Volume XXI Issue No. 82 1

April–June 2019 Volume XXI Issue No. 82 ISSN 2244-5862 FFromrom thethe Chancellor’sChancellor’s DeskDesk

CA Jose Midas P. Marquez (seated, far le ) and PHILJA offi cials led by Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna (seated, second from right) with foreign and local speakers and par cipants of the Knowledge Sharing on Cons tu ons at Times of Poli cal Crisis held on May 31, 2019, at the Manila Peninsula Hotel, Maka City

During the second quarter of this year, the Academy had conducted. PHILJA also mounted six successful Training its usual full calendar composed of the following: four Seminars on Special Issues on the Implementa on of the Orienta on Seminar-Workshops for newly appointed judges Revised Guidelines on Con nuous Trial of Criminal Cases and court personnel from the Na onal Capital Judicial Region and the Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases in (NCJR), Regions I to VIII and X to XII; the 49th Pre-Judicature the following areas: Pampanga, Manila, Ilocos Norte, Iloilo, Program for lawyers contempla ng a career in the bench; Legazpi and Palo, Leyte. and fi ve Career Enhancement Programs for diff erent court Representa ves from the Philippine Compe on personnel—First Level Court Sheriff s of the NCJR (Batch Commission joined selected Court of Appeals Jus ces from 1), Court Social Workers of Regions I to III (Round 2), Court the Cebu and Cagayan de Oro Sta ons in the Roundtable Librarians, Court Interpreters of the NCJR, and First Level Discussion on the Philippine Compe on Act and its Clerks of Court of Regions XI and XII. Implemen ng Rules and Regula ons. Quite a number of special focus programs were also The Academy once again partnered with the Konrad held during this quarter such as: a Capacity Building Adenauer S ung in moun ng here in the Philippines on Environmental Laws and the Rules of Procedure for an interna onal Panel Discussion: Knowledge Sharing on Environmental Cases for Selected Judges and Branch Clerks Cons tu ons at Times of Poli cal Crisis which was a ended of Court from the NCJR and Regions I to VIII, and Regions X by foreign delegates, selected judges from the NCJR and to XII; a Seminar-Workshop for Judges on Cybercrime; and a representa ves from the Offi ce of the Court Administrator. Seminar-Workshop for Lawyers of the Court of Appeals (Cebu It also con nued to perform its role in the Supreme Court and Cagayan de Oro Sta ons) on the Philippine Compe on Enhanced Jus ce on Wheels Program (EJOW) through the Act and its Implemen ng Rules and Regula ons. holding of the Informa on Dissemina on through a Dialogue In addi on, a Seminar-Workshop on Elec on Laws among Barangay Offi cials and Court Offi cials in the following for Regional Trial Court Judges na onwide was likewise places: the Municipali es of Bogo and Toledo in Cebu City, (con nued on page 2) 2 April–June 2019

From the Chancellor’s Desk (continued from page 1) Contents in the Municipality of Aparri, and the City of From the Chancellor’s Desk ...... 1 Tuguegarao in Cagayan province. Training Programs and Activities ...... 3 We likewise provided our usual assistance Judicial Moves ...... 11 in the 20th Na onal Conven on and Seminar of First Impressions ...... 11 the Sheriff s’ Confedera on of the Philippines Doctrinal Reminders ...... 16 (SCOPHIL) with the theme “The Supreme Court: Stronger a er the Storm” held in San Fernando, Circulars Pampanga and in the 12th Na onal Conven on OCA CIRCULAR NO. 08-2019 — Amendment of Sec on 11, Rule 141, Revised and Seminar of the Process Servers Associa on Rules of Court, on the Increase in the Rate for Requested Cer fi ed Transcript of of the Philippines (PROSAPHIL) with the theme Notes ...... 23 “Judicial Success: Uphold and Solidify Processes OCA CIRCULAR NO. 18-2019 — Computa on of Legal Fees in Small Claims Cases of Law Professionally” which took place in Filed by Plain ff s Engaged or Not Engaged in the Business of Banking, Lending and Similar Ac vi es in Rela on to Le er d(i) of A. M. No. 17-12-09-SC (Re: Ini al Tagbilaran, Bohol. Recommenda ons on Administra ve Adjustments from the Judiciary-Wide The Academy, through the Philippine Commi ee on Legal Fees) under OCA Circular No. 36-2018 ...... 24 Media on Center Offi ce, held a series of ac vi es OCA CIRCULAR NO. 43-2019 — Issuance of the En Banc Resolu on dated October in support of Alterna ve Dispute Resolu on 2, 2018 in A.M. 15-06-10-5C (Re: Adop ng the Guidelines for Con nuous Trial of beginning with the Refresher/Advanced Courses Criminal Cases in Pilot Courts) ...... 25 for Court-Annexed Media on for the Bohol OCA CIRCULAR NO. 45-2019 — Amendments to Sec ons 2 and 8 of A.M. No. 08- and Negros Oriental Media on Programs; an 8-7-SC or the Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases ...... 28 Orienta on Conference with Stakeholders in OCA CIRCULAR NO. 47-2019 — Execu on of Judgments in Appealed Cases Court-Annexed Media on for the Occidental Pursuant to Sec on 1, Rule 39, Rules of Court ...... 28 Mindoro Media on Program; two Skills-based OCA CIRCULAR NO. 63-2019 — Issuance of the En Banc Resolu on Dated Judicial Se lement Conferences for Judges on October 2, 2018 in A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (Re: Rule on Declara on of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages) and A.M. No. Judicial Dispute Resolu on (JDR) from the NCJR 02-11-11- SC (Re: Rule on Legal Separa on) ...... 29 and Regions II, IV to V, and Regions VII and IX, respec vely. Two Work Orienta on and Skills OCA CIRCULAR NO. 64-2019 — Issuance of Search Warrants During Elec on Period ...... 30 Enhancement Seminars (WOSES) for PMCU staff in Luzon rounded off the ac vi es of the PMCO OCA CIRCULAR NO. 80-2019 — Minute Resolu on dated April 2, 2019 in A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC (Re: Le er of Associate Jus ce Diosdado M. Peralta on for this quarter. the Suggested Plea Bargaining Framework Submi ed by the Philippine Judges We also took note of the new rulings of Associa on) ...... 31 the Supreme Court and its doctrinal reminders, resolu ons, circulars and orders, as well as Orders the circulars issued by the Offi ce of the Court MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 17-2019 — Allowing Public Access to the Supreme Administrator. Court E-Library ...... 37 To our offi cials and staff whose usual good MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 26-2019 — Reorganizing the Special Commi ee to Review the Plan lla Posi ons and Salary Grades of Offi cials and Employees in work and enthusiasm con nue to make PHILJA the Judiciary ...... 38 one of the leading judicial training academies in MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 27-2019 — Crea ng the Special Commi ee for the world today, thank you and congratula ons. the Rules on Inspec on ...... 38 I also wish to thank all our development MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 30-2019 — Reorganizing the Commi ee for the partners for their material and moral support Deconges on of Provincial, City and Municipal Jails ...... 39 and for the trust and confi dence they have in the MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 32-2019 — Crea ng the Special Commi ee on the Academy in pursuit of our common goal. Guidelines Implemen ng Sec on 6 of Republic Act No. 8369 ...... 40 Thank you, too, to the Honorable Supreme MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 33-2019 — Reorganizing the Commi ee on Court, for the unwavering support and Con nuing Legal Educa on and Bar Ma ers ...... 41 encouragement given to PHILJA and all our MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 34-2019 — Reorganizing the Subcommi ee on endeavors. the Admission to the Bar ...... 42 MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 35-2019 — Reorganizing the Subcommi ee on Finally, thanks to God Almighty for giving us Maintenance of Membership in the Philippine Bar ...... 42 strength and wisdom as we strive to do our part MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 36-2019 — Reorganizing the Subcommi ee on for an ever improving judiciary. the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Oversight ...... 43 All the best. Conventions Conven on Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisa on for Foreign Public Documents ...... 44 ADOLFO S. AZCUNA HCCH Conven on of October 5, 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Chancellor Legalisa on for Foreign Public Documents ...... 46 Volume XXI Issue No. 82 3

Training Programs and Ac vi es

Panel Discussion: Knowledge Sharing on Cons tu ons at Times of Poli cal Crisis

Dr. Maartje De Visser (center), Associate Professor of Law at the Singapore Management University School of Law, leads the discussion on Knowledge Sharing on Cons tu ons at Times of Poli cal Crisis held at the Manila Peninsula Hotel on May 31. She is joined by Federal Supreme Finance Court of Germany President Prof. Dr. h.c. Rudolf Mellinghoff (far le ), PHILJA Chancellor Jus ce Adolfo S. Azcuna (second from le ), Former UN Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers Dato’ Param Cumaraswamy (second from right), and Court of Appeals Associate Jus ce Maria Filomena D. Singh (far right).

The Philippine Judicial Academy conducted a panel discussion Values.” Each session featured two speakers presen ng the en tled Knowledge Sharing on Cons tu ons at Times of foreign perspec ve and another two speakers providing the Poli cal Crisis on May 31 at the Manila Peninsula Hotel in Philippine perspec ve. Both sessions were presided by Dr. Maka City, a ended by 40 foreign and local par cipants. Maartje De Visser, Associate Professor of Law at the Singapore Held in partnership with the Konrad Adenauer S ung Management University School of Law. (KAS), the panel discussion was part of the forum on During the fi rst session, Prof. Dr. h.c. Rudolf Mellinghoff , Transforma ve Cons tu onalism in Asia: Exploring the President of the Federal Supreme Finance Court of Germany Poten al and the Challenges conducted on May 30 to June and former Judge of the Federal Cons tu onal Court of 1. This forum brought together representa ves from India, Germany, shared Mrs. Elsner’s view that Cons tu ons are Malaysia, Korea, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Singapore, Myanmar, Hong o en rooted in crisis and disclosed that “their Cons tu on is Kong, Vietnam, Netherlands, and Bangalore, including selected not prepared for current issues like economic and migra on fi rst and second level judges, representa ves from the Offi ce crises, modern internet and data protec on rules.” Dato’ of the Court Administrator and PHILJA offi cials to deeply Param Cumaraswamy, former United Na ons Rapporteur discuss the concept of “transforma ve cons tu onalism” as on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, and Advocate ar culated in diff erent courts and its relevance to the mul ple and Solicitor from Malaysia, shared Pakistan’s experience on legal and poli cal tradi ons of Asia. judicial ac vism in 2007 where people power, just like in the PHILJA Chancellor Jus ce Adolfo S. Azcuna formally Philippines, proved to be eff ec ve in mes of poli cal crisis. opened the panel discussion and noted that the topic is mely Sharing the Philippine perspec ve, Jus ce Azcuna referred for the fast changing Asian region. Mrs. Gisela Elsner, Director to “the Philippine Cons tu on as a People Power document of the Rule of Law Programme Asia of KAS, men oned that and pointed out the current need for its amendment.” He “Cons tu ons are o en born and tested in crisis and that further stressed that “the Cons tu on itself provides for courts, as fi nal interpreters of laws, are allowed to look into mechanisms for adjus ng in diffi cult mes when faced with poli cal ma ers in mes of crisis.” vast poli cal issues.” The panel discussion delved on two topics, fi rst on Court of Appeals Associate Jus ce Maria Filomena D. “Poli cal Crises and Cons tu ons,” and second on “The Role of Singh shared that, “tradi onally, the Supreme Court has been Courts in Times of Poli cal Crisis: A Guardian of Cons tu onal consistent in its stance to shy away from poli cal ques ons.” 4 April–June 2019

She highlighted the important power of the judiciary to review Court Administrator Marquez, following the lead of acts of the legisla ve and execu ve branches when there is previous panelists, elaborated on the issue of overcrowded grave abuse of discre on, and the shi in the Supreme Court’s prisons in the Philippines. The Court, he said, “ mely role in interpre ng the Cons tu on in mes of poli cal crisis. responded by striking down the drug law provision disallowing plea bargaining in drug off enses as uncons tu onal.” He The four panelists further discussed (1) populism and noted that the Supreme Court, exercising its administra ve its threat to democracy, stressing that in order to address power, also issued rules such as direc ng all courts to hear populism it is important “to keep the public well-informed, drugs cases and adop ng a plea bargaining framework. preferably teaching Cons tu onal principles in school from a These resulted in a successful drop in conges on rate. Court very early level”; (2) the protec on of fundamental rights given Administrator Marquez further said that our courts have been to courts because it is non-majoritarian and not responsible to proac ve when faced with pressure and challenges. Judge popular clamor, and as such, judges are in the best posi on to Montesa added that it is upon the judge’s character “to rule protect fundamental rights; (3) the importance of con nuing not in deference to any appoin ng power but always in line involvement and par cipa on of people in governance to with law and jurisprudence.” solve any type of crisis; (4) the necessity for Cons tu ons Judge Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro, Pasig City to fi t each par cular society se ng; and (5) that “while RTC Branch 158 Presiding Judge and member of the PHILJA Cons tu ons should be unchangeable and steady, charter Commercial Law Department, gave a synthesis of the change is needed and o en mes inevitable.” panel discussion. She shared her personal thoughts on the discussions and stressed that we should be proac ve, not just reac ve, as protectors of the Cons tu on and the people we serve. She likewise commended that, truly, the discussions gave the par cipants a be er understanding of the Cons tu ons in mes of poli cal crisis. The ac vity was capped by the closing remarks of Mrs. Elsner and PHILJA Vice Chancellor Jus ce Romeo J. Callejo, Sr., on behalf of PHILJA and KAS, respec vely. Mrs. Elsner expressed gra tude to the competent resource persons and the par cipants for their ac ve par cipa on. Session two featured Jus ce Madan Lokur, Former Judge of the Supreme Court of India; Jus ce Kang Il-Won, Former Judge of the Cons tu onal Court, South Korea; Judge Rainelda H. Estacio-Montesa, Presiding Judge of Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 46; and Court Administrator Jose Midas P. Marquez, sharing their respec ve views and experiences on “The Role of Courts in Times of Poli cal Crisis: A Guardian of Cons tu onal Values.” Jus ce Lokur cited a local jurisprudence in India which held that “although the Cons tu on may be changed, its In his message, Jus ce Callejo stressed that “x x x the basic structure cannot be changed.” Dr. De Visser responded Cons tu on is the basic and paramount law to which all by saying that the more detailed a Cons tu on is, the less other laws must conform and to which all persons, including ques ons can be classifi ed as poli cal ques ons. Jus ce the highest offi cials of the land, must defer. Cons tu onal Lokur also added that in India, they regard their trial courts as doctrines must remain steadfast no ma er what may be “Guardians of the Cons tu on.” the des of me. It cannot simply be made to sway and Meanwhile, Jus ce Il-Wong shared how the Korean accommodate the call of situa ons and tailor itself to the Cons tu onal Courts have provided real and direct relief to whims and caprices of government and the people who run the people, stressing on the importance of accessibility of it. Indeed, the interplay between poli cal acts, on one hand, these courts in its success. and the role of the Judiciary, on the other, note must be taken of the fact that just like anything else, values, concepts and Judge Montesa men oned that “trial court judges also ideas change through me. What may have been recognized face unarguably poli cal complex cases.” She advised that as outside the domain of judicial power in the past would no these be treated as regular cases and simply apply the law longer be immune from governmental interference in years and jurisprudence on the evidence presented. to come.” Volume XXI Issue No. 82 5

Hon. Edmond B. Lorenzo Orienta on-Seminar MTC, Sta. Maria, Bulacan Hon. Mischelle R. Maulion-Jocson MTC, Lubao, Pampanga 84th Orienta on Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Hon. Cheryl Ann A. Tungpalan-De Jesus Judges MTC, Br. 1, Guagua, Pampanga Date: May 21–29, 2019 Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City M C T C Par cipants: 23 newly appointed judges, namely: R III M T C Hon. Chona T. Guiao-Pichay 4th MCTC, Masantol-Macabebe, Pampanga N C J R Hon. Juliet Sangalang-Salaria Hon. Lorelei S. Balansay-Tapia 2nd MCTC, Orani-Samal, Bataan MeTC, Br. 130, Maka City Hon. Ludovino Joseph Augusto L. Tobias, Jr. 4th MCTC, Bagac-Morong, Bataan M T C I C

R III 39th Orienta on Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Hon. Ryan Philipp L. Bartolome Clerks of Court MTCC, Br. 1, San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan Date: March 26–29, 2019 Hon. Ana Florence S. Cuntapay-Oamil Venue: Bayview Park Hotel, Manila MTCC, Balanga City, Bataan Par cipants: 67 newly appointed clerks of court, namely: Hon. Nelson V. Largo MTCC, Br. 3, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija R T C Hon. Robert Christopher F. Reyes N C J R MTCC, Br. 1, Angeles City, Pampanga A y. Jeff Kevin C. Carbonel RTC, Br. 292, Malabon City M T C A y. Glynis Fe B. Escabarte R III RTC, Br. 141, Maka City Hon. Marvic C. Alfonso A y. Mark Joseph Bajado Hingpes MTC, Porac, Pampanga RTC, Br. 214, Mandaluyong City Hon. Bienvenido B. Almonte, Jr. A y. Lowell Frederick A. Madrileño MTC, Pandi, Bulacan RTC, Br. 104, Quezon City Hon. Theodorick K. Ayungo A y. Wyna Lee J. Manongsong MTC, Nampicuan, Nueva Ecija RTC, Br. 272, Marikina City Hon. Ninethz L.T. Balagtas-Alzate A y. Kris anne D. Pinera MTC, Aliaga, Nueva Ecija RTC, Br. 233, Maka City Hon. Mary Kwen Cañete Elefante A y. Bianca Camille B. Salvador MTC, Obando, Bulacan RTC, Br. 237, Maka City Hon. Denise A. Dacanay-Sagun A y. Jonna A. Sorallo MTC, San Narciso, Zambales RTC, Br. 173, Manila Hon. Leah A. De Guzman A y. Yiyi Khindini Z. Tan-Montemayor MTC, General Tinio, Nueva Ecija RTC, Br. 12, Manila Hon. Persel G. Esman A y. Eden Louise P. Zuñiga-Golo MTC, Br. 2, Guagua, Pampanga RTC, Br. 291, Malabon City Hon. Maria Zenaida V. Ferrer-Alejandre MTC, Sta. Rita, Pampanga R I Hon. Cheryl S. Gamalinda-Encinares A y. Imelda D. Guidangen MTC, Bongabon, Nueva Ecija RTC, Br. 35, Bontoc, Mt. Province Hon. Jennifer A. Grospe-Apacible A y. George Henry A. Manipon MTC, Talavera, Nueva Ecija RTC, Br. 61, Baguio City, Benguet Hon. Dante Gil D. Gumpal A y. Aimee Fortune L. Yadao MTC, San Leonardo, Nueva Ecija RTC, Br. 11, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte 6 April–June 2019

R II R VII A y. Ruddy Allen N. Yee A y. Cretchen B. Balbon RTC, Br. 12, Sanchez Mira, Cagayan RTC, Br. 45, Bais City, Negros Oriental A y. Charo A. Canin R III RTC, Br. 77, Carcar City, Cebu A y. Daniel Junior G. Domingo A y. Hazel Y. Cuñado RTC, Br. 19, Malolos City, Bulacan RTC, OCC, Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu A y. Maria Cris na I. Francia A y. Janet U. Dacudao RTC, Br. 37, Baloc, Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija RTC, Br. 89, Mandaue City, Cebu A y. Tasnem A. Hamdain A y. Jasville A. Dela Peña RTC, Br. 61, Angeles City, Pampanga RTC, Br. 86, Mandaue City, Cebu A y. Roscellini T. Mamaclay A y. Celeste Virma-Fleur Y. Espina RTC, Br. 30, Cabanatuan City , Nueva Ecija RTC, Br. 24, Cebu City A y. Avril C. Fuentes R IV RTC, Br. 1, Tagbilaran City, Bohol A y. Mary Melanyn G. Arambulo A y. Romela Mae L. Napao RTC, Br. 49, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan RTC, Br. 75, Bais City, Negros Oriental A y. Jillian T. Decilos A y. Charro R. Ra lla RTC, Br. 14, Nasugbu, Batangas RTC, Br. 83, Mandaue City, Cebu A y. Jenifer M. Gabrillo-Salvador A y. Philline Rosemae R. Yu RTC, Br. 108, Cabuyao, Laguna RTC, Br. 69, Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu A y. Chris an Roy S. Ganancial RTC, Br. 77, San Mateo, Rizal R VIII A y. Desserie Marie L. Guillarte A y. Ma. Corazon P. Bollido-Sudario RTC, Br. 70, Binangonan, Rizal RTC, Br. 36, Carigara, Leyte A y. Marie Jean P. Maningas A y. Analee B. Montes-Rubin RTC, Br. 20, Imus, Cavite RTC, Br. 2, Borongan City, Eastern Samar A y. May Abigail F. Pimentel R X RTC, Br. 93, City of San Pedro, Laguna A y. Ian J. Calmares A y. Jose C. Rivera, Jr. RTC, Br. 32, Dinagat Islands, Surigao del Norte RTC, Br. 34, Calamba, Laguna A y. Brainard J. Morales A y. Jerome B. Sadongdong RTC, OCC, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte RTC, Br. 165, Brooke’s Point, Palawan A y. Ana Fe P. Salubre-Dela Vega RTC, Br. 55, Trento, Agusan del Sur R V A y. Isabella S. Abelita R XI RTC, Br. 44, Masbate City A y. Shiela May J. Jagolino-Operiano A y. Jose A. A bagos II RTC, Br. 45, Surallah, South Cotabato RTC, Br. 47, Masbate City A y. Sherryl B. Ogoy-Bernardo A y. Cherryl B. Nate* RTC, Br. 43, Koronadal City RTC, OCC, Naga City, Camarines Sur A y. Candice T. Pelarion A y. Hazel V. Paguio RTC, Br. 50, Alabel, Sarangani RTC, Br. 64, Labo, Camarines Norte A y. Achilles Windilen G. Tato RTC, Br. 60, General Santos City, South Cotabato R VI A y. Carmel Y. Peralta R XII RTC, Br. 6, Kalibo, Aklan A y. Fa ma B. Berua A y. Suze e R. Reynaldo RTC, Br. 8, Marawi City, Lanao del Sur RTC, Br. 3, Kalibo, Aklan A y. Chris an Jane D. Cen na RTC, Br. 61, Kidapawan City, North Cotabato A y. Josianne M. Uy-Debalucos * Incomplete A endance (a ended March 26, 2019 only) RTC, Br. 3, Iligan City, Lanao del Norte Volume XXI Issue No. 82 7

F C A y. Sunshine R. Corpuz N C J R RTC, Br. 267, Taguig City A y. Stacy L. Cunanan A y. Stella P. Agus n RTC, Br. 142, Maka City FC, Br. 4, Malabon City A y. Kim G. Espina A y. Marie Alexis G. Bahillo RTC, Br. 162, San Juan City FC, Br. 3, Maka City A y. Katrine R. Foronda A y. Marygrace D. Bathan-Barcelona RTC, Br. 219, Quezon City FC, Br. 11, Pasay City A y. Jacqueline D. Ledda A y. Paul Cayetano L. Caba ngan RTC, Br. 235, Maka City FC, Br. 13, Quezon City A y. Ciriaco L. Rubiano A y. Karla Kirs n C. Pasajol RTC, Br. 227, Quezon City FC, Br. 1, Caloocan City A y. Russell Jay S. Tagama A y. Jhun T. Perez RTC, Br. 222, Quezon City FC, Br. 6, Manila F C R III N C J R A y. Ma. Cris na S. Hernal-Garcia A y. Alain Kris C. Concepcion FC, Br. 8, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija FC, Br. 5, Mandaluyong City A y. Carla Nikasia V. Roxas A y. Mary Grace G. Cruz-Ersando FC, Br. 4, Malolos City, Bulacan FC, Br. 10, Parañaque City A y. Carla Rosario DL. Señado FC, Br. 6, Sta. Maria, Bulacan M T C N C J R R IV Mr. Floren no V. Alumbres, Jr. A y. Arlene C. Aceveda MeTC, Br. 89, Parañaque City FC, Br. 12, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro Mr. Jus n Michael B. Berango A y. Lotus C. Ignacio MeTC, Br. 128, Maka City FC, Br. 18, Cainta, Rizal Mr. Felson Jay-R G. Bernisca A y. Mary Rose C. Villanueva MeTC, Br. 100, Mandaluyong City FC, Br. 9, Boac, Marinduque Ms. Maria Rowena A. Cordero MeTC, Br. 42, Quezon City 40th Orienta on Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Ms. Sarah Jane M. Deseo Clerks of Court MeTC, Br. 57, San Juan City Date: May 14–17, 2019 Ms. Rofylyn L. Lagundino Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City MeTC, Br. 80, Mun nlupa City Par cipants: 27 newly appointed clerks of court, namely: Ms. Edita E. Oneza MeTC, Br. 29, Manila Mr. Jhimbol Z. Pabalinas R T C MeTC, Br. 64, Maka City N C J R Ms. Melissa B. Perez A y. Dario V. Aguila MeTC, OCC, San Juan City RTC, Br. 9, Manila A y. Mark Anthony L. Teodoro A y. Carlo Inocencio F. Almario MeTC, OCC, Caloocan City Ms. Angelica H. Tuazon-Alcuaz RTC, Br. 224, Quezon City MeTC, Br. 129, Maka City A y. Rosalie C. Arosa A y. James Voldemar R. Velasco, Jr. RTC, Br. 67, Pasig City MeTC, Br. 87, Parañaque City A y. Mercedita C. Cariño RTC, OCC, Quezon City 18th Orienta on Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed A y. Marjorie R. Cas llo Sheriff s and Process Servers RTC, Br. 236, Maka City Date: May 21–23, 2019 A y. Beverly F. Cas llo Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City RTC, Br. 72, Malabon City Par cipants: 62 sheriff s and process servers 8 April–June 2019

Lhem J. Naval Pre-Judicature Program Maria Luisa B. Ong Alfredo A. Orquillas, Jr. Fair Lady T. Osorio Milmon Bryce C. Tenorio 49th Pre-Judicature Program Chloe Hope B. Trinidad-Abas llas Date: May 20–31, 2019 Gandhi B. Truya Venue: Hotel Elizabeth, Cebu City Ariane Krystel C. Uriarte-Yamco Par cipants: 48 lawyers, namely: Joanna Ruth T. Utzurrum

N C J R R VIII Dorothy J. Alarcio-Padilla Kathrina R. Cas llo Ruben S. Ayson, Jr. Aljun B. Diaz Michellee C. Bastasa Eligene B. Patalinghug Mary Grace S. Bonsol-Cabal June Abigail S. Dela Cruz R IX Jennifer P. Hernandez Arvin L. Bonbon Leney L. Layug-Delfi n* Benison M. Mahawan Cholyn Mae M. Ruiz-Bonbon Ginalyn M. Sacmar-Badiola Eli Dino D. Santos R X Norlyn I. Lanquibo-Tantay R I Chonita L. Maagad Ma. Golda G. Arquillo R XI R II Rosemarie E. Buendia-Garde** Tshaine B. Taguinod-Maggay Andres D. Lorenzo III

R III R XII Virgin Rose Sharon P. Guillermo-Encomienda Gretchen D. Lamayan Lea S. Joaquin Lordelyn L. Lacap

R IV Jocelyn G. Fumera Career Enhancement Program Gerardo P. Sirios

R V Career Enhancement Program for First Level Court Sheriff s of Remedios I. Soriano-Santonia the Na onal Capital Judicial Region (Batch 1) Date: March 26–28, 2019 R VI Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Cheysson A. Chavez Par cipants: 59 MeTC sheriff s Jojane D. Miane-Marcelo Iris L. Roncesvalles Career Enhancement Program for Court Social Workers of Sheilamar S. Saliganan-Abadia the First, Second and Third Judicial Regions (Round 2) Ann V. Sorianosos-Estomo Date: April 10–12, 2019 Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City R VII Par cipants: 34 RTC social workers Jason M. Bandal Pablito C. Benedian, Jr. Chauncey T. Boholst Orville T. Dela Cerna * Incomplete a endance (did not a end sessions on May 23 morning and Jean-Paul A. Diputado a ernoon) Adolfo T. Lopez, Jr. ** Did not take the Wri en Evalua ve Exam (WEE) Volume XXI Issue No. 82 9

Career Enhancement Program for Court Librarians M A Date: April 23–25, 2019 Date: May 30, 2019 Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Venue: St. Patrick Garden Hotel, Aparri Municipal Gymnasium, Par cipants: 55 court librarians Aparri, Cagayan Par cipants: 93 barangay offi cials Career Enhancement Program for Court Interpreters of the Na onal Capital Judicial Region (Batch 6) C T Date: May 7–9, 2019 Date: May 31, 2019 Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Venue: Cagayan Na onal High School, Mamba Gymnasium, Par cipants: 62 RTC, FC and MeTC court interpreters Tuguegarao City, Cagayan Par cipants: 58 barangay offi cials Career Enhancement Program for First Level Clerks of Court Seminar-Workshop for Judges on Cybercrime of Regions XI and XII Development Partners: Supreme Court Subcommi ee Date: June 18–20, 2019 on Commercial Courts and United States Department of Venue: Waterfront Insular Hotel, Davao City Jus ce Criminal Division through its Overseas Prosecutorial Par cipants: 65 clerks of court Development, Assistance and Training (OPDAT) Date: April 4–5, 2019 Venue: Baguio Country Club, Baguio City Par cipants: 33 RTC judges

Special Focus Programs Seminar-Workshop for Lawyers of the Court of Appeals (Cebu and Cagayan de Oro Sta ons) on the Philippine Compe on Act and Its Implemen ng Rules and Regula ons Capacity Building on Environmental Laws and the Rules of Development Partner: Philippine Compe on Commission Procedure for Environmental Cases for Selected Judges and Date: April 23–24, 2019 Branch Clerks of Court Venue: Waterfront Hotel, Cebu City Date: April 2–4, 2019 Par cipants: 58 CA Cebu and Cagayan de Oro lawyers Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Par cipants: 54 judges and branch clerks of court Seminar on Elec on Laws for Regional Trial Court Judges Development Partner: Commission on Elec ons Date: April 29, 2019 Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Par cipants: 93 RTC judges

Training Seminar on Special Issues on the Implementa on of the Revised Guidelines on Con nuous Trial of Criminal Cases and the Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases Development Partners: Special Commi ee on Speedy Trial, and Governance in Jus ce Program with support of the European Union Informa on Dissemina on through a Dialogue between Date: April 12, 2019 Barangay Offi cials and Court Offi cials Venue: Quest Hotel, Clark, Pampanga Par cipants: 69 MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges C B Date: May 2, 2019 Date: April 25, 2019 Venue: Century Park Hotel, Manila Venue: Don Celes no Mar nez, Sr. Sports Complex, Bogo City, Par cipants: 66 MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges Cebu Par cipants: 113 barangay offi cials Date: May 10, 2019 Venue: Fort Ilocandia Resort Hotel, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte C T Par cipants: 77 MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges Date: April 26, 2019 Date: May 17, 2019 Venue: Barba Sports Complex, Toledo City, Cebu Venue: Seda Atria Hotel, Iloilo City Par cipants: 99 barangay offi cials Par cipants: 59 MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges 10 April–June 2019

Date: May 24, 2019 Venue: The Oriental Hotel, Legazpi City Alterna ve Dispute Resolu on Par cipants: 56 MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges Date: June 7, 2019 C-A M Venue: The Oriental Hotel Leyte, Palo, Leyte Refresher/Advanced Course for Court-Annexed Mediators Par cipants: 60 MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges (Skills Enhancement Course) B A N O M P Date: April 24–25, 2019 Roundtable Discussion Venue: Belian Hotel, Tagbilaran City, Bohol Par cipants: 24 mediators

Roundtable Discussion with Jus ces of the Court of Appeals Orienta on Conference with Stakeholders on Court-Annexed Media on (Cebu and Cagayan de Oro Sta ons) on the Philippine Compe on Act and Its Implemen ng Rules and Regula ons O M M P Development Partners: Court of Appeals and Philippine Date: April 11, 2019 Compe on Commission Venue: SJ Mansion Hotel, San Jose, Occidental Mindoro Date: April 23, 2019 Par cipants: 73 judges, clerks of court/branch clerks of court, Venue: Waterfront Hotel, Cebu City representa ves from Na onal Prosecu on Service, Public Par cipants: 18 CA Cebu and Cagayan de Oro jus ces, and A orney’s Offi ce, Integrated Bar of the Philippines, local representa ves from the Philippine Compe on Commission government units, academe/media and civil society

Panel Discussion: Knowledge Sharing on Cons tu ons at Times of Poli cal Crisis Judicial Dispute Resolu on (JDR) Development Partner: Konrad Adenauer S ung Date: May 31, 2019 Judicial Se lement Conference for Judges on Judicial Dispute Venue: The Peninsula Manila Hotel, Maka City Resolu on (Skills-based Course) Par cipants: 35 selected judges from NCJR, representa ves Date: April 1–4, 2019 from the Offi ce of the Court Administrator, and foreign Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City delegates Par cipants: 47 judges Date: May 20–23, 2019 Venue: Kew Hotel, Tagbilaran City, Bohol Par cipants: 41 judges Conven on-Seminar

20th Na onal Conven on and Seminar of the Sheriff s’ Other Training Programs and Ac vi es Confedera on of the Philippines (SCOPHIL) Theme: “The Supreme Court: Stronger a er the Storm” Work Orienta on and Skills Enhancement Seminar for Date: April 10–12, 2019 Philippine Media on Center Unit Staff Venue: Kingsborough Interna onal Conven on Center, City of San Fernando, Pampanga L (B 1) Par cipants: 811 sheriff s Date: May 8–9, 2019 12th Na onal Conven on and Seminar of the Process Servers Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Associa on of the Philippines (PROSAPHIL) Par cipants: 38 PMC Unit Staff Theme: “Judicial Success: Uphold and Solidify Processes of Law Professionally” L (B 2) Date: April 24–26, 2019 Date: May 29–30, 2019 Venue: JJ’s Seafood Village, Tagbilaran City, Bohol Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Par cipants: 545 process servers Par cipants: 44 PMC Unit Staff Volume XXI Issue No. 82 11

Administra ve Law

The Energy Regulatory Commission’s func ons as granted by the EPIRA are limited to the enforcement of the IRR of the EPIRA and may only take other ac on delegated to it pursuant to EPIRA

Under the EPIRA, it is the DOE that issues the rules and regula ons to implement the EPIRA, including the implementa on of the policy objec ves stated in Sec on 2 of the EPIRA. Rules and regula ons include circulars that have Hon. HENRI JEAN PAUL B. INTING the force and eff ect of rules or regula ons. Thus, pursuant Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court to its powers and func ons under the EPIRA, the DOE issued Appointed on May 29, 2019 the 2015 DOE Circular manda ng the conduct of CSP. The 2015 DOE Circular, as stated in its very provisions, was issued pursuant to the DOE’s power to “formulate such Jus ce Henri Jean Paul B. In ng obtained his Bachelor rules and regula ons as may be necessary to implement of Laws degree from the Ateneo de Davao University the objec ves of the EPIRA,” where the State policy is to in 1982 where he graduated cum laude. Prior thereto, “[p]rotect the public interest as it is aff ected by the rates and he earned a degree in Bachelor of Science, Major services of electric u li es and other providers of electric in Psychology from the University of San Carlos Cebu. power.” Under the EPIRA, it is also the State policy to “ensure the x x x aff ordability of the supply of electric power.” The For the past 30 years, he has devoted his en re purpose of the 2015 DOE Circular is to implement the State career to public service. policies prescribed in the EPIRA. Clearly, the 2015 DOE He served in various government posts star ng Circular cons tutes a rule or regula on issued by the DOE in 1978. He was Clerk in the Bureau of Lands (1978– pursuant to its rule-making power under Sec on 37(p) of the EPIRA. 1979), Legal Researcher in the City Court of Davao City (1980–1982), Senior Corporate A orney in the The EPIRA also provides for the powers and func ons Na onal Housing Authority (1983–1984), Appellate of the ERC. Sec on 43 of the EPIRA mandates that the ERC Court Supervising Staff Assistant in the then “shall be responsible for the following key func ons in the restructured industry:” Intermediate Appellate Court (1984–1986), Ci zens’ A orney in the then Ci zen’s Legal Assistance (a) Enforce the implemen ng rules and regula ons of this Offi ce, and Public A orney when said offi ce became Act. known as the Public A orney’s Offi ce (1986–1995), x x x x and Prosecutor in the Na onal Prosecu on Service (o) Monitor the ac vi es in the genera on and supply of the (1995–1998). electric power industry with the end in view of promo ng He began his career in the judiciary in 1998 free market compe on and ensuring that the alloca on when he was appointed as Presiding Judge of the or pass through of bulk purchase cost by distributors is transparent, non-discriminatory and that any exis ng Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 33, subsidies shall be divided pro-rata among all retail where he served for six years un l his promo on suppliers; as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 95 in 2004. Eight years later or x x x x in September 2012, he was appointed as Associate Thus, the very fi rst mandate of the ERC under its charter, Jus ce of the Court of Appeals. the EPIRA, is to “[e]nforce the implemen ng rules and regula ons” of the EPIRA as formulated and adopted by DOE. Clearly, under the EPIRA, it is the DOE that formulates the policies, and issues the rules and regula ons, to implement 12 April–June 2019

First Impressions Administrative Law (continued) the EPIRA. The func on of the ERC is to enforce and implement the policies formulated, as well as the rules and regula ons Criminal Law issued, by the DOE. The ERC has no power whatsoever to amend the implemen ng rules and regula ons of the EPIRA as issued by the DOE. The ERC is further mandated under EPIRA to ensure that the “pass through of bulk purchase cost The off ense of Traffi cking in Persons under Sec on 4 and by distributors is transparent [and] non-discriminatory.” Acts that Promote Traffi cking in Persons under Sec on 5 of Despite the ERC’s characteriza on as an “independent, RA No. 9208 are separate and dis nct off enses with their quasi-judicial regulatory body,” it is incorrect to conclude, own corresponding penal es as Jus ce Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa holds, that the ERC exercises “inherent and suffi cient power,” and “suffi cient The courts a quo commi ed serious error in convic ng Roxas power, as the independent regulator of the industry,” to for Qualifi ed Traffi cking of Persons and Traffi cking in Persons supplant or change, as it did in the present case, policies, as the off enses proscribed under Sec on 5 of RA No. 9208 rules, and regula ons prescribed by the DOE. The power are properly denominated as Acts that Promote Traffi cking in involved in the ERC’s implementa on of the 2015 DOE Persons. Circular is not quasi-judicial but execu ve. There are no Thus, the Court affi rms with modifi ca on Roxas’ convic on adverse par es involved in the implementa on by the ERC of and holds that he is guilty of one count of viola on of Sec on the 2015 DOE Circular. The ERC does not adjudicate rights and 5(a) of RA No. 9208 for Acts that Promote Traffi cking in obliga ons of adverse par es in the present case. The issue presented here involves the propriety of the exercise of the Persons and not Traffi cking in Persons, qualifi ed or otherwise. ERC’s execu ve implementa on of the policies, as well as the There are four punishable acts under RA No. 9208: (1) rules and regula ons of the EPIRA as issued by the DOE. Acts of Traffi cking in Persons under Sec on 4; (2) Acts that Moreover, the nature of the power involved in the Promote Traffi cking in Persons under Sec on 5; (3) Viola on of ERC’s postponement of the eff ec vity of CSP as mandated the Confi den ality Rule under Sec on 7 in rela on to Sec on in the 2015 DOE Circular is not quasi-judicial but delegated 10(d); and (4) Use of Traffi cked Persons under Sec on 11. legisla ve power. Jus ce Caguioa states that “the ERC could The off ense of Traffi cking in Persons under Sec on 4 and solely issue” any resolu on changing the dates of eff ec vity Acts that Promote Traffi cking in Persons under Sec on 5 of RA of CSP as set by the CSP Guidelines and the ERC Clarifi catory No. 9208 are separate and dis nct off enses with their own Resolu on “because it was empowered by the law, i.e., the corresponding penal es. Sec on 6 provides for qualifying EPIRA.” circumstances of Traffi cking in Persons under Sec on 4, x x x The ERC’s func ons, as granted by the EPIRA, are which when alleged and proved, will merit the imposi on limited, inter alia, to the enforcement of the implemen ng of the maximum penalty of life imprisonment and a fi ne of rules and regula ons of the EPIRA, and not to amend or Two Million Pesos (P2 million) but not more than Five Million revoke them. At most, as stated in paragraph (m) of Sec on Pesos (P5 million) under Sec on 10(c). 43, the ERC may only take any other ac on delegated to it pursuant to EPIRA. The ERC may not exceed its delegated The relevant por ons of the provisions are quoted authority. x x x below: x x x x S. 4. Acts of Traffi cking in Persons. – It shall be unlawful The 2015 DOE Circular took eff ect upon its publica on on for any person, natural or juridical, to commit any of the June 30, 2015 in the Philippine Daily Inquirer and the Philippine following acts: Star. Sec on 10 expressly declares that the “Circular x x x (a) To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, provide, or shall remain in eff ect un l otherwise revoked.” Indisputably, receive a person by any means, including those done CSP became mandatory as of June 30, 2015. Taking all these under the pretext of domes c or overseas employment provisions together, all PSAs submi ed to the ERC a er the or training or appren ceship, for the purpose of eff ec vity of the 2015 DOE Circular, on or a er June 30, pros tu on, pornography, sexual exploita on, forced 2015, are required to undergo CSP. labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage; Since the 2015 DOE Circular was issued solely by the DOE, x x x x it is solely the DOE that can amend, postpone, or revoke the 2015 DOE Circular unless a higher authority, like the Congress (e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in pros tu on or the President, amends or revokes it. Certainly, the ERC has or pornography; no authority to amend, postpone, or revoke the 2015 DOE x x x x Circular, including its date of eff ec vity. S. 5. Acts that Promote Traffi cking in Persons. – The Carpio, J., Alyansa Para sa Bagong Pilipinas, Inc. (ABP) v. Energy following acts which promote or facilitate traffi cking in Regulatory Commission, et al., G.R. No. 227670, May 3, 2019. persons, shall be unlawful: Volume XXI Issue No. 82 13

(a) To knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to be The RTC found that Roxas violated Sec on 5(a) of RA used any house, building or establishment for the No. 9208 for knowingly leasing a room for the purpose of purpose of promo ng traffi cking in persons; pros tu on. Unfortunately, in spite of this, it s ll convicted x x x x Roxas of Qualifi ed Traffi cking in Persons as regards minors AAA and BBB and Traffi cking in Persons as regards CCC. The S. 6. Qualifi ed Traffi cking in Persons. – The following are CA, for its part, affi rmed the RTC’s ruling. considered as qualifi ed traffi cking: The RTC and the CA thus commi ed serious error as the (a) When the traffi cked person is a child[.] proper denomina on of the off ense is Acts that Promote Sec on 10 of RA No. 9208 provides for the penal es of Traffi cking in Persons under Sec on 5(a). In this regard, it the above: should be noted that the off enses punished under Sec on S. 10. Penal es and Sanc ons. – The following penal es 5 cannot be qualifi ed by Sec on 6 as what the la er seeks and sanc ons are hereby established for the off enses to qualify is the act of traffi cking and not the promo on of enumerated in this Act: traffi cking. To be sure, this was clarifi ed in the amendatory (a) Any person found guilty of commi ng any of the acts law, RA No. 10364 or the Expanded An -Traffi cking in Persons enumerated in Sec on 4 shall suff er the penalty of Act of 2012 where Sec on 6 was amended accordingly. imprisonment of 20 years and a fi ne of not less than S. 9. Sec on 6 of Republic Act No. 9208 is hereby One Million Pesos (P1 million) but not more than Two amended to read as follows: Million Pesos (P2 million); S. 6. Qualifi ed Traffi cking in Persons. – (b) Any person found guilty of commi ng any of the acts Viola ons of Sec on 4 of this Act shall be enumerated in Sec on 5 shall suff er the penalty of considered as qualifi ed traffi cking: imprisonment of 15 years and a fi ne of not less than x x x x Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000) but not more than One Million Pesos (P1 million); (d) When the off ender is a spouse, an ascendant, parent, sibling, guardian or a person who (c) Any person found guilty of qualifi ed traffi cking under exercises authority over the traffi cked Sec on 6 shall suff er the penalty of life imprisonment and a fi ne of not less than Two Million Pesos person or when the off ense is commi ed by (P2 million) but not more than Five Million Pesos a public offi cer or employee; (P5 million)[.] x x x x Thus, Sec on 4 of RA No. 9208 refers to those acts which (f) When the off ender is a member of the directly involve traffi cking in persons, such as recruitment, military or law enforcement agencies; transport, transfer, harboring, receiving, buying, off ering, (g) When by reason or on occasion of the act selling, or trading persons to engage in pros tu on, of traffi cking in persons, the off ended party pornography, sexual exploita on, forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude, or debt bondage. Meanwhile, Sec on dies, becomes insane, suff ers mu la on or 5 refers to those acts that promote or facilitate any of the is affl icted with Human Immunodefi ciency aforemen oned predicate acts of Traffi cking in Persons. Virus (HIV) or the Acquired Immune Defi ciency Syndrome (AIDS); In arriving at its Decision, the RTC reasoned: (h) When the off ender commits one or more As for accused Alfredo Roxas, based on the evidence viola ons of Sec on 4 over a period of adduced during trial, the prosecu on was able to establish 60 or more days, whether those days are that Alfredo Roxas owned a house/apartment; that said con nuous or not; and house/apartment had a room; that the room was off ered for lease for every paying customer of the complainants; (i) When the off ender directs or through that accused Roxas, in considera on of the sum of One another manages the traffi cking vic m in Hundred Pesos (P100), would allow the complainants and carrying out the exploita ve purpose of her (sic) customers to use the room and engage in sex traffi cking. therein; that Roxas had knowledge of the fact that the As can be gleaned from the above amendment, only complainants engaged in sex for a fee as he cleaned the viola ons of Sec on 4 on Traffi cking in Persons can be room a er the complainant and her customer fi nished qualifi ed. Sec on 5 on Acts that Promote Traffi cking in Persons, using it; that, moreover, he sold condoms to complainant’s being separate and dis nct off enses, cannot be qualifi ed as male customers before using the room. All of these acts the law does not expressly provide therefor. The clarifi catory promoted traffi cking in persons as defi ned under Sec on amendment, being benefi cial to the accused, must be applied 5 of [RA No. 9208]. in his favor. 14 April–June 2019

First Impressions Criminal Law (continued) Accordingly, Roxas’ convic on of Qualifi ed Traffi cking in intestate proceedings, a new cer fi cate of tle in the name Persons and Traffi cking in Persons as well as the sentence of of the transferee shall be issued by the Register of Deeds life imprisonment and a fi ne of Two Million Pesos (P2 million) only upon the submission of a cer fi ed copy of the par on must be modifi ed. and distribu on, together with the fi nal judgment or order of the court approving the same or otherwise making fi nal Caguioa, J., People of the Philippines v. Susan Sayo y Reyes and distribu on, supported by evidence of payment of estate tax Alfredo Roxas y Sagon, G.R. No. 227704, April 10, 2019. or exemp on therefrom, as the case may be. x x x x x x x Further, under Sec on 91 of PD No. 1529, even without an Civil Law order of fi nal distribu on from the testate/intestate court and in an cipa on of a fi nal distribu on of a por on or the whole of the property, the Register of Deeds may be compelled to In transfer of proper es subject of testate or intestate issue the corresponding cer fi cate of tle to the transferee proceedings, a new cer fi cate of tle in the name of the only when the executor/administrator of the estate submits transferee shall be issued by the Register of Deeds only a cer fi ed copy of an order from the court having jurisdic on upon the submission of a cer fi ed copy of the par on of the testate or intestate proceedings direc ng the executor/ and distribu on, together with the fi nal judgment or order administrator to transfer the property to the transferees. x x x of the court approving the same or otherwise making fi nal distribu on, supported by evidence of payment of estate tax x x x x or exemp on therefrom, as the case may be The aforemen oned sec ons of PD No. 1529 are in perfect conjunc on with Rule 90, Sec on 1 of the Rules of Court, Ar cle 777 of the Civil Code, which is substan ve law, states which states that the actual distribu on of property subject that the rights of the inheritance are transmi ed from the moment of the death of the decedent. Ar cle 777 operates at to testate or intestate proceedings, i.e., the issuance of a new the very moment of the decedent’s death—meaning that the tle in the name of the distributee, shall occur only when the transmission by succession occurs at the precise moment of debts, funeral charges, and expenses of administra on, the death and, therefore, at that precise me, the heir is already allowance to the widow, and inheritance tax, if any, chargeable legally deemed to have acquired ownership of his/her share to the estate, have been paid. Only then can the testate or in the inheritance, “and not at the me of declara on of intestate court assign the residue of the estate to the persons heirs, or par on, or distribu on.” Thus, there is no legal bar en tled to the same. Under Rule 90, Sec on 1, the testate or to an heir disposing of his/her hereditary share immediately intestate court may also order the distribu on of the property a er such death. The Court, early on in Teves de Jakosalem v. pending the fi nal order of distribu on if the distributees give Rafols, et al., explained that a sale made by a legal or intestate a bond in a sum fi xed by the court condi oned upon the heir of his share in an inheritance does not interfere with the payment of the aforesaid said obliga ons within such me as administra on of the estate. the court directs, or when provision is made to meet those As applied to the instant case, upon the death of Amanda, obliga ons. Resurreccion became the absolute owner of the devised Hence, under the applicable provisions of PD No. 1529 subject property, subject to a resolutory condi on that upon and the Rules of Court, it is only upon the issuance by the se lement of Amanda’s Estate, the devise is not declared testate or intestate court of the fi nal order of distribu on of inoffi cious or excessive. Hence, there was no legal bar preven ng Resurreccion from entering into a contract of sale the estate or the order in an cipa on of the fi nal distribu on with the pe oners Sps. Sali co with respect to the former’s that the cer fi cate of tle covering the subject property may share or interest over the subject property. be issued in the name of the distributees. x x x x In the instant case, there is no showing that, in the pendency of the se lement of the Estate of Amanda, the Nevertheless, the existence of a valid sale in the instant case does not necessarily mean that the RD may already be Probate Court had issued an order of fi nal distribu on or an compelled to cancel OCT P-1908 and issue a new tle in the order in an cipa on of a fi nal distribu on, both of which the name of the pe oners Sps. Sali co. law deems as requirements before the RD can issue a new cer fi cate of tle in the name of the pe oners Sps. Sali co. According to Sec on 92 of Presiden al Decree (PD) No. 1529, otherwise known as the Property Registra on Decree, To clarify, this holding does not go against Ar cle 777 with respect to the transfer of proper es subject of testate or of the Civil Code whatsoever. What the aforesaid Civil Code Volume XXI Issue No. 82 15

provision signifi es is that there is no legal bar preven ng an the performance of offi cial duty; as such, it cons tutes prima heir from disposing his/her hereditary share and transferring facie evidence of the facts therein stated. Under Sec on 23, such share to another person, inasmuch as the right thereto Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, “[d]ocuments consis ng of is vested or transmi ed to the heir from the moment of the entries in public records made in the performance of a duty death of the decedent or testator. The rule, however, does not by a public offi cer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein state that the transferee may already compel the issuance of stated. All other public documents are evidence, even against a new cer fi cate of tle covering the specifi c property in his/ a third person, of the fact which gave rise to their execu on her name. and of the date of the la er.” Hence, reading Ar cle 777 of the Civil Code together with There was therefore no need to further iden fy the per nent provisions of PD No. 1529 and the Rules of Court, and authen cate Dr. Labis’ Medical Cer fi cate. “A public while an heir may dispose and transfer his/her hereditary document, by virtue of its offi cial or sovereign character, or share to another person, before the transferee may compel because it has been acknowledged before a notary public the issuance of a new cer fi cate of tle covering specifi c (except a notarial will) or a competent public offi cial with the property in his/her name, a fi nal order of distribu on of the formali es required by law, or because it is a public record of estate or the order in an cipa on of the fi nal distribu on issued by the testate or intestate court must fi rst be had. a private wri ng authorized by law, is self-authen ca ng and requires no further authen ca on in order to be presented as Therefore, despite the existence of a valid contract of evidence in court.” sale between Resurreccion and the pe oners Sps. Sali co, which ordinarily would warrant the delivery of the owner’s x x x x duplicate copy of OCT P-1908 in favor of the la er, pending As for pe oner’s argument that the medical cer fi cate the fi nal se lement of the Estate of Amanda, and absent failed to specifi cally cer fy that respondent “has not undergone any order of fi nal distribu on or an order in an cipa on of sex change or sex transplant” as required by law, suffi ce it to a fi nal distribu on from the Probate Court, the RD cannot be state that this is no longer required with the cer fi ca on by Dr. compelled at this me to cancel OCT P-1908 and issue a new Labis that respondent is “phenotypically male,” meaning that cer fi cate of tle in favor of the pe oners Sps. Sali co. respondent’s en re physical, physiological, and biochemical makeup—as determined both gene cally and environmentally Caguioa, J., Spouses Isidro R. Sali co and Conrada C. Sali co v. Heirs —is male, which thus presupposes that he did not undergo of Resurreccion Mar nez Felix, namely: Luciano, et al., G.R. No. sex reassignment. In other words, as determined gene cally 240199, April 10, 2019. and environmentally, from concep on to birth, respondent’s en re being, from the physical, to the physiological, to the biochemical—meaning that all the chemical processes and Remedial Law substances occurring within respondent—was undoubtedly male. He was conceived and born male, he looks male, and he func ons biologically as a male. When there is a medical fi nding that the pe oner in a case for Thus, in respondent’s case, the Court must do away with correc on of erroneous entry as to gender is phenotypically the requirement of no-sex change cer fi ca on. The same is male or female, the no-sex change or transplant cer fi ca on true with respondent’s failure to include his known aliases in becomes mere surplusage his pe on, simply because there appear to be none at all; Pe oner ques ons the Medical Cer fi cate issued by Dr. the bo om line issue is his gender as entered in the public Labis, Medical Offi cer III of the Northern Mindanao Medical record, not really his name. Center under the Department of Health, claiming that it failed Nonetheless, it must be laid down as a rule that when to include a cer fi ca on that respondent “has not undergone there is a medical fi nding that the pe oner in a case for sex change or sex transplant” as required by Sec on 5 of RA correc on of erroneous entry as to gender is phenotypically No. 9048, as amended, and that Dr. Labis was not presented male or female, the no-sex change or transplant cer fi ca on in court in order that his qualifi ca ons may be established becomes mere surplusage. and so that he may iden fy and authen cate the medical cer fi cate. However, the said Medical Cer fi cate is a public Del Cas llo, J., Republic of the Philippines v. Miller Omandam Unabia, document, the same having been issued by a public offi cer in G.R. No. 213346, February 11, 2019. 16 April–June 2019

just compensa on and damages assessed therein. The MTC could not have proceeded to determine just compensa on given that the value of the subject property is clearly beyond its jurisdic on. Further, the award of rental in arrears by the MTC is Cons tu onal Law improper because BDC is only en tled to the just compensa on of the subject land and consequen al damages as determined A case for recovery of possession or ejectment suit against pursuant to Sec ons 5 and 6, Rule 67 of the Rules of Court. a public service corpora on, endowed with the power of While the award of rental in arrears is proper in an unlawful eminent domain, will not prosper as there can only remain detainer ac on, its award in the present case cannot be upheld to the owner a right of just compensa on since an unlawful detainer ac on is not a sanc oned remedy in case a public service or u lity corpora on, endowed with x x x [I]t is well-se led that a case fi led by a landowner for the power of eminent domain, like TransCo in this case, has recovery of possession or ejectment against a public u lity occupied privately-owned property without fi rst acquiring tle corpora on, endowed with the power of eminent domain, thereto by nego ated purchase or expropria on proceedings. which has occupied the land belonging to the former in the The MTC being bere of jurisdic on to entertain the interest of public service without prior acquisi on of tle unlawful detainer case, its Decision manda ng TransCo to thereto by nego ated purchase or expropria on proceedings, vacate the subject property and remove all structures thereon will not prosper. Any ac on to compel the public u lity and to pay BDC P10,350,000 as reasonable rental computed corpora on to vacate such property is unavailing since from December 13, 2008 is without legal basis. the landowner is denied the remedies of ejectment and injunc on for reasons of public policy and public necessity The subsequent fi ling by TransCo of the expropria on as well as equitable estoppel. The proper recourse is for the proceedings could not have rendered the unlawful detainer ejectment court: (1) to dismiss the case without prejudice to case moot and academic inasmuch as the MTC erred in the landowner fi ling the proper ac on for recovery of just proceeding with the unlawful detainer case and not dismissing compensa on and consequen al damages; or (2) to dismiss it following the prevailing jurisprudence. the case and direct the public u lity corpora on to ins tute the proper expropria on or condemna on proceedings and Caguioa, J., Na onal Transmission Corpora on v. Bermuda to pay the just compensa on and consequen al damages Development Corpora on, G.R. No. 214782, April 3, 2019. assessed therein; or (3) to con nue with the case as if it were an expropria on case and determine the just compensa on and Doctrine of Opera ve Fact consequen al damages pursuant to Rule 67 (Expropria on) of the Rules of Court, if the ejectment court has jurisdic on over While the Court understands the fi nancial implica ons that the value of the subject land. may result from the July 3, 2018 decision, it is not within the Pursuant to Republic Act No. 9136 or the Electric Power power of the Court to adjust the purportedly exorbitant rate Industry Reform Act of 2001, the Na onal Transmission of the fair share of the LGUs. In striking down the aff ected Corpora on (TransCo or TRANSCO), a government agency, provisions of the LGC, the Court is only exercising and was created to assume the electrical transmission func ons discharging its cons tu onal duty of judicial review. The of the Na onal Power Corpora on and is vested with the duty does not allow the Court to mark me and await the power of eminent domain subject to the requirements of the rec fi ca on to be made by Congress of the uncons tu onal Cons tu on and exis ng laws. situa on, as the OSG seems to suggest, considering that the Given that BDC fi led before the MTC a complaint for Court has to intervene and act once its power of judicial unlawful detainer against TransCo, which erected and then review has been properly and duly invoked. energized a 230 KV transmission traversing the whole extent Lastly, pe oner Garcia argues that because por ons of the subject property, the MTC should have found or taken of Sec on 284 of the LGC are found and declared to be judicial no ce that TransCo is a public service corpora on uncons tu onal, the LGUs are en tled to recover the arrears with the power to expropriate. Upon such fi nding, the MTC, in their just share. In contrast, the OSG wants the ruling to pursuant to the aforecited prevailing jurisprudence, should have a prospec ve applica on. have then ordered the dismissal of the unlawful detainer case without prejudice to BDC’s right to recover the value of the Both posi ons have been fully considered and se led land actually taken, or ordered TransCo to ins tute the proper by the decision of July 3, 2018, as borne out by the following expropria on or condemna on proceedings and to pay the excerpts of the relevant por ons of the decision, viz.: Volume XXI Issue No. 82 17

The pe oners’ prayer for the payment of the arrears of Labor Law the LGUs’ just share on the theory that the computa on of the base amount had been uncons tu onal all along cannot be granted. For redundancy to be valid, it is not enough for the company It is true that with our declara on today that the IRA to declare it is overmanned; it must produce adequate proof is not in accordance with the cons tu onal determina on to jus fy the dismissal of the aff ected employees of the just share of the LGUs in the na onal taxes, logic demands that the LGUs should receive the diff erence Essen ally, redundancy exists when an employee’s posi on is between the just share they should have received had the superfl uous, or an employee’s services are in excess of what LGC properly reckoned such just share from all na onal would reasonably be demanded by the actual requirements of taxes, on the one hand, and the share—represented by the the enterprise. Redundancy could be the result of a number IRA—the LGUs have actually received since the eff ec vity of the IRA under the LGC, on the other. This puts the of factors, such as the overhiring of workers, a decrease in Na onal Government in arrears as to the just share of the the volume of business, or the dropping of a par cular line LGUs. A legisla ve or execu ve act declared void for being or service previously manufactured or undertaken by the uncons tu onal cannot give rise to any right or obliga on. enterprise. In this rela on, jurisprudence explains that the characteriza on of an employee’s services as redundant, and Yet, the Court has conceded in Araullo v. Aquino III that: therefore, properly terminable, is an exercise of management preroga ve, considering that an employer has no legal x x x the generality of the rule makes us ponder obliga on to keep more employees than are necessary for the whether rigidly applying the rule may at mes be opera on of its business. imprac cable or wasteful. Should we not recognize the need to except from the rigid applica on of the Nevertheless, case law qualifi es that the exercise of such rule the instances in which the void law or execu ve preroga ve “must not be in viola on of the law, and must not act produced an almost irreversible result? be arbitrary or malicious.” Thus, following Ar cle 298 of the The need is answered by the doctrine of Labor Code as above cited, the law requires the employer to opera ve fact. The doctrine, defi nitely not a novel prove, inter alia, its good faith in abolishing the redundant one, has been exhaus vely explained in De Agbayani posi ons, and further, the existence of fair and reasonable v. Philippine Na onal Bank x x x criteria in ascertaining what posi ons are to be declared redundant and accordingly abolished. x x x x The doctrine of opera ve fact recognizes “To exhibit its good faith and that there was a fair and the existence of the law or execu ve act prior to reasonable criteria in ascertaining redundant posi ons, a the determina on of its uncons tu onality as an company claiming to be overmanned must produce adequate opera ve fact that produced consequences that proof of the same.” cannot always be erased, ignored or disregarded. Thus, the Court has ruled that it is not enough for a In short, it nullifi es the void law or execu ve act company to merely declare that it has become overmanned. but sustains its eff ects. It provides an excep on to Rather, it must produce adequate proof of such redundancy the general rule that a void or uncons tu onal law to jus fy the dismissal of the aff ected employees, such as but produces no eff ect. But its use must be subjected not limited to the new staffi ng pa ern, feasibility studies/ to great scru ny and circumspec on, and it cannot be invoked to validate an uncons tu onal law or proposal, on the viability of the newly created posi ons, execu ve act, but is resorted to only as a ma er of job descrip on and the approval by the management of the equity and fair play. It applies only to cases where restructuring. extraordinary circumstances exist, and only when Meanwhile, in Golden Thread Kni ng Industries, Inc. v. the extraordinary circumstances have met the NLRC, the Court explained that fair and reasonable criteria stringent condi ons that will permit its applica on. may include but are not limited to the following: “(a) less Conformably with the foregoing pronouncements in preferred status (e.g., temporary employee); (b) effi ciency; Araullo v. Aquino III, the eff ect of our declara on through and (c) seniority. The presence of these criteria used by the this decision of the uncons tu onality of Sec on 284 of employer shows good faith on its part and is evidence that the the LGC and its related laws as far as they limited the source implementa on of redundancy was painstakingly done by the of the just share of the LGUs to the NIRTs is prospec ve. It employer in order to properly jus fy the termina on from the cannot be otherwise. service of its employees.” Bersamin, C.J., Congressman Hermilando I. Mandanas, et al. v. x x x x Execu ve Secretary Paquito N. Ochoa, Jr., et al., G.R. No. 199802, and Honorable Enrique T. Garcia, Jr. v. Honorable [Paquito] N. Ochoa, Finally, it may not be amiss to point out that while Jr., et al., G.R. No. 208488, April 10, 2019. respondent had duly no fi ed pe oner that it was termina ng 18 April–June 2019

Doctrinal Reminders Labor Law (continued) him on the ground of redundancy, records are bere of any Court’s long-established jurisprudence. Republic Act No. showing that he was paid his separa on pay, which is also a 6552 recognizes in condi onal sales of all kinds of real requisite to properly terminate an employee based on this estate (industrial and commercial as well as residen al) ground. As Ar cle 298 states, “[i]n case of termina on due to the non-applicability of Ar cle 1592 (1504) Civil Code x x x redundancy, the worker aff ected thereby shall be en tled to such contracts to sell on installments and the right of to a separa on pay equivalent to at least his one month pay or the seller to cancel the contract (in accordance with the to at least one month pay for every year of service, whichever established doctrine of this Court) upon non-payment is higher.” “which is simply an event that prevents the obliga on of the vendor to convey tle from acquiring binding force.” Perlas-Bernabe, J., Enrique Marco G. Yulo v. Concentrix Daksh (Manuel v. Rodriguez, 109 Phil. 1, 10, per Reyes, J.B.L.). The Services Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 235873, January 21, 2019. Act in modifying the terms and applica on of Art. 1592 Civil Code reaffi rms the vendor’s right to cancel unqualifi edly in the case of industrial lots and commercial buildings (as Civil Law in the case at bar) and requires a grace period in other cases, par cularly residen al lots, with a refund of certain Maceda Law applies to sale of residen al, commercial and percentages of payments made on account of the cancelled industrial proper es but provides diff erent protec on to contract. residen al buyers as compared to commercial and industrial In other words, whether the property is residen al, lot buyers commercial or industrial, Maceda Law does not make any dis nc on insofar as the availability of the remedy of It is clear that the buyer’s protec on under RA No. 6552 cancella on by the seller in case of nonpayment of installments only applies to contracts of sale of real estate on installment is concerned. The only dis nc on lies on the added protec on payments, including residen al condominium apartments, given by the law to residen al buyers, which is not enjoyed by but excluding industrial lots, commercial buildings and sales commercial and industrial lot buyers. Indeed, the Maceda Law to tenants. A purchase by a company involved in the real addressed the predicament of thousands upon thousands of estate business, just like the pe oners in this case, of a six- residen al property buyers who, in the words of this Court, are hectare lot can hardly be considered as residen al. This is the hounded to suff er the loss of their life earnings only because same interpreta on conveyed in the case of Spouses Garcia of an oversight or diffi culty in paying one or two installments. v. Court of Appeals, when this Court held that the subject This is not the case for industrial or commercial lot buyers, lands, comprising fi ve parcels and aggrega ng 69,028 square who, the law perceives to have deep pockets. To quote the meters, do not comprise residen al real estate within the verba m pronouncement of this Court: contempla on of the Maceda Law. Moreso in this case where it was shown that pe oner Corpora on is already engaged in The Act even in residen al proper es recognizes and the selling of the por ons of the said lots to individual buyers. reaffi rms the vendor’s right to cancel the contract to sell upon breach and [nonpayment] of the s pulated But this is not to say that sellers in a contract to sell of installments but requires a grace period a er at least two industrial and commercial lots are precluded to cancel the years of regular installment payments (of one month for contract when buyers defaulted in one installment. The old every one year of installment payments made, but to be case of Luzon Brokerage Co., Inc. v. Mari me Building Co., lnc. exercise[d] by the buyer only once in every fi ve years of the made it clear that RA No. 6552 or the Maceda Law expressly life of the contract) with a refund of certain percentages recognizes the vendor’s right of cancella on of sale on of payments made on account of the cancelled contract installments of industrial and commercial proper es with full reten on of previous payments. In the said case, the Supreme (star ng with 50 percent with gradually increasing Court En Banc held: percentages a er fi ve years of installments). In case of industrial and commercial proper es, as in the case at The enactment on September 14, 1972 by Congress of bar, the Act recognizes and reaffi rms the Vendor’s right Republic Act No. 6552 en tled “An Act to Provide Protec on unqualifi edly to cancel the sale upon the buyer’s default. to Buyer[s] of Real Estate on Installment Payments” which inter alia compels the seller of real estate on installments It is clear by the said provision that in case of industrial (but excluding industrial lots, commercial buildings among and commercial proper es, the seller can unqualifi edly cancel others from the Act’s coverage) to grant one month’s grace the sale upon the buyer’s default. period for every one year of installments made before the contract to sell may be cancelled for non-payment of J. Reyes, Jr., J., Royal Plains View, Inc. and/or Renato Padillo v. Nestor the installments due forecloses any overturning of this C. Mejia, G.R. No. 230832, November 12, 2018. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 19

Where the government acquires private property through hydrochloride a er he was subjected to a drug test following voluntary sale, the laws rela ng to contracts will govern his arrest. This was done in compliance with Sec on 38, RA No. 9165, x x x In sum, the award of legal interest in cases where the x x x x government acquires private property through voluntary sale Thus, Fatallo was subjected to a drug test as a result of his is not a ma er of law. Unlike in cases where the state exercises apprehension which, as already explained, was conducted in its power of eminent domain or a party ini ates expropria on viola on of Sec on 21, RA No. 9165. Sec on 21, RA No. 9165 proceedings and other similar ac ons, in nego ated sale, is a statutory exclusionary rule of evidence, bearing in mind there is an exis ng contract that governs the rela ons of the that, under the Rules of Court, “evidence is admissible when par es and determines their respec ve rights and obliga ons. it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the law or In turn, these contractual s pula ons should be complied these rules.” with in good faith, unless they are contrary to law, morals, The results of the drug test cannot therefore be used good customs, public order or public policies. Hence, the laws against Fatallo for they are considered, under the law, as the rela ng to contracts should govern in case of controversy in “fruit of the poisonous tree.” In the case of People v. Alicando, their applica on. it was explained thus:

J. Reyes, Jr., J., Republic of the Philippines, represented by the x x x. According to this rule, once the primary source (the “tree”) is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any Secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) secondary or deriva ve evidence (the “fruit”) derived from v. Jose Gamir-Consuelo Diaz Heirs Associa on, Inc., G.R. No. 218732, it is also inadmissible. Stated otherwise, illegally seized November 12, 2018. evidence is obtained as a direct result of the illegal act, whereas the “fruit of the poisonous tree” is the indirect result of the same illegal act. The “fruit of the poisonous Criminal Law tree” is at least once removed from the illegally seized evidence, but it is equally inadmissible. The rule is based on the principle that evidence illegally obtained by the State Arias doctrine can only be invoked by a head of offi ce for should not be used to gain other evidence because the subordinates directly under him originally illegally obtained evidence taints all evidence subsequently obtained. The subordinates contemplated by the Arias doctrine are those public offi cers and employees who are actually under Applied in the present case, since the apprehension of the control or supervision of the head of offi ce concerned, Fatallo by the police offi cers was illegal for non-compliance or those who answer directly or indirectly to their superiors, with the procedure provided by Sec on 21, RA No. 9165, it who are in the employ of the same government agency. In therefore follows that the drug test conducted on him was other words, for the Arias doctrine to fi nd applica on, both likewise illegal for it is an indirect result of his arrest. Otherwise the superior and the subordinate must be public offi cers stated, if Fatallo was not arrested in the fi rst place, he would working for the same government offi ce or agency. not have been subjected to a drug test because Sec on 38 In his cross-examina on, A y. Marcos admi ed that he refers to “any person apprehended or arrested for viola ng was merely consulted by Gov. Co in his capacity as a private the provisions of this Act,” As Fatallo was not proved to lawyer, x x x have violated any of the provisions of RA No. 9165, then the drug test conducted on him has no leg to stand on. Fatallo’s x x x x acqui al for the charge of viola ng Sec on 15, RA No. 9165 Given the foregoing admission, the Court cannot extend must necessarily follow. the protec on aff orded by the Arias doctrine to Gov. Co. Caguioa, J., People of the Philippines v. Alvin Fatallo y Alecarte a.k.a. A. Reyes, Jr., J., Josie Cas llo-Co v. Honorable Sandiganbayan (Second “Alvin Patallo y Alecarte,” G.R. No. 218805, November 7, 2018. Division), and People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 184766, August 15, 2018. Commercial Law A case for viola on of Sec on 15 of RA No. 9165 (use of a dangerous drug) will not prosper if the drug test, which was the basis of the charge, was a result of an apprehension that Test in evalua ng the feasibility of the rehabilita on plan was conducted in viola on of Sec on 21 of RA No. 9165 To note, the test in evalua ng the feasibility of the plan was The case for viola on of Sec on 15, RA No. 9165 was fi led laid down in Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Sarabia Manor because Fatallo tested posi ve for use of methamphetamine Hotel Corpora on (Bank of the Philippine Islands), to wit: 20 April–June 2019

Doctrinal Reminders Commercial Law (continued) In order to determine the feasibility of a proposed d. cash fl ow cannot sustain daily opera ons; and rehabilita on plan, it is impera ve that a thorough e. nega ve net worth and the assets are near full examina on and analysis of the distressed corpora on’s deprecia on or fully depreciated. fi nancial data must be conducted. If the results of such examina on and analysis show that there is a real Taking all these points into considera on, among others, opportunity to rehabilitate the corpora on in view of in the case of Fortuna, the Court disagrees with the fi nding the assump ons made and fi nancial goals stated in the of the lower courts that the Rehabilita on Plan is one that is proposed rehabilita on plan, then it may be said that a economically feasible for several reasons. rehabilita on is feasible. In this accord, the rehabilita on First, the Rehabilita on Plan is primarily premised on court should not hesitate to allow the corpora on to specula ve investments and the lack of material fi nancial operate as an ongoing concern, albeit under the terms and commitments. x x x condi ons stated in the approved rehabilita on plan. On the other hand, if the results of the fi nancial examina on x x x x and analysis clearly indicate that there lies no reasonable It is clear from a perusal of the Rehabilita on Plan that the probability that the distressed corpora on could be process is heavily, if not completely predicated on specula ve revived and that liquida on would, in fact, be er business proposals as well as the con ngent entry of the subserve the interests of its stakeholders, then it may be poten al foreign investor, Polycity. It is emphasized that the said that a rehabilita on would not be feasible. In such case, the rehabilita on court may convert the proceedings entry of Polycity is wholly predicated on condi ons imposed into one for liquida on. on Fortuna by the former, as seen in the le er of Polycity. x x x In the recent case of Phil. Asset Growth Two, Inc., et al. v. x x x x Fastech Synergy Phils., Inc., et al., the Court took note of the The aforecited transac on is not the viable and realis c characteris cs of feasible rehabilita on plan as opposed to an op on that complies with the minimum requirements of the infeasible rehabilita on plan as follows: Interim Rules. Cri cally, to this date, there is also no showing Professor Stephanie V. Gomez of the University of the on the part of Fortuna that the company was able to comply Philippines College of Law suggests specifi c characteris cs with the condi ons that would result in Polycity inves ng in of an economically feasible rehabilita on plan: the former. In fact, Fortuna subsequently fi led a Mo on to a. The debtor has assets that can generate more cash if Amend Rehabilita on Plan dated March 5, 2009 almost two used in its daily opera ons than if sold. years a er the fi ling of the Rehabilita on Plan, sta ng that the b. Liquidity issues can be addressed by a prac cable investment of Polycity did not push through, necessita ng the business plan that will generate enough cash to entry of Fortuna in the real estate business, x x x sustain daily opera ons. x x x x c. The debtor has a defi nite source of fi nancing for the Even Fortuna’s men on of the joint-venture agreement proper and full implementa on of a Rehabilita on with Oroquieta Proper es, Inc. (OPI) in its Comment to the Plan that is anchored on realis c assump ons and Pe on as a viable means for feasibility, is based on con ngency goals. and is far from a sure thing. While Fortuna alleges that it has These requirements put emphasis on liquidity: the already moved ahead of the realty development aspect of cash fl ow that the distressed corpora on will obtain from the Plan and that the architectural plans have already been rehabilita ng its assets and opera ons. A corpora on’s prepared by OPI and submi ed to the Home Development assets may be more than its current liabili es, but some Mutual Fund for assessment, Fortuna itself admits that this assets may be in the form of land or capital equipment, is subject to the condi on that OPI is willing to par cipate such as machinery or vessels. Rehabilita on sees to it that these assets generate more value if used effi ciently rather only as soon as the legal issues of rehabilita on is resolved. than if liquidated. It is clear that this subs tute investment also has the taint of uncertainty that certainly deprives the Rehabilita on Plan of On the other hand, this court enumerated the the requisite feasibility under the law, and thus, this Court characteris cs of a rehabilita on plan that is infeasible: must rule as to its invalidity especially as holding otherwise a. the absence of a sound and workable business plan; would go against the purpose of corporate rehabilita on and b. baseless and unexplained assump ons, targets and the protec on of creditors. goals; c. specula ve capital infusion or complete lack thereof A. Reyes, Jr., J., Metropolitan Bank & Trust Company v. Fortuna Paper for the execu on of the business plan; Mill & Packaging Corpora on, G.R. No. 190800, November 7, 2018. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 21

contrary to the real facts that occurred. What the Remedial Law law altogether distrusts is not a erspeech but a erthought.

Requisites for res gestae [T]here are no limits of me within which the res gestae can be arbitrarily confi ned. These limits vary in fact with each par cular x x x As a general rule, hearsay evidence is inadmissible in case. The acts or declara ons are not required courts of law. As an excep on, however, Sec on 42 of Rule to be contemporaneous with the primary 130 allows the admission of hearsay evidence as part of the fact, but they must be so connected with it as res gestae, to wit: to make the act or declara on and the main S. 42. Part of the res gestae. – Statements made by a fact par cularly inseparable, or be generated person while a startling occurrence is taking place or by an excited feeling which extends, without immediately prior or subsequent thereto with respect to break or let-down, from the moment of the the circumstances thereof, may be given in evidence as event they illustrate. In other words, if the part of the res gestae. So, also, statements accompanying acts or declara ons sprang out of the principal an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it a legal transac on, tend to explain it, were voluntary and signifi cance may be received as part of the res gestae. spontaneous, and were made at a me so near it as to preclude the idea of deliberate design, they The following requisites must, thus, be sa sfi ed for the may be regarded as contemporaneous in point of excep on to apply: (i) that the principal act, the res gestae, me, and are admissible. be a startling occurrence; (ii) that the statements were made before the declarant had the me to contrive or devise In People v. Sanchez, this Court had occasion to state a falsehood; and (iii) that the statements must concern that the cases are not uniform as to the interval of me that the occurrence in ques on and its immediate a ending should separate the occurrence of the startling event and circumstances. x x x the making of the declara on. What is important is that the declara ons were voluntarily and spontaneously made x x x x “so nearly contemporaneous as to be in the presence of x x x In determining the admissibility of evidence as part the transac on which they illustrate or explain, and were of the res gestae, the test is whether the act or declara on made under such circumstances as necessarily to exclude was made as a spontaneous reac on and is so in mately the ideas of design or delibera on.” interwoven or connected with the principal fact or event that As to the second factor, it may be stressed that “a it characterizes as to be regarded as a part of the transac on statement made, or an act done, at a place some distance itself and whether it negates any premedita on or purpose to from the place where the principal transac on occurred manufacture tes mony. will not ordinarily possess such spontaneity as would Anent the requirement of spontaneity, the Court in People render it admissible.” v. Manhuyod, Jr. (Manhuyod, Jr.) laid down several factors in Anent the third factor, “[a] statement will ordinarily determining whether statements off ered in evidence as part of be deemed spontaneous if, at the me when it was the res gestae have sa sfi ed the requirement of spontaneity: made, the condi ons of the declarant was such as to raise an inference that the eff ect of the occurrence on It goes without saying that the element of spontaneity his mind s ll con nued, as where he had just received is cri cal. The following factors are then considered in a serious injury, was suff ering severe pain, or was under determining whether statements off ered in evidence as intense excitement. Conversely, a lack of spontaneity part of the res gestae have been made spontaneously, may be inferred from the cool demeanor of declarant, viz., (1) the me that lapsed between the occurrence of his consciousness of the absence of all danger, his delay the act or transac on and the making of the statement; (2) in making a statement un l witnesses can be procured, or the place where the statement was made; (3) the condi on from the fact that he made a diff erent statement prior to of the declarant when he made the statement; (4) the the one which is off ered in evidence.” presence or absence of intervening events between the With regard to the fourth factor, what is to be occurrence and the statement rela ve thereto; and (5) the considered is whether there intervened between the event nature and circumstances of the statement itself. As to the or transac on and the making of the statement rela ve fi rst factor, the following proves instruc ve: thereto, any circumstance calculated to divert the mind of The rule is that the statements, to be admissible, the declarant which would thus restore his mental balance should have been made before there had been and aff ord opportunity for delibera ons. me or opportunity to devise or contrive anything The last factor needs no further elabora on. 22 April–June 2019

Doctrinal Reminders Remedial Law (continued) Guided by the foregoing standards, the Court fi nds that basis for the Court’s minute resolu on therein. In this light, the CA and RTC correctly considered the statements of AAA as the principle of stare decisis cannot be invoked to obtain a part of the res gestae. dismissal of the instant pe on. As refl ected in the records, EEE’s tes mony places AAA’s u erances only several hours from the me the disputed Perlas-Bernabe, J., Philippine Pizza, Inc. v. Jenny Porras Cayetano, incidents took place on April 15, 2001, i.e., 7 p.m., 9 p.m., and Rizaldo G. Avenido, Pee Jay T. Gurion, Rumel A. Recto, Rogelio T. Sumbang, Jr., and Jimmy J. Deloso, G.R. No. 230030, August 29, 2018. 12 midnight: x x x x Eff ect of order of default Based on the foregoing account, it is clear that at the me AAA u ered her statements to EEE—a few hours a er While, concededly, a defending party declared in default loses the incidents—the eff ect of the occurrence on her mind s ll his standing in the trial court and his right to adduce evidence con nued. Her demeanor, as narrated by EEE, showed that she and to present his defense, this, however, does not impliedly was s ll suff ering as a result of the viola on of her person and suggest a loss of all his/her rights in the stages of the case honor by her father, herein accused-appellant XXX. Moreover, a er the default judgment. This can be clearly inferred from following the standard in Manhuyod, Jr., while the u erances the wordings of Sec on 3, Rule 9 of the 1997 Rules of Court. were not made contemporaneous to the act described, the Thus: Court fi nds that they remained to be “so connected with it as to make the act or declara on and the main fact par cularly S. 3. Default; declara on of. – If the defending party inseparable.” More importantly, the Court fi nds nothing on fails to answer within the me allowed therefor, the court the records that would show an intervening event between shall, upon mo on of the claiming party with no ce to the me of the rape incidents and the me of AAA’s revela on the defending party, and proof of such failure, declare to EEE that would indicate a restora on of her mental balance the defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall as in fact, she was s ll under distress when she arrived at EEE’s proceed to render judgment gran ng the claimant such home. x x x relief as his pleading may warrant, unless the court in its discre on requires the claimant to submit evidence. Such Caguioa, J., People of the Philippines v. XXX, G.R. No. 205888, August recep on of evidence may be delegated to the clerk of 22, 2018. court. (a) Eff ect of order of default. – A party in default shall be Minute resolu ons cannot be used as basis of stare decisis en tled to no ce of subsequent proceedings but not for non-par es to take part in the trial. It is evident from the foregoing rule that even when The CA’s reliance on the Philippine Pizza, Inc.’s minute a defendant is already declared in default, he is en tled to resolu on is, however, misplaced. Case law instructs that no ce of subsequent proceedings. although the Court’s dismissal of a case via a minute resolu on cons tutes a disposi on on the merits, the same could not Default, therefore, is not meant to punish the defendant, be treated as a binding precedent to cases involving other but to enforce the prompt fi ling of the answer to the persons who are not par es to the case, or another subject complaint. Its existence is jus fi ed on the ground that it is the ma er that may or may not have the same par es and issues. one fi nal expedient to induce defendant to join issue upon In other words, a minute resolu on does not necessarily bind the allega ons tendered by the plain ff , and to do so without non-par es to the ac on even if it amounts to a fi nal ac on unnecessary delay. on a case. The provision that the defaul ng party cannot take part In this case, records do not bear proof that respondents in the trial only meant that he/she has already lost his/her were also par es to the Philippine Pizza, Inc.’s case or that they standing in the trial court. In other words, the eff ect of the par cipated or were involved therein. Moreover, there was judgment of default is limited only to those stages in the prosecu on of the case which terminated with and included no showing that the subject ma ers of the two cases were in in the judgment of the trial court on the merits. some way similar or related to one another, since the minute resolu on in the case of Philippine Pizza, Inc. did not contain a complete statement of the facts, as well as a discussion J. Reyes, Jr., J., Royal Plains View, Inc. and/or Renato Padillo v. Nestor of the applicable laws and jurisprudence that became the C. Mejia, G.R. No. 230832, November 12, 2018. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 23

Legal Ethics

Performing notarial acts without the necessary commission from the Court cons tutes a viola on of both the oath to obey the law and Canons 1 and 7 of the Code of Professional OCA CIRCULAR NO. 08-2019 Responsibility

In the present case, it is undisputable that A y. Abao performed notarial acts on the subject deed of absolute sale knowing fully TO: ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT/OFFICERS IN CHARGE well that she was without a valid notarial commission. Her AND BRANCH CLERKS OF COURT/OFFICERS IN CHARGE OF lack of notarial commission at the me of the unauthorized THE FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS notariza on was likewise suffi ciently established by the Cer fi ca on issued by A y. Jelou F. Almalbis-Laguna, Clerk SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF SECTION 11, RULE 141, REVISED of Court VI of the Offi ce of the Clerk of Court, Regional Trial RULES OF COURT, ON THE INCREASE IN THE RATE FOR Court, 6th Judicial Region, Roxas City in the territory where REQUESTED CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT OF NOTES A y. Abao performed the unauthorized notarial act. Clearly, In accordance with the October 2, 2018 Resolu on In A.M. No. A y. Abao could not perform notarial func ons in Dao, Capiz, 18-10-03-SC (Re: Increase in Chargeable Rate of Transcript of since she was not commissioned in the said places to perform Stenographic Notes), the Court En Banc RESOLVED to AMEND such act in the year 1995. Sec on 11, Rule 141, Revised Rules of Court, rela ve to the x x x x increase in the rate for requested cer fi ed transcript of notes, the full text of which is quoted as follows: Clearly, for misrepresen ng in the subject Deed of Absolute Sale that she was a notary public for and in Dao, (a) APPROVE the increase in the rate for requested Capiz, when in fact she was not, A y. Abao further commi ed cer fi ed transcript of notes from Ten Pesos (P10) to a form of falsehood which is undoubtedly anathema to the Twenty Pesos (P20) per page before the appeal is lawyer’s oath. A y. Abao’s misdeeds run afoul of her du es taken, and from Five Pesos (P5) to Ten Pesos (P10) and responsibili es, both as a lawyer and a notary public. for the same page a er the fi ling of the appeal, with By performing notarial acts without the necessary one-third (1/3) of the total charges accruing to the commission from the court, A y. Abao violated not only Judiciary Development Fund and the remaining two- her oath to obey the laws, par cularly the Rules on Notarial thirds (2/3) to the stenographer concerned; and Prac ce, but also Canons 1 and 7 of the Code of Professional (b) AMEND Sec on 11 , Rule 141 of the [Revised] Rules of Responsibility which proscribes all lawyers from engaging Court, to read as follows: in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or decei ul conduct and S. 11. Stenographers. – Stenographers shall give directs them to uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession, at all mes. cer fi ed transcript of notes taken by them to every person reques ng the same upon payment to the In the case of Nunga v. A y. Viray, the Court appropriately Clerk of Court of (a) TWENTY (P20) PESOS for each held that where the notariza on of a document is done by page of not less than two hundred and fi y words a member of the Philippine Bar at a me when he has no before the appeal is taken and (b) TEN (P10) PESOS for authoriza on or commission to do so, the off ender may be the same page, a er the fi ling of the appeal, provided, subjected to disciplinary ac on. For one, performing a notarial however, that one-third (1/3) of the total charges shall [act] without such commission is a viola on of the lawyer’s accrue to the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and oath to obey the laws, more specifi cally, the Notarial Law. the remaining two-thirds (2/3) to the stenographer Then, too, by making it appear that he is duly commissioned concerned. (Amendments in bold) when he is not, he is, for all legal intents and purposes, indulging in deliberate falsehood, which the lawyer’s oath Any prior circular from the Offi ce of the Court Administrator similarly proscribes. These viola ons fall squarely within the on this ma er which is contrary to the foregoing is hereby prohibi on of Rule 1.01 of Canon 1 of the Code of Professional superseded. Responsibility, which provides: “A lawyer shall not engage in For your informa on, guidance and strict compliance. unlawful, dishonest, immoral or decei ul conduct.” January 22, 2019. Peralta, J., Spouses Pepito and Prescila Frias v. A y. Nelly E. Abao, (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ A.C. No. 12467, April 10, 2019. Court Administrator 24 April–June 2019

To clarify, Sec on 8(a), Rule 141, shall apply in cases OCA CIRCULAR NO. 18-2019 where plain ff s are engaged in the business of banking, lending, and similar ac vi es, while Sec on 8(d), Rule 141, shall apply in cases where plain ff s are not engaged in the TO: ALL JUDGES, CLERKS OF COURT, BRANCH CLERKS OF business of banking, lending, and similar ac vi es. The COURT AND OFFICERS IN CHARGE/ACTING CLERKS OF COURT addi onal fee under paragraph 1, Sec on 10, 2016 Revised OF THE FIRST LEVEL COURTS Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases, otherwise known as the frequent fi ler fee, applies only in cases where plain ff s SUBJECT: COMPUTATION OF LEGAL FEES IN SMALL CLAIMS are not engaged in the business of banking, lending, and CASES FILED BY PLAINTIFFS ENGAGED OR NOT ENGAGED similar ac vi es, and shall be deposited to the Judiciary IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKING, LENDING AND SIMILAR Development Fund. ACTIVITIES IN RELATION TO LETTER d(i) OF A.M. NO. 17-12- To illustrate, below are the sample computa ons 09-SC (RE: INITIAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON ADMINISTRATIVE comparing the fees to be paid by the plain ff s engaged and ADJUSTMENTS FROM THE JUDICIARY-WIDE COMMITTEE ON not engaged in the business of banking, lending, and similar LEGAL FEES) UNDER OCA CIRCULAR NO. 36-2018 ac vi es: We have received requests for clarifi ca on on the proper computa on of fi ling fees in small claims cases, par cularly ENGAGED IN NOT ENGAGED IN SAMPLE 1 on which rule shall apply in cases where plain ff s are engaged BUSINESS BUSINESS in the business of banking, lending, and similar ac vi es. Amount Involved P200,000 P200,000 Sec on 10 of the 2016 Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Applicable Sec on Sec. 8(a), Rule 141 Sec. 8(d), Rule 141 Claims Cases provides for the computa on of fi ling fees: Docket Fees P2,500 P700 S. 10. Payment of Filing Fees. – The plain ff shall pay the Summons Fee 200 200 docket and other legal fees prescribed under Rule 141 of the Revised Rules of Court, unless allowed to li gate as an LRF 27 10 indigent. Exemp on from the payment of fi ling fees shall be MF 500 500 granted only by the Supreme Court. However, if more than VCF 55 fi ve small claims are fi led by one party within the calendar STF 1,000 1,000 year, regardless of the judicial sta on, an addi onal fi ling fee of P500 shall be paid for every claim fi led a er the Total Ini al Filing P4,232 P2,415 fi h claim, and an addi onal P100 or a total of P600 for Frequent Filer On the 6th to 10th None every claim fi led a er the 10th claim, and another P100 or Fees P500 (so on ... ) a total of P700 for every claim fi led a er the 15th claim, progressively and cumula vely. ENGAGED IN NOT ENGAGED IN If the plain ff is engaged in the business of banking, SAMPLE 2 BUSINESS BUSINESS lending and similar ac vi es, the amount of fi ling and other legal fees shall be the same as those applicable to Amount Involved P20,000 P20,000 cases fi led under the regular rules. (emphasis ours) Applicable Sec on Sec. 8(a), Rule 141 Sec. 8(d), Rule 141 x x x x Docket Fees P300 P700 Based on this provision, the fi ling fees to be paid in small Summons Fee 200 200 claims cases depend on whether the plain ff is engaged in LRF 10 10 the business of banking, lending, and similar ac vi es or MF 500 500 not. This dis nc on was emphasized in the January 10, 2018 VCF 55 Resolu on of the Court in A.M. No. 17-12-09-SC (Re: Ini al STF 1,000 1,000 Recommenda ons on Administra ve Adjustments from the Judiciary-Wide Commi ee on Legal Fees),* par cularly Total Ini al Filing P2,015 P2,415 Frequent Filer On the 6th to 10th P500 paragraph d(i), which states that “[t]he computa on of legal None fees for small claims cases should be based on Sec on 8(a) Fees (so on ... ) and (d), Rule 141, as the case may be.” For your guidance and strict compliance.

February 4, 2019. (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ * Under OCA Circular No. 36-2018 dated February 26, 2018 (Court resolu on dated January 10, 2018 [Administra ve Adjustments on Legal Fees]). Court Administrator Volume XXI Issue No. 82 25

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 43-2019

TO: ALL DESIGNATED AND STATUTORY FAMILY COURT JUDGES (PRESIDING/ACTING PRESIDING/ASSISTING) OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS SUBJECT: ISSUANCE OF THE EN BANC RESOLUTION DATED OCTOBER 2, 2018 IN A.M. 15-06-10-SC (RE: ADOPTING THE GUIDELINES FOR CONTINUOUS TRIAL OF CRIMINAL CASES IN PILOT COURTS) For the informa on and compliance of all the designated and statutory Family Court Judges of the Regional Trial Courts (RTCs), the Honorable Court En Banc issued a Resolu on dated October 2, 2018 in A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC (Re: Adop ng the Guidelines for Con nuous Trial of Criminal Cases in Pilot Courts) approving the applicability of the ‘Revised Guidelines for Con nuous Trial of Criminal Cases’ to Family Courts and Regional Trial Courts Handling Family Courts Cases subject to modifi ca ons. The copy of said resolu on is a ached herewith as Annex “A” for reference. March 20, 2019. (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ Court Administrator

Annex “A”

Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court Manila

En Banc

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames: Please take no ce that the Court en banc issued a Resolu on dated OCTOBER 2, 2018, which reads as follows: A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC (Re: Adop ng the Guidelines for Con nuous Trial of Criminal Cases in Pilot Courts). – Ac ng on Resolu on No. 05-2018 of the Commi ee on Family Courts and Juvenile Concerns, the Court Resolved to APPROVE the applicability of the ‘Revised Guidelines for Con nuous Trial of Criminal Case’ to Family Courts and Regional Trial Courts Handling Family Courts Cases with the following modifi ca ons: First, the Family Courts shall set the arraignment of the Child in Confl ict with the Law (CICL) and the pre-trial of the case within 10 calendar days from date of the court’s receipt of the case for a detained (CICL) and within the 30 calendar days from the date the court acquires jurisdic on (either by arrest or voluntary surrender) over a non-detained CICL, UNLESS there is a need to subject the CICL to a diversion proceeding pursuant to Sec on 37 of Republic Act No. 9344, which reads: S. 37. Diversion Measures. – Where the maximum penalty imposed by law for the off ense with which the child in confl ict with the law is charged is imprisonment of not more than 12 years, regardless of the fi ne or fi ne alone regardless of the amount, and before arraignment of the child in confl ict with the law, the court shall determine whether or not diversion is appropriate. Diversion is an alterna ve, child-appropriate process of determining the responsibility and treatment of a CICL on the basis of his/her social, cultural, economic, psychological or educa onal background without resor ng to formal court proceedings. “Diversion Program” is the program that the CICL is required to undergo a er he/she is found responsible for an off ense without resor ng to formal court proceedings. 26 April–June 2019

Circulars OCA CIRCULAR NO. 43-2019 (continued)

Should diversion be found not appropriate or should the diversion program fail, the Family Courts shall set the arraignment of the CICL and the pre-trial as required by the Revised Guidelines. The periods devoted to diversion proceeding and program, which shall not exceed” 45 days and 2 years, respec vely,1 should in no way be treated as a delay in the disposi on of the case. Second, the Family Courts shall schedule the dates of trial, for both the prosecu on and the defense, in a con nuous manner and within the period provided in the Regular Rules/Special Rules EXCEPT when prevented from doing so by reason of some causes, such as (a) the physical, emo onal or psychological condi on of the vic m, CICL or child witness which render it diffi cult for them to appear and tes fy in court; (b) their need for prior professional interven on; (c) the necessity of appoin ng a support person, facilitator, or guardian ad litem, etc. to facilitate the child’s giving of tes mony in court; (d) the need to re-arrange the courtroom or to set up special equipment like live-link television, screens, one-way mirrors, etc.; (e) the natural reluctance of the vic m to tes fy owing to his or her close rela onship with the off ender; (f) the interference of the vic m’s family ; (g) the fear of the vic m for her safety or security; and (h) other similar causes. In these cases, the extension shall not go beyond 30 days except for jus fi able reasons. In this regard, the Family Courts shall adhere to the one-day examina on of witness rule only insofar as prac cable. Third, a mo on for postponement is prohibited EXCEPT if it is based on (1) acts of God, (2) force majeure, (3) physical inability of the witness to appear and tes fy, or (4) any of the above-enumerated causes. The extension of the periods caused by the foregoing good causes shall be excluded from the computa on of the 180-day period within which trial must be completed. Fourth, the Family Courts shall conduct media on proceedings “on all issues under the Family Code and other laws in rela on to support, custody, visita on, property rela ons, guardianship of minor child and other issues which can be the subject of a compromise agreement” pursuant to Rule 1 of the Rule on Court-Annexed Family Media on. Fi h, the Family Courts shall con nue to conduct media on proceedings in cases involving Republic Act No. 9262 notwithstanding the exclusionary provisions of Rule 1 of A.M. No. 10-4-16-SC, or the Rule on Court-Annexed Family Media on and Sec on 23 of A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC,2 or the Rule on Violence Against Women and Their Children. These

1 See Sec on 26 of RA No. 9344 which states that “the diversion proceedings shall be completed within 45 days. The period of prescrip on of the off ense shall be suspended un l the comple on of the diversion proceedings but not exceed 45 days. x x x The period of prescrip on of the off ense shall be suspended during the eff ec vity of the diversion program, but not exceeding a period of two years.”

2 A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC. Sec on 23 of said Rule provides:

S. 23. Preliminary conference. – x x x Prohibited compromise. – The court shall not allow compromise on any act cons tu ng the crime of violence against women and their children and other prohibited ma ers, such as the following:

(1) The civil status of persons; (2) The validity of a marriage, declara on of nullity of a marriage or of legal separa on; (3) Any ground for declara on of nullity or annulment of a marriage or of legal separa on; (4) Future support; (5) The jurisdic on of courts; and (6) Future legi me.

In addi on, Sec on 27 of the same Rule states:

S. 27. Prohibited acts. – The court hearing a pe on for a protec on order shall not order, direct, force or in any way unduly infl uence the applicant for a protec on order to compromise or abandon any of the reliefs sought in the pe on for protec on under the law and this Rule. Failure to comply with this sec on shall render the judge administra vely liable. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 27

exclusionary provisions shall be considered to have been superseded by OCA Circular No. 51-2011,3 or the Consolidated and Revised Guidelines to Implement the Expanded Coverage of Court-Annexed Media on (CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolu on (JDR), which provides that “in cases under RA No. 9262, where the par es inform the court that they have agreed to undergo media on on some aspects thereof, e.g., custody of minor children, separa on of property, or support pendente lite, the court shall refer them to Media on.”4 Bersamin, J., on offi cial business. Caguioa, J., on leave. Gesmundo, J., on offi cial business.

(Sgd.) EDGAR O. ARICHETA Clerk of Court

3 Dated April 6, 2011

4 Mandatory Coverage for Court-Annexed Media on (CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolu on (JDR)

The following cases shall be 1) referred to Court-Annexed Media on (CAM) and 2) be the subject of Judicial Dispute Resolu on (JDR) proceedings:

(1) All civil cases and the civil liability of criminal cases covered by the rule on Summary Procedure, including the Civil liability for Viola on of BP 22, except those which by law may not be compromised;

(2) Special proceedings for the se lement of estates;

(3) All civil and criminal cases fi led with a cer fi cate to fi le ac on issued by the Punong Barangay or the Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo under the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law;

(4) The civil aspect of Quasi Off enses under Title 14 of the Revised Penal Code;

(5) The civil aspect of less grave felonies punishable by correc onal penal es not exceeding six years imprisonment, where the off ended party is a private person;

(6) The civil aspect of estafa, the and libel;

(7) All civil cases and probate proceedings, testate and intestate, brought on appeal from the exclusive and original jurisdic on granted to the fi rst level courts under Sec on 33, par. (1) of the Judiciary Reorganiza on Act of 1980;

(8) All cases of forcibly entry and unlawful detainer brought on appeal from the exclusive and original jurisdic on granted to the fi rst level courts under Sec on 33, par. (2) of the Judiciary Reorganiza on Act of 1980;

(9) All civil cases involving tle to or possession of real property or an interest therein brought on appeal from the exclusive and original jurisdic on granted to the fi rst level courts under Sec on 33, par. (3) of the Judiciary Reorganiza on Act of 1980;

(10) All habeas corpus cases decided by the fi rst level courts in the absence of Regional Trial Court judge, that are brought up on appeal from the special jurisdic on granted to the fi rst level courts under Sec on 35 of the Judiciary Reorganiza on Act of 1980;

The following cases shall not be referred to CAM and JDR:

1. Civil cases which by law cannot be compromised (Ar cle 2035, New Civil Code); 2. Other criminal cases not covered under paragraphs 3 to 6 above; 3. Habeas Corpus pe ons; 4. All cases under Republic Act No. 9262 (Violence Against Women and Children); and 5. Cases with pending applica on for Restraining Orders/Preliminary Injunc ons.

However, in cases covered under 1, 4 and 5 where the par es inform the court that they have agreed to undergo media on on some aspects thereof, e.g., custody of minor children, separa on of property, or support pendente lite, the court shall refer them to media on.

This provision in the Consolidated and the Revised Guidelines to Implement the Expanded Coverage of CAM and JDR must be taken as an excep on to the general rule on the prohibi on of media on in cases under RA No. 9262. 28 April–June 2019

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 45-2019 OCA CIRCULAR NO. 47-2019

TO: ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT OF THE FIRST LEVEL TO: ALL JUDGES OF FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS COURTS RE: EXECUTION OF JUDGMENTS IN APPEALED CASES PURSUANT TO SECTION 1, RULE 39, RULES OF COURT SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 2 AND 8 OF A.M. NO. 08-8-7-SC OR THE REVISED RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR Due to persistent reports that prior to the remand of the SMALL CLAIMS CASES records to the court of origin, some courts have refused to issue the writ of execu on in appealed cases which have been In accordance with the February 26, 2019 Resolu on in fi nally resolved thereby causing unnecessary delay, all judges A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC or The Revised Rules of Procedure for are reminded of the mandatory requirements set forth under Small Claims Cases, the Court En Banc RESOLVED to AMEND the Rules of Court and case law. Sec ons 2 and 8 of the Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Sec on 1, Rule 39, Rules of Court, as amended, provides Claims Cases, the full text of which is reproduced as follows: in part: S. 2. Scope. – These Rules shall govern procedure in If the appeal has been duly perfected and fi nally resolved, ac ons before the Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTCs), the execu on may forthwith be applied for in the court Municipal Trial Courts in Ci es (MTCCs), Municipal Trial of origin, on mo on of the judgment obligee, submi ng Courts (MTCs) and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTCs) therewith cer fi ed true copies of the judgment or judgments or fi nal order or orders sought to be enforced for payment of money where the value of the claim does and of the entry thereof, with no ce to the adverse party. not exceed the jurisdic onal amount of these courts under 1 Republic Act No. (RA) 7691 (Four Hundred Thousand In Jason v. Judge Ygaña, the Court allowed the execu on of the judgment by the court of origin even “before remand Pesos [P400,000] for the MeTCs and Three Hundred to the la er by the appellate court of the records of the Thousand Pesos [P300,000] for the MTCCs, MTCs, and case solely on the basis of the cer fi ed true copy of the MCTCs) exclusive of interest and costs. judgment of the appellate court and the entry thereof.”2 In x x x x a similar case, the Court reiterated that “[u]nder the present procedure, the prevailing party can secure cer fi ed true S. 8. Joinder of Claims. – Plain ff may join in a single copies of the judgment or fi nal order of the appellate court statement of claim one or more separate small claims and the entry thereof, and submit the same to the court of against a defendant provided that the total amount origin x x x without wai ng for the receipt of the records from claimed, exclusive of interest and costs, does not exceed the appellate court.”3 the jurisdic onal amount of the concerned court under RA While the Rules require that the mo on is with “no ce No. 7691 (Four Hundred Thousand Pesos [P400,000] for to the adverse party,”4 the Court, in more recent cases, the MeTCs and Three Hundred Thousand Pesos [P300,000] has emphasized that “once a judgment becomes fi nal and for the MTCCs, MTCs, and MCTCs). (Amendments in bold) executory, the prevailing party can have it executed as a ma er The appropriate Small Claims Forms are likewise of right, and the judgment debtor need not be given advance amended to refl ect the increased threshold amount of no ce of the applica on for execu on nor be aff orded prior P400,000 for the MeTCs. hearings thereon.”5 Moreover, its “issuance is, in fact, the trial court’s ministerial duty x x x Even the holding in abeyance of The amendments to Sec ons 2 and 8 of the Revised Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases were published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer and Manila Bulle n on March 15, 2019, and the same will take eff ect on April 1, 2019. 1 Jason v. Judge Ygaña, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1543, August 4, 2000. 2 Strict compliance is enjoined. Ibid. 3 Bergonia v. Judge Gonzalez-Decano, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1505, October 29, March 21, 2019. 1999. 4 R C, Rule 39, Sec on 1, as amended. 5 Anama v. CA, G.R. No. 187021, January 25, 2012, ci ng De Mesa v. CA, G.R. (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ No. 109387, April 25, 1994. See also Pamintuan v. Muñoz, No. L-26331, Court Administrator March 15, 1968. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 29

the issuance of a writ of execu on of a fi nal and executory 11-SC (Re: Rule on Legal Separa on) approving the Proposed judgment can be considered abuse of discre on on the part Guidelines to Validate Compliance with the Jurisdic onal of the trial court.”6 Requirement Set Forth in A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, the full text Considering the express mandate of Sec on 1, Rule 39, of which is appended herein as Annex "A" for immediate Rules of Court, as well as the consistent interpreta on of the reference. Court based on case law, all fi rst and second level court judges April 17, 2019. are hereby directed to immediately issue the writ of execu on (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ in appealed cases which have been duly perfected and fi nally Court Administrator resolved, without wai ng for the records of the case, upon mo on of the judgment obligee, and upon submission to the court of origin of the following documents:7 Annex “A” 1. cer fi ed true copy of the judgment or judgments or fi nal order or orders; 2. cer fi ed true copy of the denial of the Mo on for Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court Reconsidera on, if applicable; and, Manila 3. cer fi ed true copy of the entry of judgment. En Banc The same direc ve applies to quasi-judicial agencies with appealed cases before the Court of Appeals and the Supreme NOTICE Court. Sirs/Mesdames: For strict compliance. Please take no ce that the Court en banc issued a Resolu on March 26, 2019. dated OCTOBER 2, 2018, which reads as follows: A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (Re: Rule on Declara on of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ Voidable Marriages) and A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC (Re: Court Administrator Rule on Legal Separa on). – Ac ng on Resolu on No. 02-2018 of the Commi ee on Family Courts and Juvenile Concerns, the Court Resolved to APPROVE the 6 Vargas and del Rosario v. Cajucom, G.R. No. 171095, June 22, 2015. Proposed Guidelines to Validate Compliance with the Jurisdic onal Requirement Set Forth in A.M. No. 02- 7 Supra note 4. 11-10-SC, viz.: (a) Contents and form of the pe on. With reference to the requirements of Sec on 5 of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC and Sec on 2(b) of A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC, pe oner shall state the complete address of the par es in the OCA CIRCULAR NO. 63-2019 pe on (i.e., house number, street, purok/ village/subdivision, barangay, zone, town, city, and province); TO: ALL DESIGNATED AND STATUTORY FAMILY COURT In view of the foregoing, pe oner JUDGES (ACTING PRESIDING/ASSISTING) OF THE REGIONAL shall a ach the following: (1) sworn cer fi ca on of residency (with house TRIAL COURTS loca on sketch) issued by the foregoing SUBJECT: ISSUANCE OF THE EN BANC RESOLUTION DATED barangay; (2) sworn statement of counsel of the record that he/she has personally OCTOBER 2, 2018 IN A.M. NO. 02-11-10-SC (RE: RULE ON verifi ed pe oner’s residency and that DECLARATION OF ABSOLUTE NULLITY OF VOID MARRIAGES the pe oner had been residing thereat AND ANNULMENT OF VOIDABLE MARRIAGES) AND A.M. NO. for at least six months prior to the fi ling of 02-11-11-SC (RE: RULE ON LEGAL SEPARATION) pe on; and (3) any but not limited to the following suppor ng documents: For the informa on, guidance, and strict compliance of all the (i) U lity bills in the name of the designated and statutory Family Court Judges of the Regional pe oner for at least six months prior Trial Courts (RTCs), the Honorable Court En Banc issued a to the fi ling of the pe on; Resolu on dated October 2, 2018 in A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (ii) Government-issued I.D. or Company (Re: Rule on Declara on of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages I.D. bearing the photograph and and Annulment of Voidable Marriages) and A.M. No. 02-11- 30 April–June 2019

Circulars OCA CIRCULAR NO. 63-2019 (continued)

address of the pe oner and issued at OCA CIRCULAR NO. 64-2019 least six months prior to the fi ling of the pe on; (iii) Notarized lease contract, if available TO: ALL JUDGES OF FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS and/or receipts for rental payments (bearing the address of the pe oner) SUBJECT: ISSUANCE OF SEARCH WARRANTS DURING for at least six months prior to the fi ling ELECTION PERIOD of the pe on; Ac ng on reports that the courts are being used by (iv) Transfer Cer fi cate of Title, or Tax Declara on, or Deed of Sale and the unscrupulous poli cians to obtain search warrants against like, in the name of the pe oner their rivals during this elec on period, all judges are hereby where he/she resides; REMINDED and ADVISED to remain impar al and non- If the pe on is fi led by the pe oner without par san, and be very circumspect on ac ng on applica ons counsel and a counsel subsequently appears, said for search warrants, to preclude the courts from being used counsel shall submit, together with the formal entry of for elec on purposes. appearance, an affi davit of verifi ca on of residency of the pe oner. Courts must ensure their jurisdic on before entertaining 1 (b) Collusion inves ga on. In cases where the public applica ons for search warrants, and conduct the proper prosecutor is directed to inves gate whether proceedings before the same are issued.2 collusion exists between the par es, the court shall addi onally order the public prosecutor In Rodriguez v. Villamiel, the Court admonished that “of to include in the collusion inves ga on report a all the rights of a ci zen, few are of greater importance or determina on of the party's residence. more essen al to his peace and happiness than the right (c) Dismissal of the pe on for alleging a false of personal security, and that involves the exemp on of his address. At any stage of the proceedings where private aff airs, books and papers from inspec on and scru ny it appears that the address alleged in the verifi ed of others. While the power to search and seize is necessary pe on is false or where it appears from the registry return/s that either party is unknown at to the public welfare, s ll it must be exercised and the law the given address, the court shall, a er no ce enforced without transgressing the cons tu onal rights of and hearing, dismiss the pe on and require the ci zens, for the enforcement of no statute is of suffi cient the counsel of record to show cause why no importance to jus fy indiff erence to the basic principles of appropriate sanc ons be imposed upon him/her govemment.”3 Thus, in issuing a search warrant, the judge for submi ng a false affi davit of verifi ca on. must strictly comply with the requirements of the Cons tu on (d) Dismissal of the pe on, without prejudice, for and the statutory provisions.4 failure to prove residency. Failure of the pe oner to comply with the residency requirement shall Nothing can jus fy the issuance of a search warrant be a ground for the immediate dismissal of the unless all legal requisites are fulfi lled.5 At the very least, the pe on, without prejudice to the refi ling of the pe on in the proper venue. disregard by a judge of the requirements for the issuance of a search warrant cons tutes grave abuse of discre on.6 (e) If the pe on is fi led at the respondent's place of residence and summons could not be served by For strict compliance. reason that the respondent is not actually residing at the given address, then the pe on shall be April 17, 2019. dismissed. (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ (f) Sanc ons. Offi cials, par es or representa ves who submit a false cer fi ca on or document Court Administrator shall be held liable for indirect contempt, without prejudice to criminal and/or administra ve liabili es. The above Guidelines shall be applied prospec vely. 1 See Rules of Court, Rule 126, Sec on 2. Bersamin, J., on offi cial business. Caguioa, J., on leave. 2 See Rules of Court, Rule 126, Sec ons 4 and 5. Gesmundo, J., on offi cial business. 3 G.R. No. 44328, December 23, 1937. Very truly yours, 4 People v. Mamaril, G.R. No. 147607, January 22, 2004. (Sgd.) EDGAR O. ARICHETA 5 People v. Salanguit, G.R. Nos. 133254–55, April 19, 2001. Clerk of Court 6 Marcelo v. De Guzman, No. L-29077, June 29, 1982; Silva v. Presiding Judge, Br. 33, RTC, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental, G.R. No. 81756, October 21, 1991; Uy v. Bureau of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 129651, October 20, 2000. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 31

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 80-2019 among others, that this client would have qualifi ed to avail of proba on if not for the fact that under Supreme Court Administra ve Circular A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC TO: ALL SECOND LEVEL COURTS dated April 10, 2018 (Adop on of the Plea Bargaining SUBJECT: MINUTE RESOLUTION DATED APRIL 2, 2019 Framework in Drug Cases), said drug is not men oned IN A.M. NO. 18-03-16-SC (RE: LETTER OF ASSOCIATE therein, but only shabu and marijuana. JUSTICE DIOSDADO M. PERALTA ON THE SUGGESTED PLEA A y. Dagohoy claims that Nalbuphine BARGAINING FRAMEWORK SUBMITTED BY THE PHILIPPINE Hydrochloride is not dangerous per se and not JUDGES ASSOCIATION) as harmful as shabu and marijuana. He avers that, according to the Interna onal Journal of For the informa on, guidance and strict observance of all Pharmaceu cal Sciences and Research, Nalbuphine second level courts, appended herein as Annex "A" is the Hydrochloride is a good analgesic op on in a balanced Minute Resolu on dated April 2, 2019 of the Honorable Court anaesthesia technique as it provides intra-opera ve En Banc, in A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC (Re: Le er of Associate and post-opera ve analgesia and good haemodynamic Jus ce Diosdado M. Peralta on the Suggested Plea Bargaining stability with less side eff ects. Medically, said drug is Framework Submi ed by the Philippine Judges Associa on). primarily used for pain relief, including anaesthesia. Please take note of the por on of the Resolu on in Its other medical uses include suppression of diarrhea, boldface found in pages 8 and 9 [here page 36]. replacement therapy for opioid use disorder, reversing opioid overdose, suppressing cough, and suppressing May 30, 2019. opioid-induced cons pa on. That is the reason why under RA No. 9165, this par cular drug is excluded (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ as dangerous drug but merely added as such upon Court Administrator recommenda on of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA). It is only when Nalbuphine Hydrochloride is used indiscriminately that it will have side eff ects, necessita ng its administra on only by a trained medical prac oner. Verily, it is only a regulated Annex “A” drug.2 In view of the foregoing, A y. Dagohoy requests Republic of the Philippines the Court to include Nalbuphine Hydrochloride in Supreme Court A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC dated April 10, 2018, in addi on Manila to shabu and marijuana, as it is ironic that his client could not plea bargain, while others who were caught En Banc with shabu and marijuana could. He implores that the inclusion of said drug would give his client and those NOTICE similarly situated, the chance to avail of proba on and, thus, start a new life.3 Sirs/Mesdames: The reasons cited by A y. Dagohoy to include Please take no ce that the Court en banc issued a Resolu on Nalbuphine Hydrochloride in the coverage of A.M. dated APRIL 2, 2019, which reads as follows: No. 18-03-16-SC dated April 10, 2018, that may be subject of plea bargaining, like illegal sale of minuscule A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC (Re: Le er of Associate Jus ce quan es of shabu and marijuana, fails to persuade. Diosdado M. Peralta on the Suggested Plea Bargaining Framework Submi ed by the Philippine Judges Contrary to his claim that Nalbuphine Associa on). – In the Agenda of February 26, 2019, Hydrochloride is only a regulated drug, A y. Dagohoy the Court resolved to note the Le er1 dated December would do well to remember that the inclusion of said 19, 2018 of A y. Dennis G. Dagohoy, in behalf of his drug in the list of dangerous drugs was made upon the client, Sherwin P. Felonia, charged with viola on of ini a ve of the PDEA and the Department of Health Sec on 5 of Republic Act (RA) No. 9165, pending (DOH) a er a series of public hearings conducted by before Branch 15, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Davao the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) on February 10, City, denominated as Criminal Case No. 17-03548-CR, for allegedly selling Nalbuphine Hydrochloride, sta ng,

2 Id. 1 Rollo, p. 38. 3 Id. 32 April–June 2019

Circulars OCA CIRCULAR NO. 80-2019 (continued)

2006, March 28, 2007 and May 6, 2009,4 in accordance The whereas clauses of DDB Regula on No. 1, with Sec on 93,5 Ar cle XI of RA No. 9165. Series of 2010,6 explain why Nalbuphine Hydrochloride was included in the list of dangerous drugs. Despite the wide use of said drug as to cure moderate to severe pain, it is found to have serious side eff ects, requiring 4 Dangerous Drugs Board Regula on No.1, Series of 2010, its administra on only by a trained medical prac oner approved on December 16, 2010. with valid S-2 license. Studies, likewise, show that said 5 S. 93. Reclassifi ca on, Addi on or Removal of Any Drug drug, when used or administered indiscriminately, has from the List of Dangerous Drugs. – The Board shall have the capacity to produce dependence and is found to the power to reclassify, add to or remove from the list of dangerous drugs. Proceedings to reclassify, add, or remove be the fi h most commonly encountered drug abuse a drug or other substance may be ini ated by the PDEA, the by vic ms seeking treatment and rehabilita on in DOH, or by pe on from any interested party, including the various rehabilita on centers, per DDB 2009 admission manufacturer of a drug, a medical society or associa on, a reports.7 There have also been numerous reports of pharmacy associa on, a public interest group concerned abuse of said drug in major ci es in the country, and its with drug abuse, a na onal or local government agency, or an individual ci zen. When a pe on is received by the use as an injectable drug, with the a endant prac ce Board, it shall immediately begin its own inves ga on of of needle-sharing, pose a serious public health and the drug. The PDEA also may begin an inves ga on of a social problem, like the spread of HIV-AIDs, malaria and drug at any me based upon the informa on received hepa s.8 from law enforcement laboratories, na onal and local law enforcement and regulatory agencies, or other sources of For proper context, since the enactment of informa on. RA No. 9165 on July 4, 2002 un l the promulga on The Board a er no ce and hearing shall consider the of Es pona, Jr. v. Lobrigo9 on August 15, 2017, any following factors with respect to each substance proposed person charged under any provision of RA No. 9165, to be reclassifi ed, added or removed from control: regardless of the imposable penalty, are not allowed (a) Its actual or rela ve poten al for abuse; to avail of the provision on plea bargaining. Due to the (b) Scien fi c evidence of its pharmacological eff ect if far-reaching eff ect of Sec on 23 of RA No. 9165 having known; been declared uncons tu onal for being contrary to (c) The state of current scien fi c knowledge regarding the rule-making authority of the Supreme Court under the drug or other substance; Sec on 5(5), Ar cle VIII of the 1987 Cons tu on, it was (d) Its history and current pa ern of abuse; not immediately clear as to what extent should the sound discre on of the trial court be exercised in terms (e) The scope, dura on, and signifi cance of abuse; of plea bargaining. At best, Es pona held: (f) Risk to public health; and The plea is further addressed to the sound (g) Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of discre on of the trial court, which may a substance already controlled under this Act. allow the accused, to plead guilty to a lesser The Board shall also take into accord the obliga ons and commitments to interna onal trea es, conven ons and agreements to which the Philippines is a signatory. The Dangerous Drugs Board shall give no ce to the chemicals, no criminal liability involving the same general public of the public hearing of the reclassifi ca on, under this Act shall arise un l a er the lapse of 15 addi on to or removal from the list of any drug by days from the last publica on of such no ce; publishing such no ce in any newspaper of general (d) In case of removal of a drug from the list of dangerous circula on once a week for two weeks. drugs and precursors and essen al chemicals, all The eff ect of such reclassifi ca on, addi on or persons convicted and/or detained for the use and/ removal shall be as follows: or possession of such a drug shall be automa cally (a) In case a dangerous drug is reclassifi ed as released and all pending criminal prosecu on precursors and essen al chemicals, the penal es involving such a drug under this Act shall forthwith for the viola ons of this Act involving the two la er be dismissed; and categories of drugs shall, in case of convic on, be (e) The Board shall, within fi ve days from the date of imposed in all pending criminal prosecu ons; its promulga on submit to Congress a detailed (b) In case a precursors and essen al chemicals is reclassifi ca on, addi on, or removal of any drug reclassifi ed as dangerous drug, the penal es for from the list of dangerous drugs. viola ons of the Act involving precursors and 6 Id. essen al chemicals shall, in case of convic on, be 7 Id. imposed in all pending criminal prosecu ons; 8 Id. (c) In case of the addi on of a new drug to the list of dangerous drugs and precursors and essen al 9 G.R. No. 226679, August 15, 2017, 837 SCRA 160. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 33

off ense which is necessarily included in the of marijuana, which likewise suffi ces to be deemed off ense charged. The word may denotes an necessarily included in the same off ense of viola on of exercise of discre on upon the trial court on the same Sec on 12 of RA No. 9165, while 10.00 grams whether to allow the accused to make such and above is ample enough to disallow plea bargaining. plea. Trial courts are exhorted to keep in In contrast, despite the various medical use mind that a plea of guilty for a lighter off ense of Nalbuphine Hydrochloride which should only be than that actually charged is not supposed administered by a trained medical prac oner, the to be allowed as a ma er of bargaining or Court cannot see from A y. Dagohoy's one-page compromise for the convenience of the le er request the compelling reason why said drug accused. is similarly situated with the more ubiquitous shabu Plea bargaining is allowed during the and marijuana, and why illegal sale thereof should be arraignment, the pre-trial, or even up to the included as subject of plea bargaining. point when the prosecu on already rested Moreover, it is presumptuous for A y. Dagohoy its case. As regards plea bargaining during to claim that his client would be en tled to proba on the pre-trial stage, the trial court's exercise if allowed to plea bargain for illegal sale of dangerous of discre on should not amount to a grave drugs. As held in Es pona, “a defendant has no 10 abuse thereof. x x x cons tu onal right to plea bargain. No basic rights are In view of Es pona, the Philippines Judges infringed by trying him rather than accep ng a plea of Associa on (PJA) submi ed the Suggested Plea guilty; the prosecutor need not do so if he prefers to Bargaining Framework which was deliberated upon go to trial. Under the present Rules, the acceptance of and discussed by the Court En Banc on April 3, 2018. an off er to plead guilty is not a demandable right but depends on the consent of the off ended party and the On April 5, 2018, Associate Jus ce Diosdado M. prosecutor, which is a condi on precedent to a valid Peralta met with the Offi cers of the PJA to discuss the plea of guilty to a lesser off ense that is necessarily revisions on the plea bargaining framework, which was included in the off ense charged.”11 made simpler and easier to understand, and addressed the concerns raised in the En Banc Agenda of April 3, Meanwhile, the Court resolves to note the 2018. Memorandum12 dated March 12, 2019 from Chief Presiden al Legal Counsel and Presiden al On April 6, 2018, a revised plea bargaining Spokesperson Secretary Salvador S. Panelo re: List of framework, which is more simplifi ed, incorporated Drug Cases Where Plea Bargaining Proposals of the therein the sugges ons of the members of the En Accused were Approved by the Court without the Banc. On April 10, 2018, the plea bargaining framework Consent and over the Objec on of the Prosecu on. was further deliberated upon and approved with modifi ca ons, regarding the excep on to proba on The Memorandum of the Offi ce of the Chief of off enses involving illegal drug-traffi cking or pushing Presiden al Legal Counsel refers to the Le er13 dated under Sec on 5 in rela on to Sec on 24 of RA No. 9165, February 28, 2019 of Roxas City Prosecutor Erwin D. and clarifying the non-applicability of plea bargaining Ignacio, addressed to Secretary of Jus ce Menardo in cases where the penalty is life imprisonment or life I. Guevarra, submi ng a List of Drug Cases (as of imprisonment to death. February 2019) where the “plea bargaining proposals” of the accused were approved by the court over the It bears emphasis that the main reason of the objec on of the prosecu on, and the ac on taken Court in sta ng in A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC dated April by the Offi ce of the City Prosecutor (Roxas City) to 10, 2018 that “plea bargaining is also not allowed defend the interest of the State and the People. City under Sec on 5 (Sale, Trading, etc. of Dangerous Prosecutor Ignacio's le er reads: Drugs) involving all other kinds of dangerous drugs, except shabu and marijuana” lies in the diminu ve Courts in this jurisdic on tend to priori ze quan ty of the dangerous drugs involved. Taking the disposal of (criminal) cases to illegal judicial no ce of the volume and prevalence of cases drug cases via the plea bargaining proposals involving the said two dangerous drugs, as well as the of the accused over the objec on of the recommenda ons of the Offi cers of the PJA, the Court Prosecu on. (The herein list shows Mo ons is of the view that illegal sale of 0.01 gram to 0.99 for Reconsidera ons of this Offi ce in some gram of methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) courts were denied on the same date). is very light enough to be considered as necessarily And, this cannot even be jus fi ed by the included in the off ense of viola on of Sec on 12 guidelines for Con nuous Trial of Criminal (Possession of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus and Cases because the same is aimed to address Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs), while 1.00 backlogs of ALL CASES – long overdue gram and above is substan al enough to disallow plea bargaining. The Court holds the same view with 11 respect to illegal sale of 0.01 gram to 9.99 grams ld. at 190–191. 12 Rollo. pp. 44–45. 10 Id. at 192–193. 13 Id. at 46–47. 34 April–June 2019

Circulars OCA CIRCULAR NO. 80-2019 (continued)

pending cases “crying” for disposi on by the power of the Supreme Court. In fact, City Prosecutor courts – and NOT to illegal drugs cases alone, Ignacio a ached to his le er dated February 28, 2019 most of which are newly fi led. the list of drug cases with pe ons for cer orari The mode of disposal by the courts of endorsed to the Offi ce of the Prosecutor General for illegal drug cases is probably the reason why endorsement to the Offi ce of the Solicitor General. The most, if not all, of respondents under inquest Court will eventually delve with the said cons tu onal inves ga on refuse to sign a “waiver” of issue at the proper me. the provisions of Ar cle 125, Revised Penal Mean me City Prosecutor Ignacio bewails that Code, perhaps on the advice of counsel that they will just avail of plea bargaining once courts tend to priori ze the disposal of newly fi led the cases are fi led in court. Consequently, illegal drug cases via the plea bargaining proposals of this Offi ce is always under me pressure to the accused over the objec on of the prosecu on, resolve illegal drug cases aforesaid within rather than the long overdue pending cases “crying” the reglementary period. for disposi on. Trial courts cannot be blamed for such tendency because Sec on 90 of RA No. 9165 mandates This is alarming and a direct aff ront to the government's intensifi ed campaign that trial of drug cases shall be fi nished by the court against the “menace of illegal drugs” under not later than 60 days from the date of the fi ling of President Rodrigo Roa Duterte because the the informa on, and decision on said cases shall be courts concerned have, in eff ect, degraded rendered within a period of 15 days from the date the penal es provided by RA No. 9165— of submission of the case for resolu on. In contrast, par cularly for viola on of Sec on 5, Ar cle con nuous trial of regular criminal cases shall in no II thereof—since the accused are allowed case exceed 180 days from the fi rst day of trial, except to plead guilty to viola on of Sec on 12 as otherwise provided by the Court, pursuant to Rule only where the penalty is minimal and 119 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, which proba onable. Sec on 5, Ar cle II, of RA No. adopted in toto the provisions of the Speedy Trial Act 9165 is being defanged/rendered toothless of 1998 or RA No. 8493,15 whereas the Cons tu on and the accused are merely given a “slap-on- requires three months to decide cases from the-wrist” by the courts concerned. And, the 16 eff orts of the police and the Prosecu on will submission. Keeping in mind the reglementary period be gone to waste. to hear, try and decide cases—two-and-a-half month period to resolve drug cases and about 10 months for As of this wri ng, many of those regular criminal cases—it is not diffi cult to see why charged of viola on of Sec on 5, Ar cle II trial courts give a en on to drug cases which mostly of RA No. 9165 and whose “Plea Bargaining involve poor off enders languishing in overpopulated Proposals” were approved by the courts in the a ached list are now applying/preparing deten on cells. to apply for proba on. The Court takes excep on to the claim that For your informa on and appropriate allowance of plea bargaining over the objec on of ac on remedial ac on. the prosecu on, “is alarming and a direct aff ront to the government's intensifi ed campaign against the Very truly yours, 'menace of illegal drugs' under President Rodrigo Roa Duterte because the courts concerned have, in (Sgd.) ERWIN D. IGNACIO eff ect, degraded the penal es provided by RA No. 14 City Prosecutor 9165—par cularly for viola on of Sec on 5, Ar cle II thereof—since the accused are allowed to plead guilty To be sure, the Court takes judicial no ce that to viola on of Sec on 12 only where the penalty is there are cases pending review where the trial courts minimal and proba onable. Sec on 5, Ar cle II, of RA declared as uncons tu onal and invalid Department No. 9165 is being defanged/rendered toothless and the of Jus ce (DOJ) Circular No. 061, dated November 21, 2017 (Re: Guidelines on Plea Bargaining for Republic Act No. 9165 otherwise known as the “Comprehensive 15 AN ACT TO ENSURE A SPEEDY TRIAL OF ALL CRIMINAL CASES Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002”) and DOJ Circular No. 027 BEFORE THE SANDIGANBAYAN, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT AND dated June 26, 2018 (Re: Amended Guidelines on Plea MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, APPROPRIATING FUNDS Bargaining for Republic Act No. 9165 otherwise known THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. as the “Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002”), 16 and other related issuances, for supposedly being Ar cle VIII, Sec. 15. (I) All cases or ma ers fi led a er the eff ec vity of this Cons tu on must be decided or resolved in contraven on to or undermining the rule-making within 24 months from date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, 12 months for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all other 14 Id. lower courts. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 35

accused are merely given a 'slap-on-the-wrist' by the The defendant avoids courts concerned. And, the eff orts of the police and the extended pretrial incarcera on Prosecu on will be gone to waste.”17 and the anxie es and uncertain es of a trial; he gains a speedy The Court explained in Es pona that it is towards disposi on of his case, the chance to the provision of a simplifi ed and inexpensive procedure acknowledge his guilt, and a prompt for the speedy disposi on of cases in all courts that the start in realizing whatever poten al rules on plea bargaining was introduced. Thus: there may be for rehabilita on. Judges and prosecutors conserve x x x As a way of disposing criminal charges by agreement of the par es, vital and scarce resources. The plea bargaining is considered to be public is protected from the risks an “important,” “essen al,” “highly posed by those charged with desirable,” and “legi mate” component criminal off enses who are at large of the administra on of jus ce. Some of on bail while awai ng comple on of its salutary eff ects include: criminal proceedings. (Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 71 [1977])18 x x x For a defendant who sees slight possibility of acqui al, the As a result of Es pona declaring as uncons tu onal advantages of pleading guilty and the provision of RA No. 9165 which prohibits plea limi ng the probable penalty are bargaining in drug cases, the Court adopted plea obvious–his exposure is reduced, bargaining framework in drug cases to ini ally address the correc onal processes can the gap created thereby, which is suscep ble to abuse begin immediately, and the prac cal and misinterpreta on. Concededly a work in progress, burdens of a trial are eliminated. For the plea bargaining framework was intended to expedite the State there are also advantages– criminal proceedings and declog court dockets, so also the more promptly imposed as not to aff ect the other equally-important cases punishment a er an admission of (criminal, civil, commercial, special proceedings and guilt may more eff ec vely a ain the special civil ac ons) that merit the trial court's limited objec ves of punishment; and with personnel and logis cal resources. Always bearing in the avoidance of trial, scarce judicial mind the declara on of policy19 under RA No. 9165, and prosecutorial resources are as amended, the Court carefully chose to allow plea conserved for those cases in which bargaining, for instance, in illegal sale of marijuana there is a substan al issue of the and shabu in trifl ing quan es [e.g., 0.01–1.00 gram defendant's guilt or in which there is of shabu and 0.01–9.99 grams of marijuana], because substan al doubt that the State can these are the off enses that are o en commi ed and sustain its burden of proof. (Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 752, [1970]) 18 Es pona, Jr. v. Lobrigo, supra note 9, at 188–189. 19 Disposi on of charges a er S. 2. Declara on of Policy. – It is the policy of the State to plea discussions x x x leads to prompt safeguard the integrity of its territory and the well-being of its ci zenry par cularly the youth, from the harmful eff ects of and largely fi nal disposi on of most dangerous drugs on their physical and mental well-being, and to criminal cases; it avoids much of defend the same against acts or omissions detrimental to their the corrosive impact of enforced development and preserva on. In view of the foregoing, the idleness during pretrial confi nement State needs to enhance further the effi cacy of the law against for those who are denied release dangerous drugs, it being one of today’s more serious social ills. pending trial; it protects the public Toward this end, the government shall pursue an from those accused persons who intensive and unrelen ng campaign against the traffi cking are prone to con nue criminal and use of dangerous drugs and other similar substances conduct even while on pretrial through an integrated system of planning, implementa on and enforcement of an -drug abuse policies, programs, and release; and, by shortening the me projects. The government shall however aim to achieve a between charge and disposi on, balance in the na onal drug control program so that people it enhances whatever may be the with legi mate medical needs are not prevented from being rehabilita ve prospects of the treated with adequate amounts of appropriate medica ons, guilty when they are ul mately which include the use of dangerous drugs. imprisoned. (Santobello v. New York, It is further declared the policy of the State to provide 404 U.S. 257, 261 [1971]) eff ec ve mechanisms or measures to re-integrate into society individuals who have fallen vic ms to drug abuse or dangerous drug dependence through sustainable programs of treatment 17 Rollo, p. 46. and rehabilita on. 36 April–June 2019

Circulars OCA CIRCULAR NO. 80-2019 (continued)

that really fl ood the court dockets, but get dismissed (a) the off ender is in need of correc onal later not because the off enders are innocent, but treatment that can be provided most because the cases are poorly built-up. With the heavy eff ec vely by his commitment to an infl ow of drug cases fi led before courts, like in Roxas ins tu on; or City, Capiz, of which Ignacio is a City Prosecutor, where (b) there is undue risk that during the period of there are only about six organized RTCs, administra on proba on the off ender will commit another of jus ce will certainly suff er if the prosecu on will crime; or insist on full-blown trial of every dangerous drug case. (c) proba on will depreciate the seriousness of Signifi cantly, plea bargaining is always addressed the off ense commi ed. to the sound discre on of the judge, guided by Court S. 9. Disqualifi ed Off enders. – The benefi ts of issuances, like A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC dated April 10, this Decree shall not be extended to those: 2018. If the objec on to the plea bargaining is solely to the eff ect that it will weaken the drug campaign (a) sentenced to serve a maximum term of of the government, then the judges may overrule imprisonment of more than six years; such objec on because they are cons tu onally (b) convicted of any crime against the na onal bound to se le actual controversies involving rights security; which are legally demandable and enforceable. (c) who have previously been convicted by Judges must decide cases based on evidence, law fi nal judgment of an off ense punished by and jurisprudence, and they cannot just defer to the imprisonment of more than six months and policy of another Branch of the government. However, one day and/or a fi ne of more than One if objec ons to the plea bargaining are valid and Thousand Pesos (P 1,000); supported by evidence to the eff ect that the off ender is a rescidivist, a habitual off ender, or known in the (d) who have been once on proba on under the community as a drug addict and a troublemaker, or provisions of this Decree; and one who has undergone rehabilita on but had a (e) who are already serving sentence at the me relapse, or has been charged many mes, or when the substan ve provisions of this Decree the evidence of guilt–of the charge is strong, courts became applicable pursuant to Sec on 33 should not allow plea bargaining, because that will hereof. not help keep law and order in the community and S. 10. Condi ons of Proba on. – Every the society. And just because the prosecu on and the proba on order issued by the court shall contain defense agree to enter into a plea bargain, it does not condi ons requiring that the proba oner shall: mean that the courts will approve the same. The judge (a) present himself to the proba on offi cer must s ll exercise sound discre on in gran ng or designated to undertake his supervision at denying plea bargaining, taking into account relevant such place as may be specifi ed in the order circumstances, such as the character of the accused. within 72 hours from receipt of said order; City Prosecutor Ignacio further laments that many (b) report to the proba on offi cer at least once of those charged with viola on of Sec on 5, Ar cle II a month at such me and place as specifi ed of RA No. 9165 and whose “Plea Bargaining proposals” by said offi cer. were approved by the courts, over the objec on of the prosecu on are now applying/preparing to apply for The court may also require the proba oner to: proba on. This view underes mates the purpose of (a) cooperate with a program of supervision; the Proba on Law or Presiden al Decree No. 968, as (b) meet his family responsibili es; amended by RA No. 10707.20 It does not follow that once an off ender applies for proba on, the same will (c) devote himself to a specifi c employment be granted by the court. In fact, there are strict criteria and not to change said employment without and exac ng condi ons for the grant of proba on, thus: the prior wri en approval of the proba on offi cer; S 8. Criteria for Placing an Off ender on Proba on. – In determining whether an (d) undergo medical, psychological or psychiatric examina on and treatment and off ender may be placed on proba on, the enter and remain in a specifi ed ins tu on, court shall consider all informa on rela ve, when required for that purpose; to the character, antecedents, environment, mental and physical condi on of the (e) pursue a prescribed secular study or off ender, and available ins tu onal and voca onal training; community resources. Proba on shall be (f) a end or reside in a facility established denied if the court fi nds that: for instruc on, recrea on or residence of persons on proba on; (g) refrain from visi ng houses of ill-repute; 20 AN ACT AMENDING PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 968, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “PROBATION LAW OF 1976,” (h) abstain from drinking intoxica ng beverages AS AMENDED. to excess; Volume XXI Issue No. 82 37

(i) permit to proba on offi cer or an authorized social worker to visit his home and place or work; (j) reside at premises approved by it and not to change his residence without its prior wri en approval; or (k) sa sfy any other condi on related to the rehabilita on of the defendant and not unduly restric ve of his liberty or MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 17-2019 incompa ble with his freedom of conscience.

City Prosecutor Ignacio may have also overlooked that A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC dated April 10, 2018 provides ALLOWING PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SUPREME COURT that even if plea bargaining is allowed for illegal sale E-LIBRARY of 0.01 gram to 0.99 grams of shabu and illegal sale of 0.01 gram to 0.99 grams of marijuana, the accused shall s ll undergo drug dependency test which may require Ac ng on the recommenda on of Assistant Court rehabilita on for a period of not less than six months, Administrator Brian Keith F. Hosaka, Chief of the Public aside from the period of proba on that may be granted by the court, or may serve his or her sentence of not Informa on Offi ce (PIO), and in order to enhance less than 6 months and 1 day as the minimum, and 4 transparency and provide be er access for lawyers, law years as the maximum,* if proba on is denied by the professors, law students, and legal researchers to decisions, court. resolu ons, issuances, and rules of the court, the use of and WHEREFORE, the le er dated December 19, 2018 of A y. Dennis G. Dagohoy reques ng the Court access to the Supreme Court E-Library hereby made open to include the illegal sale of Nalbuphine Hydrochloride to the public upon proper registra on and documenta on. as subject of plea bargaining pursuant to A.M. No. 18- Henceforth, the E-Library shall no longer be exclusive for the 03-16-SC dated April 10, 2018 (Adop on of the Plea Bargaining Framework in Drug Cases), is DENIED for use of and access to by judicial offi cials and court personnel. lack merit. The Chief of the PIO, upon coordina on with the The Memorandum dated March 12, 2019 from Management Informa on Systems Offi ce (MISO) and the Chief Presiden al Legal Counsel and Presiden al Spokesperson Secretary Salvador S. Panelo, re: List of Supreme Court Library, shall oversee the implementa on of Drug Cases Where Plea Bargaining Proposals of The this Memorandum Order immediately. Accused were Approved by the Court without the Consent and Over the Objec on of the Prosecu on, is The MISO and the Supreme Court Library shall ensure that NOTED. proper measures are in place to guarantee system security Let copies of this Resolu on be furnished the once the use and access of the E-Library are made public. Offi ce of the Chief Presiden al Legal Counsel and Presiden al Spokesperson, the Offi ce of the Solicitor This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon its General, the Offi ce of the Secretary of Jus ce, the issuance. Offi ce of the Prosecutor General, the Public A orney's Offi ce, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and the March 20, 2019. Offi ce of the Court Administrator, for their guidance and informa on. Jardeleza, J., on offi cial business; J. Reyes, Jr., J., on offi cial leave; Hernando, J., on leave.

Very truly yours, (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Chief Jus ce (Sgd.) EDGAR O. ARICHETA Chairperson, First Division Clerk of Court (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate Jus ce Chairperson, Second Division

* Penalty for viola on of Sec on 12, RA No. 9165, or for Illegal Possesion of Equipment, Apparatus and other (Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs. Associate Jus ce Chairperson, Third Division 38 April–June 2019

[To be designated by the Clerk of Court En Banc] MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 26-2019 Stenographer, Clerk of Court En Banc The Chairperson, Members, and Secretariat of the above- REORGANIZING THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE commi ee shall receive the usual expense allowances. PLANTILLA POSITIONS AND SALARY GRADES OF OFFICIALS This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon its AND EMPLOYEES IN THE JUDICIARY issuance this 7th day of May 2019.

In view of the re rement, resigna on, promo on, and appointment of some jus ces, judges, offi cials, and employees (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN of the judiciary, the Special Commi ee to review the Plan lla Chief Jus ce Posi ons and Salary Grades of Offi cials and Employees in the Chairperson, First Division Judiciary is hereby reorganized as follows: Chairperson (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO Hon. Ramon Paul L. Hernando Associate Jus ce Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Chairperson, Second Division Members (Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Hon. Romeo F. Barza Associate Jus ce Presiding Jus ce, Court of Appeals Chairperson, Third Division Hon. Amparo M. Cabotaje-Tang Presiding Jus ce, Sandiganbayan Hon. Roman G. Del Rosario Presiding Jus ce, Court of Tax Appeals Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 27-2019 Court Administrator A y. Edgar O. Aricheta Clerk of Court En Banc, Supreme Court CREATING THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE FOR THE RULES ON INSPECTION A y. Maria Carina M. Cunanan Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief Administra ve Offi cer WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Sec on 5(5) of Ar cle Supreme Court VIII of the Cons tu on, the Supreme Court has the power to adopt and promulgate rules concerning the protec on and A y. Corazon G. Ferrer-Flores enforcement of cons tu onal rights, pleading, prac ce and Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief Fiscal Management and Budget Offi ce, Supreme Court procedure in all courts, the admission to the prac ce of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged; A y. Tomas W. Reyes, Jr. Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief A orney, Supreme Court WHEREAS, Republic Act No. 10667, otherwise known as the “Philippine Compe on Act,” defi nes an -compe ve Hon. Selma P. Alaras agreements, abuse of dominant posi on, and an -compe ve Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court mergers and acquisi ons; prescribes fi nes and penal es Branch 62, Maka City therefor; and provides for their inves ga on, prosecu on and Hon. Carissa Anne O. Manook-Frondozo adjudica on; Execu ve Judge, Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila WHEREAS, Sec on 12(g) of the Philippine Compe on Act A y. Charisma I. Nolasco (PCA) grants the Philippine Compe on Commission (PCC) Representa ve, Offi ce of the Chief Jus ce the power to “upon order of the court, undertake inspec ons Resource Persons of business premises and other offi ces, land and vehicles, [Three Resource Persons to be designated by the as used by the en ty, where it reasonably suspects that Chairperson] relevant books, tax records, or other documents which relate Secretariat to any ma er relevant to the inves ga on are kept, in order A y. Ma. Lisa L. Tolen no to prevent the removal, concealment, tampering with or Secretary, destruc on of the books, records, or other documents”; Offi ce of Associate Jus ce Ramon Paul L. Hernando WHEREAS, the power granted under Sec on 12(g) of the A y. Djoanivie Jomare A. Junasa PCA to conduct inspec ons is intended to be an eff ec ve Assistant Secretary inves ga ve tool to obtain informa on which would allow the Offi ce of Associate Jus ce Ramon Paul L. Hernando PCC to eff ec vely enforce the provisions of the PCA; Volume XXI Issue No. 82 39

WHEREAS, the PCA's power to conduct inspec ons is c. Budget requirements for each ini a ve; and dependent upon an order of the courts, and there is a need to d. Responsible/focal persons. ensure that the authority granted under inspec on orders to be issued by the courts are uniform and eff ec ve; 2. Survey and compile the best prac ces employed and issues encountered by the trial court judges in handling NOW THEREFORE, the Special Commi ee for the Rules of cases under the Philippine Compe on Act; Inspec on is hereby created and cons tuted as follows: 3. Propose a dra Rules of Inspec on; Chairperson 4. Iden fy other ini a ves that will expedite trial of Hon. Diosdado M. Peralta compe on law cases; and Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court 5. Formulate guidelines for the implementa on of approved Vice Chairperson Rules on Inspec on. Hon. Alexander G. Gesmundo Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court To enable it to perform its func ons and du es, the Commi ee shall be authorized to: Members Hon. Ramon Paul L. Hernando 1. Create technical working groups, as the need arises, Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court to look into special issues to be determined by the Commi ee; Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez Court Administrator, Supreme Court 2. Collaborate with the Philippine Judicial Academy for the development of skills and advancement training modules A y. Rigor R. Pascual for trial court judges; Representa ve, Offi ce of the Chief Jus ce 3. Invite resource persons who are experts in commercial Commissioner Amabelle C. Asuncion law and procedure, as well as in compe on law; and Philippine Compe on Commission 4. Do such other acts as may be necessary in the performance Commissioner Johannes R. Bernabe of its mandate. Philippine Compe on Commission The Chairperson, Members, Resource Persons, Secretariat Commissioner Macario R. de Claro, Jr. and Stenographers of the above Special Commi ee, including Philippine Compe on Commission those who have rendered service as part of the said Commi ee shall receive the usual expense allowances. A y. Genevieve E. Jusi Philippine Compe on Commission This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon its issuance this 9th day of May 2019. A y. Gifany L. Tongohan Philippine Compe on Commission (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Resource Persons Chief Jus ce (To be designated by the Chairperson) Chairperson, First Division Secretariat (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO A y. Ralph Jerome D. Salvador Associate Jus ce Offi ce of Associate Jus ce Diosdado M. Peralta Chairperson, Second Division A y. Camille Sue Mae L. Ting Offi ce of the Court Administrator (Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Associate Jus ce Ms. Noreen B. Bargas Chairperson, Third Division Representa ve, Offi ce of the Chief Jus ce (To be designated by the Chairperson) Stenographer The Special Commi ee shall have the following func ons MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 30-2019 and du es: 1. Dra a work plan to be submi ed to the Chief Jus ce REORGANIZING THE COMMITTEE FOR THE DECONGESTION within two months from the crea on of the Special OF PROVINCIAL, CITY AND MUNICIPAL JAILS Commi ee that will include: In the interest of service, and for a more eff ec ve and effi cient a. Iden fi ed ini a ves/ac vi es with melines; administra on of jus ce, the Commi ee for the Deconges on b. Brief Descrip on and expected outcome/output of of Provincial, City and Municipal Jails is hereby reorganized as the ini a ve/ac vi es; follows: 40 April–June 2019

Orders MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 30-2019 (continued) Chairperson Offi ce, and other agencies relevant to jail deconges on Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez to facilitate data management and informa on Court Administrator dissemina on; and Vice Chairperson 4. Collaborate with the Philippine Judicial Academy in cases Hon. Raul B. Villanueva where skills development and other capacity building Deputy Court Administrator measures are necessary. Members The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Members and A y. Marina B. Ching Secretariat of the commi ee shall receive the usual expense Court Management Offi ce allowances. Offi ce of the Court Administrator This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon its A y. Laura C.H. del Rosario issuance this 30th day of May 2019. Program Management Offi ce Representa ve (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Offi ce of the Chief Jus ce Chief Jus ce Representa ve Chairperson, First Division Philippine Judges Associa on Representa ve (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO Metropolitan and City Judges Associate Jus ce Associa on of the Philippines, Inc. Chairperson, Second Division Representa ve Philippine Trial Judges League, Inc. (Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Associate Jus ce Secretariat Chairperson, Third Division To be designated by the Court Administrator

The Commi ee shall have the following func ons and du es: 1. Review data and other issues on jail conges on falling within the jurisdic on of the Judiciary; MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 32-2019 2. Oversee the implementa on of the Guidelines for Deconges ng Holding Jails by Enforcing the Rights of the CREATING THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE GUIDELINES Accused Persons to Bail and to Speedy Trial (A.M. No. 12- IMPLEMENTING SECTION 6 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8369 11-2-SC); 3. Coordinate with appropriate Supreme Court commi ees WHEREAS, Sec on 6 of Republic Act (RA) No. 8369, otherwise and offi ces in employing appropriate monitoring and known as “The Family Courts Act of 1997,” authorizes the evalua on mechanisms; Family Courts to use 10 percent of the income derived from 4. Cause the prepara on of all relevant periodical reports; fi ling and other court fees under Rule 141 of the Rules of 5. Review and enhance the Work Plan submi ed by the Court for research and other opera ng expenses, including Commi ee; and capital outlay; 6. Perform such other func ons as may be directed by the WHEREAS, there is a need to formulate guidelines on the Chief Jus ce or by the Court and those that are inherent, implementa on of Sec on 6 of RA No. 8369; incidental or essen al to the accomplishment of its above du es and objec ves. WHEREAS, in a Resolu on dated June 26, 2018 in A.M. No. To enable the Commi ee to perform its func ons and 15-02-10-SC (Re: Report of the Commi ee on Family Courts du es, it is authorized to: and Juvenile Concerns on the Budget Proposal for the Formal 1. Create technical working groups, as the need arise[s], Organiza on of Family Courts for 2016), the Court, upon to look into special issues to be determined by the the recommenda on of the Commi ee on Family Courts Commi ee; and Juvenile Concerns (CFCJC), resolved to CREATE a Special 2. Invite resource persons and observers who may provide Commi ee that shall study and recommend guidelines; input in the Commi ee discussions; NOW THEREFORE, the Special Commi ee on Guidelines 3. Coordinate with the Bureau of Jail Management and Implemen ng Sec on 6 of RA No. 8369 is hereby created as Penology, Na onal Prosecu on Service, Public A orney's follows: Volume XXI Issue No. 82 41

Chairperson This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon its A y. Corazon G. Ferrer-Flores issuance this 14th day of June 2019. Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief Fiscal Management and Budget Offi ce (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Vice Chairperson Chief Jus ce A y. Ruby E. Garcia Chairperson, First Division Chief of Offi ce Financial Management Offi ce (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO Offi ce of the Court Administrator Associate Jus ce Members Chairperson, Second Division A y. Marina B. Ching Chief of Offi ce (Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Court Management Offi ce Associate Jus ce Offi ce of the Court Administrator Chairperson, Third Division The Offi cer in Charge Management Informa on Systems Offi ce Representa ve Clerks of Court Associa on of the Philippines MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 33-2019 Secretary Assistant Secretary REORGANIZING THE COMMITTEE ON CONTINUING LEGAL To be appointed by the Chairperson EDUCATION AND BAR MATTERS The Commi ee shall have the following du es and func ons: In view of the re rement, resigna on, promo on and 1) Study the impact of implemen ng Sec on 6 of RA appointment of some jus ces, judges, offi cials and employees No. 8369 on the programs of the Court that are of the judiciary, the Commi ee on Legal Educa on and Bar either sourced or to be sourced from the Judiciary Ma ers is hereby reorganized as follows: Development Fund; 2) Con nuously examine the current systems and Chairperson procedures in the collec on of fi ling fees par cularly Hon. Lucas P. Bersamin on those derived from the fi ling fees of family court- Chief Jus ce related cases; Vice Chairperson 3) Prepare and submit to the Court, thru the CFCJC, all Hon. Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe relevant reports on these ma ers; Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court 4) Propose to the Court, thru the CFCJC, the interven ons Members to the judiciary’s automated case management Hon. Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen systems to aid the lower courts in accurately and Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court effi ciently assess the family court-related fi ling fees, in coordina on with the Commi ee on Computeriza on Hon. Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa and Library; Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court 5) Develop relevant training materials in coordina on Hon. Alexander G. Gesmundo with the CFCJC to enhance the capacity of court Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court personnel involved in the collec on of family court- related fi ling fees; Hon. Ramon Paul L. Hernando Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court 6) Submit to the Court, thru the CFCJC, a manual of opera ons on the collec on of family court-related Hon. Amy C. Lazaro-Javier fi ling fees; Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court 7) Recommend to the Court, thru the CFCJC, the Hon. Romeo J. Callejo, Sr. guidelines on the implementa on of Sec on 6 of RA Vice Chancellor, PHILJA No. 8369; and Hon. Minerva P. Gonzaga-Reyes 8) Perform inherent, incidental, and essen al func ons Chairperson, MCLE Offi ce as are necessary to the accomplishment of its du es and as may be directed by the Court. A y. Ma. Cris na B. Layusa Deputy Clerk of Court and Bar Confi dant The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Members, and Members of the Secretariat of the Commi ee shall receive A y. Charisma I. Nolasco the usual expense allowances. OCJ Representa ve 42 April–June 2019

Orders MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 33-2019 (continued) Secretariat Dean Joan C. Largo To be designated by the Chairperson President, Philippine Associa on of Law Schools To be designated by the Chairperson A y. Abdiel Dan Elijah S. Fajardo Na onal President, Integrated Bar of the Philippines Stenographer A y. Rigor R. Pascual To be designated by the Chairperson OCJ Representa ve The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Members and the Secretariat Secretariat of the commi ee shall receive the usual expense To be designated by the Chairperson allowances. To be designated by the Chairperson This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon its Stenographer issuance. To be designated by the Chairperson June 13, 2019. The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Members and the (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Secretariat of the commi ee shall receive the usual expense Chief Jus ce allowances. Chairperson, First Division This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon its issuance. (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate Jus ce June 13, 2019. Chairperson, Second Division (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Chief Jus ce (Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Chairperson, First Division Associate Jus ce (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO Chairperson, Third Division Associate Jus ce Chairperson, Second Division

(Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 34-2019 Associate Jus ce Chairperson, Third Division

REORGANIZING THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE ADMISSION TO THE BAR MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 35-2019

In view of the re rement, resigna on, promo onal and appointment of some jus ces, judges, offi cials and employees REORGANIZING THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON MAINTENANCE OF of the judiciary, the Subcommi ee on the Admission to the MEMBERSHIP IN THE PHILIPPINE BAR Bar is hereby reorganized as follows: In view of the re rement, resigna on, promo on and Chairperson appointment of some jus ces, judges, offi cials and employees Hon. Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe of the judiciary, the Subcommi ee on the Maintenance of Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Membership in the Philippine Bar is hereby reorganized as follows: Vice Chairperson Hon. Rosmari D. Carandang Chairperson Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Hon. Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Members Hon. Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen Vice Chairperson Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Hon. Ramon Paul L. Hernando A y. Ma. Cris na B. Layusa Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Deputy Clerk of Court and Bar Confi dant Members Dean Sedfrey M. Candelaria Hon. Minerva P. Gonzaga-Reyes Chief, Research, Publica on and Linkages Offi ce, PHILJA Chairperson, MCLE Offi ce Volume XXI Issue No. 82 43

Hon. Romeo J. Callejo, Sr. Vice Chairpersons Vice Chancellor, PHILJA Hon. Alexander G. Gesmundo A y. Ma. Cris na B. Layusa Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Deputy Clerk of Court and Bar Confi dant Hon. Jose C. Reyes, Jr. Dean Sedfrey M. Candelaria Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Chief, Research, Publica ons and Linkages Offi ce, PHILJA Hon. Amy C. Lazaro-Javier A y. Jeff rey G. Gallardo Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court OCJ Representa ve Members A y. Corazon G. Ferrer-Flores Secretary Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief, FMBO A y. Jeanne Carla T. Ferrer Offi ce of Associate Jus ce M.F. Leonen A y. Ma. Cris na B. Layusa Deputy Clerk of Court and Bar Confi dant Assistant Secretaries A y. Abdiel Dan Elijah S. Fajardo A y. Ruby Ann Theresa L. Alberto Na onal President, Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Offi ce of Associate Jus ce M.F. Leonen A y. Minerva M. Ambrocio Ms. Anna Mickaela Lingat Na onal Director, IBP Na onal Center for Legal Aid Offi ce of Associate Jus ce M.F. Leonen A y. Roderick D.M. Dela Paz The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Members and the Representa ve, IBP Secretariat of the commi ee shall receive the usual expense allowances. A y. Ellen V. Abesamis-Quinto OCJ Representa ve This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon it issuance. Resource Person Dean Joan C. Largo June 13, 2019. President, Philippine Associa on of Law Schools (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Chief Jus ce Secretariat Chairperson, First Division A y. Harvey A. Bilang Offi ce of Associate Jus ce A.S. Caguioa (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO A y. Michelle S. Duguil Associate Jus ce Offi ce of Associate Jus ce A.S. Caguioa Chairperson, Second Division A y. Leonardo M. Camacho Offi ce of Associate Jus ce A.S. Caguioa (Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Associate Jus ce The Chairperson, Vice Chairpersons, Members and the Chairperson, Third Division Secretariat of the commi ee shall receive the usual expense allowances. This Memorandum Order shall take eff ect upon its issuance. MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 36-2019 June 13, 2019. (Sgd.) LUCAS P. BERSAMIN REORGANIZING THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE INTEGRATED Chief Jus ce BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES OVERSIGHT Chairperson, First Division

In view of the re rement, resigna on, promo on and (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO appointment of some jus ces, judges, offi cials and employees Associate Jus ce of the judiciary, the Subcommi ee on the Integrated Bar of Chairperson, Second Division the Philippines Oversight is hereby reorganized as follows: Chairperson (Sgd.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Hon. Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa Associate Jus ce Associate Jus ce, Supreme Court Chairperson, Third Division 44 April–June 2019

country in which the document has to be produced cer fy the authen city of the signature, the capacity in which the person signing the document has acted and, where appropriate, the iden ty of the seal or stamp which it bears. CONVENTION ABOLISHING THE REQUIREMENT OF LEGALISATION FOR FOREIGN PUBLIC DOCUMENTS1 A 3 Concluded October 5, 1961 The only formality that may be required in order to cer fy the authen city of the signature, the capacity in which the person The States signatory to the present Conven on, signing the document has acted and, where appropriate, the Desiring to abolish the requirement of diploma c or consular iden ty of the seal or stamp which it bears, is the addi on of legalisa on for foreign public documents, the cer fi cate described in Ar cle 4, issued by the competent Have resolved to conclude a Conven on to this eff ect and authority of the State from which the document emanates. have agreed upon the following provisions: However, the formality men oned in the preceding paragraph cannot be required when either the laws, A 1 regula ons, or prac ce in force in the State where the The present Conven on shall apply to public documents which document is produced or an agreement between two or more have been executed in the territory of one Contrac ng State Contrac ng States have abolished or simplifi ed it, or exempt and which have to be produced in the territory of another the document itself from legalisa on. Contrac ng State. A 4 For the purposes of the present Conven on, the following The cer fi cate referred to in the fi rst paragraph of Ar cle 3 are deemed to be public documents: shall be placed on the document itself or on an “allonge”; a) documents emana ng from an authority or an offi cial it shall be in the form of the model annexed to the present connected with the courts or tribunals of the State, Conven on. including those emana ng from a public prosecutor, It may, however, be drawn up in the offi cial language of a clerk of a court or a process-server (“huissier de the authority which issues it. The standard terms appearing jus ce”); therein may be in a second language also. The tle “Apos lle b) administra ve documents; (Conven on de La Haye du Octobre 5, 1961)” shall be in the c) notarial acts; French language. d) offi cial cer fi cates which are placed on documents A 5 signed by persons in their private capacity, such as offi cial cer fi cates recording the registra on of a The cer fi cate shall be issued at the request of the person document or the fact that it was in existence on a who has signed the document or of any bearer. certain date and offi cial and notarial authen ca ons When properly fi lled in, it will cer fy the authen city of of signatures. the signature, the capacity in which the person signing the However, the present Conven on shall not apply: document has acted and, where appropriate, the iden ty of the seal or stamp which the document bears. a) to documents executed by diploma c or consular agents; The signature, seal and stamp on the cer fi cate are exempt from all cer fi ca on. b) to administra ve documents dealing directly with commercial or customs opera ons. A 6

A 2 Each Contrac ng State shall designate by reference to their offi cial func on, the authori es who are competent to issue Each Contrac ng State shall exempt from legalisa on the cer fi cate referred to in the fi rst paragraph of Ar cle 3. documents to which the present Conven on applies and which have to be produced in its territory. For the purposes It shall give no ce of such designa on to the Ministry of of the present Conven on, legalisa on means only the Foreign Aff airs of the Netherlands at the me it deposits its formality by which the diploma c or consular agents of the instrument of ra fi ca on or of accession or its declara on of extension. It shall also give no ce of any change in the designated authori es. 1 This Conven on, including related materials, is accessible on the website of A 7 the Hague Conference on Private Interna onal Law (www.hcch.net) under Each of the authori es designated in accordance with Ar cle “Conven ons” or under the “Apos lle Sec on.” For the full history of the Conven on, see Hague Conference on Private Interna onal Law, Actes et 6 shall keep a register or card index in which it shall record the documents de la Neuvieme session (1960), Tome II, Legalisa on (193 pp.) cer fi cates issued, specifying: Volume XXI Issue No. 82 45

a) the number and date of the cer fi cate, The Conven on shall enter into force as between the acceding State and the States which have raised no objec on b) the name of the person signing the public document th and the capacity in which he has acted, or in the case of to its accession on the 60 day a er the expiry of the period unsigned documents, the name of the authority which of six months men oned in the preceding paragraph. has affi xed the seal or stamp. A 13 At the request of any interested person, the authority which has issued the cer fi cate shall verify whether the Any State may, at the me of signature, ra fi ca on or par culars in the cer fi cate correspond with those in the accession, declare that the present Conven on shall extend to register or card index. all the territories for the interna onal rela ons of which it is responsible, or to one or more of them. Such a declara on shall A 8 take eff ect on the date of entry into force of the Conven on for the State concerned. When a treaty, conven on or agreement between two or more Contrac ng States contains provisions which subject At any me therea er, such extensions shall be no fi ed the cer fi ca on of a signature, seal or stamp to certain to the Ministry of Foreign Aff airs of the Netherlands. formali es, the present Conven on will only override such When the declara on of extension is made by a State provisions if those formali es are more rigorous than the which has signed and ra fi ed, the Conven on shall enter into formality referred to in Ar cles 3 and 4. force for the territories concerned in accordance with Ar cle 11. When the declara on of extension is made by a State A 9 which has acceded, the Conven on shall enter into force for Each Contrac ng State shall take the necessary steps to the territories concerned in accordance with Ar cle 12. prevent the performance of legalisa ons by its diploma c or consular agents in cases where the present Conven on A 14 provides for exemp on. The present Conven on shall remain in force for fi ve years from the date of its entry into force in accordance with the fi rst A 10 paragraph of Ar cle 11, even for States which have ra fi ed it The present Conven on shall be open for signature by or acceded to it subsequently. the States represented at the Ninth Session of the Hague If there has been no denuncia on, the Conven on shall Conference on Private Interna onal Law and Iceland, Ireland, be renewed tacitly every fi ve years. Liechtenstein and Turkey. Any denuncia on shall be no fi ed to the Ministry of It shall be ra fi ed, and the instruments of ra fi ca on Foreign Aff airs of the Netherlands at least six months before shall be deposited with the Ministry of Foreign Aff airs of the end of the fi ve year period. Netherlands. It may be limited to certain of the territories to which the A 11 Conven on applies. th The present Conven on shall enter into force on the 60 The denuncia on will only have eff ect as regards the State day a er the deposit of the third instrument of ra fi ca on which has no fi ed it. The Conven on shall remain in force for referred to in the second paragraph of Ar cle 10. the other Contrac ng States. The Conven on shall enter into force for each signatory State which ra fi es subsequently on the 60th day a er the A 15 deposit of its instrument of ra fi ca on. The Ministry of Foreign Aff airs of the Netherlands shall give no ce to the States referred to in Ar cle 10, and to the States A 12 which have acceded in accordance with Ar cle 12, of the Any State not referred to in Ar cle 10 may accede to the present following: Conven on a er it has entered into force in accordance with a) the no fi ca ons referred to in the second paragraph of the fi rst paragraph of Ar cle 11. The instrument of accession Ar cle 6; shall be deposited with the Ministry of Foreign Aff airs of the b) the signatures and ra fi ca ons referred to in Ar cle 10; Netherlands. c) the date on which the present Conven on enters into Such accession shall have eff ect only as regards the force in accordance with the fi rst paragraph of Ar cle 11; rela ons between the acceding State and those Contrac ng States which have not raised an objec on to its accession in d) the accessions and objec ons referred to in Ar cle 12 and the six months a er the receipt of the no fi ca on referred to the date on which such accessions take eff ect; in sub-paragraph d) of Ar cle 15. Any such objec on shall be e) the extensions referred to in Ar cle 13 and the date on no fi ed to the Ministry of Foreign Aff airs of the Netherlands. which they take eff ect; 46 April–June 2019 Conventions Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents (continued) f) the denuncia ons referred to in the third paragraph of Nonetheless, Ar cle 1 provides some guidance as to Ar cle 14. types of documents that can be considered “public”. In witness whereof the undersigned, being duly authorised These examples include documents emana ng from thereto, have signed the present Conven on. an authority or offi cial connected with a court or th tribunal of the Contrac ng Party (including documents Done at The Hague the 5 October 1961, in French and issued by an administra ve, cons tu onal or in English, the French text prevailing in case of divergence ecclesias cal court or tribunal, a public prosecutor, a between the two texts, in a single copy which shall be deposited clerk or a process-server); administra ve documents; in the archives of the Government of the Netherlands, and of notarial acts; and offi cial cer fi cates which are which a cer fi ed copy shall be sent, through the diploma c placed on documents signed by persons in their channel, to each of the States represented at the Ninth private capacity, such as offi cial cer fi cates recording Session of the Hague Conference on Private Interna onal Law the registra on of a document or the fact that it was and also to Iceland, Ireland, Liechtenstein and Turkey. in existence on a certain date and offi cial and notarial authen ca ons of signatures. The main examples of public documents for which Apos lles are issued in prac ce include birth, marriage and death HCCH CONVENTION OF OCTOBER 5, 1961 cer fi cates; extracts from commercial registers and ABOLISHING THE REQUIREMENT OF LEGALISATION other registers; patents; court rulings; notarial acts FOR FOREIGN PUBLIC DOCUMENTS and a esta ons of signatures; academic diplomas issued by public ins tu ons.3 Apos lles may also Purpose of the Conven on be issued for cer fi ed copies of a public document. The Apos lle Conven on facilitates the circula on of Although the Conven on does not strictly apply to public documents executed in one Contrac ng Party documents executed by diploma c or consular agents to the Conven on and to be produced in another.1 It or to administra ve documents dealing directly with replaces the cumbersome and o en costly formali es commercial or customs opera ons, these Ar cle 1(3) of a full legalisa on process (chain cer fi ca on) with exclusions are to be interpreted extremely narrowly. the mere issuance of an Apos lle. The Conven on has also proven very useful for countries that do not Who may issue an Apos lle and how to verify the require foreign public documents to be legalised, origin of an Apos lle? or that do not know the concept of legalisa on in Apos lles may only be issued by a Competent Authority their domes c law: the ci zens in these countries designated by the Contrac ng Party from which the enjoy the benefi ts of the Conven on whenever they public document emanates.4 The Permanent Bureau intend to produce a domes c public document in (Secretariat) of the Hague Conference on Private another Contrac ng Party which, for its part, requires Interna onal Law (HCCH) does not issue Apos lles. authen ca on of the document concerned. The Apos lle is placed by the Competent Public documents Authority on the public document itself or on an allonge, and should conform as closely as possible to The Conven on applies only to public documents. As the Model annexed to the Conven on. In addi on, the Conven on does not defi ne “public document”, each Competent Authority is required to keep a the “public” nature of a document is le to be Register in which it records the Apos lles it has issued. determined by the law of the place where the document originates (i.e. the State of origin).2 3 Diplomas issued by private ins tu ons may not be apos llised directly; a ‘private‘ diploma may, however, bear an offi cial cer fi cate issued by any person or authority competent under the law of the State of origin of the diploma to authen cate 1 The Apos lle Conven on only applies as between Contrac ng the signature on the diploma. This offi cial cer fi cate is a public Par es. For a comprehensive and updated list of Contrac ng document under the Conven on and thus may be apos llised. Par es, see the “Updated list of Contrac ng Par es (status In such a case the Apos lle does not relate to the diploma itself; table)”, which is available on the “Apos lle Sec on” of the HCCH instead it cer fi es the authen city of the cer fi cate on the website at . diploma. 4 2 This approach has been confi rmed in Conclusions & For more informa on, including the list of designated Competent Recommenda ons No. 72 of the 2009 Special Commission, and Authori es, contact details of Competent Authori es and other in Conclusions & Recommenda ons No. 14 of the 2012 Special prac cal informa on such as the price for an Apos lle, see the Commission. “Apos lle Sec on” of the HCCH website. Volume XXI Issue No. 82 47

The Registers, which may be accessed by any interested success of the Program, the word “Pilot” was removed person, are an essen al tool to combat fraud and verify from the tle of the e-APP in January 2012, though the the origin of an Apos lle in case of doubt. original “P” is retained in the acronym. The e-APP is an eff ec ve tool to further enhance The eff ect of an Apos lle the secure and eff ec ve opera on of the Apos lle The only eff ect of an Apos lle is to cer fy the authen city Conven on; it drama cally increases security and of the signature, the capacity in which the person signing off ers a very powerful and eff ec ve deterrent to fraud. the document has acted, and where appropriate, the The e-APP is technology neutral and it does not privilege iden ty of the seal or stamp which the document bears. the use of one specifi c technology over another, The Apos lle does not relate to the content of the Contrac ng Par es are free to choose the technology that underlying document itself (i.e., the apos llised public best suits their needs. The e-APP (the e-Apos lle and/or document). e-Register component) has been implemented in many countries around the globe, with others ac vely pursuing Handbook on the Prac cal Opera on of the Apos lle or considering implementa on. The HCCH regularly Conven on (1st Edi on, 2013) organises Interna onal Fora on the e-APP to discuss and The Apos lle Handbook is a comprehensive reference promote the implementa on of the e-APP, the last of th tool that off ers detailed explana ons and commentary, which was the 10 Forum, held in 2016 to coincide with addressing issues arising in the contemporary opera on the mee ng of the Special Commission. of the Conven on. It is also designed to assist Competent For any further informa on on the Apos lle Authori es designated by Contrac ng Par es with Conven on and the e-APP, please visit the HCCH website prac cal guidance in issuing Apos lles and performing at or contact the Permanent Bureau of their func ons under the Conven on. It is available the HCCH. for download from the “Apos lle Sec on” of the HCCH website.

Monitoring of the Conven on The prac cal opera on of the Apos lle Conven on was last reviewed by a Special Commission in 2016. The Special Commission has reiterated at several mee ngs that the spirit and le er of the Conven on ‘do not cons tute an obstacle to the usage of modern technology’ and that the Conven on's applica on and opera on can be further improved by relying on such technology. This fi nding was confi rmed by the 2016 Interna onal Forum on the e-APP.

The e-APP (electronic Apos lle Program) In April 2006, the HCCH and the Na onal Notary Associa on of the United States of America (NNA) offi cially launched the (then) electronic Apos lle Pilot Program. The aim of the e-APP is to promote and assist with the implementa on of low-cost, opera onal and secure so ware technology for (i) the issuance of electronic Apos lles (e-Apos lles) and (ii) the opera on of electronic Registers of Apos lles (e-Registers) that can be accessed online by recipients to verify the origin of (both paper and electronic) Apos lles they have received.5 In light of the

5 An e-Register under the e-APP allows for easy online queries by recipients of Apos lles who wish to verify the origin of an Apos lle without Competent Authori es having to answer these queries individually by phone, email or otherwise. However, it does not allow for “fi shing expedi ons” (i.e. persons do not have unlimited access to all of the informa on stored in the e-Register) but only enough informa on as is necessary to verify whether an Apos lle they have received was issued by the Competent Authority purpor ng to have done so. 48 3rd Floor, Supreme Court Centennial Building PRIVATE OR UNAUTHORIZED USE April–JuneTO AVOID 2019 Padre Faura Street corner Taft Avenue, Manila PAYMENT OF POSTAGE IS PENALIZED BY FINE 1000 Philippines OR IMPRISONMENT OR BOTH

Jus ce Adolfo S. Azcuna Chancellor

Dean Sedfrey M. Candelaria Editor in Chief

Editorial and Research Staff A y. Ma. Melissa Dimson-Bau sta A y. Ronald Paz Caraig Ms. Armida M. Salazar

Ms. Regina Maria Sofi a M. Babasa A y. Rizsa Rose S. Baer Ms. Jocelyn D. Bondoc Mr. Jonel M. Candelaria Mr. Joseph Arvin S. Cruz Ms. Judith B. Del Rosario Ms. Chris ne A. Ferrer Ms. Joanne Narciso-Medina Ms. Charmaine S. Nicolas Ms. Sarah Jane S. Salazar

Circula on and Support Staff Mr. Romeo A. Arcullo Mr. Michael Angelo P. Laude Mr. Lope R. Palermo Mr. Daniel S. Talusig

Prin ng Services Mr. Ponciano M. San ago, Jr. and Staff

The PHILJA Bulletin is published quarterly by the Research, Publica ons and Linkages Offi ce of the Philippine Judicial Academy, with offi ce at the 3rd Floor of the Supreme Court Centennial Building, Padre Faura Street corner Ta Avenue, Manila. Tel: 552-9524; Fax: 552-9621; Email: research_philja@yahoo. com; [email protected]; Website: h p://philja.judiciary.