ENDEAVOR
Last Oct. 14, Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo formally launched the Strategic Plan for Judicial Innovations (SPJI) 2022-2027 at an en banc session of the Supreme Court. This was preceded by an hour-long Court Watch interview by journalist Jing Castañeda with four Supreme Court (SC) justices, namely: Ramon Paul L. Hernando, Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, Mario V. Lopez, and Maria Filomena D. Singh. I wish to share with readers highlights of that interview.
So what’s the SPJI really all about?
While the public views the judiciary in terms of its basic role to adjudicate cases, Justice Singh pointed out its reformist role by taking a proactive stance to bring about fair and swift justice.
To be efficient, said Justice Lazaro-Javier, the members of the court will have to embrace the new technology. The justices recalled their first virtual session at the height of the pandemic – and the light moments that punctuated it – as they all did their best to cope with having to meet online from their homes.
Justice Lopez cited the change in his study table at home: “I now have a clean table, where they used to be a tall pile of papers. With my I-pad, I could work anytime, anywhere. We were very productive even at the height of the pandemic.”
Justice Singh said: “Covid forced everyone to shift to technology. We held more than 778,000 video conference hearings; around 100,000 persons deprived of liberty were released” including some 1,200 children in conflict with the law. She said the SC will set up information sites with digital gadgets so that the public could make online inquiries, be guided on bringing their cases to court, and obtain free legal aid. The public is also being encouraged to use social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.
Digital transformation is the key driver for judicial innovations. But won’t this bring about layoffs or staff reduction? Not so, said Justice Hernando, who said the judiciary is understaffed. “We will retrain, not cut off people. We will build capacities and broaden their knowledge. Walang dapatikabahala.” (“Our people need not be apprehensive.”)
Justice Lopez, who is chairman of the decongestion committee, said that the focus is on “efficiency, streamlined procedures, continuous trial, and expeditious prosecution through electronic processes.” He acknowledged a common concern “Kung mag-demanda ka, magastos at matagal. We are discussing with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) on how to lessen cost by setting fair and standard fees.”
Equally important, he said, is enforcing compliance with the Supreme Court’s “marching order” on a maximum two-year period within which to dispose of cases. There is a 90-day limit for decision-making in trial courts; one year for the Court of Appeals. If this is achieved “ramdamagad ang hustisya.” (“The impact of swift and fair justice will be felt.”)
Also tackled were the Philippines’ trailblazing innovation on a judiciary-initiated naturalization of stateless persons; the use of gender-free and -fair language; and the observance of Pride Week to underline the Court’s commitment to diversity and inclusion. Justice Singh pointed out that the latter initiatives emanate from the Constitutional guarantee on the right to dignity, which includes the right of gender choice.
Following the pathfinding conduct of digitalized and regionalized bar examinations last year led by Senior Associate Justice MarvicLeonen, the Court is implementing further improvements. In 2023, bar exams will be held in September; the results will be known by November, followed by the oath-taking of successful examinees who will also get to sign the roll of attorneys so they could begin their career as practicing lawyers immediately.
Reforms will also be implemented by the Legal Education Board. In the revised law curriculum, subjects have been trimmed down and a wider choice of electives is available. This will ease the burden on law students and enable them to enjoy a higher quality of life, according to Justice Singh.
Another key reform is the enactment of Republic Act 11691 on the creation of the Judiciary Marshals Office to ensure the safety and security of justices, judges and court personnel. Marshalls will also investigate and assess threats versus institutions and individuals; have forensic analysis capability; and enforce writs and processes. The urgency of having marshals was underlined by the recent killing of a Manila trial court judge in her office in which the suspected assailant was a member of her staff.
Another offshoot of this incident, according to Justice Lopez, is recognition of the importance of ensuring the mental health of court officers and employees through an annual examination, health insurance coverage and provision of professional mental health counseling and assistance on a 24/7 basis.
Justice Lazaro-Javier also emphasized the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA) that has been launched through an ethics caravan in Cebu and other major cities. The judiciary is determined to use an iron-fist approach, if need be, to cleanse its ranks of “hoodlums in robes.” Disciplinary cases are now being tackled by the Judicial Integrity Board.
In conclusion, the justices emphasized the Supreme Court’s determination to bring about the full fruition of the planned strategic innovations. Justice Singh urged the public to take note: “Wala nang ‘just-tiis.’ The SPJI is coming to a court near you.”
