Judicial Issues and

Challenges
Prepared by:
Jonathan A. Rivera

1. Court Delays
As, the saying goes, Justice delayed is justice denied.
Court delay is one of the most prevalent issues that
confront the Judiciary. Cases filed may take years and
might even reach decades before they are decided.
Article III Section 16 states that, all persons shall have the
right to a speedy disposition of their cases with regards to
judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative bodies. In
Article VIII Section 15 of the Philippine Constitution, it is
stated that all cases must be decided within 24 months

 However, despite these provisions, court delay is still an eminent

problem confronting the Judiciary. An example of a case that
experience delay is the Abadilla-5 Case which lasted for almost a
decade without proper decision. Both the Supreme Court and
afterwards the Court of Appeals had failed to comply with the provision
in the Constitution which requires them to give a speedy disposition
and decision about the case. This delay even led to the Asian Human
Rights Committee, an international organization, getting involved in
the issue. Court delay hinders serving of justice and at the same time
extends the injustice given to the innocent whose trials have not been
decided.

Solution: Continuous Trial System

In this system, 90 days are allotted as trial period
and trials must be held on times and date agreed
upon. During the test pilot of the continuous trial
system, the judges observed that, 1.) trial delays
were brought down the: minimum, 2.) number of
postponements were decreased, 3.) undesirable
system of re settings was stopped and 4.)
settlements by compromise in civil cases and plea
bargaining in criminal cases increased.

 However, it was criticized stating that: 1.) it was

to the disadvantage of poor litigants who couldnt
afford of seasoned lawyers and 2.) It was also to
the disadvantage of lawyers which are only
allowed one appearance per day in courts which
diminished their levels of income. However, I
believe that the income of the lawyers is not of a
great issue with regards to the Judiciary.

Solution: Barangay Justice System

Through the Katarungang Pambarangay, small
cases in communities could be decided by
Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo, and it is only after
15 days since it convenes that the trial is moved
to the courts. The Katarungang Pambarangay was
also an effective measure to decongest court
dockets and minimize delay in case disposition.

2. Perceptions and Existence of Wide Spread

Corruptions in the Judiciary
A survey in the year 2000 reveals that 62% of
respondents believed that there were significant
levels of corruption within the judiciary. 65% of
respondents believed that many or most
lawyers could be bribed and 57% thought the same
about judges. Considering this data, the Judiciary
seems to have a very negative impression with
regarding its performance. Some of the problems
seen with regards to corruption are partiality, bias
of judges and bribery.

Solution: Judicial Education & Evaluation of

Code of Ethics
There are several measures being pushed through
by different sectors and institutions for the
solutions of this problem. For the IBP, one of the
most effective ways of preventing the corruption
in the judiciary is through thorough judicial
education . Other solutions suggested to the
problem is evaluation of the existing ethics code
applicable to judges and court staff and revising
it as needed.

3. Fiscal Autonomy leading to other

problems
Fiscal autonomy is a privilege granted to the judiciary
by the Constitution as part of ensuring its
independence. However, according to the study
conducted by Araneta, in practice, the judiciarys
budget and cash releases are subject to the same
terms and conditions applied to agencies without fiscal
autonomy. This then may be seen as the cause of the
other problems arising in the judiciary like lack of
supplies, deficient court technologies and facilities and
many others.

4. High Vacancy Rate of Judges

A high vacancy rate in the position of judges in
trial courts naturally contributes to clogged
dockets. At present, the overall vacancy rate in
first and second level courts is 25.6%. This
includes unfunded and unopened trial courts. The
vacancy rate in funded and opened trial courts,
or existing trial courts, is 22.4%.

 These vacancy rates are quite high, exacerbating

the already clogged dockets. The vacancy rate in
existing trial courts should ideally be less than
5%, to account only for the time needed to fill
vacancies arising from normal retirements,
promotions and resignations.

Financial transparency
The judiciary should embrace transparency and
accountability in governance by publishing its
COA Audited Annual Reports, its collections and
disbursements of the Judiciary Development Fund
(JDF) and the Special Allowance for Judges (SAJ),
as well as all other financial reports required by
law. If you go to the Supreme Court website, you
will see all these reports now posted online.

The End!