The presence of an effective judicial independence, especially in a constitutional democracy such as the Philippines’ is imperative in making sure that the fundamental rights of every citizen of this country are observed.
In the Philippines, the Legislative (Senate and House of Representatives) makes the laws and the Executive (President) enforces them. In some cases these laws collide or endanger the right of the people either in the way they were crafted by Congress or in the manner the President implements them. The Judiciary, the third estate in the Philippine society, is responsible in deciding relevant laws to a proven set of facts to uphold the rights of a citizen.
To help retain the public confidence in the Philippine judicial system, composed of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Court of Tax Appeals, Sandiganbayan, and the lower courts, magistrates prudently holds its independence by being impervious to the “plague” caused by politics such as kinship, relationship, friendship and fellowship.
“Fiat justitia coelum ruat. Let justice be done though the heavens fall, even if this should require my turning back the tide,” said Chief Justice Renato C. Puno Corona, Suprmeme Court of the Philippines on his oath-taking last May 17, 2010.
The newly appointed Chief Justice promised the country the organization will improve itself even further in every aspect possible and to strengthen the great institution of the Supreme Court.
With this overwhelming pressure, the Philippine judiciary is faced with another tougher challenge. In a recently released proposed budget for 2011, the Judiciary was allocated just P14.1 billion of the P1.65 trillion national budget instead of the P27.1 billion it is asking.
Court Administrator and Supreme Court spokesman Midas Marquez said Malacañang’s expressed disappointment over the budget cut before the hearing of the committee on appropriations.
“The judiciary has not been given even one percent of the national budget in the last four years and worse, there is a high probability in 2011 of a decreased budget,” Marquez said. In 2007, the judiciary was allotted 0.76 percent of the national budget; it received 0.88 percent in 2008; and 0.94 percent in 2009.
Receiving less than one percent of the national budget, the Judiciary is still expected by the administration to perform well despite the budget cut.
“It is our expectation that they will continue to do their work to the utmost level and they will support our program for strengthening the Judiciary,” said Communications Operations Sec. Herminio Coloma in a news briefing at Malacañang last September 7.
The Philippines’ ratio of judge to inhabitants right now is 1:50,000, when the ideal ratio is 1:10,000. So far the Philippine judiciary has been stable and has consistently held its independence, but for how long?
In order for the system to improve appropriate financing is needed. The budget the Judiciary is asking from the government is just enough to create more courts and construct justice halls. This will help fill up the vacancies of existing courts and decrease the rate of 4,000 backlogs of cases to the ideal 500 backlogs.
The issue of money may remain debatable, especially for legal ethicists, but the judicial system of the Philippine needs it to help in the swift dispensation of justice. The bond of trust within the Judiciary and its constituents is not earned simply by converting the latter into an efficiency machine. The Judiciary needs its resources, and with enough resources it may function well and in the long run establishes its credibility. (AJPress)
( www.asianjournal.com )
( Published September 9, 2010 in Asian Journal Las Vegas p. A6 )
