria Gleoresty Sp. Guerra, Director IV 2011, Leyte Park Hotel, Tacloban City;
and Assistant PIO Chief and editor-in-chief of the December 13, 2011, Marco Polo Plaza Cebu,
Benchmark, the official publication of the SC PIO, presented Cebu City

The Increasing Judicial Efficiency: Seminar- in handling human trafficking cases, and to enhance the
Workshop For Judges On The Effective Use Of appellate court justices’ knowledge of the law and practices
The Benchbook For Philippines Trial Courts on human trafficking.
(Revised And Expanded) was attended by a total
of 391 first- and second-level judges. The Discussion is a follow-up activity of the series of
Seminar-Workshops on Combating Human Trafficking in
Held in six batches, the Seminar-Workshop, the Philippines, which was designed to improve the
aimed to help judges render decisions more competencies of judges and prosecutors in handling human
speedily, expeditiously, and consistently. The first trafficking cases.
and second batches, for judges in the National
Capital Judicial Region, were held on September 4TH HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE
20, 2011, at the Traders Hotel in Pasay City. The INTERNATIONAL LAW ASIA-PACIFIC REGIONAL
third batch, for judges in the 10th, 11th, and 12th CONFERENCE (MANILA CONFERENCE), October 26
Judicial Region, was held on November 17 also at to 28, 2011, Mandarin Hotel, Makati City
the Traders Hotel in Pasay City. The fourth batch,
for judges in the 9th Judicial Region, was held on Lauded for its “successful conduct” and “exceptional
November 21, 2011, at the Garden Orchid Hotel, organization,” the 4 th Hague Conference on Private
Zamboanga City; fifth batch, for judges in the 8th International Law Asia-Pacific Regional Conference
Judicial Region, on December 2, 2011, at the Leyte (Manila Conference) held on October 26 to 28, 2011 at the

Park Hotel, Tacloban City; sixth batch, for judges Mandarin Hotel bore fruits beyond expectations.
in the 7th Judicial Region, on December 13, 2011,
at the Marco Polo Plaza Cebu, Cebu City. The approved Conclusions and Recommendations
Chief Justice Diana Bryant of the Family Court of Australia
The Seminar-Workshop was held by the SC, presented to the plenary at the final day of the Manila
through the PHILJA, with support from the Office Conference also welcomed the Philippines as the newest
of the Court Administrator, United States Agency member of the Hague Conference in the Asia-Pacific
for International Development (USAID), and the Region. The Conclusions and Recommendations also
American Bar Association-Rule of Law Initiative. included statements hailing the increase in the number of
Asia-Pacific States that have become Contracting States
ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION ON COMBATING to the Hague Conventions.
HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN THE PHILIPPINES
FOR SELECTED APPELLATE COURT The Hague Conventions discussed during the Manila
JUSTICES (MANILA, CEBU, AND CAGAYAN Conference include the Intercountry Adoption Convention,
DE ORO), September 22, 2011, Century Park the Apostille (Abolition of Legalization) Convention, the
Hotel, Manila Service Convention, the Evidence Convention, the
International Child Protection Convention, the International
A total of 45 select participants attended the Recovery of Child and Family Support Convention and
Roundtable Discussion On Combating Human Ongoing Work on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Trafficking In The Philippines For Selected Judgment, and the Access to Justice Convention.
Appellate Court Justices (Manila, Cebu, and
Cagayan De Oro) on September 22, 2011 at the The Manila Conference was held jointly by the Supreme
Century Park Hotel in Manila. Court and the PHILJA, the High Court’s education and
training arm, in partnership with the Department of Foreign
The Discussion was led by PHILJA Chancellor Affairs and the University of the Philippines College of Law.
Adolfo S. Azcuna, PHILJA Academic Affairs Office More than 230 international law experts, senior foreign
Chief Delilah Vidallon-Magtolis, and Court of affairs and justice officials, and members of the academe
Appeals Presiding justice Andres B. Reyes. and non-governmental organizations from 26 countries
participated in the Conference.
In his speech, United States Ambassador Harry The Hague Conference on Private International Law is
K. Thomas Jr. reiterated the US government’s a global inter-governmental organization with 72 Members
commitment of continued support for the efforts of (71 States and the European Union) working for the
the Philippine government to stop the evils of progressive unification of private international rules.
trafficking. He also lauded the Philippine courts
for prioritizing and expediting human trafficking WORKSHOP ON IMPLEMENTING THE
cases. He added that the prosecution of human INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR COURT
traffickers is one part of the solution. EXCELLENCE, November 2 to 4, 2011, PHILJA
Training Center, Tagaytay City
Organized by the PHILJA and the CA, in
partnership with the US Department of Justice Chief Justice Robert J. Torres of the Supreme Court of
Criminal Division, through its OPDAT, the Guam facilitated the Workshop on Implementing the
Discussion sought to address the problem areas International Framework for Court Excellence to at least

83
60 judges from the National Capital Judicial Region and among the key agencies toward the
the 4th Judicial Region on November 2 to 4, 2011 at the implementation of the strategies and action plans.
PHILJA Training Center in Tagaytay City. National Center
for State Courts (NCSC) Vice President for Court Towards the end of the Forum, representatives
Consulting Services Daniel J. Hall assisted Chief Justice from various concerned agencies signed the
Torres in the workshop. Multisectoral Declaration of the Justice Sector
Agencies in Support of the Campaign Against
The Workshop aims to enhance the capabilities of the Illegal Drugs. In the Declaration, they vowed to,
Philippine courts by helping reduce court backlogs and among others, “continue to adopt a coordinated
overly complex procedures which detract from court quality approach through the Member-Agencies of the
and efficiency and aid in improving their performance. It JSCC in the campaign against illegal drugs.” Each
also seeks to develop innovative ways for addressing sector also vowed “to fulfill its legal mandate in
issues, improving transparency and clarity, and enhancing the government’s anti-crime and anti-illegal drugs
access. efforts” and “to commit to extend any and all
assistance possible to each other in the course of
The Workshop is a project of the Supreme Court fulfilling their respective legal mandates as well
through the PHILJA, in partnership with the USAID and as in the implementation of their respective Action
the NCSC. Plans.”
2011 ANTI-ILLEGAL DRUGS FORUM, NOVEMBER 14, 1ST NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE SUMMIT,
2011, Philippine International Convention Center, CCP December 5 to 11, 2011, Manila Hotel, Manila
Complex, Pasay City
Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, Justice
Sponsored by the Justice Sector Coordinating Council, Secretary Leila M. De Lima, and Interior Secretary
which is led by the Supreme Court with the Department of Jesse M. Robredo inked their commitment to
Justice and the Department of Interior and Local justice reform during the 1st National Criminal
Government, the 2011 Anti-Illegal Drugs Forum was held Justice Summit sponsored by the Justice Sector
at the Philippine International Convention Center, CCP Coordinating Council held December 5 to 11, 2011
Complex, Roxas Boulevard, Pasay City. at the Manila Hotel in Manila.
The Forum aimed to identify the issues, problems, and All three, in the Declaration for Justice Reform,
gaps in the enforcement, trial, judgment, execution of made a commitment to “work together, respecting
penalty/corrections, and rehabilitation/prevention in the independence while acknowledging the
handling illegal drugs cases. It also aimed to formulate interdependence of the three branches of the
strategies and action plans among key agencies as government and the constitutional bodies, in the
solutions to these problems. It also initiated commitments pursuit of a just and peaceful society.”

2011 PROFESSORIAL CHAIR LECTURE, National Convention and Seminar of the Court
December 9, 2011, Court of Appeals, Manila Stenographers Association of the Philippines, May 18 to
20, Davao City; Convention and Seminar of the Court
The 2011 Metrobank Foundation Professorial Librarians of the Philippines, Inc., May 25 to 27, Dumaguete
Chair Lecture, titled Legal Nuances to the City; 10th National Convention and Seminar of the Regional
Philippine Ratification of the Rome Statute of the Trial Court Clerks of Court Association of the Philippines,
International Criminal Court was delivered by August 23 to 25, Cebu City.
Professor Herminio Harry L. Roque, Jr. on
December 9, 2011 at the Court of Appeals OTHER SEMINAR-WORKSHOPS
Auditorium, Centennial Bldg., Court of Appeals in
Manila. The following core programs of the PHILJA, which
benefitted almost a thousand attendees, were also
Sponsored by the Metrobank Foundation, the conducted in 2011: Orientation Seminar-Workshop for
Lecture was attended by officials of the Supreme Newly Appointed Judges, Orientation Seminar-Workshop
Court and the Philippine Judicial Academy, for Newly Appointed Clerks of Court, Pre-Judicature
Metrobank Foundation, judges. Program, Career Enhancement Program for Clerks of
Court, and Career Development Program for Court Legal
VARIOUS CONVENTION-SEMINARS FOR Researchers.
JUDGES AND COURT PERSONNEL

Four convention-seminars for judges, attended OTHER SPECIAL FOCUS PROGRAMS
by more than a thousand participants, were held Thousands of stakeholders attended other special focus
in 2011: the 16th National Convention and Seminar programs held by the Supreme Court, through the PHILJA:
of the Philippine Women Judges Association held the ASEAN Awareness Program on Trafficking in Persons
on March 2 to 4 in Cebu City; the 13th Convention for Judges and Prosecutors, participated in by judges and
and Seminar of the Metropolitan and City Judges prosecutors; Competency Enhancement Training for
Association of the Philippines, September 13 to Family Court Judges and Personnel Handling Child Abuse
15, held in Olongapo City; the National Convention Cases, attended by judges, clerks of court, legal
and Election of Officers and Directors of the researchers, interpreters, prosecutors and Public Attorneys
Philippine Judges’ Association held on October Office (PAO) lawyers; Enhanced Justice on Wheels
12 to 14, in Makati City; and 18 th National (EJOW): Information Dissemination Through a Dialogue
Convention-Seminar and Election of the Philippine Between Barangay and Court Officials, attended by
Trial Judges’ League, November 17 to 19, barangay officials; Multi-Sectoral Seminar-Workshop on
Dumaguete City. Public-Private Partnership, participated in by executive and
Not to be missed were five convention- vice-executive judges from the National Capital Judicial
seminars for court personnel: Convention and Region; representatives from the Bases Conversion
Seminar and Election of Officers of the Sheriff’s Development Authority, Department of Finance,
Confederation of the Philippines, April 5 to 7, Department of Public Works and Highways, Energy
Legazpi City; 8th National Convention and Election Regulatory Board, Laguna Lake Development Authority,
of Officers of the Process Servers Association of USAID, and Maritime Industry Authority; and Orientation
the Philippines, April 13 to 15, Davao City; 6th Seminar-Workshop on Comparative Analysis Between the
Family Code and the Code of Muslim Personal Laws,
attended by judges, and representatives from the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines, PAO, National Bureau of
Investigation, Philippine National Police, Coast Guard,
Philippine Navy, and Commission on Muslim Filipinos.
Other seminars conducted in 2011 include Seminar-

Workshop on Agrarian Justice; Seminar-Workshop on
CEDAW and Gender Sensitivity; Seminar Workshop on
Combating Human Trafficking in the Philippines; Seminar-
Workshop on Dangerous Drugs for Judges, Prosecutors
and Law Enforcers; Seminar-Workshop on Land Valuation
and Just Compensation for Special Agrarian Court Judges;
Seminar-Workshop on the Rule of Procedure for Small
Claims Cases; Training on the Small Claims Case
Monitoring System; Workshop on Implementing the
International Framework for Court Excellence; Seminar-
Workshop on the Special Rules of Court on Alternative
Dispute Resolution; Forum on the Philippine Membership
to the Permanent Court Arbitration; and Seminar-Workshop
on Public-Private Partnership.

85
2011 Significant Administrative Rulings

Emphasizing that “no position exacts a greater demand for moral righteousness
and uprightness of an individual than a seat in the Judiciary,” the Supreme Court in
2011 continued to discipline erring members of the Bench and the Bar; as well as court
personnel who violated the norms of public accountability or diminished the faith of
the people in the Judiciary.
For failure to decide within the constitutionally required A clerk of court from the MCTC, San Fabian-
90-day period, a judge of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), San Jacinto, Pangasinan was found guilty of
Banaue, Ifugao was found guilty of undue delay in the dishonesty and grave misconduct for failing to
disposition of cases. She was fined P10,000, with a stern report and remit collections, in violation of OCA
warning considering that this is her first infraction and that Circulars 50-95 and 26-97. Consequently, he was
most of the cases involved were inherited cases. (AM No. dismissed from the service, effective immediately,
RTJ-09-2188, Tilan v. Piscoso-Flor, January 10, 2011) with all benefits forfeited and with prejudice to re-
employment in the government service. (AM No.
A court interpreter of the Municipal Trial Court in P-10-2799, OCA v. Dion, January 18, 2011)
Tagkawayan, Quezon was fined P3,000 for simple neglect,
for failing to make an accurate record of the minutes of the For motu propio reversing a final and executory
hearings in a civil case. The Court emphasized that “A order of another judge, a judge from RTC, Baguio
court interpreter is duty-bound to prepare and sign the
• 2011 SIGNIFICANT ADMINISTRATIVE RULINGS •
City was dismissed for gross ignorance of the law.

minutes of court sessions which is an important document, (AM No. RTJ-07-2062, Marcos v. Pamintuan,
for it gives a brief summary of the events that take place January 18, 2011)
thereat including a statement of the date and time of the
session; the name of the judge, clerk of court, court A judge from the RTC, Koronadal City was
stenographer, and court interpreter who are present; the dismissed from service for gross misconduct in
names of the counsel for the parties who appear; the parties violation of Canon 3 of the New Code of Judicial
presenting evidence; the names of the witnesses who
testified; the documentary evidence marked; and the date
of the next hearing.” (AM No. P-09-2696, Reyes v. Pabilane,
January 12, 2011)
A clerk of court and a court stenographer of the

Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC), Ilog-Candoni, Negros
Occidental were found guilty of gross neglect of duties for
the irregularities in the administration of court funds,
including failure to deposit court collections, unauthorized
withdrawals from undeposited collections, improper
recording of the court’s financial transactions, and
shortages and the loss or misplacement of receipts. A fine
of P5,000 each was imposed, after due restitution and
considering that they have already retired from office. (AM
No. P-06-2179, OCA v. Cuachon, January 12, 2011)
The Court found a retired judge and a clerk of court of

the RTC, Urdaneta, Pangasinan individually and collectively
guilty of mismanagement of case records which led to their
branch’s inability to dispose of many pending matters. They
were thus held liable for the less serious charge of violation
of Supreme Court rules, directives, and circulars, and were
ordered to pay fines of P20,000 and P8,000, respectively.
Additionally, the judge was likewise found guilty of the
less serious charge of simple misconduct for failure to
investigate a bundy card incident reported by the judicial
audit team, for which the judge was fined P12,000. (AM
No. 08-4-253-RTC, In re: Report on the Judicial Audit
Conducted in the Regional Trial Court, Branch 45, Urdaneta
City, Pangasinan, and Report on the Incident at Branch
49, Same Court, January 12, 2011)

Conduct for obtaining commodity loans from a For her failure to immediately account for the excess in
party litigant in his court in the form of building the cash bond she had received; issue appropriate receipts;
materials for the construction of his house. The safekeep monies received; and remit/deposit cash bonds
Court also found the judge in violation of Canon 1, in the government depository upon receipt, a Clerk of Court
Canon 2, and Canon 4 of the said Code, which II of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC), Pantabangan, Nueva
respectively highlights the judge’s independence, Ecija, was found guilty for dishonesty and grave
promotes a judge’s integrity, and mandates a judge misconduct. The Court emphasized that these infractions
to observe and maintain proper decorum and its which deserve dismissal from service. (AM No. P-11-2887,
appearance in his public office, including OCA v. Angeles, AM No. P-10-2880, Judge Aldea-Arocena
impropriety in talking with litigants outside court v. Angeles, January 18, 2011)
proceedings, in absence of the opposing litigants
and their counsel. (AM No. RTJ-09-2189, Sy v. A deputy sheriff of RTC, Makati City was dismissed for
Dinopol, January 18, 2011) gross misconduct in negligently implementing a writ in a
civil case because he was not given a 35% share in the
A sheriff from the RTC, Angeles City was collections from the writ’s implementation. Corollary to
found liable for grave misconduct and dismissed this, he was earlier found criminally liable for violation of
for his refusal to implement the writ of execution RA 3019 in relation to the same case. (AM P-90-488, OCA
in a civil case, and for interposing obstacles in v. Ramano, January 25, 2011)
the enforcement of the writ on grounds not within
the scope of his duty. In the same case, an OIC For soliciting and receiving donations for a religious
branch clerk of court and a clerk in charge of civil celebration from a private lawyer and a public prosecutor,
cases of RTC Binangonan, Rizal, were a judge of the RTC, Catarman, Northern Samar was found
respectively imposed one year suspension guilty of impropriety and unbecoming conduct and was

without pay for conduct prejudicial to the service fined P10,000.00 with a warning that a repetition of the
for, among others, the former’s delay in issuing same or similar act shall be dealt with more severely. (AM
the writ, which was, on its face, defective, No. RTJ-11-2270, Perfecto v. Desales-Esidera, January
including inaction of the latter in the delay of the 31, 2011)
release of the order granting a motion for
execution. (AM No. P-03-1730, Judge Iturralde Two court stenographers of the RTC, Guagua,
v. Ramirez, January 18, 2011) Pampanga were dismissed from service for falsification of

87
official documents and dishonesty in preparing and signing inappropriately calling the complainant and
court orders, decisions, and court records in anomalous intervenors to a meeting inside his chambers, and
cases for annulment of marriages, among others. The using derogatory and irreverent language in
case against the judge of the same court, who had passed relation to the complainant, calling her as “only a
away during the pendency of the case, was dismissed for live-in partner of Belot,” a “prostitute,” an
being moot and academic. (AM No. RTJ-00-1600, Dabu “opportunist” and a “mistress” in an “illegitimate
v. Kapunan and A.M. No. 01-3-138-RTC, Re: Evaluation relationship,” and accusing the complainant as
Of The Report And Inventory Submitted By Executive being motivated by “insatiable greed,” which is
Judge Rogelio C. Gonzales, RTC, Guagua, Pampanga, inconsistent with the Temporary Protection Order
on Annulment of Marriage Cases in Branches 49, 50, 51, (TPO) he had issued in her favor as a victim of
52 and 53 of the Guagua Regional Trial Court , 1 February domestic violence. (AM No. RTJ-08-2149,
2011) Benancillo v. Amila, March 9, 2011)
A retired judge of the RTC, Panabo City was found For using her position as a court employee to
guilty of undue delay in taking more than a year to resolve stop the implementation of a court’s judgment in
a motion for reconsideration, thus violating Rule 1.02, favor of a friend, a records officer of the Office of
Canon 1 and Rule 3.05, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial the Clerk of Court, MTC, Meycauayan, Bulacan
Conduct. He was fined P5,000, to be deducted from his was found guilty of violation of Section 1, Canon
retirement benefits. (AM No. RTJ-10-2220, Angelia v. IV of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel and
Grageda, February 7, 2011) was fined P5,000 with the stern warning that a
repetition of the same or similar acts will warrant a
For conducting a preliminary investigation of a criminal more severe penalty. (AM No. P-09-2677, Lim v.
complaint when under AM No. 05-8-26-SC, amending Aromin, March 9, 2011)
Rules 112 and 114 of the Revised Rules on Criminal

Procedure, MTC judges are clearly no longer authorized For failure to account for and to return the sums
to conduct the same, and considering that this is his of money received from his clients to recover their
offense, a judge of the MTC, Bocaue, Bulacan was found property from a foreclosing banking institution, a
guilty of gross ignorance of the law and was suspended lawyer was found guilty of a violation of Canon 16,
for six months without salary and other benefits, with a Rule 16.01 and Canon 17 of the Code of
stern warning that a repetition of the same or similar acts Professional Responsibility and accordingly, was
shall be dealt with more severely. (AM No. MTJ-09-1737, disbarred and ordered to return the sums owing to
Conquilla v. Bernardo, February 9, 2011) his clients, plus interest. (AC No. 8253, Tarog v.
Ricafort, March 15, 2011)
A judge of the RTC, Surigao City was fined P11,000
for failing to comply with Supreme Court rules, directives, A sheriff of the RTC, Butuan City was found
and circulars in releasing an accused in a criminal case liable for grave misconduct, dishonesty, and
on bail despite lack of a written application for bail, a neglect of duty; and was suspended for six months
certificate of deposit from the Bureau of Internal Revenue for failure to execute a writ of execution, as well
collector or provincial, city, or municipal treasurer, and as causing the lifting of the notices of garnishment
written undertaking signed by the accused, and written earlier served upon the judgment obligors despite
release order. (AM No. RTJ-11-2262, Pantilo III v. Canoy, the absence of any court directive for the purpose
February 9, 2011) from the court. (AM No. P-11-2914, Dy Teban
Trading Co., Inc. v. Verga, March 16, 2011)
For allowing, abetting, or tolerating numerous
unreasonable postponements of a criminal proceeding, a For continued performance of his judicial
judge of the MeTC, Malabon City was held liable for delay functions and receipt of his salaries as judge after
in the disposition of his cases tantamount to inefficiency having already filed a certificate of candidacy in
and incompetence in the performance of his official duties, the May 1998 elections, a judge of 10th Shari’a
and was fined P21,000 to be deducted from his retirement Circuit Court SCC, Tamparan, Lanao del Sur was
benefits. (AM No. MTJ-08-1714, Sevilla v. Lindo, February found guilty of gross misconduct and dishonesty,
9, 2011) and was accordingly dismissed with forfeiture of
all benefits as well as barred from re-employment
A lawyer was disbarred for gross misconduct and willful in the government. He was likewise ordered to
disobedience of the Court’s orders after it was found that refund the salaries, allowances, and other benefits
she continued to practice law despite a five-year he received from March 26, 1998 to November
suspension order, and even misrepresented herself to be 30, 1998, without prejudice to appropriate criminal
another person to evade said penalty, and for failure to and civil cases that may be filed against him. (AM
comply with the Court’s resolutions. (AC No. 534, Santeco No. SCC-98-4, Alauya v. Limbona, March 22,
v. Avance et al., February 22, 2011) 2011)
A judge of the RTC, Tagbilaran City was found liable A court stenographer of the RTC, Malolos City,
for conduct unbecoming of a judge and fined P21,000 for Bulacan was suspended from service for six

months without pay for having been found guilty For prolonged delay in the service of a copy of a warrant
of immorality in carrying out an illicit relationship of arrest in a criminal case to the police authorities resulting
with a sheriff in the same city. For having been in the failure to arrest the accused, a court clerk of the
declared AWOL, however, the said sheriff was RTC, Morong, Rizal was declared liable for conduct
held beyond the jurisdiction of the Court. (AM prejudicial to the best interest of the service and was
No. P-09-2651, Gibas, Jr. v. Gibas, March 23, suspended for one year without pay, with warning that a
2011) similar offense in the future shall be dealt with more
severely. (AM No. P-10-2794, Sonido v. Ilocso, June 1,
For gross negligence of duty for transmitting 2011)
court records two years from the order directing
the transmittal of the same to the Court of Appeals, A sheriff of the RTC, Sorsogon City was suspended for
Cagayan de Oro in one case, and after six years six months without pay for grave misconduct for (1) failure
in another, a branch clerk of court of RTC, Davao to make a sheriff’s return of the writ of execution within the
City was found guilty of gross negligence of duty period provided by the Rules of Court; and (2) failure to
and was fined P20,000 with a warning that a turn over the checks amounting to P118,000 which he had
repetition of the same or similar act shall be dealt received by virtue of the implementation of the writ; and
with more severely. (AM No. P-10-2791, Funtes worse, encashing one of the checks for P60,000, without
v. Fabro, April 6, 2011) having been authorized to do so. (AM No. P-09-2715, OCA
v. Tolosa, June 13, 2011)
“A court personnel is prohibited from disclosing
confidential information to any unauthorized A lawyer who was a former member of the legal staff of
person,” reminded the Court after finding a legal a retired justice was suspended from the practice of law
researcher of RTC, Borongan, Eastern Samar for six months for taking the rollo of a case involving himself

guilty of simple
misconduct for
informing a movant of
his submission of the
draft resolution of a
motion to dismiss to
the judge, which is
violative of the
confidentiality required
under Section 1,
Canon II of the New
Code of Judicial
Conduct for Court
Personnel. In view of
his retirement, said
legal researcher was
fined P20,000 to be
deducted from his
retirement benefits.
(AM No. P-11-2919,
Tan v. Quitorio, May
31, 2011)
A branch clerk of
court and court clerk
were suspended for three months and a month outside court premises through misrepresentation and
and a day, respectively, for simple misconduct. abuse of position and without the court’s consent; and
The branch clerk of court was found to have asked returning the same only upon discovery after almost 12
for a commissioner’s fee, while the branch clerk years. (AC No. 6683, Re: Resolution of the Court Dated 1
of court was found to have not faithfully June 2004 in GR No. 72954 Against Atty. Victor C. Avecilla,
accomplished her daily time record. The branch June 21, 2011)
clerk of court was likewise found guilty of simple
neglect of duty for losing the attendance logbook A sheriff who accepted money from litigants without
of the court. (AM No. P-05-1970, An Anonymous prior court approval as well as failed to make a timely report
Complaint Against Atty. Portia Diesta, Branch on the status of the execution of judgment in favor of the
Clerk Of Court, Regional Trial Court, Branch 263, litigants was dismissed from service. The Court upheld
Pasig City and Luz Santos-Tacla, Clerk III, Same the finding of the Office of the Court Administrator that the
Court, May 30, 2011) sheriff had demanded from a party P5,000 to defray his

89
expenses in the implementation of the writ of execution in the judge to fight, and, after being cited for
that party’s favor; and after a few months, demanded contempt, even returning to the courtroom and
another P2,000, allegedly to defray his gasoline expenses. disrupting the ongoing proceedings - were not only
(AM No. P-11-2896, Anico v. Pilipiña, August 2, 2011) against the person, the position, and the stature
of the judge, “but against the court as well whose
The High Court found three employees of the MTC of proceedings were openly and flagrantly disrupted,
Santiago City, Isabela liable for misconduct for illegally and brought to disrepute by the respondent.” (AC
tape-recording a conversation with a counsel and his client No. 8920, Baculi v. Battung, September 28, 2011)
regarding the receipt by their co-employee of money for
safekeeping, and thereafter filing a complaint for alleged For obtaining money from a client without
illegal deposit against said coemployee before the Court. rendering proper legal services and appropriating
The Court stressed that “[m]aking false accusations and for herself the insurance proceeds of the client’s
sowing intrigues are acts unbecoming of a public servant. husband, a lawyer was meted the ultimate
They run against the principles of public service envisioned administrative penalty of disbarment for gross
by the 1987 Constitution and by the Code of Conduct and misconduct. She was also ordered to turn over to
Ethical Standards for Public Officials & Employees (RA the complainant the proceeds of her deceased
6713).” (AM No. P-04-1771, Capuchino v. Apolonio, husband’s insurance policies remitted to the former
September 5, 2011) by two insurance companies in London, United
Kingdom, which was approximately equivalent to
The Court revoked a lawyer’s notarial commission, P700,000. (AC No. 6246, Freeman v. Reyes,
indefinitely suspended his reappointment as a notary November 15, 2011)
public, and suspended him from the practice of law for
one year, but only for humanitarian reasons, for violation The Court disbarred a former judge who had
of the Notarial Law, the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, previously been dismissed from service in 2000
and the Code of Professional Responsibility after he was for entertaining a Petition for Declaratory Relief
found to have notarized documents “either without the despite his being a judge of a first-level court.
presence of the affiants or with their forged signatures.” “Displaying an utter lack of familiarity with the rules,
The Court held that it is no excuse that the said lawyer he in effect erodes the public’s confidence in the
was an octogenarian and insulin dependent: “[T]he competence of our courts. Moreover, he
respondent’s age and sickness cannot be cited as reasons demonstrates his ignorance of the power and
to disregard the serious lapses he committed in the responsibility that attach to the processes and
performance of his duties as a lawyer and as a notary issuances of a judge, and that he as a member of
public.” (AC No. 6689, Gemina v. Madamba, August 24, the bar should know,” the Court stressed. (AC No.
2011) 5355, OCA v. Liangco, December 13, 2011)
For failing to file his Statement of Assets and Liabilities, For having incurred a total of 61 counts of
and Net Worth for the years 2004 to 2008, a judge of the of tardiness from July 2010 to October 2010, a Clerk
the Shari’a Circuit Court, Pagadian City was ordered to of Court V from the Lucena City RTC was found
pay a fine of P5,000, for violating section 7 of RA 3019, administratively liable for habitual tardiness and
the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and section 8 of was reprimanded by the High Court. “Such
RA 6713, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for administrative offense seriously compromises
Public Officials and Employees (AM No. SCC-08-12, OCA work efficiency and hampers public service. By
v. Usman, October 19, 2011) being habitually tardy, he has fallen short of the
stringent standard of conduct demanded from
A Sarangani RTC judge who had granted bail to the everyone connected with the administration of
accused in a murder case without first conducting a hearing justice,” emphasized the Court. (AM No. P-11-
was fined P20,000 for gross ignorance of the law and the 2945, Leave Division, OAS-OCA v. Pua, Jr., July
Rules of Court. The Court found no merit in the judge’s 13, 2011)
contention that a bail hearing was not necessary because
the accused did not file an application for bail and because “Any errant behaviour on the part of a lawyer,
the public prosecutor had recommended bail. It reiterated be it in his public or private activities, which tends
that a bail hearing was mandatory, whether bail is a matter to show him deficient in moral character, honesty,
of right or discretion. (AM No. RTJ-04-1845, Gacal v. probity or good demeanor, is sufficient to warrant
Infante, October 5, 2011) his suspension or disbarment.” Thus said the Court
as it ordered the disbarment of a lawyer who had
A lawyer was suspended from the practice of law for admitted his illicit relationship with a woman
one year for violating Rule 11.03, Canon 11 of the Code of married to his client. (AC No. 4428, Tiong v.
Professional Responsibility. The Court found the acts of Florendo, December 12, 2011)
the said lawyer - shouting at the judge during court
proceedings, threatening him “Judge, I will file gross A judge in a Cotabato City court was found
ignorance against you! I am not afraid of you,” challenging guilty of gross misconduct for committing violations

of the Code of Judicial Conduct and was fined P25,000, while his branch clerk of court was found guilty of neglect
of duty and was suspended for two months. The Court found that the judge failed to exert due diligence required
of him to ascertain the facts of a case before granting an ex parte petition for the issuance of a writ of possession
to revive a case which had already been nullified and set aside by the Court of Appeals. On the other hand, the
Court found that the clerk of court was remiss in his duty to inform the respondent judge of the existence of the
Court of Appeals and Supreme Court decisions which have nullified and set aside the case in question. (AM No.
RTJ-07-2069, Espina and Madarang, Co. & Makar Agricultural and Dev’t. Corp. v. Indar and Amilil, December
14, 2011)
A Kabacan, North Cotabato RTC clerk of court was dismissed from service and was ordered to restitute the
amount of P1,747,715.02 representing shortages in judiciary funds. The Supreme Court found that a number of
accountable documents under the responsibility of the clerk of court (such as official receipts, deposit and withdrawal
slips, cashbooks, and passbooks) were missing. (AM No. P-05-2082, OCA v. Marasigan, December 12, 2011)
“In the judiciary, ‘moral integrity is more than a virtue; it is a necessity.’ A court employee who has fallen short
of the exacting standards of morality and decency has to face the consequences, even after the embers have
died and the scars have faded.” This was highlighted by the Court in imposing a fine of P50,000 on a Quezon City
RTC Interpreter III who maintained an illicit relationship with a married man. (AM No. P-11-3011, Banaag v.
Espeleta, December 16, 2011)
Suspension from the practice of law for six months was the penalty imposed by the Supreme Court on a
lawyer who had assisted his paralegal, who was not member of the Philippine Bar, in the latter’s illegal practice
of law by allowing her to sign the minutes of the court proceedings of a civil case. (AC No. 7269, Noe-Lacsamana

v. Busmente, November 23, 2011)
A clerk of court from the Liloan, Southern Leyte Municipal Trial Court who used the letterhead of the court and
of her official designation in eight demand letters she prepared for private entities, acting as “counsel” and
collecting agent was found guilty of misconduct and was dismissed from service. (AM No. P-11-3000, Gabon v.
Merka, December 14, 2011)
Data on Administrative Complaints

JUSTICES

91
RTC, MeTC,
Court Personnel
MTCC, MTC, & MCTC
Cases Filed 235
Complaint Dismissed 104
PENALTY / ACTION
Admonished 6
Benefits Forfeited 4
Censured 0
Dismissed from Service 24
Fined 41
Reprimanded 39
Suspended 46
TOTAL 160
SDC Personnel SCC Personnel
Cases Filed 0 1
Cases Decided 1 2
Complaint Dismissed 0 2

Dismissed from Service 0 0
Reprimanded 0 0
Suspended 1 0
Fined 1 0
Source: Docket and Clearance Division; Legal Office, OCA; and the Complaints and
LAWYERS Investigation Division, OAS
Note: Admonition and Warning

are not penalties.
SC – Supreme Court
CA – Court of Appeals
CTA – Court of Tax Appeal
RTC – Regional Trial Court
MeTC – Metropolitan Trial Court
MTCC – Municipal Trial Court in Cities
MTC – Municipal Trial Court
MCTC – Municipal Circuit Trial Court
SDC – Shari’a District Court
SCC – Shari’a Circuit Court
Source: Office of the Bar Confidant

93
Employee
Welfare and Benefits
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE
Regardless of employment status, employees who have
been in the service for at least six consecutive months are
granted the annual clothing allowance, in cash or in kind,
provided that they remain in the service for another six
months from the day the clothing allowance was given.
REPRESENTATION
AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE
RATA is given to employees whose positions are
expressly authorized by the General Appropriations Act to
receive such allowance, those of equivalent rank as
determined by the Department of Budget and Management,
and those who have been duly designated by the appointing
authority to a vacant position entitled to RATA.
Since the RATA is attached to the position, employees

• EMPLOYEE WELFARE AND BENEFITS •
entitled to the said allowance must render actual service

incident to or in connection with the discharge of their official
duties. Hence, employees who go on a leave for more
than a month are not entitled to receive such allowance.
PERSONAL ECONOMIC RELIEF ASSISTANCE (PERA)

AND ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION (ADCOM)
Upon assumption of duty, each employee receives are based on salary brackets, so that those with
Personal Economic Relief Assistance of P500, and a basic monthly salary of P14,000 or less are given
Additional Compensation of P1,500 per month. In the biggest share, next are those receiving more
accordance to the Department of Budget Management’s than P14,000 to P21,000, and those receiving
Budget Circular No. 2009-3, the PERA and ADCOM have more than P21,000, the least share. The JDF
been combined as PERA in the amount of P2,000. allocated for employees of the same salary grade
is the same across all courts. Court employees
ADDITIONAL COST OF LIVING ALLOWANCE who have rendered at least six months of service
FROM THE JUDICIARY DEVELOPMENT FUND (JDF) in the Judiciary are entitled to the full amount of
The JDF was established in 1984 by PD 1949 for the the allowance, while court personnel who have
benefit of the members and personnel of the Judiciary, to rendered less than six months of service as of
help ensure and guarantee the independence of the the cut-off date are entitled to the pro-rated
Judiciary as mandated by the Constitution and public policy amounts of the JDF.
and required by the impartial administration of justice.
Derived from the increase in legal fees and from other For 2011, the total collections of the JDF as of
sources, such as Bar examination fees, interest on deposits December 31 amounted to P992,865,700.89. The
of its income, confiscated bail bonds, income from Court also had the beginning balance of
publications of the Supreme Court Printing Press, and P1,046,685,618.11 in the JDF as of January 1,
rentals of facilities in the Halls of Justice, the JDF is used 2011. The total disbursements of the JDF in 2011
to augment the allowances of members and personnel of amounted to P867,449,097.97.
the Judiciary and to finance the acquisition, maintenance,
and repair of office equipment and facilities. PD 1949 SPECIAL ALLOWANCE
provides that at least 80 percent of the JDF shall be used FOR THE JUDICIARY (SAJ)
for cost of living allowances, and that no more than 20 The SAJ is a special allowance equivalent to
percent of the said Fund shall be used for office equipment the 100 percent individual basic monthly salaries
and facilities. under the Salary Standardization Law, granted to
justices, judges, and other Judiciary officials
The 80 percent of the JDF is given monthly to all holding the equivalent rank of a Court of Appeals
qualified employees in proportion to their basic monthly justice or Regional Trial Court judge. Created in
salaries. The rates of the additional cost of living allowance 2003 by RA 9227, An Act Granting a Special


Allowance for Justices, Judges, and those Holding the Court also had a beginning balance in January 2011,
Ranks Equivalent to Justices of the Court of the amount of P564,363,870.67. The total disbursement
Appeals and the Regional Trial Court, the SAJ of the SAJ fund in 2011 was P1,522,696,023.60.
was implemented over the span of four years,
spreading uniformly the special allowance in LONGEVITY PAY
amounts equivalent to 25 percent of the basic Pursuant to Section 42, BP 129, justices, judges, and
salaries covered for each installment. employees of similar rank are granted longevity pay
equivalent to five percent of their monthly basic pay, for
As provided by RA 9227, the surplus from the every five years of continuous and commendable service
collections in excess of the amount needed to fund rendered in the Judiciary, provided, that the total salary of
the special allowances granted to justices, judges, each justice or judge concerned, after this longevity pay is
and all other positions in the Judiciary with the added, does not exceed the salary of the justice or judge
equivalent rank of justices of the Court of Appeals next in rank.
and judges of the Regional Trial Court may be
used by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court PRODUCTIVITY INCENTIVE BENEFIT
to grant additional allowances exclusively to other This benefit is based on the productivity and
court personnel not covered by the benefits performance of employees, as evaluated by the heads of
granted under the said law. their respective offices. Entitled to this benefit are court
employees who have had a performance rating of at least
Funding for the SAJ is derived from the legal “satisfactory” and have rendered actual government service
fees originally prescribed, imposed, and collected for at least one year.
under Rule 141 of the Rules of Court prior to the
promulgation of the amendments under PD 1949, PRODUCTIVITY ENHANCEMENT INCENTIVE
Judiciary Development Fund Decree, and This benefit is granted to members and personnel of
increases in 1989 current fees and new fees which the Judiciary, in recognition of the commendable
may be imposed by the Supreme Court after the performance and contribution of its workforce in achieving
effectivity of RA 9227 on November 11, 2003. efficiency in the operations of the courts.
For 2011, the Court was able to collect the FRINGE BENEFITS
total amount of P1,120,444.539.01 funding for the Fringe benefits in the form of rice subsidy allowance,
SAJ as of December 31. On top of this figure, grocery expense, and emergency economic allowance are

95
granted to employees to alleviate them from their present Additionally, three (3) months prior to their
economic condition arising from the prevailing economic compulsory retirement at age 65, they are entitled
crisis in the country. The fringe benefit in the form of to an automatic grant of one (1) salary range or
anniversary bonus is given to officials and personnel of grade higher than the basic salary, and the
the High Court and the appellate courts, on the occasion retirement benefits shall be computed on the basis
of the founding anniversary of the Supreme Court, of the upgraded salary, provided that they have
chargeable against the respective savings from the regular fulfilled the age and service requirements under
appropriations of the courts. existing laws.
YEAR-END BENEFITS AND CASH GIFT SHUTTLE BUS SERVICE

Every December, Court employees receive a bonus (FOR SC EMPLOYEES)
equivalent to the actual base monthly salary as of October To extend additional economic benefits to
31, and a cash gift of P5,000, as provided under RA 6686, Supreme Court employees, the Supreme Court
as amended by RA 8441. Employees who have been in provided 10 shuttle buses which help Court
the service from January 1 to October 31, and those who personnel save on transportation expenses. Each
have rendered at least four months of service inclusive of shuttle bus has a fixed route in the areas of
leaves of absence with pay are entitled to this benefit. Bulacan, Las Piñas, Cainta, Valenzuela,
Employees may avail one half (1/2) of the amount, as an Novaliches, Fairview, Laguna, Cavite, and
interest free loan during midyear, pursuant to the General Marikina.
Provisions of the General Appropriations Act of Fiscal Year
2011 or RA 10147. The shuttle buses are also utilized to provide
transportation to Court officials and personnel to
STEP INCREMENT and from different official events of the Court,
Step increment is given to employees who have been especially during outreach programs.
in continuous service for the last three years in a particular
position. Likewise, justices, judges, and employees of MEDICAL AND DENTAL SERVICES
similar rank are entitled to step increment, in addition to The SC Clinic provided a total of 23,242 various
their longevity pay. medical services in 2011, of which 15,630 were
medical consultations/treatment, 2,763 were
LOYALTY AWARD dental consultations/treatment, 1,207 were
The Loyalty Award is conferred to Court employees laboratory services, and 2,872 were physical
who have rendered an initial 10 years of continuous and therapy.
satisfactory service in the government and every five years
thereafter. The award, given in cash,
shall be in accordance with the
allowable rates at the time of the grant.
In addition, a token of appreciation
shall be given to the qualified
employees.
For purposes of granting the

loyalty award, services rendered in
other government agencies prior to
January 1, 2002 shall be not
considered. Likewise, an official or
employee who earned a total of not
more than 50 days authorized
vacation leave without pay within the
ten-year period shall be considered as
having rendered continuous service,
for the grant of the loyalty award.
SPECIAL BENEFITS OF
EMPLOYEES OF THE SC
MEDICAL SERVICES AS
PUBLIC HEALTH WORKERS
The Court’s Health Workers may
avail of the benefits provided under
the Magna Carta of Public Health
Workers, subject to the requirements
or conditions set forth therein.

Five hundred seventy-six underwent (special leave), 51 were for maternity leave, 21 were for
psychological testing, and 68 subjects had neuro- disability retirement, 24 were for sick leave, and five were
psychiatric evaluations made for pre-employment for rehabilitation leave.
purposes, disability retirement and diagnostic
purposes. The SC Clinic also conducted 126 pre- SC HEALTHCARE SERVICES AGREEMENT
employment physical examinations. In addition to its local healthcare services made
available through the SC Medical and Dental Services,
Of the 16 ailments commonly encountered at the Supreme Court since 2009, has entered into annual
the SC Clinic, respiratory tract infections and healthcare services agreements with healthcare providers.
cardiovascular complaints were the most common Under its Healthcare Services Project, the 15 Supreme
cause of consultation, with 3,783 cases and 3,659 Court justices, and all other officials and employees,
cases, respectively. These were followed by regardless of status of appointment, are covered by the
endocrine/metabolic ailments comprising 3,349 health care program, as long as they are in the service as
reported cases. Other common ailments of the date of the contract’s effectivity. The healthcare
experienced by the employees were services and benefits under the Project include out-patient
musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal, dermatological, services, preventive services, emergency care services,
neurologic, and urogenital/renal, and hospitalization/in-patient services, dental care services,
ophthalmologic in nature. and annual physical examination.
In addition, the SC Clinic conducted a total of SUPREME COURT MOTORCYCLE, COMPUTER

2,763 various dental services last year, of which AND HANDGUN ACQUISITION PROGRAM
675 were ginggiva/gum treatment, 574 were (SC-MCHAP)
permanent filling, 389 were oral prophylaxis, and The Court offers interest-free loans for the acquisition
315 were simple extraction. of motorcycle, computer and handgun under the Supreme
Court Motorcycle, Computer, and Handgun Acquisition

The Clinic staff attended to 270 post-operative Program (SC-MCHAP). These loans are charged against
cases, 200 procedural cases, 204 cases of the 20 percent of the JDF where the said portion of the
temporary tooth filling, 97 cases of oral Fund shall be used for office equipment and facilities of
consultations, and one difficult extraction. the Courts located where the legal fees are collected.
Out of the 213 requests received by the SC A.Motorcycle Acquisition Program (MAP) grants a
Clinic, 108 were evaluated for magna carta loan of P50,000.00 which can be paid initially in installment
of three years pursuant to the Resolution of the Court En
Banc No. A.M. 99-8-12 SC dated
October 19, 1999, however the
installment payment terms was
extended to five years through OCA
Circular No. 15-2002 dated June 7,
2002.
As provided under the En Banc

Resolution on MAP, the loan applicant
shall have the option to choose the
mode of payment he wants – either
through salary deduction or his share
in the JDF.
B.Computer Acquisition
Program (CAP) for Lawyers,
Justices, and Judges This program
offers financial assistance to qualified
justices, judges, and court attorneys
who wish to acquire a computer
through loans and staggered payment
schemes. Pursuant to the Resolution
of the Court En Banc in A.M. No. 05-
09-18 SC dated September 20, 2005,
the CAP offers a loan of P36,000.00,
which can be paid with a monthly
deduction of P1,000.00 from the
monthly JDF allowance.

97
ANNUAL
ANNUAL REPORT
REPORT 2011
2011 || SUPREME
SUPREME COURT
COURT OF
OF THE
THE PHILIPPINES
PHILIPPINES
The CAP for other qualified court employees grants a portability of membership, optional withdrawal of
loan for a maximum amount of P30,000.00 with a payment contributions, housing features, death benefits, and
term of 30 monthly installments pursuant to Court En Banc various short-term loans and other benefits
Resolution A.M. No. 05-5-17 SC dated June 7, 2005, as programs.
amended by the En Banc Resolution of the Court dated
June 20, 2006. Loans not exceeding P24,000.00 shall be PHILHEALTH BENEFITS
paid in 24 equal monthly installments. Employees with PhilHealth ID card can benefit
from quality and affordable healthcare services
C. Handgun Acquisition Program (HAP) offers loan through PhilHealth’s administration of the National
to judges in an amount not exceeding P50,000.00 which Health Insurance Program.
is payable in 36 monthly installments, pursuant to Court
En Banc Resolution A.M. No. 08-3-13 –SC dated EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION
September 30, 2008. AND STATE INSURANCE FUND BENEFITS
Created under PD No. 626 which took effect
PERMISSION TO TEACH on January 1, 1975, the Employees’ Compensation
In accordance to En Banc Resolution dated June 4, benefits or disability benefits comes as a
1974 and Circular No. 62-97 dated October 9, 1997 of the compensation package for both public and private
Office of the Court Administrator, all judges and personnel sector employees and their dependents in the
of the courts may be allowed to teach, subject to the rules event of work-related injury, sickness, disability or
and regulations specified therein. death. The employee is not obliged to contribute
any amount to the program as it is a purely
GOVERNMENT SERVICE employer-based contribution benefit. The GSIS
INSURANCE SYSTEM (GSIS) BENEFITS administers the program for the public sector, and
All employees who have not reached the compulsory the Social Security System for the private sector.
retirement age, regardless of employment status, are

required to avail the membership in the GSIS, to be RETIREMENT BENEFITS
covered with life insurance upon entrance to duty. Retirement benefits of justices, judges and
officials with judicial rank are governed by RA 910,
PAG-IBIG FUND BENEFITS as amended by RA 9946, while RA 660, RA 1616,
Membership in the PAG-IBIG Fund is compulsory upon and RA 8291 amending PD 1146 are laws
all employees covered by the GSIS, irrespective of their governing the retirement of employees. Revised
employment status, and their employers. Members can Administrative Circular No. 81-2010 laid out the
avail of benefits such as dividends, return of contributions, guidelines on the implementation of RA 9946.

The Philippine
JUDICIAL SYSTEM
• THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEM •

FIRST LEVEL
Occupying the first level of the hierarchy are Since the Shari’a Appellate Court has not yet been
the first-level courts comprised of the Metropolitan organized, decisions of SDCs may be brought to the
Trial Courts (MeTCs), which are established in Supreme Court through a special civil action of certiorari
Metropolitan Manila; the Municipal Trial Courts in if the issue is one of jurisdiction or through a petition for
Cities (MTCCs), in every city which does not form review on certiorari as a mode of appeal under Rule 45.
part of Metropolitan Manila; the Municipal Trial (GR No. 159210, Macaraig v. Balindong, September 20,
Courts (MTCs) established in each of the other 2006)
cities or municipalities; and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts (MCTCs), created in each circuit THIRD LEVEL
comprising such cities and/or municipalities as
grouped by law. COURT OF APPEALS
At the third level is the Court of Appeals (CA), which
At the same level are the Shari’a Circuit Courts exercises its powers, functions, and duties through 23
(SCC). Shari’a Courts have been established in Divisions of three members each. The CA’s 18th, 19th,
Islamic regions and provinces to interpret and and 20th Divisions comprise the CA Visayas, located in
apply the Code of Muslim Personal Laws (PD Cebu City; while the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd Divisions make
1083). Their decisions are appealable to the up CA Mindanao, situated in Cagayan de Oro City. The
Shari’a Appellate Court, which, however, is yet to CA is assigned to review cases elevated to it from the
be organized.
SECOND LEVEL
The second tier consists of the Regional Trial

Courts (RTCs) established in each of the 13
regions in the Philippines. Each RTC may be
single-sala or composed of several branches.
RTCs act as trial courts and may receive evidence
from the parties of the case. They also exercise
appellate jurisdiction over decisions of the MeTCs,
MTCCs, MTCs, and MCTCs in their respective
territorial jurisdictions.
Also at the same level are the Shari’a District

Courts (SDC). Their decisions are appealable to
the Shari’a Appellate Court.

99
RTCs as well as quasi-judicial agencies such as the Civil and 14 Associate Justices who sit in five divisions
Service Commission, Securities and Exchange of three Justices each. Like the CA, its decisions
Commission, National Labor Relations Commission, and are directly appealable to the Supreme Court.
the Land Registration Authority.
The CA also reviews cases where the sentence is COURT OF TAX APPEALS
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, as well as Under RA 9503, the CTA is composed of a
decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative Presiding Justice and eight Associate Justices,
disciplinary cases. The CA is a collegiate court and may and may sit en banc or in three divisions of three
sit en banc only for the purpose of exercising justices each. Republic Act 9282, which took effect
administrative, ceremonial, or other non-adjudicatory on March 30, 2004, has elevated the status of the
functions. Being essentially an appellate court, it generally CTA to that of the CA. It has exclusive jurisdiction
resolves cases only on the basis of records, but in certain to review on appeal decisions in cases involving
instances, it may also try cases, conduct hearings, and disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue
receive evidence. taxes, fees, or other charges, penalties in relation
thereto, or other matters arising under the National
The Philippine Judicial System also includes two Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs
special courts: the Sandiganbayan and the Court of Tax Code, It also exercises original jurisdiction over
Appeals.
SANDIGANBAYAN
The Sandiganbayan is an anti-graft court that tries public
officers with a salary grade of 27 and above – including
their co-accused private persons – charged with criminal
• THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL SYSTEM •
cases involving graft and corrupt practices as well as

corresponding civil cases for the recovery of civil liability.
The Sandiganbayan is composed of a Presiding Justice
all criminal offenses arising from violations of the

Tax or Tariff Codes and other laws administered
by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau
of Customs.
FOURTH LEVEL
SUPREME COURT
At the apex of the judicial hierarchy is the
Supreme Court. It is composed of a Chief Justice
and 14 Associate Justices who currently sit En
Banc or in three divisions of five members each.
It has the power to settle actual controversies
involving rights that are legally demandable and
enforceable, and to determine whether or not there
has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any
branch or instrumentality of the government.
The Supreme Court is considered “the court of

last resort” since no more appeals can be made
from a judgment or decision on the merits rendered
by this court. A decision of a Supreme Court
division is considered a decision of the entire
Court. Decisions of the Supreme Court are
considered as part of the law of the land.

SC Annual 11 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SC Annual 11 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SC Annual 11 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

This is a publication of the Supreme Court Public Information Office.

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

• The 2011 Corona Court 2

• Message from the Acting Chief Justice 4

• 2011: Upholding the Rule of Law 6

• Justices of the Supreme Court 15

• Highlights of the CY 2013 Budget Proposals 41

• The State of the 2011 Judiciary 44

• 2011 Supreme Court Reform Projects 50

• Officials of the Supreme Court 55

• 2011 Significant Decisions 70

• 2011 Significant Rules 76

• Significant Fora, Conferences, 80

• 2011 Significant Administrative Rulings 86

• Employee Welfare and Benefits 94

• The Philippine Judicial System 99

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

Unlike the President or Congress, however, the

4 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

• MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE •

Justice Antonio T. Carpio

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

2011: Upholding the Rule of Law

6 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

is required because the Rules expressly mandate their

GR No. 172087, Philippine Amusement and Gaming

GR No. 191560, General v. Arroyo, March 29, 2011

• 2011: UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW IN FACE OF UNPRECEDENTED CHALLENGES •

(Signed Res.) GR No. 164195, Apo Fruits

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

December 7, 2010 decision declaring (Signed Res.) GR No. 171101, Hacienda

compulsory coverage on mandated land

8 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

• 2011: UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW IN FACE OF UNPRECEDENTED CHALLENGES •

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

as the VAT covers all kinds of services rendered in the RULE-MAKING

in Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo, the Court B) By publication once in a newspaper of

GR No. 191805, Rodriguez v. Arroyo; GR No. 193160,

10 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

• 2011: UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW IN FACE OF UNPRECEDENTED CHALLENGES •

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

assistance from USAID and ABA-ROLI, also

12 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

• 2011: UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW IN FACE OF UNPRECEDENTED CHALLENGES •

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

14 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, the

Chief Justice Corona finished his Bachelor of Laws

Chief Justice Corona served as special counsel at

16 ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

• JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT •

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 | SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

Born in Davao City, Philippines,

In his student days, Justice Carpio was Chairman

Fresh out of law school, Justice Carpio went into

Justice Carpio also held other important

For his “distinguished and exemplary service” to