VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 1

JULY-SEPTEMBER 2014 VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 ISSN 2244-5862

From the Chancellor’s Desk

It was a hectic quarter for PHILJA with the usual delivery of over the country: Competency Enhancement Training for our various programs—the Orientation Seminar-Workshop Judges and Court Personnel Handling Cases Involving for Executive Judges (selected Executive Judges and Vice Children (Dumaguete City); seminar-workshops on Various Executive Judges of the Visayas) held in Cebu; the Career Laws and Rules Relating to Money-Laundering and other Enhancement Program for RTC Clerks of Court in Region VI Financial Crimes held for Judges of Regions XI and XII (Davao (Roxas City) and Region XI (Davao City); the 70th Orientation City) and Regions VIII and IX (Cebu City); seminars on the Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Judges; the 28th Rules of Procedure on Financial Rehabilitation for Special Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Clerks Commercial Court Judges and Pairing Court Judges in the of Court and the 4th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for NCJR and Regions IV and V (Pasay City), Regions I to III, and Newly Appointed Sheriffs and Process Servers (Batch 1), for other stakeholders (Baguio City); seminar-workshop on both held at the PHILJA Training Center (PTC) in Tagaytay Strengthening Judicial Integrity and Rule of Law for City. Other activities also held at the PTC were the Judicial Executive and Vice Executive Judges of Regions IX to XII Career Enhancement Program for selected RTC Judges of (Davao City). the National Capital Judicial Region and the Career After a long time since the last one, and pursuant to Development Program for Court Legal Researchers of the Chief Justice’s directive, a Curriculum Review for the Region VIII. Philippine Judicial Academy was held at the PTC which was The Focus Group Discussion on the Rules of Procedure immediately followed by a well-attended 4th Plenary for Environmental Cases and the Personal Security Training Assembly of the PHILJA Corps of Professors at the Court of for Judges, as well as the Refresher/Advanced Course for Appeals Auditorium in Manila. Court-Annexed Mediators for the Batangas, Laguna, and It was at this last forum that I shared the information Quezon Mediation Programs, also took place at the PTC. that I had been elected Member of the International “Glenda,” one of the most powerful typhoons to hit the Commission of Jurists for a five-year term. I will continue as Philippines this year, dealt the Metro area and Tagaytay Chancellor of PHILJA but will attend and give lectures on City a blow dreadful enough to damage some areas of the human rights and the rule of law in the Asian region to fulfill PTC and to cause both a power outage and water shortage. two weeks a year of service. Our commendable PTC staff and PHILJA training teams Notwithstanding its full calendar, PHILJA continued to proceeded with the scheduled activities notwithstanding assist in the Enhanced Justice on Wheels Program (EJOW) the discomfort in the typhoon’s aftermath. through the delivery of the component Information In August, we headed to Dumaguete, the lovely city by Dissemination through a Dialogue among Barangay Officials the sea, for this year’s Academic Excellence Lecture Series and Court Officials in the cities of Iloilo and Bacolod in in the Judiciary (AELSJ), in partnership with the Metrobank Western Visayas, in Digos, Davao del Sur, and in Kidapawan Foundation and in cooperation with the Silliman University City in the province of Cotabato. College of Law and its General Education Integrative We also extended a hand to the 16th Convention and Learning Lectures Program. Human Rights lawyer and Seminar of the 20,000 strong Philippine Association of Court University of the Philippines Professor Herminio Harry L. Employees (PACE) in Davao City, which was attended by Roque, Jr., featured speaker, addressed an audience of some 3,000 of its members, and likewise helped in the 16th judges, lawyers, and law students in a lecture on Legal Convention and Seminar of the Metropolitan and City Judges Nuances to the Philippine Ratification of the Rome Statute Association of the Philippines held in Quezon City. in the International Criminal Court held at the University’s world-class Claire Isabel McGill Luce Auditorium. The Academy, thru the Philippine Mediation Center Office (PMCO), conducted a number of activities supporting In addition, quite a number of special focus seminar- workshops were carried out by PHILJA training teams all (Continued on page 6) 2 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Contents Chancellor Azcuna Elected as ICJ Commissioner

From the Chancellor’s Desk ...... 1 Judicial Views ...... 3 Trainings, Programs and Activities ...... 7 Judicial Moves ...... 20 Doctrinal Reminders ...... 21 Circulars OCA Cir. No. 87-2014 — Guidelines on the Release of Pensions for Judges/Pensioners and Survivorship Pensioners ...... 27 OCA Cir. No. 89-2014 — Small Claims Case Monitoring System (SC2MS) Survey ...... 27 OCA Cir. No. 90-2014 — A.M. No. 12-4-6-SC (Re: BIR Letter of Authority to Examine SC Books of Account and other Accounting Records)...... 28 OCA Cir. No. 99-2014 — Reduction of Initial/ Opening Deposit and Maintaining Balance of Regular Savings Account from P10,000 to P1,000 for the Fiduciary and Sheriff’s Trust Fund Accounts; Waiver of Certification Fee on Bank Balances; and Waiver of Fee on Requests for Snapshots and Re- Printing of Bank Statements ...... 28 OCA Cir. No. 104-2014 — Court of Appeals Decision dated June 25, 2014 in C.A. G.R. SP No. 131969 . . . 28 OCA Cir. No. 110-2014 — Bar Matter No. 2604 (Re: Clarification Relative to Sections 2 and 13, RULE III of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice). . . . 29 Cir. No. 112-2014 — Court Recognition of BJMP’s The Philippine Judicial Paralegal Program ...... 29 Academy (PHILJA) takes OCA Cir. No. 113-2014 — Inventory of Confiscated pride in its Chancellor, Property Bonds ...... 29 Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna, OCA Cir. No. 115-2014 — Uniform Period and for his election as a Procedure in the Payment of Fines in Commissioner to the International Commission of Jurists Administrative Matters ...... 30 (ICJ) [http://www.icj.org] based in Geneva, Switzerland. OCA Cir. No. 119-2014 — Conduct of Physical Inventory and Renewal of Acknowledgment Justice Azcuna’s election to the ICJ is a recognition of Receipt for Equipment (ARE) ...... 30 PHILJA’s work in judicial education particularly in promoting OCA Cir. No. 120-2014 — Piloting of a New System and strengthening the cause of human rights and the rule for Speedy Court Trial ...... 31 of law in the Philippines and worldwide. OCA Cir. No. 121-2014 — Clarification on the Collection of Postponement Fee in Consolidated The International Commission of Jurists, composed of Cases ...... 38 eminent judges and lawyers from around the world, OCA Cir. No. 122-2014 — A.M. No. 14-08-94-MeTC promotes and protects human rights through the rule of (Re: Proper Fees to be Collected in Election Contests law to develop and strengthen national and international Involving Elective Municipal and Barangay justice systems. It aims to ensure the progressive Officials) ...... 39 development and effective implementation of international OCA Cir. No. 125-2014 — A.M. No. 11-10-03-0 (Re: Letter Dated April 18, 2011 of Chief Public Attorney human rights and international humanitarian law; to secure Persida Rueda-Acosta ...... 39 the realization of civil, cultural, economic, political, and Orders social rights; to safeguard the separation of powers; and to guarantee the independence of the judiciary and the legal Office Order No. 10-2014 — Establishing the Standard Thickness of Case Rollos and Records . . . 41 profession. As a Commissioner, Justice Azcuna is expected

Memorandum Order No. 19-2014 – Reorganizing to work actively towards the fulfilment of the objectives of the Committee on Computerization and Library . . 41 the Commission and to assist in the implementation of its Memorandum Order No. 20-2014 — Creating the programmes, especially those related to his expertise — Committee on Family Courts and Juvenile Concerns . . . . 42 human rights.

Fourth Quarter Trainings, Programs and Activities . . . 44 Justice Azcuna, the first Filipino ICJ Commissioner, will serve for a five-year term until 2019. VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 3

A Thought Piece on the Philippine Judicial Academy Curriculum Review

Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno Chief Justice of the Philippines

In 1996, the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) was established by the Supreme Court and “charged with the formulation and implementation of a continuing program of judicial education for justices, judges, court personnel and lawyers” (Sec. 1, A.O. No. 35-96, March 12, 1996). Two years later,1 PHILJA was given its legislative charter through the passage of Republic Act No. 8557 (“An Act Establishing the Philippine Judicial Academy, Defining Its Powers and Functions, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes”).

Pursuant to the State policy to ensure the existence of an efficient and credible Judiciary, PHILJA’s mandate is to “provide members of the Judiciary and prospective OFFICE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE applicants with continuing good education and training” SUPREME COURT (Sec. 1, RA No. 8557) by serving as a “training school for MANILA Justices, Judges, court personnel, lawyers and aspirants to judicial posts” (Sec. 3, RA No. 8557). 12 August 2014

Under the last mentioned provision of RA No, 8557, Hon. ADOLF S. AZCUNA PHILJA “shall provide and implement a curriculum for Chancellor judicial education, and shall conduct seminars, workshops Philippine Judicial Academy and other training programs designed to upgrade (the) legal knowledge, moral fitness, probity, efficiency, and Dear Chancellor Azcuna: capability” of those it is mandated to train and educate.2 Allow me to express my gratitude to the Philippine Eighteen years after the passage of PHILJA’s charter, a Judicial Academy (PHILJA) for its initiative to conduct a curriculum review has become imperative. Modern trends curriculum review, with the goal of establishing a in judicial education should be recognized, and strategic training plan and adapting new methods of international best practices be considered for local judicial education to address the distinct educational application, to keep the Philippine judiciary up-to-date with needs and skill-sets of our judges and court personnel. current developments. Some of my observations and recommendations are as follows: One of my reform visions includes a reinvigorated PHILJA that is able to utilize modern trends in judicial 1. Judicial Education by Career Stages education and impart international best practices to our judges and court personnel. I have concretized this Our programs should follow a cycle set by stages, for the vision through the attached Thought-Piece, which I am different participants. In the United States they call this sharing with you and the participants of the curriculum “Career Stage Education Programming” based on the review, such that we may continue to realize our philosophy that “judicial education programming occurs common vision of PHILJA as the gold standard in judicial learning and training. (Next page) Again, congratulations and mabuhay! 1. Approved by President Fidel V. Ramos on February 26, 1998.

2. SEC. 3. The PHILJA shall serve as a training school for justices, Sincerely, judges, court personnel, lawyers and aspirants to judicial posts. For this purpose, it shall provide and implement a curriculum for judicial education, and shall conduct seminars, workshops and other training programs designed to upgrade their legal MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO knowledge, moral fitness, probity, efficiency, and capability. It Chief Justice shall perform such other functions and duties as may be necessary in carrying out its mandate. 4 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014 along a continuum” (Issues and Trends in Judicial Branch to become better at chosen fields, even as it continues to Education, Judicial Education Reference, Information and strengthen Judges who choose to remain “generalists.” Technical Transfer Project JERITT, Michigan State University). The following stages are currently in use 2. Degree and Certificate Programs internationally and may be studied: PHILJA could further maximize its potential as a judicial (a) Pre-bench Programming academy by offering degree programs. At present, it only offers certificate programs which have largely not been of (b) New Judge/Employee Orientation: within the use to participants who wish to obtain higher academic first year credentials. Thus far, only San Beda School of Law’s Master (c) Updates/Hot Topics: all career stages of Legal Studies program, which accepts PHILJA credits from seminars attended as equivalent to class credits, has (d) Mentoring progressed ahead of other schools in this respect. It is suggested that by using PHILJA credits, participants may (e) Early Career Programming: 1–3 years be awarded with “diplomas” if they satisfy certain (f) Mid-Career Programming: 3.5–6 years requirements. The National Judicial College in the United States confers a “Diploma of Judicial Skills” and a “Diploma (g) Advanced Career Programming: 6+ years of Humanities and Judging.” (h) Retreats More significant, however, would be the grant of Locally, new judges undergo an orientation seminar, degrees (e.g., Master of Judicial Studies and Ph.D. in Judicial then after a year (which is too brief a period) participate in Studies). Majority of our judges have had no opportunity a career enhancement seminar in compliance with for further studies due to “financial and time constraints.” continuing legal education. A comparison of the programs PHILJA should be able to partially address this need. PHILJA for these two seminars shows similarity, if not identity, in could also commission a study by educators and curriculum content. While jurisprudence may have evolved in a span specialists on “equivalencies” so that the value of experience of a year or more, there is so much more that PHILJA can can also lead to attainment of a higher degree. offer. It has been observed that, more often than not, the same lecturer at the orientation for new judges will likewise 3. Methodology for Program Delivery: “Blended deliver the same lecture at the enhancement seminar, with Learning” (hopefully) updated materials. The value-added factor is thus diminished. “Interactive” learning methods produce better results, especially in continuing education. At present, the majority Following the career track per type of participant, I of PHILJA programs follow the traditional face-to-face suggest that programs be developed to advance their delivery format, without the interactive learning respective expertises within a set time frame. For example, component. A variety of delivery formats should be explored PHILJA must study what programs should be conducted for and utilized based on the needs of the participants and the judges who have been on the bench for one to five years, goals of the program, thus: for those those who have served from five to 10 years, and for those who have been judges for longer than that. This 1. Traditional Conference Format would coincide with the career track of a judge who may 2. Seminar-type Format apply for promotion from a first level court to a second level court after five years, and so on. The Judicial and Bar 3. Retreats (with Strategic Mentoring) Council, pursuant to Republic Act No. 8557 and A.O. No. 4. Internet-based/Computer-assisted/Self-study 35-96, would thus have additional basis for vetting Format applicants for judicial posts, in terms of knowledge and skills training received. 5. Video Teleconferencing

Consistent with career tracking, PHILJA may also 6. Live Broadcasts consider developing its curriculum to allow for 7. Clinical education, when legally possible specialization by Judges, after a specified period of time. It may be considered that, part of developing one’s judicial The last three options maximize distance learning career is to not be a “generalist,” knowledgeable in all fields education. E-learning has become the trend in judicial of law but mastering none, but that one may pursue education. Through “webinars,” distance learners may passionately a chosen field, even as a Judge. Thus, PHILJA listen to and view presentations, then type in their could consider preparing its curriculum to allow for Judges questions for the lecturer’s immediate response. Short VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 5 courses on a particular subject, which will be a prerequisite I recommend that skills training be the emphasis of to a “live” program, may also be offered online, thereby our programs. Thus, judges should be taught how to write obviating the need to discuss basic principles and freeing by actually making them write, and not through lectures up time for interactive learning. Post-program assignments on how to write. This can be done live with follow-up writing will likewise be done online. This is an example of a mixed activities via distance education computer-based writing delivery format, which John Meeks and Diane Cowdrey of exercises. Judges should also be taught how to handle and the US National Center for State Courts call “Blended rule on objections in the examination of witnesses. They Learning,“ referring to a mix of the traditional law school should be trained on how to conduct an exhaustive pre- classroom type of education and distance education. The trial – not by lecturing them about Rule 18, but through a objective is “to match the best methods to the educational live action approximation of a pre-trial proceeding. While goals and the audience.” moot court is currently part of the new judges’ orientation, they do not get to practice being judges but instead act The pedagogical value of a Retreat with Strategic out the roles of lawyers, litigants, and witnesses. Judges Mentoring cannot be gainsaid. Close quarters supervision should likewise be taught how to deal with the different over a period of time, where the Judge is not distracted types of witnesses, and how to compute penalties. They with the burden of his office and can focus on “sharpening should also be taught how to conduct plea bargaining and the saw,” by experienced mentors can do a lot to transform how to conduct sentencing in open court. Judges should be the ways people think and act. The value of experience taught how to manage their caseload based on their court’s that a mentor brings into the retreat would be in the peculiar needs, and not based on a general formula that practical things and the many “best practices” that can be fails to take into account the environment each court shared and taken on by the Judge. PHILJA must consider operates in. I likewise propose a mentoring program to be venues such as strategic retreats as not only an opportunity established in conjunction with the OCA. Judges should be for wellness but also for education. taught how to manage their personnel and meager supplies. Judges should be taught how to manage their Presently, the bulk of PHILJA lectures are on substantive trials and keep active control of proceedings. Above all, law. Unless there are new developments which require judges should be taught how to conduct themselves face-to-face training, it is suggested that all learning in ethically in day-to-day scenarios they commonly encounter. substantive law be done through distance education, i.e., The case study method of the leading schools can be a the target audience will have access to recorded lectures, good model to equip judges on handling many everyday whether through CDs or via the internet. The text of the “dilemma” situations. presentation should likewise be made accessible. A mechanism for receiving and answering questions on the 4. Fixed and Synchronized Program Calendar presentation should also be put in place. It is every judicial officer’s professional duty to keep abreast of legal Although PHILJA prepares an annual calendar of its developments, and each judicial officer is presumed to have programs, it currently does not make this calendar available more than just a rudimentary understanding of the law. to the targeted participants to enable them to synchronize PHILJA will provide them with the materials; it is their duty their own schedules with the projected activities. More to study them. often than not, participants receive notices only a few weeks before the date of the program, and virtually all As for remedial law, it is suggested that lectures on participants need to make travel arrangements. This results the Rules of Court and related jurisprudence be dispensed in numerous resetting of court schedules, which is contrary with. Instead, all remedial law lectures should incorporate to the judiciary’s mandate and therefore should be avoided. the presentation of procedural flowcharts that justices, judges and court personnel can easily follow, coupled with As far as feasible, PHILJA should schedule its regular checklists of jurisdictional requirements, formal programs in January and July when trial courts conduct requirements, and the like. Each remedial law lecture their semestral inventories and hold no hearings. PHILJA should also provide participants with sample ready-made should also utilize the dates when the DOJ prosecutors, templates and forms of frequently used papers (court- the public attorneys, the court stenographers, and the court issued and court-bound) relevant to the subject of the interpreters are set to hold their annual conventions (and lecture. As with the suggestion on substantive law, any therefore no court hearings are scheduled). “Seasonal” changes in the rules or updates on jurisprudence should programs such as the orientation of new judges and the also be done by distance education. seminar component of conventions may be scheduled based on need. These suggestions are considerably more cost-effective than traditional programs, particularly with respect to the Judges should be able to maximize oral arguments by executive time of judges, court officials and employees. way of summation instead of requiring that everything be 6 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014 reduced to writing. This saves time and shortens the period for resolution of cases. From the Chancellor’s Desk (Continued from page 1) Alternative Dispute Resolution. In Negros Oriental, It is therefore proposed that PHILJA come out with its we delivered an Orientation Conference with annual calendar of programs by November of the current Stakeholders on Court-Annexed Mediation, an year, such that it may be circulated to all targeted Orientation and Screening of Prospective Mediators participants by December 1 of the same year. and PMC Unit Staff, and a Basic Mediation Course and a Pre-Internship Orientation and Meeting with 5. Learning Needs Assessment and Program Evaluation judges, clerks of court, branch clerks of court, mediation-trainees and PMC Unit staff in Court- It is important that an effective needs-assessment Annexed Mediation under their Mediation Program. mechanism be put in place. The evaluation form currently In Iloilo City, we held a Judicial Settlement used for programs administered by PHILJA generates Conference for Judges on Judicial Dispute Resolution predictable results. In these evaluations, PHILJA solicits (JDR) and the JDR Orientations of Public Prosecutors comments on the program, as well as suggestions on future and Practitioners, Clerks of Court, and Branch Clerks programs that participants want PHILJA to offer. These of Court. A Refresher/Advanced Course for Court- evaluation forms are filled out by participants when the Annexed Mediators was also held in La Union for program is about to end, and participants are frequently in the benefit of the La Union, Benguet, and a rush to leave. To be effective, needs assessment requires Pangasinan Mediation Programs. great thought and consideration; a hastily filled-out form may not provide the information necessary to formulate a Two roundtable discussions (RTDs), held for the responsive curriculum. Instead of the written survey form, benefit of Court of Appeals Justices, rounded off our PHILJA might consider ending the program with an activities for this quarter—one on Substantive Laws interactive, on-the-spot assessment of the program and a and Jurisprudence on Intellectual Property (Batch survey of further learning needs of the participants. 3) held in Zambales and the other on the Rules of Procedure on Financial Rehabilitation in Manila. Program evaluation should also go beyond the usual end-of-program evaluation. There should be a follow-up We took note of the new rulings, doctrinal evaluation on profitability or the “value-added” to assess reminders, and recent resolutions, circulars, and whether changes, positive or negative, have been observed orders of the Supreme Court as well as of the Office and could be attributed to attendance in the program. of the Court Administrator. There should also be a cost-benefit analysis after each To our officials and staff, keep up the good work program. and congratulations on our highlights thus far. 6. Training for Court Personnel To our development partners, thank you for your valuable support as we pursue our common goal. Only clerks of court and legal researchers receive regular To the Supreme Court, we are very grateful for formal training from PHILJA. The other court personnel the unwavering support for PHILJA in all our receive training as a part of their conventions, but since trainings, programs, and activities. participation is voluntary because it entails personal expenses, not all court personnel benefit from these To the Almighty be the glory. programs. Besides, these programs usually just comprise two to four lectures. PHILJA should expand its programs to train court personnel in the efficient operations of our courts. The most urgent candidates for training are sheriffs and process ADOLFO S. AZCUNA servers. Next to the clerks of court, the sheriffs have the Chancellor weightiest responsibilities in a court. To aid in the training of the different types of personnel, manuals should be developed for each group, such as the Manual for Clerks of Courts. Training should then be conducted based on the developed manuals, which should be simpler, checklist-oriented, and employ a practical, experience-based approach. VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 7

TRAININGS, PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES

PHILJA Curriculum Review

On August 14, 2014, PHILJA convened the most brilliant minds in judicial education for a PHILJA Curriculum Review, in response to the directive of the PHILJA Board of Trustees, to re-visit the training curricula and ensure that the substance of PHILJA programs meet the needs of the judiciary and current trends in judicial education. The activity was designed: to develop a strategic training plan based on needs assessment, including skills training, professional development and personal growth; to learn, develop, and adopt new methods in judicial education in relation to emerging trends and technological advances; and to formulate programs which address distinct educational needs and enhance specific skills of judges and court personnel who work in highly specialized areas of law.

PHILJA Chief of Office for Academic Affairs Justice The PHILJA Curriculum Review was carried out in two Delilah Vidallon-Magtolis presented the PHILJA Highlights discussion sessions: the first was a presentation addressing from 2012–2013 which provided: the current state of PHILJA what judicial training should be, considering the comments activities; statistics on the core programs completed and and suggestions previously gathered from the Chief Justice their profitability ratings; trends in PHILJA courses; and issues and Supreme Court justices; the second was a re- and concerns in the delivery of curricula. By way of examination of PHILJA programs with department introduction to the curriculum review proper, Justice Hilarion chairpersons/member-representatives presenting their L. Aquino, Department of Ethics and Judicial Conduct Chair, respective comments and suggestions. and Fr. Ranhilio C. Aquino, Department of Jurisprudence and Legal Philosophy Chair, presented The Problem of Prior to the forum, Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Integrity and Teaching of Judicial Ethics and Current Trends Sereno provided PHILJA her observations and and Developments in Judicial Education, respectively. recommendations for the activity through her paper A (Continued on page 43) 8 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

presented the Review’s outputs and summary of recommendations. The afternoon session was devoted to 4th Plenary Assembly of the workshop-focus group sessions by academic departments PHILJA Corps of Professors and Conferment where key guide questions were provided to facilitate their Ceremony of the Posthumous Award to discussions. In the same session, participants who were not Dr. Purificacion V. Quisumbing yet members of any department were given the opportunity to sign up for membership in the department of their choice. Following through the recently conducted Review of PHILJA Led by Justice Delilah Vidallon-Magtolis,the present Curriculum and acting upon the proposal of the members of members of the Corps of Professors then took their Oath of the Corps of Professors, PHILJA held a Plenary Assembly of Professorial Commitment to solidify their dedication to the the PHILJA Corps of Professors on August 29, 2014, to task of judicial development and education. Justice Hilarion apprise the participants on the outcome and output of the L. Aquino delivered the closing remarks. PHILJA Curriculum Review and gather their professorial commitment to PHILJA. One hundred eight members of the Corps of Professors, comprising Supreme Court and PHILJA officials, incumbent and retired justices and judges, Focus Group Discussion on the professors of law, the academe, including the SC and PHILJA Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases staff, attended the activity. Within the past four years since the Rules of Procedure on Environmental Cases took effect on April 14, 2010, the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA), in partnership with valuable development partners conducted 18 multi-sectoral capacity building trainings on the Rules for judges and other stakeholders of designated Green courts and courts of environmental hot spot areas. Court of Appeals justices who are also duty bearers of the Rules were capacitated in its application in three trainings conducted by the Academy. To determine the Rules’ effectiveness, PHILJA, in partnership with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the United States Department of the Interior (USDOI), conducted a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) on the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases on July 3–4, 2014 at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City having as participants selected Court of Appeals justices and judges who have participated in the previous trainings. The FGD aimed to assess the application of the Rules; identify the provisions of the Rules that need enhancement; identify additional provisions to further improve the application of the Rules; identify innovations and best practices in the effective enforcement of remedies and redress for violation of environmental laws; and assess the impact of the series of trainings in the conduct by justices and judges of their hearings and decision-making. The Chancellor, Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna, formally opened the activity with a total of 52 participants in The program’s morning session began with the attendance. The participants were clustered into workshop conferment of the Posthumous Award to Dr. Purificacion V. groups to discuss problem areas in the application of the Quisumbing, Chair of the PHILJA Department of Rules and share best practices in the resolution of identified International and Human Rights Law, for her significant problems. The workshop outputs were then presented in contributions to the Academy and to the Supreme Court. plenary before distinguished panelists, Supreme Court The award was presented to Justice Leonardo Quisumbing Justices Diosdado M. Peralta and Lucas P. Bersamin, who (ret.) and the rest of the family. Justice Quisumbing are members of the Subcommittee on the Rules of responded with a message of appreciation. Procedure for Environmental Cases, Justice Oswaldo D. The plenary assembly proper immediately followed the Agcaoili and Director Asis G. Perez of the Bureau of Fisheries conferment ceremony. PHILJA Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna (Continued on page 43) VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 9

Visit of Bangladesh SC Delegation Orientation-Seminars

The Supreme Court of Bangladesh delegation, led by Mr. Chief Justice Md. Muzammel Hossain, accompanied 70th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed by H.E. John Gomez, Ambassador of Bangladesh in the Judges Philippines, visited to the Philippine Judicial Academy on August 25, 2014, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay Date: July 15–24, 2014 City. They were welcomed by Chancellor Adolfo S. Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Azcuna, Executive Secretary Marina L. Buzon, Chief of Participants: 41 newly appointed and 7 promoted judges, Office for Academic Affairs Delilah Vidallon-Magtolis, namely: Head of the Research, Publications and Linkages Office Sedfrey M. Candelaria and PHILJA Professor Thelma A. NEW APPOINTMENTS A. Ponferrada. The delegation of eight was composed of Mr. Chief Justice Md. Muzammel Hossain; Honorable REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS Judges of the Appellate Divisions Najmum Ara Sultana REGION III and Syed Mahmud Hossain; Honorable Judges of the High Hon. Gorgonio B. Elarmo, Jr. Court Division A.H.M. Shamsuddin Choudhury, Moyeenul RTC, Branch 77, Malolos City, Bulacan Islam Chowdhury, and Naima Haider; Senior District Judge Hon. Francisco P. Felizmenio S. M. Kuddus Zaman; and Mr. Jakhongir Khayderov, Chief RTC, Branch 19, Malolos City, Bulacan Technical Adviser of Judicial Strengthening Project. Hon. Gener M. Gito During the visit, the PHILJA officials gave them a tour of RTC, Branch 92, Balanga City, Bataan the PTC facilities and a brief overview on PHILJA, with Hon. Philger Noel B. Inovejas focus on its composition, programs, publications, and RTC, Branch 93, Balanga City, Bataan mediation activities. Hon. Jose Marie A. Quimboy RTC, Branch 94, Mariveles, Bataan Hon. Maria Zenaida Bernadette T. Tamayo-Mendiola RTC, Branch 80, Malolos City, Bulacan

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS Hon. Kirk M. Aniñon MeTC, Branch 44, Pasay City Hon. Ma. Lourdes V. Barrios-Sapalo MeTC, Branch 64, Makati City Hon. Dorothy Grace R. Daguna-Inciong MeTC, Branch 52, Caloocan City Hon. Honorio C. Ebora, Jr. MeTC, Branch 71, Pasig City Hon. Ihmie Michiko C. Gacad-Presto MeTC, Branch 5, Manila Hon. Fricia C. Gomez-Guillen MeTC, Branch 15, Manila Hon. Jerome U. Jimenez MeTC, Branch 6, Manila Hon. Ma. Ludmila P. Lim MeTC, Branch 34, Quezon City Hon. Analie B. Oga-Brual MeTC, Branch 41, Quezon City Hon. Eriza P. Pagaling-Zapanta MeTC, Branch 4, Manila Hon. Karen M. Sy MeTC, Branch 19, Manila Hon. Manuel Gerard C. Tomacruz MeTC, Branch 10, Manila 10 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Hon. Sheryll D. Tulabing* MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS MeTC, Branch 56, Malabon City REGION III Hon. Julius A. Java MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES 1st MCTC: Quezon-Licab, Nueva Ecija REGION V Hon. Stanley Marvin J. Pengson Hon. Jocelyn P. Gamboa-Delos Santos 3rd MCTC: Laur-Gabaldon, Nueva Ecija MTCC, Branch 4, City of San Fernando, Pampanga Hon. Zharone Fritz M. Japzon-Ferreras B. PROMOTION MTCC, City of Cabuyao, Laguna Hon. Roberto Ricardo O. Kanapi REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS MTCC, Branch 2, San Jose City REGION I Hon. Ryan Scott F. Robiños Hon. Rusty M. Naya MTCC, Branch 1, Tarlac City, Tarlac RTC, Branch 51, Tayug, Pangasinan

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS REGION III Hon. Isidra A. Argañosa-Maniego REGION III Hon. Michael Benedick V. Aleta RTC, Branch 7, Malolos City, Bulacan MTC, Pantabangan, Nueva Ecija Hon. Amelita C. Corpuz Hon. Kristine A. Aquino-Ferrer RTC, Branch 96, Dinalupihan, Bataan MTC, Lupao, Nueva Ecija Hon. Eda P. Dizon-Era Hon. Maria Cristina C. Botigan-Santos** RTC, Branch 60, Angeles City, Pampanga MTC, San Ildefonso, Bulacan Hon. Maria Maruja P. Narvaiza-Mendoza Hon. Jamila D.R. Cruz-Sarga RTC, Branch 82, Malolos City, Bulacan MTC, Rizal, Nueva Ecija Hon. Marion Jacqueline P. Poblete Hon. Rachelle G. Ernie RTC, Branch 3, Balanga City, Bataan MTC, Zaragosa, Nueva Ecija Hon. Frazierwin V. Viterbo Hon. Julieta M. Isidro-Reyes RTC, Branch 33, Guimba, Nueva Ecija MTC, Dingalan, Aurora th Hon. Vincent E. Lamug 28 Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed MTC, Iba, Zambales Clerks of Court Hon. Ian P. Ramoso MTC, Talugtog, Nueva Ecija Date: September 16–19, 2014 Hon. Juan G. Rañola, Jr. Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City MTC, Hagonoy, Bulacan Participants: 69 newly appointed clerks of court, namely: Hon. Mario Pocholo M. Telan REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS MTC, Baliuag, Bulacan NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION REGION IV Atty. Joselino N. Sucion Hon. Cyrus B. Goco RTC, Branch 61, Makati City MTC, Socorro, Mindoro Oriental Hon. Dennis U. Magsombol REGION II MTC, Balayan, Batangas Atty. Maylene M. Nicolas Hon. Maricel M. Magpantay-Ng RTC, Branch 23, Roxas, Isabela MTC, Mataas-na-Kahoy, Batangas Hon. Amiel Raymond O. Pargas REGION III MTC, San Pascual, Batangas Atty. Theodorick K. Ayungo Hon. Emmanuel S. Paynor RTC, Branch 86, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija MTC, San Antonio, Nueva Ecija Atty. Anihairah B. Hadji Omar Hon. Juanita A. Unira-Orejas RTC, Branch 73, Olongapo MTC, Lian, Batangas REGION IV Atty. Alpha L. Andrada RTC, Branch 22, Imus, Cavite * Missed the morning session on the fifth day (July 21) Atty. Harvy Brian H. Valencia ** Missed the first day (July 15) RTC, Branch 48, Masbate VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 11

REGION V REGION XI Atty. Albert S. Olavere Atty. Marian Abbie B. Casipe RTC, Branch 33, Pili, Camarines Sur RTC, Branch 24, Koronadal, South Cotabato Atty. Rubylin D. Pecson REGION VI RTC, Branch 2, Tagum City, Davao del Norte Atty. Therese C. Del Campo-Peñaranda RTC, Branch 28, Iloilo City REGION XII Atty. Jean-Paul A. Diputado Atty. Vicente C. Dumbrigue, Jr. RTC, OCC, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental RTC, Branch 17, Kidapawan City, North Cotabato Atty. Maria Cecilia M. Garrido Atty. Ma. Luningning P. Lagcao-Dy RTC, Branch 40, Silay City RTC, Branch 4, lligan City, Lanao del Norte Atty. Kathryn Rose A. Hitalia-Baliatan Atty. Ruby M. Luy-Dela Banda RTC, Branch 24, Iloilo City, Iloilo RTC, OCC, Kidapawan City, North Cotabato Atty. Ma. Jezzel C. Rasimo Atty. Nurhani C. Pacasem-Nur RTC, Branch 69, Silay City RTC, Branch 14, Cotabato City Atty. Desiree P. Pacilan REGION VII RTC, OCC, IIigan City, Lanao del Norte Atty. Perpetua Socorro O. Enriquez-Belarmino RTC Branch 8, Cebu City, Cebu METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT Atty. Rosadey E. Faelnar-Binongo RTC Branch 11, Cebu City Ms. Ofelia R. Viray-Sarte MeTC, OCC, Marikina REGION VIII Atty. Hyacinth D. Renomeron MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES RTC, Branch 15, Burauen, Leyte Atty. Ruby Christie C. Jordan-Merilo REGION IV RTC, Branch 9, Tacloban City, Leyte Ms. Anita L. Crisostomo Atty. Phoebeth S. Peras MTCC, Branch 3, Antipolo City RTC, Branch 25, Maasin, Southern Leyte Atty. Djhoana Gene A. Antoni-Clemencio REGION VI RTC, Branch 44, Tacloban City Ms. Sharon Antoniette M. Verde MTCC, Branch 4, Bacolod City REGION IX Atty. Maricel S. Bangayan-Lahi REGION VII RTC, OCC, Zamboanga City, Zamboanga del Sur Ms. Clemente S. De Jesus Atty. Leah Meih S. Macapas-Gagaracruz MTCC, Branch 2, Talisay, Cebu RTC, Branch 12, Zamboanga City Ms. Beverly A. Presas Atty. Richelle A. Noblefranca MTCC, OCC, Talisay City RTC, Branch 8, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte Atty. Edwin M. Tomon REGION X RTC, Branch 21, Pagadian, Zamboanga del Sur Ms. Laarne D. Badoles Atty. Aileen A. Zorrilla-Febiar MTCC, Branch 2, Cagayan de Oro City RTC Branch 10, Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte Ms. Ma. Rizalie Blossom E. Bagas MTCC, OCC , Cagayan de Oro REGION X Atty. Joseph Emmanuel C. Cotares REGION IX RTC OCC, Tandag, Surigao del Sur Ms. Eleanor S. Angeles Atty. Ed Anthony F. Guerra MTCC, Branch 2, Dipolog City RTC, Branch 29, Surigao City, Surigao del Norte Atty. Jeanny Mae H. Rafols REGION XI RTC, Branch 38, Cagayan de Oro City Ms. Maria Luisa F. Elorde-Ellima Misamis Oriental MTCC OCC, Island Garden City of Samal, Davao del Norte Atty. Katrina Farrah P. Suarez Ms. Cynthia Mae F. Pingoy RTC, Branch 7, Bayugan City, Agusan del Sur MTCC, Branch 1, General Santos City 12 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

REGION XII Ms. Necifora G. Sayon Ms. Mia E. Dela Peña 16th MCTC: Carmen-Batuan, Bohol MTCC, Branch 2, Iligan City Mr. Ramon Moshe U. Pernitez II REGION VIII MTCC, Branch 5, Iligan City Ms. Mirasol O. Catamco 5th MCTC: Maydolong-Balangkayan, Eastern Samar MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS Ms. Nora S. Dato 6th MCTC: San Jose-Biri-Rosario, Northern Samar REGION II Mr. Leon C. Duran Ms. Leonida L. Sandoval 10th MCTC: Balangiga-Lawaan, Eastern Samar MTC, Bambang, Nueva Vizcaya Mr. Alexander Serapio C. Abala 11th MCTC: Villaba-Tabango, Leyte REGION IV Ms. Merly A. Beso REGION IX MTC, Calauag, Quezon Mr. Johnil D. Magtuba Mr. Jose Roy C. Piñon 5th MCTC: Katipunan-Sergio Osmeña, Sr. MTC, Branch 2, Binangonan, Rizal Zamboanga del Norte Mr. Sherlando R. Pepito REGION V 10th MCTC: R. Magsaysay-Midsalip-Sominot Ms. Maryruth M. Verdadero Zamboanga del Sur MTC, Pasacao, Camarines Sur Mr. Peter Laurence D. Real 2nd MCTC: Naga-Titay, Zamboanga Sibugay REGION VI Ms. Jessica G. Castro REGION XI MTC, Cauayan, Negros Occidental Ms. L’Leonor G. Huqueriza Ms. Arlyn M. Medina 1st MCTC: Norala-T’Boli-Sto. Nino, South Cotabato MTC, San Jose, Antique

REGION XII REGION VII Ms. Euvelyn P. Casangoan Ms. Hannah B. Ortiz 1st MCTC: Parang-Buldon-Matanog-Barira, Maguindanao MTC, Sibonga, Cebu 4th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed REGION VIII Sheriffs and Process Servers (Batch 1) Mr. Ranulfo R. Balano MTC, Tanauan, Leyte Date: September 2–4, 2014 Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City REGION XII Participants: 35 newly appointed sheriffs and 27 newly Ms. Wenifreda I. Epe appointed process servers, namely: MTC, Sultan Naga Dimaporo, Lanao del Norte A. SHERIFFS MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION I NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION Ms. Resanelyn Margarita B. Nicolas Mr. Marwin Paul S. Bacho 4th MCTC: Piddig-Carasi-Solsona, IIocos Norte RTC, Br. 128, Caloocan City Mr. Vladimir T. Cos REGION III RTC, OCC, Parañaque City Mr. Jerrycham A. Lora Mr. Melito E. Cuadra 3rd MCTC: Botolan-Cabangan, Zambales RTC, Br. 100, Quezon City Mr. Constancio M. Gallamos, Jr. REGION V RTC, Br. 192, Marikina City Mr. Diogenes L. Virtucio, Jr. Mr. Delfin Dakila Y. Guerrero II 7th MCTC: Mobo-Milagros, Masbate RTC, Br. 111, Pasay City Ms. Marietta B. Limon REGION VII RTC, Br. 113, Pasay City Mr. Aladino B. Lumayno Mr. Felix V. Moreto III 6th MCTC: Ubay-President Carlos P. Garcia, Bohol RTC, OCC, Parañaque City VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 13

REGION IV MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES Mr. Francis Gerald C. Cruz RTC, Br. 77, San Mateo Rizal REGION IV Mr. Joel S. Dalida Mr. Conrado O. Quiamzon, Jr. RTC, Br. 57, Lucena City, Quezon MTCC, OCC, Cavite City Ms. Lea G. De Los Santos Mr. Frederick Matthew A. Galvez RTC, Br. 96, Antipolo City, Rizal MTCC, Br. 2, Batangas City Mr. Mario S. Devanadera B. PROCESS SERVERS RTC, Br. 30, San Pablo City, Laguna Ms. Imelda M. Magpantay REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS RTC, OCC, San Pedro, Laguna NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION Mr. Vincent Patrick R. Mataban Ms. Carol D. Aguilar RTC, Br. 34, Calamba, Laguna RTC, Br. 255, Las Piñas City Mr. Bryan E. Noroña Mr. Alejandro U. Aribuabo RTC, Br. 27, Sta. Cruz, Laguna RTC, Br. 44, Manila Mr. Eduardo C. Castillo, Jr. METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS RTC, Br. 158, Pasig City Mr. Dino B. Alejandro Mr. Mark King V. Corrales MeTC, Br. 99, Mandaluyong City RTC, Br. 155, Pasig City Mr. Norgen A. Altarejos Mr. Andrew Nikko M. Dimo MeTC, Br. 81, Valenzuela City RTC, Br. 84, Quezon City Mr. Frederick F. Amparo Mr. Lorenzo D. Martinez MeTC, Br. 73, Pateros RTC, Br. 262, Pasig City Mr. Dann August S. Arnuelo Mr. Ramesis L. Minay MeTC, Br. 91, Parañaque City RTC, OCC, Quezon City Ms. Elena C. Banias MeTC, OCC, Parañaque City REGION IV Mr. Jaime G. Banias, Jr. Mr. Joemar C. Aseremo MeTC, Br. 88, Parañaque City RTC, Br. 5, Lemery, Batangas Ms. Menchie A. Barcelona Mr. Jeremy M. Atienza MeTC, OCC, Parañaque City RTC, OCC, San Pablo, Laguna Mr. Rogelio V. Clemente, Jr. Ms. Racquel A. Javate MeTC, Br. 39, Quezon City RTC, Br. 35, Calamba City, Laguna Mr. Marc Christofer G. Dela Cruz METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS MeTC, Br. 93, Marikina City Mr. Rommel P. Divina Mr. Ric L. Gorospe MeTC, Br. 37, Quezon City MeTC, Br. 32, Quezon City Mr. Igmedio D. Garonia Mr. IIvin M. Jacob MeTC, Br. 12, Manila MeTC, Br. 85, Caloocan City Mr. Zarex G. Marqueses Mr. Mario P. Liprado MeTC, Br. 6, Manila MeTC, Br. 98, Mandaluyong City Mr. Enrico H. Matias Ms. Ricky B. Maniago MeTC, Br. 2, Manila MeTC, Br. 88, Parañaque City Ms. Editha S. Pacamparra Mr. Reymie Jay Z. Montes MeTC, Marikina City MeTC, Br. 97, Mandaluyong City Mr. Araw C. Perez Ms. Sheila S. Pendon MeTC, OCC, Makati City MeTC, OCC, Parañaque City Ms. Emily J. Reyes Ms. Joy M. Punzalan MeTC, Marikina City MeTC, Br. 96, Mandaluyong City Mr. Ronelio V. Salamanca Mr. Ryan R. Quinto MeTC, Br. 55, Malabon City MeTC, Br. 49, Caloocan City Mr. Daniel Q. Saligumba Mr. Elias Francisco E. Ranches MeTC, OCC, Manila MeTC, Br. 91, Parañaque City Mr. Wilbur S. Young Mr. Rhonald Allan G. Santos MeTC, Br. 80, Muntinlupa City MeTC, Br. 22, Manila 14 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Mr. Rizalino D.L. Santos Region XI MeTC, OCC, Parañaque City Date: September 16–18, 2014 Mr. Frederick E. Silloga Venue: Park Inn by Radisson Davao, Davao City MeTC, Br. 55, Malabon City Participants: 42 RTC clerks of court

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES

REGION IV Career Development Program for Court Personnel (CDP) Mr. Mark Lyndon C. Alzate MTCC, OCC, Cavite City Mr. Edgardo B. Bisente CDP for Court Legal Researchers of Region VIII MTCC, Dasmariñas City, Cavite Date: July 16–17, 2014 Ms. Marilyn O. Gabica Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City MTCC, OCC, Antipolo City, Rizal Participants: 16 RTC and MTCC legal researchers

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT

REGION IV Special Focus Programs Mr. Jose Emmanuel Z. Sumbilla MTC, OCC, San Pedro, Laguna Competency Enhancement Training for Judges and Court MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT Personnel Handling Cases Involving Children REGION IV Date: July 8–10, 2014 Venue: Bethel Guest House, Dumaguete City Mr. Glenn C. Austria Participants: 56 RTC judges, clerks of court/officers in 6th MCTC: Roxas-Cagayancillo, Palawan charge, court interpreters, court social workers, prosecutors, PAO lawyers, and representatives from Seminar for Executive Judges (Selected Executive Judges Consuelo Foundation and Vice Executive Judges of the Visayas) Seminar-Workshop on Various Laws and Rules Relating to Date: July 24–25, 2014 Money Laundering and Other Financial Crimes for Judges Venue: Marco Polo Plaza Hotel, Cebu City Participants: 24 RTC and MTC judges Regions XI and XII Date: July 23–24, 2014 Venue: Marco Polo Hotel, Davao City Participants: 29 RTC judges Judicial Career Enhancement Programs (JCEP) Regions VIII and IX Date: September 24–25, 2014 Venue: Radisson Blu Hotel, Cebu City JCEP for Selected RTC Judges of the National Capital Judicial Participants: 28 RTC judges Region Date: July 16–18, 2014 Seminar on the Rules of Procedure on Financial Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Rehabilitation for Special Commercial Court Judges and Participants: 15 RTC judges Pairing Court Judges

NCJR and Regions IV and V Career Enhancement Date: August 8, 2014 Programs (CEP) Venue: Traders Hotel, Pasay City Participants: 44 RTC judges

CEP for RTC Clerks of Court Regions I to III and Other Stakeholders Region VI Date: August 27, 2014 Date: July 1–3, 2014 Venue: The Manor, Camp John Hay, Baguio City Venue: San Antonio Hotel, Baybay, Roxas City Participants: 40 RTC judges and IBP Baguio-Benguet Participants: 66 RTC clerks of court Chapter lawyers VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 15

Curriculum Review of the Philippine Judicial Academy Personal Security Training for Judges Date: August 14, 2014 Date: September 30–October 2, 2014 Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Venue: PHILJA Training Center Participants: 26 PHILJA officials and members of PHILJA Participants: 67 RTC, MeTC, MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges Academic Departments

Academic Excellence Lecture Series in the Judiciary Roundtable Discussions Topic: Legal Nuances to the Philippine Ratification of the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court Date: August 19, 2014 Roundtable Discussion on Substantive Laws and Venue: Claire Isabel McGill Luce Auditorium Silliman University, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental Jurisprudence on Intellectual Property for Court of Appeals Participants: 248 PHILJA official, secretariat/documentors, Justices (Batch 3) RTC and MTCC judges/branch clerks of court/clerks of Date: July 3–4, 2014 court/legal researchers, Silliman University students and Venue: Kamana Sanctuary, Subic, Zambales other guests Participants: 23 CA justices

Information Dissemination through a Dialogue between Roundtable Discussion on the Rules of Procedure on Barangay Officials and Court Officials Financial Rehabilitation for Court of Appeals Justices Date: September 4, 2014 Iloilo City Venue: Court of Appeals Auditorium, Manila Participants: 40 CA justices Date: September 4, 2014 Venue: Sen. Potenciano T. Treñas Hall Lone District Office, Iloilo City Focus Group Discussion Participants: 167 barangay officials and RTC court personnel

Bacolod City Focus Group Discussion on the Rules of Procedure for Date: September 5, 2014 Environmental Cases Venue: Atrium Hall of Justice, Bacolod City Date: July 3–4, 2014 Participants: 152 barangay officials Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Participants: 52 CA justices, SC Officials and staff, and RTC, Kidapawan City MTCC, MTC, and MCTC judges

Date: September 25, 2014 Venue: Kidapawan Provincial Gymnasium Amas, Kidapawan City Convention-Seminars Participants: 711 barangay officials

Digos City 16th Convention and Seminar of the Metropolitan and City Judges Association of the Philippines (MetCJAP) Date: September 26, 2014 Theme: Judicial Innovations: Trends, Issues and Practices Venue: Digos Cultural Center and Sports Complex Date: September 24–26, 2014 Digos City Venue: Crowne Plaza Manila Galleria, Quezon City Participants: 288 barangay officials Participants: 164 MeTC and MTCC judges

Seminar-Workshop on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and 16th National Convention and Seminar of the Philippine Rule of Law for Executive and Vice Executive Judges of Association of Court Employees (PACE) Regions IX to XII Date: July 9–11, 2014 Date: September 17–18, 2014 Venue: SMX Convention Center, Lanang, Davao Venue: Marco Polo Hotel, Davao City Participants: 2082 RTC, MeTC, MTCC, MTC and MCTC court Participants: 28 RTC, MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges employees 16 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Newly elected officers of the Philippine Association of Court Employees (PACE)

2014–2016

National Officers

National President: Atty. Ma. Fe O. Maloloy-on Treasurer: Ellen DLS Serrano MTCC OCC, Davao City RTC, Branch 231, Pasay City

Exec. Vice President: Atty. Virginia R. Coloma-Rafael Assistant Treasurer: Arlyn M. Falcon RTC, Branch 1, Tagum City RTC,Branch 119, Pasay City

Vice President for Luzon: Eddie H. Saracanlao Auditor: Agnes T. Sapinoso MTCC, Bacoor City MTCC, Imus City

Vice President for Visayas: Lyvia M. Malate Assistant Auditor: Belinda G. Go RTC, Branch 34, Tacloban City Branch 10, Cebu City, Cebu

Vice President for Atty. Andres B. Mission, Jr. Presidential and Atty. Perlita V. Ele Mindanao: RTC, Branch 35, Legal Adviser: RTC, OCC, Quezon City General Santos City Secretary General: Marie Ann B. Dolorito Vice President for NCJR: Edmund S. De Javing RTC, Branch 1, Tagum City RTC Branch 148, Makati City Davao Del Norte

Board of Directors

Region I: Dr. Macario Salva Region XII: Atty. Kristinne M. Camandero MCTC, Sarrat-Vintar RTC, Branch 24, Midsayap Ilocos Norte North Cotabato

Region III: Roy M. Mendonez Region XIII/CARAGA: Ferninand P. Mesagrande RTC OCC, Iba, Zambales RTC, Branch 28, Lianga Surigao del Sur Region IV-A: Rosalina G. Aguado RTC, Branch 8, Batangas City Caloocan City: Azucena A. Berania RTC OCC, Caloocan City Region V: Zenaida Magayanes RTC, Branch 7, Legaspi City Makati City: Ma. Teresa L. Umali METC OCC, Makati City Region VI: Dr. Erly M. Martir RTC, Branch 65 Malabon City: Percival S. Ponciano Buena Vista-Guimaras RTC, Branch 72, Malabon City

Region VII: Meriam C. Quizo Mandaluyong City: Rayson M. Mayor MTCC, Bais City RTC, Branch 210 Mandaluyong City Region VIII: Leila L. Cinco RTC, Branch 28, Catbalogan, Parañaque City: Rumel M. Macalisang Samar RTC, Branch 258, Parañaque City

Region IX: Virgilio S. Sila Quezon City: Bambito Sabiniano MTCC, Branch 2, Pagadian City RTC, Branch 219, Quezon City

Region X: Nolan P. Lacang Taguig City: Joselito C. Baldamor RTC, Branch 35, Ozamis City RTC, Branch 267, Pasig City

Region XI: Virgilia Elnah G. Gementiza Valenzuela City: Atty. Rio Nila L. Abiang RTC, Branch 30, Tagum City RTC OCC, Valenzuela City VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 17

Orientation of Clerks of Court and Branch Clerks of Court Alternative Dispute Resolution on Judicial Dispute Resolution (ADR) Programs Date: August 28, 2014 Refresher/Advanced Course for Court-Annexed Mediators Venue: Hotel del Rio, M.H. del Pilar Street La Union, Benguet and Pangasinan Mediation Programs Molo, Iloilo City Participants: 50 clerks of court and branch clerks of court Date: July 2–3, 2014 Venue: Oasis Country Resort, San Fernando City, La Union Basic Mediation Course (Negros Oriental Mediation Participants: 50 mediators Program)

Batangas, Laguna, and Quezon Mediation Programs Date: September 23–26, 2014 Venue: Bethel Guest House, Dumaguete City Date: August 14–15, 2014 Negros Oriental Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City Participants: 54 mediators Participants: 56 mediators Pre-Internship Orientation and Meeting with Judges, Orientation Conference with Stakeholders on Court- Clerks of Court, Branch Clerks of Court, Mediation Annexed Mediation (Negros Oriental Mediation Program) Trainees and PMC Unit Staff in Court-Annexed Mediation (Negros Oriental Mediation Program) Date: July 10, 2014 Venue: Hotel Essencia, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental Date: September 26, 2014 Participants: 97 RTC, MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges, clerks Venue: Bethel Guest House, Dumaguete City of court, representatives from NPS, PAO, IBP, LGU, civil Negros Oriental society, business, academe, and media Participants: 108 RTC, MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges, clerks of court, branch clerks of court, mediation trainees, Judicial Settlement Conference for Judges on Judicial and PMCU staff Dispute Resolution (Skills-based Course)

Date: August 26–29, 2014 On PHILJA Venue: Hotel del Rio, Iloilo City Participants: 47 RTC, MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges 4th Plenary Assembly of the PHILJA Corps of Professor (with Orientation and Screening of Prospective Mediators and Conferment Ceremony of the Posthumous Award to the PMC Unit Staff (Negros Oriental Mediation Program) Family of Dr. Purificacion V. Quisumbing) Date: August 27, 2014 Date: August 29, 2014 Venue: Hall of Justice, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental Venue: Auditorium, Court of Appeals, Manila Participants: 63 mediators, and staff applicants Participants: 64 PHILJA officials and professorial lecturers, Justice Leonardo A. Quisumbing and family, and other Date: August 28, 2014 guests Venue: Hall of Justice, Bais City, Negros Oriental Participants: 31 mediators, and staff applicants

Orientation of Public Prosecutors, Public Attorneys and Law Practitioners on Judicial Dispute Resolution

Date: August 28, 2014 Venue: Hotel del Rio, M.H. del Pilar Street, Molo, Iloilo City Participants: 40 prosecutors, PAO and IBP lawyers 18 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

PHILJA Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna (seated center), and DCA Raul B. Villanueva (seated fifth from left) with the participants of the 70th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Judges held on July 15–24, 2014 at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.

Dr. Cheselden George V. Carmona, Member of PHILJA’s Department of Commercial Law lectures on “Overview on Asset Forfeiture” during the 4th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Sheriffs and Process Servers held on September 2–4, 2014, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.

Judge Jaime B. Santiago, Presiding Judge of RTC Br. 4, Manila, gives some pointers on firearms proficiency to the participants of the Personal Security Training held on September 30–October 2, 2014 at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City. VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 19

Supreme Court Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe gives an “Overview of the 2013 Financial Rehabilitation Rules” during the Seminar for Court of Appeals Justices on the Rules of Procedure on Financial Rehabilitation held on September 4, 2014, at the Traders Hotel, Pasay City.

Lecturers and Resource Persons Justice Magdangal M. De Leon (seated fourth from left), Justice Delilah Vidallon-Magtolis (seated fifth from left) IPO-Phil Director General Ricardo R. Blancaflor (seated center), and Justice Teresita Dy-Liacco Flores with the participants of the Roundtable Discussion on Substantive Laws and Jurisprudence on Intellectual Property for Court of Appeals Justices (Batch 3), held on July 3–4, 2014 at the Kamana Sanctuary, Subic, Zambales.

Justice Marina L. Buzon, PHILJA Executive Secretary and Acting Chief of the Philippine Mediation Center Office (seated center) with the participants of the Judicial Settlement Conference for Judges on Judicial Dispute Resolution, held on August 26–29, 2014 at the Hotel del Rio, Iloilo City. 20 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

In 1996, Justice Jardeleza became Senior Vice President and General Counsel of San Miguel Corporation, a position he held until June 30, 2010. Justice Jardeleza also taught Constitutional and Administrative Law, and Civil Procedure at the University of Hon. FRANCIS H. JARDELEZA the Philippines (UP) College of Law, where he was a Associate Justice professorial lecturer since 1993. He also served as examiner Supreme Court for Political Law in the 2012 bar examinations. appointed on August 19, 2014 Born in Jaro, Iloilo, on September 26, 1949, Justice Jardeleza graduated class valedictorian in elementary and high school at the Jaro Elementary School and the UP Iloilo College High School, respectively. He took his Bachelor of Justice Francis H. Jardeleza served as Solicitor General of Arts, Major in Political Science, from UP Iloilo College, where the Republic of the Philippines from February 2012 until his he was recognized as the Most Outstanding Graduate in appointment as the 173rd Associate Justice of the Supreme 1970. In 1974, he obtained his Bachelor of Laws from the Court on August 19, 2014. He also served as Deputy UP College of Law, Diliman, graduating salutatorian and Ombudsman for Luzon. cum laude. In the same year, he placed third in the Bar As Solicitor General, Justice Jardeleza argued many Examinations with a general average of 88.35 percent. In cases before the Supreme Court, notably the constitutional 1977, he obtained his Master of Laws at the Harvard Law challenges to the Cybercrime Law and the Reproductive School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. He then trained Health Law. He also served as Agent for the Republic of the as a foreign associate in the New York law firm of Sullivan Philippines and Head of the Philippine legal team handling and Cromwell, specializing in securities, litigation, and public the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea Annex offerings. VII arbitration with China, in relation to the West Philippine Sea maritime disputes. As Agent of the Republic, he lectured extensively on the Philippines’ claim here and abroad, including at the Department of Foreign Affairs; the Philippine Navy Headquarters; the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, USA; the Center for a New American Security in Washington, D.C., USA; Harvard University in Fourth Quarter Trainings, Programs and Activities Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA; New York University in (Continued from page 44) New York, USA; and at the New York State Bar Association Seasonal Meeting in Hanoi, Vietnam.  Seminar-Workshop on Various Laws and Rules Relating to Money Laundering and Other At the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), Justice Financial Crimes Jardeleza worked to improve the quality of representation November 26–27, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan by the OSG through capacity building programs for OSG lawyers and the recruitment of new lawyers from the top  Career Enhancement Program for RTC Clerks of graduates of law schools, including bar topnotchers. Court (Region VII) December 2–4, Cebu City Prior to his career in government, Justice Jardeleza had an extensive private law practice. He joined Angara Abello  Personal Security Training for Judges Concepcion Regala and Cruz (ACCRALAW) in 1975 and December 2–4, PTC, Tagaytay City became partner in 1981. He was the only junior partner allowed to be a member of both the Litigation and Corporate  Career Development Program for Court Legal (Special Projects) Departments. In 1986, he became Researchers Chairman of the ACCRALAW Litigation Department. December 9–10, Tagaytay City In 1987, Justice Jardeleza left ACCRALAW and founded  Jardeleza Sobrevinas Diaz Hayudini and Bodegon. In 1990, Seminar-Workshop on Money Laundering and he established the Jardeleza Law Offices as a solo practice. Other Financial Crimes (Region VI) Later, he joined Roco Bunag Kapunan Migallos and December 9–10, Bacolod City Jardeleza, as partner, where he headed the Litigation and Labor Law Departments. VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 21

In the present case, respondent Cortes’ appointment as IO V in the CHR by the Commission En Banc, where his father is a member, is covered by the prohibition. Commissioner Mallari’s abstention from voting did not cure the nepotistic character of the appointment because the Administrative Law evil sought to be avoided by the prohibition still exists. His mere presence during the deliberation for the appointment of IO V created an impression of influence and cast doubt Nepotism defined. on the impartiality and neutrality of the Commission En Banc.

Nepotism is defined as an appointment issued in favor of a (Abad, J., Civil Service Commission v. Maricelle M. Cortes, G.R. No. relative within the third civil degree of consanguinity or 200103, April 23, 2014.) affinity of any of the following: (1) appointing authority; (2) recommending authority ; (3) chief of the bureau or office; and (4) person exercising immediate supervision over Labor Law the appointee. Here, it is undisputed that respondent Cortes is a relative of Commissioner Mallari in the first degree of Requisites of a valid dismissal based on loss of trust consanguinity, as in fact Cortes is the daughter of and confidence. Commissioner Mallari. By way of exception, the following shall not be In M+W Zander Philippines, Inc. v. Enriquez the requisites covered by the prohibition: (1) persons employed in a of a valid dismissal based on loss of trust and confidence, confidential capacity; (2) teachers; (3) physicians; and (4) follows: members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. In the Article 282(c) of the Labor Code allows an employer present case, however, the appointment of respondent to terminate the services of an employee for loss Cortes as IO V in the CHR does not fall to any of the of trust and confidence. Certain guidelines must exemptions provided by law. In her defense, respondent be observed for the employer to terminate an Cortes merely raises the argument that the appointing employee for loss of trust and confidence. It was authority referred to in Section 59 of the Administrative held in General Bank and Trust Company v. Court of Code is the Commission En Banc and not the individual Appeals, viz.: Commissioners who compose it. [L]oss of confidence should not be simulated. It The purpose of Section 59 on the rule against nepotism should not be used as a subterfuge for causes which are improper, illegal, or unjustified. Loss of is to take out the discretion of the appointing and confidence may not be arbitrarily asserted in the face recommending authority on the matter of appointing or of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It must be recommending for appointment a relative. The rule insures genuine, not a mere afterthought to justify earlier the objectivity of the appointing or recommending official action taken in bad faith. by preventing that objectivity from being in fact tested. The first requisite for dismissal on the ground Clearly, the prohibition against nepotism is intended to of loss of trust and confidence is that the employee apply to natural persons. It is one pernicious evil impeding concerned must be one holding a position of trust the civil service and the efficiency of its personnel. and confidence. Moreover, basic rule in statutory construction is the There are two classes of positions of trust: legal maxim that “we must interpret not by the letter that managerial employees and fiduciary rank-and-file employees. killeth, but by the spirit that giveth life.” To rule that the prohibition applies only to the Commission, and not to the Managerial employees are defined as those individual members who compose it, will render the vested with the powers or prerogatives to lay down prohibition meaningless. Apparently, the Commission En management policies and to hire, transfer, suspend, lay-off, recall, discharge, assign or discipline Banc, which is a body created by fiction of law, can never employees or effectively recommend such have relatives to speak of. managerial actions. They refer to those whose Indeed, it is absurd to declare that the prohibitive veil primary duty consists of the management of the on nepotism does not include appointments made by a establishment in which they are employed or of a department or a subdivision thereof, and to other group of individuals acting as a body. What cannot be done officers or members of the managerial staff. Officers directly cannot be done indirectly. This principle is and members of the managerial staff perform work elementary and does not need explanation. Certainly, if directly related to management policies of their acts that cannot be legally done directly can be done employer and customarily and regularly exercise indirectly, then all laws would be illusory. discretion and independent judgment. 22 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Doctrinal Reminders ownership of the husband or the wife. Although the property Labor Law (continued) appears to be registered in the name of the husband, it has the inherent character of conjugal property if it was The second class or fiduciary rank-and-file acquired for valuable consideration during marriage. It employees consist of cashiers, auditors, property retains its conjugal nature. custodians, etc., or those who, in the normal exercise of their functions, regularly handle In order to rebut the presumptive conjugal nature of significant amounts of money or property. These the property, the petitioner must present strong, clear and employees, though rank-and-file, are routinely convincing evidence of exclusive ownership of one of the charged with the care and custody of the employer’s money or property, and are thus classified as spouses. The burden of proving that the property belongs occupying positions of trust and confidence. exclusively to the wife or to the husband rests upon the party asserting it. x x x x In the present case, aside from its allegation that the The second requisite of terminating an subject property is no longer conjugal and its assertion that employee for loss of trust and confidence is that it is a mortgagee in good faith, the petitioner bank offered there must be an act that would justify the loss of trust and confidence. To be a valid cause for no evidence, convincing to the Court, that the subject dismissal, the loss of confidence must be based property exclusively belonged to Jose, Sr. As stated earlier, on a willful breach of trust and founded on clearly the petitioner bank failed to overcome the legal established facts. presumption that the disputed property was conjugal. Thus, the conclusion of both lower courts that the subject property To summarize, the first requisite is that the employee was conjugal property holds. Factual findings of the CA concerned must be one holding a position of trust and affirming those of the trial court are binding on the Court confidence, thus, one who is either: (1) a managerial unless there is a clear showing that such findings are tainted employee; or (2) a fiduciary rank-and-file employee, who, in with arbitrariness, capriciousness or palpable error. the normal exercise of his or her functions, regularly handles significant amounts of money or property of the employer. (Brion, J., Philippine National Bank v. Jose Garcia and Children Nora The second requisite is that the loss of confidence must be Garcia, Jose Garcia, Jr., Bobby Garcia and Jimmy Garcia and Heirs of Rogelio Garcia Namely: Celedonio Garcia, Danilo Garcia, Elsa Garcia, based on a willful breach of trust and founded on clearly Fermin Garcia, Heherson Garcia, Gregorio Garcia, Imelda Garcia and established facts. Jane Garcia., G.R. No. 182839, June 2, 2014.) In Lima Land, Inc. v. Cuevas, we discussed the difference Novation; its concept. between the criteria for determining the validity of invoking loss of trust and confidence as a ground for terminating a managerial employee on the one hand and a rank-and-file Novation was extensively discussed by the Court in Garcia v. employee on the other. In the said case, we held that with Llamas: respect to rank-and-file personnel, loss of trust and Novation is a mode of extinguishing an obligation by confidence, as ground for valid dismissal, requires proof of changing its objects or principal obligations, by involvement in the alleged events in question, and that mere substituting a new debtor in place of the old one, or by uncorroborated assertions and accusations by the employer subrogating a third person to the rights of the creditor. would not suffice. With respect to a managerial employee, Article 1293 of the Civil Code defines novation as the mere existence of a basis for believing that such follows: employee has breached the trust of his employer would ART. 1293. Novation which consists in substituting a suffice for his dismissal. new debtor in the place of the original one, may be made even without the knowledge or against the will (Velasco, Jr., J., Wesleyan University-Philippines v. Nowella Reyes, G.R. of the latter, but not without the consent of the No. 208321, July 30, 2014.) creditor. Payment by the new debtor gives him rights mentioned in articles 1236 and 1237. In general, there are two modes of substituting Civil Law the person of the debtor: (1) expromision and (2) delegacion. In expromision, the initiative for the Registration of a property in the name of one spouse change does not come rom — and may even be does not destroy its conjugal nature. made without the knowledge of — the debtor, since it consists of a third person’s assumption of the obligation. As such, it logically requires the consent Registration of a property alone in the name of one spouse of the third person and the creditor. In delegacion, does not destroy its conjugal nature. What is material is the debtor offers, and the creditor accepts, a third the time when the property was acquired. The registration person who consents to the substitution and of the property is not conclusive evidence of the exclusive assumes the obligation; thus, the consent of these VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 23

three persons are necessary. Both modes of petitioner shall take an oath of allegiance to the Philippines substitution by the debtor require the consent of the as a sovereign nation. creditor. It is a well-entrenched rule that Philippine citizenship Novation may also be extinctive or modificatory. should not easily be given away. All those seeking to acquire It is extinctive when an old obligation is terminated it must prove, to the satisfaction of the Court, that they by the creation of a new one that takes the place of the former. It is merely modificatory when the old have complied with all the requirements of the law. The obligation subsists to the extent that it remains reason for this requirement is simple. Citizenship involves compatible with the amendatory agreement. political status; hence, every person must be proud of his Whether extinctive or modificatory, novation is made citizenship and should cherish it. Verily, a naturalization either by changing the object or the principal case is not an ordinary judicial contest, to be decided in conditions, referred to as objective or real novation; favor of the party whose claim is supported by the or by substituting the person of the debtor or preponderance of the evidence. Naturalization is not a right, subrogating a third person to the rights of the but one of privilege of the most discriminating, as well as creditor, an act known as subjective or personal delicate and exacting nature, affecting, as it does, public novation. For novation to take place, the following requisites must concur: interest of the highest order, and which may be enjoyed only under the precise conditions prescribed by law therefor. 1) There must be a previous valid obligation. Jurisprudence dictates that in judicial naturalization, 2) The parties concerned must agree to a new the application must show substantial and formal contract. compliance with CA No. 473. In other words, an applicant 3) The old contract must be extinguished. must comply with the jurisdictional requirements, establish 4) There must be a valid new contract. his or her possession of the qualifications and none of the disqualifications enumerated under the law, and present at Novation may also be express or implied. It is least two character witnesses to support his allegations. In express when the new obligation declares in Ong v. Republic of the Philippines, the Court listed the unequivocal terms that the old obligation is extinguished. It is implied when the new obligation requirements for character witnesses, namely: is incompatible with the old one on every point. 1. That they are citizens of the Philippines; The test of incompatibility is whether the two obligations can stand together, each one with its own independent 2. That they are “credible persons”; existence. (Emphasis supplied) 3. That they personally know the petitioner; (Leonen, J., Arco Pulp and Paper Co., Inc. and Candida A. Santos v. Dan T. Lim, doing business under the name and style of Quality Papers & 4. That they personally know him to be a resident Plastic Products Enterprises, G.R. No. 206806, June 25, 2014.) of the Philippines for the period of time required by law; Naturalization process may be judicial or 5. That they personally know him to be a person administrative; qualifications of applicant and his of good repute; witnesses. 6. That they personally know him to be morally No less than the 1987 Constitution enumerates who are irreproachable; Filipino citizens. Among those listed are citizens by 7. That he has, in their opinion, all the naturalization, which refers to the legal act of adopting an qualifications necessary to become a citizen alien and clothing him with the privilege of a native-born of the Philippines; and citizen. Under the present laws, the process of naturalization can be judicial or administrative. Judicially, 8. That he “is not in any way disqualified under CA No. 473 provides that after hearing the petition for the provisions” of the Naturalization Law. citizenship and receipt of evidence showing that the In vouching for the good moral character of the petitioner has all the qualifications and none of the applicant for citizenship, a witness, for purposes of disqualifications required by law, the competent court may naturalization, must be a “credible” person as he becomes order the issuance of the proper naturalization certificate an insurer of the character of the candidate. The Court, in and the registration thereof in the proper civil registry. On Ong, explained: the other hand, Republic Act (RA) No. 9139 provides that aliens born and residing in the Philippines may be granted a “credible” person is, to our mind, not only an individual who has not been previously convicted Philippine citizenship by administrative proceeding by filing of a crime; who is not a police character and has no a petition for citizenship with the Special Committee, which, police record; who has not perjured in the past; or in view of the facts before it, may approve the petition and whose “affidavit” or testimony is not incredible. issue a certificate of naturalization. In both cases, the What must be “credible” is not the declaration 24 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Doctrinal Reminders Civil Law (continued) placing emphasis on his good traits and character. This is expected of a person who longs to gain benefits and made, but the person making it. This implies that advantages that Philippine citizenship bestows. Therefore, such person must have a good standing in the a serious assessment of an applicant’s witnesses, both as to community; that he is known to be honest and the credibility of their person and their very testimony, is an upright; that he is reputed to be trustworthy and essential facet of naturalization proceedings that may not reliable; and that his word may be taken on its face be brushed aside. value, as a good warranty of the worthiness of the (Mendoza, J., Dennis L. Go. v. Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 202809, petitioner. July 2, 2014.) In consonance with the above dictum, in Lim Ching Tian Marriage ceremony defined. v. Republic, the Court explained that the “law requires that a vouching witness should have actually known an applicant While Article 352 of the RPC, as amended, does not for whom he testified for the requisite period prescribed specifically define a “marriage ceremony” and what therein to give him the necessary competence to act as constitutes its “illegal” performance, Articles 3(3) and 6 of such. The reason behind this requirement is that a vouching the Family Code are clear on these matters. These provisions witness is in a way an insurer of the character of petitioner were taken from Article 55 of the New Civil Code which, in because on his testimony the court is of necessity compelled turn, was copied from Section 3 of the Marriage Law with to rely in deciding the merits of his petition. It is, therefore, no substantial amendments. imperative that he be competent and reliable. And he is only competent to testify on his conduct, character and Article 6 of the Family Code provides that “[n]o moral fitness if he has had the opportunity to observe him prescribed form or religious rite for the solemnization of personally, if not intimately, during the period he has the marriage is required. It shall be necessary, however, for allegedly known him.” The law, in effect, requires that the the contracting parties to appear personally before the character witnesses be not mere ordinary acquaintances solemnizing officer and declare in the presence of not of the applicant, but possessed of such intimate knowledge less than two witnesses of legal age that they take each of the latter as to be competent to testify of their personal other as husband and wife.” knowledge; and that they have each one of the requisite Pertinently, Article 3(3) mirrors Article 6 of the Family qualifications and none of the statutory disqualifications. Code and particularly defines a marriage ceremony as that In this case, the OSG mainly harps on the petitioner’s which takes place with the appearance of the contracting failure to prove that his witnesses are credible. parties before the solemnizing officer and their personal declaration that they take each other as husband and wife The Court agrees. in the presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age. The records of the case show that the joint affidavits Even prior to the date of the enactment of Article 352 executed by petitioner’s witnesses did not establish their of the RPC, as amended, the rule was clear that no own qualification to stand as such in a naturalization prescribed form of religious rite for the solemnization of proceeding. In turn, petitioner did not present evidence the marriage is required. However, as correctly found by proving that the persons he presented were credible. In the CA, the law sets the minimum requirements constituting the words of the CA, “he did not prove that his witnesses a marriage ceremony: first, there should be the personal had good standing in the community, known to be honest appearance of the contracting parties before a solemnizing and upright, reputed to be trustworthy and reliable, and officer; and second, their declaration in the presence of that their word may be taken at face value, as a good not less than two witnesses of legal age, that they take warranty of the worthiness of petitioner.” each other as husband and wife.

While there is no showing that petitioner’s witnesses (Brion, J., Rene Ronulo v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 182438, July were of doubtful moral inclinations, there was likewise no 2, 2014.) indication that they were persons whose qualifications were at par with the requirements of the law on naturalization. Simply put, no evidence was ever proffered to prove the witnesses’ good standing in the community, honesty, moral Criminal Law uprightness, and most importantly, reliability. As a consequence, their statements about the petitioner do not possess the measure of “credibility” demanded of in Consequences of an acquittal on the civil liability of naturalization cases. This lack of “credibility” on the part of the accused. the witnesses, unfortunately, weakens or renders futile petitioner’s claim of worthiness. An applicant for Philippine The consequences of an acquittal on the civil liability of the citizenship would carefully testify as to his qualifications, accused are as follows: VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 25

Our law recognizes two kinds of acquittal, with Litis pendentia; its requisites. different effects on the civil liability of the accused. First is an acquittal on the ground that the accused Litis pendentia refers to the situation where another action is not the author of the act or omission complained is pending between the same parties for the same cause of of. This instance closes the door to civil liability, action so that one of these actions is unnecessary and for a person who has been found to be not the vexatious. The dismissal of a civil action on the ground of perpetrator of any act or omission cannot and can litis pendentias based on the policy that a party is not never be held liable for such act or omission. There allowed to vex another more than once regarding the same being no delict, civil liability ex delicto is out of the subject matter and for the same cause of action in order question, and the civil action, if any, which may be that possible conflicting judgments may be avoided for the instituted must be based on grounds other than sake of the stability of the rights and statuses of persons. the delict complained of. This is the situation contemplated in Rule III of the Rules of Court. The To constitute litis pendentia, the following requisites second instance is an acquittal based on must be present: (1) identity of the parties in the two reasonable doubt on the guilt of the accused. In this case, even if the guilt of the accused has not actions; (2) substantial identity in the causes of action and been satisfactorily established, he is not exempt in the reliefs sought by the parties; (3) and the identity from civil liability which may be proved by between the two actions should be such that any judgment preponderance of evidence only. This is the that may be rendered in one case, regardless of which situation contemplated in Article 29 of the Civil party is successful, would amount to res judicata in the Code, where the civil action for damages is “for the other. same act or omission.” x x x. Indisputably, the requisite identity of parties is met in (Peralta, J., Cristina B. Castillo v. Phillip R. Salvador, G.R. No. 191240, July 30, 2014.) the present case. The disputed point is whether there is substantial identity in the causes of action and in the reliefs sought in the cases for annulment of lease contract filed by Remedial Law Stop and Save and for unlawful detainer filed by Dominga. “The test to determine whether the causes of action are identical is to ascertain whether the same evidence Consideration of other grounds not raised or assigned will sustain both actions, or whether there is an identity in as errors. the facts essential to the maintenance of the two actions. If the same facts or evidence would sustain both, the two The Supreme Court has allowed the consideration of other actions are considered the same, and a judgment in the grounds not raised or assigned as errors in several instances. first case is a bar to the subsequent action.” In the case of Manila International Airport Authority v. Rivera Village Lessee Homeowners Association, In the present case, while there is an identity in the Incorporated, the Court enumerated such instances. Thus: facts between the two actions, involving as they do the same lease contract, the issues and the relief prayed for The Court has allowed the consideration of other are different so that the causes of action remain entirely grounds not raised or assigned as errors specifically distinct from each other. in the following instances: (1) grounds not assigned as errors but affecting jurisdiction over the subject In the unlawful detainer suit, the issue is who between matter; (2) matters not assigned as errors on appeal the parties has a better right to physical possession over but are evidently plain or clerical errors within the the property or possession de facto and the principal relief contemplation of the law; (3) matters not assigned as errors on appeal but consideration of which is prayed for is for Stop and Save to vacate the property for necessary in arriving at a just decision and complete failure to pay the rent. In contrast, in the annulment of resolution of the case or to serve the interest of lease contract, the issue is the validity of the lease contract, justice or to avoid dispensing piecemeal justice; where Stop and Save puts in issue Dominga’s ownership. (4) matters not specifically assigned as errors on appeal but raised in the trial court and are matters In other words, the issue of physical possession in the of record having some bearing on the issue action for unlawful detainer cannot be identical with the submitted which the parties failed to raise or which issues of ownership and validity of contract in the action the lower court ignored; (5) matters not assigned for annulment. From these essential differences, the lack as errors on appeal but closely related to an error of required identity in the causes of action for litis pendentia assigned; and (6) matters not assigned as errors to exist cannot be denied. on appeal but upon which the determination of a question properly assigned is dependent. Brion, J., Dominga B. Quito v. Stop & Save Corporation, as represented by Gregory David Dickenson, as its Chairman, and Julieta Buan- (Mendoza, J., Heirs of Paciano Yabao, Represented by Remedios Chan v. Dickenson, as its President, Roberto Buan, Henry Co, Angelina Lumotan, Paz Lentejas Van Der Kolk, G.R. No. 207266, June 25, 2014.) Rodel Pineda and Rose Calma, G.R. No. 186657, June 11, 2014. 26 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Doctrinal Reminders Remedial Law (continued)

Service of summons upon judicial entity.

Section 11, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court provides the rule employees fall within the jurisdiction of the labor tribunals on service of summons upon a juridical entity. It provides such that when the claim for damages is grounded on the that summons may be served upon a juridical entity only “wanton failure and refusal” without just cause of an through its officers. Thus: employee to report for duty despite repeated notices served upon him of the disapproval of his application for leave of SEC. 11. Service upon domestic private juridical entity. – absence, the same falls within the purview of Civil Law, to When the defendant is a corporation, partnership wit: or association organized under the laws of the Philippines with a juridical personality, service may As early as Singapore Airlines Limited v. Paño, we be made on the president, managing partner, established that not all disputes between an employer general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or and his employee(s) fall within the jurisdiction of the in-house counsel. labor tribunals. We differentiated between abandonment per se and the manner and We have already established that the enumeration in consequent effects of such abandonment and ruled Section 11 of Rule 14 is exclusive. Service of summons upon that the first, is a labor case, while the second, is a persons other than those officers enumerated in Section 11 civil law case. is invalid. Even substantial compliance is not sufficient service of summons. Upon the facts and issues involved, jurisdiction over the present controversy must be held to belong to the This provision of the rule does not limit service to the civil Courts. While seemingly petitioner’s claim for officers’ places of residence or offices. If summons may not damages arises from employer-employee relations, be served upon these persons personally at their residences and the latest amendment to Article 217 of the Labor Code under PD No. 1691 and BP Blg. 130 provides or offices, summons may be served upon any of the officers that all other claims arising from employer- wherever they may be found. employee relationship are cognizable by Labor (Leonen, J., Cathay Metal Corporation v. Laguna West Multi-Purpose Arbiters [citation omitted], in essence, petitioner’s Cooperative, Inc., G.R. No. 172204, July 2, 2014.) claim for damages is grounded on the “wanton failure and refusal” without just cause of private respondent Summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings Cruz to report for duty despite repeated notices served distinguished. upon him of the disapproval of his application for leave of absence without pay. This, coupled with the further averment that Cruz “maliciously and with bad faith” A summary judgment is usually distinguished from a violated the terms and conditions of the conversion judgment on the pleadings. Under Rule 34 of the 1997 training course agreement to the damage of petitioner Rules of Civil Procedure, trial may be dispensed with and a removes the present controversy from the coverage of case decided through judgment on the pleadings if the the Labor Code and brings it within the purview of Civil answer filed fails to tender an issue or otherwise admits the Law. material allegations of the claimant’s pleading. Clearly, the complaint was anchored not on the Judgment on the pleadings is proper when the answer abandonment per se by private respondent Cruz of his job—as the latter was not required in the filed fails to tender any issue, or otherwise admits the Complaint to report back to work—but on the manner material allegations in the complaint. On the other hand, and consequent effects of such abandonment of work in a summary judgment, the answer filed tenders issues as translated in terms of the damages which petitioner had specific denials and affirmative defenses are pleaded, but to suffer. x x x. the issues raised are sham, fictitious, or otherwise not genuine. Indeed, jurisprudence has evolved the rule that claims for damages under Article 217(a)(4) of the Labor Code, to (Leonen, J., Olivarez Corporation and Dr. Pablo R. Olivarez v. Benjamin be cognizable by the LA, must have a reasonable causal Castillo, G.R. No. 196251, July 9, 2014.) connection with any of the claims provided for in that article. Only if there is such a connection with the other claims can Jurisdiction over dispute between an employer and a claim for damages be considered as arising from employer- his employees. employee relations.

The Court ruled in the recent case of Portillo v. Rudolf Lietz, (Peralta, J., Indophil Textile Mills, Inc. v. Engr. Salvador Adviento, G.R. Inc. that not all disputes between an employer and his No. 171212, August 4, 2014.) VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 27

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 89-2014

TO: ALL SELECTED FIRST LEVEL COURT JUDGES AND BRANCH CLERKS OF COURT/OFFICERS IN CHARGE SUBJECT: SMALL CLAIMS CASE MONITORING SYSTEM (SC2MS) OCA CIRCULAR NO. 87-2014 SURVEY On March 26, 2014, the Office of the Court Administrator, TO: ALL JUDGES/PENSIONERS AND SURVIVORSHIP in cooperation with the American Bar Association Rule of PENSIONERS Law Initiative, disseminated survey/questionnaires on the Small Claims Case Monitoring System (SC2MS) to a select SUBJECT: GUIDELINES ON THE RELEASE OF PENSIONS FOR group of courts to gather insights and perspectives on how JUDGES/PENSIONERS AND SURVIVORSHIP PENSIONERS to improve the Amended Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Pursuant to OCA Circulars Nos. 18-2013 (February 8, 2013), Cases and the SC2MS.1 103-2013 (August 7, 2013) and 55-2014 (April 10, 2014), the Automated Payroll System (APS) was fully implemented To further assess the needed amendments to the for the payment of salaries and allowances to all judges and Amended Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases as well personnel of the lower courts. Payroll crediting dates for as improve the SC2MS, it is necessary to acquire additional salaries and allowances were specified for uniform data from the Iitigants. Thus, the branch clerks of court/ 2 implementation. Notably, pensions of retired judges/ officers in charge of the selected courts are hereby directed pensioners are likewise released through the automated to: (1) encode on to the SC2MS all the required data for the payroll system at their options. However, all survivorship cases you have listed as samples under OCA Circular No. 43- pensioners receive the pensions only by checks to strictly 2014, and (2) disseminate the attached questionnaires* for monitor compliance with the requirements for their receipt plaintiffs, and thereafter mail them back to the Office of of the survivorship pensions. the Court Administrator using the paid envelopes provided herein. In order to rationalize the release of pensions, whether by check or by APS, together with the releases of salaries Your utmost cooperation in completing the survey is and allowances of incumbent judges and personnel of the hereby enjoined. lower courts through APS, specific dates for the release of July 4, 2014. pensions was recommended by the Office of the Court Administrator and was APPROVED by Chief Justice MARIA (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ LOURDES P. A. SERENO on May 23, 2014. Court Administrator

Thus, beginning July 2014, the following guidelines shall 1. OCA Circular No. 43-2014 be observed in the release of pensions for judges/pensioners 2. Manila MeTC Br. 6; Manila MeTC Br. 11; Quezon City MeTC Br. 35; and survivorship pensioners: Makati City MeTC Br. 65; Marikina MeTC Br. 92; Dagupan City; MTCC Br. 2; Bacnotan MTC; Rosales MTC; Urdaneta City MTCC; Alfonso 1. Pensions of retired judges/pensioners who Lista-Aguinaldo MCTC; Aparri-Calayan MCTC Br. 2; Ilaga MTC; receive their pensions through APS shall be Limay MTC; Malolos City MTCC Br. 1; Marilao MTC; Meycauayan credited not earlier than the 7th working day of City MTCC Br. 1; Olongapo City MTCC Br. 3; Rizal MTC; Silang- Amadeo MCTC; Brooke’s Point-Espanola MCTC; Calamba City every month; MTCC; Bauan MTC; Looc-Alcantara-Sta. Fe-San Jose MCTC; Rosario 2. Pensions of retired judges/pensioners who MTC; Libmanan-Cabusao MCTC; Iriga City MTCC Br. 1; Tabaco City receive their pensions through Modified MTCC; Cadiz City MTCC; Iloilo City MTCC Br. 8; Miag-Ao MTC; Pontevedra-Panay MCTC; Pototan-Mina MCTC; Silay City MTCC; Disbursement Scheme (MDS) checks shall Toledo City MTCC; Carmen-Batuan MCTC; Cebu City MTCC Br. 1; likewise be released not earlier than the 7th Mandaue City MeTC Br. 3; Carigara MTC; Catarman- Lope De Vega working day of every month, by mail or by MCTC; Barauen MTC: Leyte MTC; Maasin City MTCC; Liloy- Tampilisan MCTC; Catbalogan City MTCC; Pagadian City MTCC Br. personal pick-up; and 1: Zamboanga City MTCC Br. 2; Zamboanga City MTCC Br. 4; Dapitan 3. Pensions of survivorship pensioners shall be City MTCC; Aurora MTC; Cagayan De Oro City MTCC Br. 1; Gingoog released not earlier than the 10th working day City MTCC: Maramag-Kalilangan-Pangantucan MCTC; Oroquieta City MTCC Br. 2; Ozamis City MTCC Br. 3; Laguindingan-Gitagum of the month, by mail or by personal pick-up. MCTC; Bansalan-Magsaysay MCTC; Norala-T’boli-Sto. Nino MCTC; For strict compliance. Tupi MTC; Kidapawan City MTCC; Davao City MTCC Br. 1; Island Garden City of Samal MTCC Br. 1; lIigan City MTCC Br. 3; Kapatagan June 23, 2014. MTC; Tacurong City MTCC; Pigkawayan-Alamada-Banisilan MCTC; Pres. Roxas-Antipas-Arakan MCTC. (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ * Questionnaires available in the PHILJA website Court Administrator (http://philja.judiciary.gov.ph). 28 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Office in its letter dated May 26, 2014, and were approved OCA CIRCULAR NO. 90-2014 by the LBP through Ms. Delma O. Bandiola, Assistant Vice President/Relationship Officer, North NCR Cluster B, to wit: TO: ALL OFFICIALS AND PERSONNEL OF THE FIRST AND (1) Reduction of initial/opening deposit and SECOND LEVEL COURTS maintaining balance of Regular Savings SUBJECT: A.M. NO. 12-4-6-SC (RE: BIR LETTER OF AUTHORITY Account from P10,000 to P1,000 for the TO EXAMINE SUPREME COURT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND Fiduciary Fund and Sheriff’s Trust Fund; OTHER ACCOUNTING RECORDS) (2) Waiver of certification fee on bank balances; In the June 25, 2014 Resolution of the Honorable Court En and Banc in A.M. No. 12-4-6-SC (Re: BIR Letter of Authority to (3) Waiver of fee on requests for snapshots and Examine Supreme Court Books of Account and Other re-printing of bank statements. Accounting Records), the Court resolved, upon the The foregoing shall also serve as an authority to open a recommendation of the Commission on Audit under Audit Fiduciary Fund and Sheriff’s Trust Fund account. Observation Memorandum No. 2014-001 (SAJ), as submitted by the Fiscal Management and Budget Office, to July 31, 2014. APPROVE the withholding and remittance of the correct (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ amount of tax required to be deducted and withheld from Court Administrator the Special Allowance for the Judiciary (SAJ) of officials and employees, as well as the withholding of the corresponding taxes from the following: OCA CIRCULAR NO. 104-2014 (1) The monthly SAJ of incumbent justices, judges and judiciary officials with the equivalent rank TO: ALL JUDGES OF THE FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS of a Court of Appeals Justice or Regional Trial Court judge; SUBJECT: COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED JUNE 25, 2014 (2) The monthly special allowance in an amount IN CA-G.R. SP NO. 131969, ENTITLED RICARDO MENDEZ Y equivalent to the SAJ being received by judiciary DUALAN V. HON. LIZA MARIE R. PICARDAL-TECSON, ET AL. officials not included in item no. 1; and In his letter dated July 30, 2014, Prosecutor General Claro (3) The additional allowance from the surplus of A. Arellano reported that some of the courts in the National the SAJ Fund that may be authorized to be given Capital Judicial Region “have dismissed a significant amount to judiciary officials and employees who are of criminal cases for lack of jurisdiction, using as basis the not direct beneficiaries under Republic Act No. decision of the Fourteenth Division of the Court of Appeals 9227. in the case, “Ricardo Mendez y Dualan v. Hon. Liza Marie For your information, guidance and strict compliance. R. Picardal-Tecson, Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 144 and People of the Philippines,” July 7, 2014. docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 131969, promulgated on June (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ 25, 2014.” With respect thereto, Prosecutor General Court Administrator Arellano disclosed that they “filed a Motion for Reconsideration to the aforementioned decision.” OCA CIRCULAR NO. 99-2014 By reason thereof, Prosecutor General Arellano sought the assistance of the Office of the Court Administrator “to provide our Honorable Courts the necessary guidance TO: EXECUTIVE/PRESIDING JUDGES, CLERKS OF COURT/ pertaining to the subject CA decision.” He added that “the OFFICERS IN CHARGE/ACCOUNTABLE OFFICERS OF THE FIRST Honorable Courts (should) restrain the dismissal of criminal AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS informations filed by (their) prosecution offices on the basis SUBJECT: REDUCTION OF INITIAL/OPENING DEPOSIT AND of the said CA decision while (their) Motion for MAINTAINING BALANCE OF REGULAR SAVINGS ACCOUNT Reconsideration is still pending before the Court of Appeals.” FROM P10,000 TO P1,000 FOR THE FIDUCIARY AND SHERIFF’S It is clear that the decision in the subject cases has yet TRUST FUND ACCOUNTS; WAIVER OF CERTIFICATION FEE ON to attain finality. Thus, the same should not be cited as basis BANK BALANCES; AND WAIVER OF FEE ON REQUESTS FOR in the meantime to quash criminal informations being filed SNAPSHOTS AND RE-PRINTING OF BANK STATEMENTS by prosecution offices which are found to be suffering from Quoted hereunder, for the information and guidance of all the supposedly fatal defect of lack of the required approval concerned, are certain matters on bank policies of the Land by the concerned city prosecutors. Accordingly, and until Bank of the Philippines (LBP) which were requested by this further notice, the proper course of action to take is to VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 29 maintain the status quo and newly-filed criminal cases should Any prior circular from the Office of the Court Administrator not be dismissed citing as authority the decision in the on this matter which is contrary to the foregoing is hereby Mendez case (CA-G.R. SP No. 131969) since the said ruling superseded. is not yet final. For your information, guidance and strict compliance. For strict compliance. August 22, 2014. August 8, 2014. (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ Court Administrator Court Administrator OCA CIRCULAR NO. 112-2014 OCA CIRCULAR NO. 110-2014

TO: ALL CONCERNED JUDGES, CLERKS OF COURT, AND OTHER TO: THE COURT OF APPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN COURT OF COURT PERSONNEL TAX APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS, SHARI’A DISTRICT SUBJECT: COURT RECOGNITION OF BJMP’S PARALEGAL COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL PROGRAM COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI’A CIRCUIT COURTS, THE OFFICE Acting on the letter of the Bureau of Jail Management and OF THE STATE PROSECUTOR, PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE AND Penology (BJMP) dated March 28, 2014 that “it has been THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES the perennial report of (their) Paralegal Officers that they find utmost difficulty in asking for court records and following SUBJECT: BAR MATTER NO. 2604 (RE: CLARIFICATION RELATIVE up cases with many court personnel,” and pursuant to the TO SECTIONS 2 AND 13, RULE III OF THE 2004 RULES ON Resolution of the Court in A.M. No. 12-11-2-SC (Guidelines NOTARIAL PRACTICE) for Decongesting Holding Jails by Enforcing the Rights of In the Resolution of the Court En Banc dated December 11, Accused Persons to Bail and to Speedy Trial), dated March 2012 in the above-cited administrative matter, the Court 18, 2014, and took effect on May 1, 2014, which recognized resolved the clarification sought by Atty. Noreen Grace the need “to effectively implement existing policies laid Salise-Gonzaga relative to the requirements for renewal of down by the Constitution, the laws, and the rules respecting notarial commission, the full context of which is reproduced the accused’s rights to bail and to speedy trial in the context below, to wit: of decongesting our detention jails and humanizing the conditions of detained persons pending the hearing of their In a Letter dated September 4, 2012, Atty. Noreen cases,” all judges, clerks of court, and other concerned court Grace Salise-Gonzaga seeks a clarification on the personnel of all first and second level courts are ENJOINED requirements for renewal of notarial commission, specifically Section 13 of Rule III of the 2004 Rules to RECOGNIZE the BJMP Paralegal Program and its on Notarial Practice. She avers that the Clerk of Court Paralegal Officers, “who are tasked to assist inmates, avail in her judicial region “requires us to comply with of legal modes of release, and conduct coordination the provisions of Rule III, Section 2 all over again, (mechanisms) to help expedite the resolution of their plus the requirement of Section 13.” pending cases,” for a speedier disposition of cases and WHEREFORE, for renewal of notarial commission, decongestion of jails. specifically under Section 13, Rule III of the 2004 For strict compliance. Rules on Notarial Practice, aside from payment of the application fee, a notary public needs only to file a written August 26, 2014. application with the Executive Judge within forty-five (45) days before the expiration of the notarial (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ commission, attaching thereto clearances from the Court Administrator following: (1) Executive Judge of the Regional Trial OCA CIRCULAR NO. 113-2014 Court who will issue the notarial commission; (2) Office of the Bar Confidant; TO: ALL TRIAL COURT JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT/ (3) Local Chapter of the Integrated Bar of BRANCH CLERKS OF COURT the Philippines where the applicant is SUBJECT: INVENTORY OF CONFISCATED PROPERTY BONDS seeking notarial commission; and (4) National Bureau of Investigation. It has come to our attention that majority of the branches (Emphasis supplied) of the lower courts have not been submitting to the Office 30 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Circulars Administrator (OCA) relative to the payment of fines in OCA Circular No. 113-2014 (continued) administrative matters, all concerned justices, judges, court officials and personnel are hereby informed of the following of the Court Administrator (OCA) their reports on procedure: confiscated property bonds in both civil and criminal cases where such bonds were posted. OCA Circular No. 4-2002 In order to have a uniform procedure in the payment of was issued on May 8, 2002 to the effect that all branches of fines imposed by the Court in administrative matters, all the lower courts are directed to submit an inventory of all fines shall be paid within 30 days from the finality of the confiscated property bonds. It is in this light that the OCA is decision or final resolution imposing the fine. Decisions and reiterating its previous directive, requiring all branches of resolutions in administrative cases which are immediately the trial courts to submit an inventory of confiscated executory shall be considered final, for purposes of the property bond. payment of fines, upon receipt of the subject decision or resolution and the fine shall be paid within the The inventory shall be reported using the following format: aforementioned period regardless of the filing of a Motion for Reconsideration. Payment shall be made with the Office of the Clerk of Court of the station where the respondent is assigned which, within five 5 days, shall furnish the Docket and Clearance Division (DCD), Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) with a certified copy of the receipt indicating therein the case number where the fine was imposed. Payment may also be made with the Cash Division of the Financial Management Office, OCA, which shall immediately furnish the DCD, OCA, with a certified copy of the receipt indicating therein the case number where the fine was imposed. The DCD shall inform the Court of all payments of fines in administrative matters. It shall likewise report to the Court any failure of respondent(s) to pay fines imposed by the Court.

The aforesaid inventory report shall be submitted to This Circular supersedes prior circulars/memoranda the Docket and Clearance Division, Legal Office, Office of inconsistent herewith and shall remain in force until further the Court Administrator, not later than 30 days from receipt orders from the Court. hereof. Henceforth, all branches of the lower courts are Strict compliance is hereby enjoined. enjoined to submit a report on the inventory of confiscated property bond, as the need arises. August 27, 2014. For strict compliance. (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ Court Administrator August 26, 2014. (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ Court Administrator OCA CIRCULAR NO. 119-2014

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 115-2014 TO: ALL CLERKS OF COURT, OFFICERS IN CHARGE, LIBRARIANS AND ACCOUNTABLE OFFICERS OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL TO: JUSTICES, JUDGES, COURT OFFICIALS AND PERSONNEL COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL OF THE THIRD, SECOND AND FIRST LEVEL COURTS CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI’A DISTRICT COURTS, SHARI’A SUBJECT: UNIFORM PERIOD AND PROCEDURE IN THE CIRCUIT COURTS AND MAINTENANCE OFFICES OF THE HALLS PAYMENT OF FINES IN ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS OF JUSTICE In accordance with the Court’s August 27, 2013 Resolution SUBJECT: CONDUCT OF PHYSICAL INVENTORY AND RENEWAL in A.M. No. P-03-1703 (Edna Fe F. Aquino v. Jose R. Martin, OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT FOR EQUIPMENT (ARE) Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Cauayan City, Isabela) For purposes of updating the records of property approving the circular proposed by the Office of the Court accountabilities and to determine the condition of all office VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 31

equipment, furniture, books and all other properties of the lower courts, all Clerks of Court, Officers in Charge, Librarians OCA CIRCULAR NO. 120-2014 and accountable officers of the lower courts and maintenance offices of the Halls of Justice are hereby directed to conduct a physical inventory of all court-issued TO: ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT OF SELECTED properties in their respective, offices, branches and libraries FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS IN QUEZON CITY, and to renew their Acknowledgment Receipt for Equipment MAKATI CITY, ANGELES CITY, ILOILO CITY, DAVAO CITY, (ARE). AND CEBU CITY The conduct of the inventory must be witnessed by a SUBJECT: PILOTING OF A NEW SYSTEM FOR SPEEDY representative from the nearest Commission on Audit (COA) COURT TRIAL office. The Supreme Court En Banc, in a Resolution dated The result of the inventory must be reflected in the March 18, 2014 in A.M. No. 14-03-02-SC (Re: Program for attached Inventory Report form, accomplished in triplicate, Piloting and Assessing the Proposed Revised Rules of Civil and must be duly attested by the representative of the Procedure), approved the Piloting of a New System for COA. Speedy Court Trial, the full text of which is appended herein as “Annex A.” In the preparation of the inventory reports, all court- issued properties, including equipment and other properties The rules of the new system shall apply to all civil actions which are issued by the offices of the Supreme Court (SC) or which have not yet undergone pre-trial in the selected first offices of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) without and second level courts mentioned in said rules, and shall ARE and donated properties whose ownership has been take effect on February 23, 2015. transferred to the SC, must be included in the report. The For your information, guidance, and strict compliance. condition (ex. serviceable, unserviceable) of each piece of property should be duly indicated in the “Remarks” column September 12, 2014. of the prescribed form. Information such as the property (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ number, serial number, the date the property was acquired Court Administrator and to whom it was issued must also be indicated. “ANNEX A” Not to be included in the Inventory Report are the properties issued by local government or non-government ANNOUNCING THE PILOTING OF agencies where ownership is not transferred to the court, A NEW SYSTEM FOR SPEEDY COURT TRIAL properties issued by the Department of Justice to the courts The Supreme Court has approved by Resolution A.M. 14- or offices housed in Halls of Justice for reason of lack of 03-02-SC dated March 8, 2014 the piloting of Rules 22 and formal transfer, and office supplies and other consumables. 24 of the draft Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, reproduced All Executive and Presiding Judges shall supervise the below. These Rules shall, beginning February 23, 2015, proper implementation of this directive within their apply to all civil actions in the following first and second respective jurisdictions to insure the proper accomplishment level courts that have not yet undergone pre-trial: and prompt submission of such reports to the Property Quezon City Division, Office of Administrative Offices, OCA. a. Regional Trial Courts: Branches 77, 78, 81, 84, 89, All Clerks of Courts, Officers in Charge, Librarians and 90, 92, 93, 97, 100, 218 and 225 accountable officers of the lower courts and maintenance b. Metropolitan Trial Courts: Branches 31, 36, 38 and offices of the Halls of Justice are required to submit their 42 respective Inventory Reports and ARE within 30 days from Makati City receipt of this Circular, and thereafter, to submit the a. Regional Trial Courts: Branches 57, 58, 60, 62, Inventory Report on or before the first week of January of 133, 134, 136, 137, 142 and 149 every succeeding year, and the ARE every three years on b. Metropolitan Trial Courts: Branches 61 and 67 the first week of January. Angeles City a. Regional Trial Courts: Branches 56 and 57 For strict compliance. b. Metropolitan Trial Courts: Branch 2 Iloilo City September 11, 2014. a. Regional Trial Courts: Branches 27, 28, 29, 37 and (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ 39 Court Administrator b. Metropolitan Trial Courts: Branches 6, 8 and 10 32 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Circulars OCA Circular No. 120-2014 (continued) (a) The court shall, motu proprio or on motion, give notice to the parties to simultaneously submit to the court within 30 days from notice and serve upon each other, Davao City the following: a. Regional Trial Courts: Branches 10, 12 and 16 b. Metropolitan Trial Courts: Branches 1 and 4 1. The judicial affidavits of their witnesses in support Cebu City of their allegations, which shall take the place of a. Regional Trial Courts: Branches 9, 10, 11, 12, 18, such witnesses’ direct testimonies; and 19, 22 and 24 2. The parties’ documentary or object evidence, if b. Metropolitan Trial Courts: Branches 6 and 7 any, which shall be attached to the judicial affidavits, identified and marked as Exhibits P, P-1, RULE 22 P-2, and so on in the case of-the plaintiff or PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE petitioner, Exhibits C, C-1, C-2, and so on in the case of the complainant, Exhibits D, D-1, D-2, and SECTION 22.1. Policy of the Rule. — It is the policy of this so on in the case of the defendant, Exhibits R, R-1, Rule in relation to the Rule on Trial of issues to: R-2, and so on in the case of the respondent, and duly identified and authenticated by the proper (a) Require the parties to make a full disclosure of the witness or witnesses. known facts of the case early in the proceedings and submit to the court the affidavits and documents that (b) A party may, if he or she so desires, submit reply judicial prove their claims, for the purpose of enabling the affidavits respecting matters not touched by his or her court to accurately identify the issues between the initial affidavits within 15 days from receipt of the parties and facilitate the process of settling their adverse party’s judicial affidavits. No further judicial disputes amicably or, if this is not possible, to affidavit may be submitted without prior leave of court considerably limit the scope of trial; which shall be granted only on justifiable grounds. (b) Treat litigations not as a contest pitting the resources (c) Should a party or a witness desire to retain possession and skills of the parties in building up their cases and of the original document or object evidence, he or she destroying those of the others, but as a collective effort may, after it has been identified, marked as exhibit, of all to search for the truth and to render justice to and authenticated, warrant in his or her judicial all; affidavit that the copy, reproduction, or picture attached to such affidavit is a faithful copy, (c) Empower the judge to take a direct role in examining reproduction, or picture of the original. In addition, the witnesses during the trial and elicit from them the the party or witness shall bring to court the original answers needed for rendering a just judgment; document or object evidence to enable the adverse (d) Make maximum use of the court’s time and shorten party to compare the original document with its copy trial without sacrificing the quality of hearing and or reproduction or the object evidence with its picture. adjudication: The comparison shall be done by the adverse party before the branch clerk of court prior to the date of (e) Require the parties and their counsels to assist the the preliminary conference. The comparison shall then court in doing work they can properly perform to enable be duly noted by the branch clerk of court on the the judge to do his judicial duties with greater dispatch attached copy, reproduction, or picture before the date and efficiency; and of the preliminary conference. Unless the comparison (f) Raise the level of professionalism of judges and counsels is done or deemed waived by the non-appearance of in terms of promptness in starting court proceedings the adverse party, the copy attached to the judicial and meeting deadlines. affidavit shall not be admitted.

SEC. 22.2. Mandatory disclosure of evidence. — If the (d) If the requested witness, who is neither the witness of parties do not settle their disputes during the JDR [Judicial the adverse party nor a hostile witness, unjustifiably Dispute Resolution stage], the case shall be raffled to a declines to execute a judicial affidavit or refuses different branch for further proceedings. The parties may, without just cause to make the relevant books, however, instead file a joint written motion or manifestation documents, or other things under his or her control requesting the court that concluded the JDR to continue available for copying, authentication, and eventual with the case. In either case, the parties shall then submit production in court, the requesting party may avail to the court and disclose to each other the evidence in the himself or herself of a subpoena ad testificandum or case that are known and available to them in the following duces tecum under the Rules of Court. The party manner: requesting the issuance of a subpoena shall be VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 33

responsible for ensuring its personal service upon the (i) The direct testimony of a witness shall be deemed witness, and shall bear the cost of such personal service offered and admitted upon submission in court of his and the expenses of the witness in appearing before or her judicial affidavit, subject to motions for exclusion the lawyer who will prepare or supervise the of inadmissible testimonies at the appropriate time preparation of his or her judicial affidavit. and to the examination of such witness. The documents (e) A party who fails to submit the required judicial and object evidence that the parties previously marked affidavits and exhibits when they are due shall be as their exhibits shall also be deemed offered and deemed to have waived such submission and the right admitted upon their submission in court as part of the to present evidence in support of his or her case. Still, testimony of the witness who testifies on their the court may, for good cause shown and not later existence, execution, or functions for the purposes that than 15 days from receipt of the adverse party’s judicial such testimony indicates, whether expressly or affidavits and exhibits, allow but once the late impliedly, subject to motions for exclusion at the submission of the requirements. It may also, if no good appropriate time and to the examination of the cause is shown, still allow such late submission but once, witness. provided that the defaulting party or his or her counsels, SEC. 22.3. Use of certain discovery procedures. — A party whoever may appear at fault, pays a fine set by the who desires to avail himself or herself of the modes of court which shall not be less than P1,000 or more than discovery shall do so in accordance with Rules 27 to 31. P5,000. Such party shall take steps to complete the process and (f) If a vital witness is (1) outside the Philippines, or (2) is submit the material portions of the record of the shown to be under an exceptional or compelling proceedings, previously undisclosed documents or facts, and predicament at the time his or her judicial affidavit is the necessary judicial affidavits pertaining to the fruits of needed for submission, the counsel may, with leave of the discovery within 60 days from the start of the discovery court, prepare such affidavit through video process. conferencing and submit it to the court with the Sec. 22.4. Preparation of the Terms of Reference. — The counsel’s attestation regarding its authenticity, Court shall, taking into account the submissions of the parties conditioned on the witness appearing at the hearing and counsels, prepare the Terms of Reference of the case to sign it, affirm its truth, and submit to an examination that will control the scope of trial. by the court and the parties. (a) After the parties shall have submitted their respective (g) The court may, on motion, allow a witness who, judicial affidavits, documentary and object exhibits, because of exceptional and compelling reasons, has and the results of the discovery procedures they have been unable to execute a judicial affidavit to testify in undertaken, the court shall issue an order requiring court by way of a narration of what he or she needs to each party through their respective counsels as officers relate in relation to the case which shall be restricted of the court, to simultaneously submit to it and serve to relevant facts, provided that the motion is filed on the other party within 15 days from notice a brief, within the period for submission of judicial affidavits concise, and fair draft of the Terms of Reference of the and the movant states in the motion the substance of case, containing: the testimony of such witness. This shall include government employees or officials who are unable to 1. A summary of the admitted facts; execute judicial affidavits by reason of the demands of 2. A statement that the documents attached to their official work. judicial affidavits or object evidence referred to (h) In case a party submits judicial affidavits that do not are faithful copies, reproductions, or pictures of conform to the content requirements, the court shall their originals if such be the case; issue an order excluding such affidavits from the record. 3. A summary of the totality of the facts that the The court may, however, allow but once and for good plaintiff’s evidence appears to have established; cause shown the subsequent submission of the compliant replacement affidavits within 10 days from 4. A summary of the totality of the facts that the receipt of the exclusion order. If no good cause is defendant’s evidence appears to have established; shown, the court may still allow such subsequent 5. Based on the two summaries above, a statement submission provided that the erring party or his or her of the factual issue or issues that the conflicting counsels, whoever may appear responsible for their evidence of the parties present: preparation and submission, pays a fine set by the court which shall not be less than P1,000 or more than 6. A list of the witnesses from either side who, based P5,000. on their judicial affidavits and exhibits, are 34 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Circulars OCA Circular No. 120-2014 (continued) person who is fully authorized to act on his behalf respecting all the matters subject of the conference. (n) competent to testify on each of the factual issues or related factual issues in the case; and SEC. 22.7. Decision as in default against absentee. — In the event a party or his counsels fails to appear at the 7. A statement of the legal issues that the case preliminary conference, the court shall, within thirty days presents once the factual issues and related factual from the date of the scheduled preliminary conference, issues have been resolved. render a decision, adjudicating the other party’s claims, if (b) An issue is factual when the contending parties cannot warranted, after the court’s ex parte examination of such agree that a thing exists or has actually happened. An party’s witness or witnesses based on their judicial affidavits. issue is legal when the contending parties assume a (n) thing exists or has actually happened but disagree on SEC. 22.8. Decision as in default, when set aside. — The its legal significance or effect on their rights or court may, however, set aside a judgment rendered under obligations. Section 22.7 if, within 15 days from notice of the decision, (c) Only relevant and significant issues need be tried. An the party concerned files a motion with the court with prior issue is relevant and significant when its resolution will notice to the adverse party that his or her failure to comply help decide the case on its merits. Otherwise, it is with what was required of him or her has been due to irrelevant and need not be tried. extrinsic fraud or unavoidable accident. Only when the ground is clearly meritorious will the court grant the motion. (d) Every factual issue should be adequately stated. The The court may at its discretion, however, where the ground statement of an issue is adequate when it contains is not clearly meritorious, still grant the motion, set aside words describing the ultimate facts that the party the decision of default, and reschedule another preliminary bearing the burden of proving the affirmative of such conference for the last time, upon admission of error or issue must establish by his or her evidence. neglect by the party or his or her counsel and after payment (e) The facts alleged by the parties in their complaint, of a fine set by the court which shall not be less than P1,000 answer, and judicial affidavits, when not put in issue in or more than P5,000. (n) the Terms of Reference, shall be deemed admitted or otherwise regarded as irrelevant to the resolution of SEC. 22.9. Matters to be taken up at the preliminary the dispute. conference. — The court shall take the following actions during the preliminary conference in the order listed below: (f) If a party’s counsel fails to submit his or her draft of the Terms of Reference, he or she shall be deemed to have (a) The, court shall determine, in consultation with the waived the submission of such draft, without prejudice parties and their counsels, if there is a need to make to appropriate sanctions for failure to comply with the changes in the contents or wordings of the Terms of order of the court. Reference that it earlier prepared. If there is such a need, the court shall enter the changes on the (g) Within 15 days of its receipt of the drafts of the Terms document. of Reference, or after the lapse of the period to submit such drafts, the court shall prepare its final version, (b) If a party asks the court to try an excluded issue, the court shall include it for trial provided that such party taking such drafts into account. (n) makes a deposit for court costs amounting to not less SEC. 22.5. Notice of Preliminary Conference. — The branch than P10,000 but not more than P50,000 at the clerk of court shall, through phone calls and electronic discretion of the court. Should the trial court or, on messages, consult the parties, through their counsels, on appeal, a higher court find the additional issue a sham, their availability before setting the case for preliminary it shall order the deposit forfeited to the court; conference. In addition, the branch clerk shall serve a otherwise it shall have the same refunded to the party written notice of such conference on the parties, through concerned. their counsels, requiring the parties and their counsels to (c) The court may adjourn the preliminary conference appear before the court for a preliminary conference on once if there is a chance of settlement and the parties the date and time that it has set. It shall be the duty of the need time to consider the matter; otherwise, the court counsels to promptly inform their clients regarding the shall proceed with the conference. setting and the need for them to be present as well. (n) (d) The court shall, in consultation with the parties: SEC. 22.6. Appearance of parties. — It shall be the duty of the parties and their counsels to appear at the preliminary 1. Fix the order in which the issues are to be tried; conference. A party’s non-appearance may be excused only 2. Identify the witnesses who need to be present to for valid cause shown or if he or she is represented by another testify on each of the issues; VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 35

3. Set the specific dates for reception of evidence on (b) A party may move on proper ground to disqualify a each issue or related issues; witness before he or she is examined and strike out his 4. Determine whether the circumstances warrant judicial affidavit or exclude any of the answers found in an alternate or face-to-face trial of issues and in it on ground of inadmissibility. This motion shall be the latter case, whether it shall be a simple or resolved in accordance with Sections 24.8 and 24.9 regular trial of issues as provided below, and below. determine who among the witnesses are exempt from face-to-face examination; (c) A party may also move to exclude any of the exhibits attached to the judicial affidavit of a witness on ground 5. Determine the need to refer certain issues to trial of inadmissibility. This motion shall be resolved also in by commissioners; and accordance with Sections 24.8 and 24.9 below. The 6. Summarize the foregoing arrangements towards objecting party shall make his motion in writing before the end of the preliminary conference and issue the trial if the exhibits are voluminous to facilitate its an Order of Trial, copy furnished the parties, which resolution. The rulings of the court respecting the shall reflect such arrangements. exclusion of testimonies and exhibits based on public policy grounds shall be without prejudice to a tender (e) The court may, as a result of the preliminary conference or in the course of it when the of excluded evidence under the appropriate rule. circumstances warrant, render judgment or dismiss (d) The court and the counsels of the parties shall examine the action. If evidence is required for adjudicating a the witnesses and determine the truthfulness of the ground for dismissal, the court shall set the case for reception of such evidence and then dismiss the action judicial affidavits that constitute their direct if warranted. testimonies in the case.

x x x x (e) A witness may testify on one or more issues.

SEC. 24.5. Rules governing alternate trial. — In an alternate RULE 24 trial: TRIAL OF ISSUES (a) The parties shall take turns in presenting their

SECTION 24.1. Alternate trial. — An alternate trial is one witnesses respecting the first factual issue or related where parties take turns in presenting their witnesses issues stated in the Order of Trial. respecting the first factual issue or related issues stated in (b) The party who bears the burden of proving the the order of trial. The party who bears the burden of proving affirmative of the issue under consideration shall be the affirmative of the issue under consideration shall be the the first to present a witness. If the party has more first to present a witness. than one witness, the witnesses will be presented SEC. 24.2. Face-to-face trial. — A face-to-face trial is one successively respecting such issue. The opposing party wherein witnesses from the contending sides appear shall afterwards present the witness or witnesses for together before the court, sit face-to-face around a table that issue. in a non-adversarial environment, and answer questions (c) The court shall be the first to examine each of the from the court as well as the parties’ counsels respecting witnesses thus presented. The parties shall then take the factual issue under consideration. their turns to conduct the cross, re-direct, and re-cross SEC. 24.3. Options for trying the issues. — The court shall of the particular witness. This is without prejudice to have the option to try the issues embodied in the Terms of the right of the court to ask additional questions of the Reference either by alternate or face-to-face trial. In the same witness. latter case, the court may conduct either simple or regular (d) The examination by the court and by the parties shall face-to-face trial, whichever it considers more suitable. The parties may by unanimous agreement, however, choose to entirely focus on the issue or issues at hand and not have an alternate trial in lieu of a face-to-face trial. dwell on matters outside of and totally unrelated to such issue or issues. SEC. 24.4. Common rules. — The following common rules shall govern both alternate and face-to-face trials: (e) After all the witnesses from both sides have been examined respecting the issue or related issues under (a) Each factual issue shall be tried strictly in the sequence consideration, the trial shall move on to the next issue provided in the Order of Trial although two or more or related issue in the Order of Trial until all the issues closely related issues may be simultaneously tried. shall have been tried. 36 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Circulars OCA Circular No. 120-2014 (continued) (g) In the second phase, the court shall allow counsels

SEC. 24.6. Ground rules governing a face-to-face trial. — In from the contending sides to cross-examine, re-direct, a face-to-face trial: and re-cross the witnesses based on their judicial affidavits, the attached exhibits, the answers the (a) The witnesses from the contending sides shall appear witnesses gave during the court’s first-phase together before the court and simultaneously swear examination, or their testimonies. This second-phase to the truth of their respective testimonies. examination shall be without prejudice to the court’s further examination of the witness already examined (b) The witnesses shall sit face-to-face around the table in by the counsels. a non-adversarial environment and answer questions from the court and the parties’ counsels respecting (h) Where there are multiple parties involved (the plaintiff, the factual issue under consideration; the defendant, the third, fourth, or fifth-party plaintiffs or defendants, or the intervenors) the court shall fix (c) Only one person at a time shall speak during the face- the order of cross, re-direct, and re-cross examination to-face trial and always with prior permission from the by the various counsels involved, making sure that a court which shall take steps to ensure that the person party is able to examine the witness whose testimony who speaks is identified for the record; is adverse. A party may adopt a favorable testimony. (d) The witnesses shall address their answers to the (i) After the counsels have concluded their examinations examining judge or counsels; and of the witnesses, the court shall terminate the second phase respecting the particular issue or related issues (e) The witnesses shall not pose questions to the other and move to the examination of the witnesses witnesses relating to their testimonies but shall be respecting the next issue or related issues if such given equal opportunity to respond to the questions. examination is likewise in the agenda of the court for that day’s setting. The reception of evidence for the SEC. 24.7. Two-phase examination of witnesses in a face- to-face trial. — The examination of the witnesses from the next issue or related issues may be scheduled on contending sides in the face-to-face trial shall consist of two another setting in accordance with the Order of Trial. phases: the first phase shall be by the court and the second SEC. 24.8. Exceptions to the court’s examination of the phase by the parties’ respective counsels. witnesses. — The counsel for any party may in the course of the court’s examination of the witnesses, take exceptions (a) In the first phase, the court shall examine the witnesses to objectionable questions that it poses to one or some of regarding the issue or related issues at hand in no them. The exceptions shall simply state the legal grounds particular sequence and may also direct its questions for objection with no further explanation. The court shall to one or more of the Witnesses from the contending act on the exceptions in the following manner: sides. (b) When the questions from the court are directed to a (a) In case of exceptions as to form, such as when the specific witness, the other witnesses from the same questions from the court are perceived to be side may seek permission to supplement, clarify, or argumentative, leading, multiple, repetitive, vague, qualify the answers that the first witness has given. improper characterization, confusing, or unfair, the counsels shall state the ground for exception after the (c) In turn, the court shall give the witnesses from the question has been answered. The court shall take note other side equal time and opportunity to reply. of the exception or where warranted, strike out the answer and rephrase the question; (d) The court may allow the witnesses from the contending sides to continue their divergent exchanges (b) Exceptions as to substance such as when the questions provided new facts or new arguments are introduced from the court are perceived to elicit answers that are and the testimonies have not become repetitive. inadmissible on public policy grounds including those relating to the rights against self-incrimination, (e) The court may also stop the exchanges if the answers privileged communication, disqualification, and to the from the contending sides have sufficiently clarified Statute of Frauds, rape shield law, bank secrecy laws, their positions and the points of their disagreement. Anti-Money Laundering Act, and other laws or rules (f) The court may, before moving the examination of the that prohibit disclosure of information or data, may be witnesses from first phase to second phase, summarize made before the witness answers the questions. The its own understanding of the positions of the parties counsels may also move to strike out any answer and the testimonies of their witnesses on the issue or already given on the same grounds. In either case, the related issues at hand. court shall promptly rule on such exceptions or motions. VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 37

(c) In case of exceptions to admissibility under the rules SEC. 24.12. Regular or summary face-to-face trial schedules. governing best evidence, parol evidence, conclusion The schedules for holding face-to-face trial of issues shall or opinion evidence, hearsay evidence, irrelevant either be simple or regular based on the circumstances of evidence, or character evidence, the counsels shall each case. state the ground for exception after the question has been answered. The court shall take note of the (a) Where the issues are complex or numerous and the exception and consider the same when deciding the evidence from both sides consist of the testimonies of case. several witnesses or involve numerous pieces of evidence, the court shall hold a regular face-to-face SEC. 24.9. Objections to the questions of counsels. trial, with the hearings spread over a period of time. (a) It is the counsels’ duty to fairly elicit only admissible (b) Where the issues are simple and few, the court shall evidence from a witness, either by way of preparing the hold a simple one-time face-to-face trial, with an oral judicial affidavit constituting the direct examination judgment rendered at the end of such trial. But if in or by way of cross, re-direct, or recross examination. the course of such trial, the court discovers that the (b) The counsels for one side may move to exclude the issues are after all complex or numerous, it shall suspend whole or part of the testimony embodied in the judicial the proceedings and direct the conduct of a regular affidavit of a witness presented by the other side on trial in the succeeding settings. ground of inadmissibility. SEC. 24.13. Memorandum, oral argument, and judgment. (c) Objections as to form in Section 24.8(a) and admissibility The court may hear the parties argue their respective in Section 24.8(c) shall be made after the questions positions before rendering judgment in the case, as follows: have been answered. Objections as to substance in (a) In an alternate or regular face-to-face trial of issues: Section 24.8(b) may be raised before the questions are answered; if the answers have already been given, 1. The court shall, after all the issues in the case have motions to strike out may be made. been heard, direct the parties to simultaneously submit their respective memorandum or draft (d) The court shall act on the motion or objection in the decision within 30 days from the date the trial same manner it would act on exceptions from questions ended, accompanied by a softcopy of the of the court as provided under Section 24.8 above. document in a format acceptable to the court.

SEC. 24.10. When face-to-face examination of witnesses 2. Furthermore, the court shall , within 10 days from shall not apply. — The face-to-face examination of receipt of such memorandum or draft decision, witnesses shall not apply when one of the witnesses to the set the case for oral argument on a date and time factual issue under consideration is either (a) a child covered the court and the parties may agree on. by the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness, or (b) a person 3. The court shall render a written decision within who is mentally, psychologically, or physically challenged, 90 days after hearing the parties on their oral or has a similar condition that puts such witness at a argument. It may wholly or partially adopt or use disadvantage in a face-to-face confrontation. In such a case, the memorandum or draft decision of the winning the witnesses on that issue shall be examined separately. party for its decision or prepare its own. The face-to-face examination shall, however, proceed with respect to the other issues that do not involve the child or (b) In a simple face-to-face trial of issues: disadvantaged witness. 1. The court may, immediately after all the witnesses The face-to-face trial shall also not be required in: (a) have been examined, hear the parties briefly on special civil actions; (b) special proceedings; and (c) where oral argument and afterwards orally state its rulings the court perceives the danger of uncontrollable passion on the issue or issues involved and announce the arising from deep animosity between the parties. dispositive part of its judgment. 2. Such oral judgment shall be recorded in the minutes SEC. 24.11. Examination of Expert Witnesses in a face-to- of the proceedings which, together with the face trial of issues. — The examination of expert witnesses resolution of each issue, shall be signed by the in a face-to-face trial of issues shall follow the same parties or their counsels as evidence of notification. procedure provided in Section 24.7. With leave of court, If a party or his counsels refuses to sign, the refusal however, an expert witness may ask questions directed to shall be reflected in the same minutes. the other party’s expert witness on any matter covered by the testimony of the latter on the issue or related issues at 3. The court shall then direct the winning party to hand. submit within 30 days from the oral judgment a 38 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Circulars OCA Circular No. 120-2014 (continued)

memorandum or draft, of the decision based on the shall be considered a waiver of appearance and trial oral judgment then rendered, accompanied by shall proceed without such counsel. The absent softcopy of the document in a format acceptable to counsel’s witnesses, if present, shall be regarded as the court. witnesses procured by the court concerning the case and shall be examined in the usual course. 4. In place of oral judgment, the court shall have the option of requiring each party to submit a (b) In the event of the failure of a witness to appear, the memorandum or draft decision within 30 days from court shall order such witness’ judicial affidavit the date the face-to-face trial ended, accompanied expunged, without prejudice to the adverse party using by a softcopy of the document in a format it as a judicial admission if the witness is also a party. acceptable to the court. SEC. 24. 16. Newly discovered evidence; new issues evolving 5. Whether or not the court adopts a party’s during trial. — A party may, in the course of trial, file a memorandum draft decision, it shall promulgate motion to admit newly-discovered evidence subject to the its written decision in the case within 60 days from rule governing its admission. A party may, without amending the oral judgment, if any, or from the date the face- the pleadings, also file a motion to amend the Order of Trial to-face trial ended. to include a new issue or issues that may have since arisen.

6. The period to appeal from the judgment of the court SEC. 24.17. Language used during trial. — The court shall in this case shall be reckoned from the date of require the witnesses in the trial of issues to testify either in receipt of written decision by the appealing party. English or Filipino, whichever language would enable such witnesses, the court, and the counsels to have fair SEC. 24.14. Trials shall be intransferable. exchanges. If any of the witnesses cannot take part in such (a) Because of the numerous persons involved in, and the exchanges because of language difficulty, the examination complex preparations required for, the conduct of trial, of the witness shall be conducted in the language or dialect especially the face-to-face trial, the dates set for trials known to such witness. In this case, the judge or examining shall be intransferable except on grounds of fortuitous counsels shall make use of an interpreter of their choosing event or serious illness of a counsel or witness. The who shall assist them in propounding questions to, and party seeking postponement or resetting of the hearing appreciating the answers of, the witness. Nevertheless, the has the burden of proving with satisfactory evidence recording of the actual answers given by the witness, not the ground invoked. Otherwise, such party shall be their English or Filipino translation, will constitute the official deemed to have waived the appearance of counsel and and binding testimony of the witness. When quoting in a witnesses at the scheduled face-to-face trial. pleading, motion, memorandum, petition, or other court submission, the text of quest ions and answers of a witness (b) No motion for postponement or resetting shall be given in a local dialect, the counsels shall indicate the granted on ground of serious illness of a counsel or translations into English or Filipino in appropriate brackets. witness, unless the party concerned presents a medical certificate issued by a physician stating that the illness is of such gravity as to prevent the counsel or witness from attending the scheduled hearing. The judge may require the physician to appear before the court or OCA CIRCULAR NO. 121-2014 order another physician either government-employed or retained by the adverse party, to verify the truth of the certification. If such certification turns out to be false, the certifying physician shall be held in contempt TO: EXECUTIVE/PRESIDING JUDGES, CLERKS OF COURT/ of court and punished accordingly. OFFICERS IN CHARGE/ACCOUNTABLE OFFICERS OF THE FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS (c) If the ground for postponement or resetting turns out to be false, the party or counsel who sought it shall SUBJECT: CLARIFICATION ON THE COLLECTION OF also be subject to contempt of court. POSTPONEMENT FEE IN CONSOLIDATED CASES

SEC. 24.15. Consequences of failure to appear at the trial. Queries have been brought to the attention of this Office as to the proper interpretation and application of Rule 141 of (a) The failure of counsel to appear at the pre-agreed face- the Revised Rules of Court, specifically on the postponement to-face trial without obtaining a prior postponement fee to be collected in consolidated cases. VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 39

The Court in, Chua v. The Executive Judge, G.R. No. 202920, October 2, 2013, explained the rationale on OCA CIRCULAR NO. 122-2014 collecting fees, albeit on the subject of docket fees, on each individual case and not on its entirety. It declared, in part, the following justifications: TO: CLERKS OF COURT/OFFICERS IN CHARGE/ACCOUNTABLE OFFICERS OF THE FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS In the instant case, there are a total of 40 counts of violation of BP Blg. 22 that was filed before the MeTC. And SUBJECT: A.M. NO. 14-08-94-MeTC (RE: PROPER FEES TO BE each of the 40 was, in fact, assessed its filing fees, individually, COLLECTED IN ELECTION CONTESTS INVOLVING ELECTIVE based on the amount of check one covers. Under the rule of MUNICIPAL AND BARANGAY OFFICIALS) criminal procedure, the filing of the 40 counts is equivalent In its September 2, 2014 Resolution in A.M. No. 14-08-94- to the filing of 40 different informations, as each count MeTC (Re: Proper Fees to be Collected in Election Contests represents an independent violation of BP Blg. 22. Filing Involving Elective Municipal and Barangay Officials) the fees are, therefore, due for each count and may be paid for Honorable Court, upon the recommendation of the Office each count separately. of the Court Administrator, resolved, among others, to: Second. In an effort to justify her refusal of petitioner’s (b) ADVISE the Clerks of Court in the first and request, the Executive Judge further argues that since all second level courts that: (i) Section 1, Rule 7 of 40 counts of violation of BP Blg. 22 were brought about by the Rules of Procedure in Election Contests a single complaint filed before the OCP and are now Before the Courts Involving Elective Municipal consolidated before the court, the payment of their filing and Barangay Officials (A.M. No. 07-4-15-SC), fees should be made for all or none at all. dated May 15, 2007, is controlling insofar as the proper collection of filing fees is concerned; That all 40 counts of violation of BP Blg. 22 all (ii) other assessments for Legal Research Fund, emanated from a single complaint filed in the OCP is Sheriffs Trust Fund, Victim’s Compensation irrelevant. The fact remains that there are still 40 counts Fund and Mediation Fund shall be collected of violation of BP Blg. 22 that were filed before the MeTC in election contests; (iii) the P3,000 filing fee for election contest shall be allocated to the and, as a consequence, 40 individual filing fees to be amount of the Special Allowance for the paid. Judiciary; and (iv) postal money orders are not acceptable as a mode of payment of filing fees. Neither would the consolidation of all 40 counts make any difference. Consolidation unifies criminal cases Strict compliance is hereby enjoined. involving related offenses only for purposes of trial. September 16, 2014 Consolidation does not transform the filing fees due for each consolidated into one indivisible fee (Emphasis (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ supplied). Court Administrator Henceforth, considering the foregoing pronouncements, the collection of a postponement fee, whenever there are consolidated cases filed in the trial OCA CIRCULAR NO. 125-2014 court, should be made separately on each case included therein, and not on the entire or collective fee for the consolidated cases, since the mode of consolidation is TO: EXECUTIVE/PRESIDING JUDGES, CLERKS OF COURT/ merely underscored for purposes of trial, and does not OFFICERS IN CHARGE/ACCOUNTABLE OFFICERS OF THE in any way affect the collection of an individual FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS postponement fee for each case involved in the SUBJECT : A.M. NO. 11-10-03-0 (RE: LETTER DATED APRIL consolidation. Further, the rule shall not only be exclusively 18, 2011 OF CHIEF PUBLIC ATTORNEY PERSIDA RUEDA- applied to consolidated BP Blg. 22 cases, but shall also ACOSTA REQUESTING EXEMPTION FROM THE PAYMENT equally apply to all types of cases subject of consolidation. OF SHERIFF’S EXPENSES) For your information, guidance, and strict compliance. In the July 30, 2013 Resolution in A.M. No. 11-10-03-0 (Re: Letter dated April 18, 2011 of Chief Public Attorney Persida September 16, 2014. Rueda-Acosta Requesting Exemption from the Payment of (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ Sheriff’s Expenses), the Supreme Court En Banc DENIED Court Administrator the request of Atty. Persida V. Rueda-Acosta for the 40 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Circulars OCA Circular No. 125-2014 (continued) Sheriff’s expenses are not exacted for any exemption of the clients of the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) service rendered by the court; they are the amount deposited to the Clerk of Court upon filing of the from the payment of sheriff’s expenses. complaint to defray the actual travel expenses of Relevant portions of the Resolution explicitly provide: the sheriff, process server or other court-authorized persons in the service of summons, subpoena and That Section 6 of RA No. 9406 exempts PAO’s clients other court processes that would be issued relative from the payment of “docket and other fees to the trial of the case. It is not the same as sheriffs’ incidental to instituting an action in court and other fees under Section 10, Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, quasi-judicial bodies” is beyond cavil. However, which refers to those imposed by the court for services contrary to Atty. Acosta’s claim, a plain reading of the rendered to a party incident to the proceedings before it. said provision clearly shows that the exemption granted to PAO’s clients cannot be extended to the payment of Thus, in In Re: Exemption of Cooperatives from sheriff’s expenses; the exemption is specifically limited Payment of Court and Sheriff’s Fees Payable to the to the payment of fees, i.e., docket and other fees Government in Actions Brought Under RA No. 6938, the incidental to instituting an action. Court clarified that sheriff’s expenses are not considered as legal fees, ratiocinating that: The term “fees” is defined as a charge fixed by law or by an institution for certain privileges or The difference in the treatment between the services. Viewed from this context, the phrase sheriff’s fees and the sheriff’s expenses in relation “docket and other fees incidental to instituting an with the exemption enjoyed by cooperatives is action” refers to the totality of the legal fees further demonstrated by the wording of Section 10, Rule 141, which uses “fees’” in delineating the imposed under Rule 141 of the Rules of Court. In enumeration in the first paragraph, and “expenses” particular, it includes filing or docket fees, appeal in qualifying the subsequent paragraphs of this fees, fees for issuance of provisional remedies, provision. The intention to make a distinction mediation fees, sheriff’s fees, stenographer’s fees between the two charges is clear; otherwise, the and commissioner’s fees. These are the fees that Rules would not have used different designations. are exacted for the services rendered by the court Likewise, the difference between the two terms is in connection with the action instituted before it. highlighted by a consideration of the phraseology in the first sentence of the second paragraph of Section Sheriffs’ expenses, however, cannot be considered 10, Rule 141, which uses the clause “in addition to as a “fee” within the purview of the exemption granted the fees hereinabove fixed,“ thereby, unequivocally to PAO’s clients under Section 6 of RA No. 9406. Sheriffs’ indicating that sheriff’s expenses are separate expenses are provided for under Section 10, Rule charges on top of the sheriff’s fees. (Italics supplied) 141 of the Rules of Court, viz: The Court, however, is not unmindful of the SEC. 10. Sheriffs, PROCESS SERVERS and other persons predicament of PAO’s clients. In exempting PAO’s serving processes. clients from paying docket and other legal fees, RA No. 9406 intended to ensure that the indigents and x x x x the less privileged, who do not have the means to In addition to the fees hereinabove fixed, the amount pay the said fees, would not be denied access to of ONE THOUSAND (P1,000) shall be deposited with courts by reason of poverty. Indeed, requiring PAO’s the Clerk of Court upon filing of the complaint to defray clients to pay sheriff’s expenses, despite their exemption the actual travel expenses of the sheriff, process server from the payment of docket and other legal fees, would or other court-authorized persons in the service of effectly fetter their free access to the courts thereby summons, subpoena and other court processes that negating the laudable means of Congress in enacting RA would be issued relative to the trial of the case. In case No. 9406. the initial deposit of ONE THOUSAND (P1,000) PESOS is not sufficient, then the plaintiff or petitioner shall x x x x be required to make an additional deposit. The sheriff, process server or other court authorized Having the foregoing principles in mind, the person shall submit to the court for its approval a Court, heeding the constitutional mandate of statement of the estimated travel expenses for ensuring free access to the courts and adequate service of summons and court processes. Once legal assistance to the marginalized and less approved, the Clerk of Court shall release the money privileged, hereby authorizes the officials and to said sheriff or process server. After service, a employees of PAO to serve summons, subpoena, statement of liquidation shall be submitted to the court for approval. After rendition of judgment by the and other court processes pursuant to Section 3, court, any excess from the deposit shall be returned Rule 14 of the Rules of Court. The authority given to the party who made the deposit. herein by the Court to the officials and employees of PAO shall be limited only to cases involving their x x x x client. VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 41

Authorizing the officials and employees of PAO to serve the summons, subpoenas and other court processes in behalf of their clients would relieve the latter from the burden of paying for the sheriffs expenses despite their non-exemption from the payment thereof under Section 6 of RA No. 9406. The amount to be defrayed in the service of OFFICE ORDER NO. 10-2014 summons, subpoena and other court processes in behalf of its clients would consequently have to be taken from the operating expenses of PAO. In turn, the amount advanced by PAO as actual travel ESTABLISHING THE STANDARD THICKNESS OF CASE expenses may be taken from the amount recovered ROLLOS AND RECORDS from the adversaries of PAO’s clients as costs of suit, attorney’s fees or contingent fees prior to the WHEREAS, the undersigned has directed the conduct of deposit thereof in the National Treasury. process mapping and cluster meetings as mechanisms for threshing out issues and addressing problem areas with WHEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing respect to the functions of a particular office or cluster; disquisitions, the Second Motion for Reconsideration filed by Atty. Persida V. Rueda-Acosta is DENIED. The Court’s WHEREAS, in these process mapping sessions and Resolution dated November 22, 2011, and April 24, 2012 cluster meetings, the offices concerned have raised the are hereby AFFIRMED. The request of Atty. Persida V. problem of voluminous rollos and case records, e.g., the Rueda-Acosta for the exemption of the clients of the Public difficulty and inconvenience of handling them, and their Attorney’s Office from the payment of sheriff’s expenses is disintegration due to constant handling; DENIED. WHEREFORE, all offices concerned are hereby Nevertheless, the officials and employees of the Public informed that, henceforth, the thickness of case rollos and Attorney’s Office are hereby AUTHORIZED to serve records shall not exceed 2½ inches. Annexes may be summons, subpoenas and other court processes in behalf of contained in a subsequent volume or volumes in cases where their clients pursuant to Section 3, Rule 14 of the Rules of the pleading itself exceeds 2½ inches; Provided, that a Court, in coordination with the concerned court. The particular document, whether pleading or annex, may not amount to be defrayed in serving the summons, subpoenas be split or divided into separate volumes. For this purpose, and other court processes could be taken from the the rollos or records shall be labeled as Volume I, II, III, and operating expenses of the Public Attorney’s Office which, in so on. turn, may be taken from the amount recovered by it from FURTHER, Members of the Court may request that the adversaries of PAO’s clients as costs of suit, attorney’s rollos or records of old cases be separated in parts in fees or contingent fees prior to the deposit thereof in the accordance with the herein established standard; Provided National Treasury, or damages that said clients may be that the rollos shall be coursed through the Rollo Room decreed as entitled to in case of the success of PAO’s indigent which shall in turn transmit the rollos to the docketing office clients. concerned for stitching. SO ORDERED. (Emphasis added) This Office Order shall take effect upon its issuance this For your information, guidance and strict compliance. 7th day of August 2014.

September 24, 2014. (Sgd.) MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO Chief Justice (Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ Court Administrator MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 19-2014

REORGANIZING THE COMMITTEE ON COMPUTERIZATION AND LIBRARY

WHEREAS, there is recognition of the need to harmonize and integrate all computerization efforts at all levels of the judiciary to truly implement the Enterprise Information Systems Plan of the Judiciary and related reforms; 42 JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014

Orders This Memorandum Order shall take effect upon its Memorandum Order 19-2014 (continued) issuance this 4th day of July 2014.

WHEREAS, there is a need to modernize and enhance (Sgd.) MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO court library collections, facilities and e-library systems to Chief Justice assist judges and court personnel in their adjudication Chairperson, First Division functions; (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO NOW, THEREFORE, in the interest of service, the Senior Associate Justice Committee on Computerization and Library is hereby Chairperson, Second Division reorganized as follows: (Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate Justice Chairperson Chairperson, Third Division Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno

Vice Chairpersons Hon. Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe MEMORANDUM ORDER NO. 20-2014 Hon. Associate Justice Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen CREATING THE COMMITTEE ON FAMILY COURTS AND Members JUVENILE CONCERNS Court of Appeals Associate Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas Court of Appeals Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh WHEREAS, Republic Act No. 8369 was enacted in 1997 Representative of the Court of Tax Appeals providing for the establishment of family court; Representative of the Sandiganbayan Representative of the Office of the Court Administrator WHEREAS, from its enactment the law has not been Chief, Management Information Systems Office fully implemented;

Secretary WHEREAS, there is a need to revisit the Iaw and map Atty. Michael B. Ocampo out plans for its implementation taking into consideration current issues and requirements; Assistant Secretary Atty. John Robert G. Real NOW THEREFORE, the Committee on Family Courts (formerly the Subcommittee on Family Courts under the Members of the Secretariat Committee on the Revision of the Rules of Court and the Ms. Editha D. Pontaoe Committee on Gender Responsiveness) is hereby created Mr. Gary Louie Comia, and and constituted as follows: Mr. Ferdinand Duero (alternate) Chairperson There shall be a Subcommittee on Libraries and Justice Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro Research, which shall be composed of the following: Vice Chairperson Chairperson: Justice Victoria Isabel A. Paredes, Court of Appeals Hon. Associate Justice Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen Members Members: Judge Angelene Mary Quimpo Sale, RTC, Br. 106, Quezon City Mrs. Milagros Santos-Ong Judge Lorifel Lacap Pahimna, RTC Br. 69, Pasig City Chief Librarian of the Supreme Court Judge Ma. Theresa M. Arcega, RTC Br. 17, Malolos Bulacan Chief Librarian of the Court of Appeals Judge Cesar Pabel D. Sulit, RTC, Pasig City Chief Librarian of the Court of Tax Appeals Court Administrator or his representative Chief Librarian of the Sandiganbayan Chief, Office of the Chief Attorney Representative of the librarians from the lower courts Chief, Fiscal Management and Budget Office [To be designated by the Chief Justice] Chief, Management Information Sytems Office Chief, Public Information Office The Chairperson, Members, Consultants, and Members Atty. Myrna Feliciano, Philippine Judicial Academy of the Secretariat of the Committee and the Sub- Representative, Office of the Chief Justice Committee, including those who have rendered service as part of the same prior to the issuance of this Memorandum Secretary Order shall receive the usual expense allowances. Atty. Catherina N. Manzano VOLUME XVI ISSUE NO. 63 43

Assistant. Secretary Ms. Ma. Theresa Baylon PHILJA Curriculum Review (Continued from page 7)

Secretariat Thought Piece on the Philippine Judicial Academy To be designated by the Chairperson Curriculum Review. Supreme Court Associate Justices Martin S. Villarama, Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe, The Committee shall have the following duties: Mario Victor F. Leonen, and Lucas P. Bersamin were 1. Formulate the implementing Rules and also interviewed for their thoughts and comments Regulations and other rules for Republic Act No. on enhancing judicial education. The Justices 8369 (Family Courts Act of 1997) responded to the discussion points given them earlier; Justice Bienvenido L. Reyes addressed the 2. Draft plan for the organization of family courts to points in a letter. The Justices’ common comments include the following: and suggestions placed emphasis on the following: a. Creation/Development of staffing pattern for how to conduct pre-trial; skills-based modules, e.g., family courts management, decision writing, strong oral and written skills, court governance to include challenges b. Determination of number of courts that must and developments in judicial processes; apprising be created under national legislation judges on latest developments in law, recent c. Report on training needs assessment of all legislative acts and SC decisions, rules and actors in family and juvenile justice sector procedures; maximizing the benefits of PJP and accreditation from other law schools; ethics; and use d. Recommendations for infrastructure of mock trial and interactive case-based simulations requirements for family courts to apply critical thinking skills in decision making. The e. Piloting of family courts that will have ideal Chief Justice’s thought piece as well as the inputs guidelines, resources, environment, facilities from the associate justices interviewed proved and staff for addressing family and juvenile substantial in the discussions on what judicial training justice concerns should be and served as the road map during the PHILJA Curriculum Review. 3. Monitor the implementation of the plan for the creation and organization of family courts Professor Sedfrey M. Candelaria, Head of the including identification of procedural rules and Research, Publications and Linkages Office, court guidelines, as well as judicial and legal forms, summarized the comments and recommendations that must be adopted to increase the effectiveness towards the end of the program, which included a and efficiency of family courts; proposal to convene another forum to study and approve the new curriculum. 4. Create such working groups as necessary to carry out its duties. All PHILJA executive officials; 22 department chairpersons, vice chairpersons, and members of the The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Members, and 14 academic departments attended the activity, Members of the Secretariat of the Committee, including with 13 PHILJA lawyers and staff assisting. those who have rendered service as part of the said Committee prior to the issuance of this Memorandum Order, shall receive the usual expense allowances. Focus Group Discussion on the Rules of Procedure for This Memorandum Order shall take effect upon its Environmental Cases (Continued from page 8 ) Issuance this 13th day of August 2014. and Aquatic Resources. The outcomes of the (Sgd.) MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO workshop and panel discussion were consolidated Chief Justice and formally presented for consideration to the Chairperson, First Division Subcommittee, through Justices Peralta and (Sgd.) ANTONIO T. CARPIO Bersamin who gave their respective responses to Senior Associate Justice the consolidated outputs. Justice Bersamin officially Chairperson, Second Division led the distribution of the certificates of participation to the participants and declared the closing of the (Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. activity. Associate Justice Chairperson, Third Division 44 3rd Floor, Supreme Court Centennial Building PRIVATE OR UNAUTHORIZEDJULY USE - SEPTEMBER TO AVOID 2014 PAYMENT OF POSTAGE IS PENALIZED BY FINE Padre Faura Street corner Taft Avenue, Manila 1000 OR IMPRISONMENT OR BOTH Philippines

Fourth Quarter Trainings, Programs and Activities

 11th Metrobank Foundation  Roundtable Discussion on Issues Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna Professorial Chair Lecture and Concerns Relating to Chancellor October 8 Intellectual Property Rights Professor Sedfrey M. Candelaria Court of Appeals Manila Enforcement Editor in Chief October 23–14, Makati City Editorial and Research Staff  Seminar-Workshop on Atty. Orlando B. Cariño Intellectual Property for Clerks of  5th Orientation Seminar- Arsenia M. Mendoza Court of Special Commercial Workshop for Newly Appointed Armida M. Salazar Courts Sheriffs and Process Servers Jocelyn D. Bondoc Joseph Arvin S. Cruz October 8–9, Cebu City November 4–6, Mactan, Cebu Christine A. Ferrer Charmaine S. Nicolas  Philippine Judges Association  CET for Judges and Court Sarah Jane S. Salazar Midterm Convention Personnel Handling Cases Jeniffer P. Sison October 14–16 Involving Children Circulation and Support Staff Legazpi City, Albay November 11–13, Tagaytay City Romeo A. Arcullo Michael Angelo P. Laude  4th Orientation Seminar-  Refresher/Advanced Course for Lope R. Palermo Workshop for Newly Appointed Court-Annexed Mediators Daniel S. Talusig Sheriffs and Process Servers November 13–14 Printing Services (Batch 2) Court of Appeals, Manila Leticia G. Javier and Printing Staff October 14–16, Tagaytay City  CEP for RTC Clerks of Court  Refresher/Advanced Course for November 18–20 Court-Annexed Mediators Cagayan de Oro City October 16–17, Tagaytay City  Seminar-Workshop for Special  21st National Convention Seminar Commercial Court Judges and The PHILJA Bulletin is published of the Philippine Trial Judges Pairing Court Judges quarterly by the Research, League, Inc. November 19–20, Pasay City Publications and Linkages Office October 23–25, Malay, Aklan of the Philippine Judicial  Seminar-Workshop on Academy, with office at the 3rd  Information Dissemination Intellectual Property for Floor of the Supreme Court through a Dialogue between Selected Special Commercial Centennial Building, Padre Faura Barangay Officials and Court Court Judges and Pairing Court Street corner Taft Avenue, Manila. Officials Judges Tel: 552-9524; Fax: 552-9621; E-mail: October 23 November 21, Pasay City [email protected]; Cagayan de Oro City [email protected]; Website: October 24, Malaybalay City (Continued on page 20) http://philja.judiciary.gov.ph