Volume XV, Issue No. 57 January-March 2013

Transcription

JANUARY-MARCH 2013
VOLUME XV ISSUE NO. 57
From the Chancellor’s Desk
2013 began with PHILJA hardly breaking its stride
after having had a good run in 2012. Two consecutive
Orientation Seminar-Workshops for Newly
Appointed Judges (the 64th and the 65th) and one
Orientation Seminar for Newly Appointed Clerks of
Court (the 25th) opened the year. The JCEP or the
Judicial Career Enhancement Program for Judges,
one of the PHILJA core programs, was also conducted
for magistrates in Region IX and in Region III.
Legal Researchers in Regions V and VII likewise
had their training via the Career Development
Program. As it is MCLE Compliance season once again,
the Academy also mounted, for the benefit of
lawyers employed in the judiciary, the Continuing
Legal Education Program for Court Attorneys in the
Court of Appeals Mindanao and Visayas stations, as
well as for those in the Sandiganbayan and the Court
of Tax Appeals.
The Ninth Metrobank Foundation Professorial
Chair Lecture entitled “Towards a More ForwardLooking Insolvency System” was delivered by 2012
Chairholder Atty. Francis Ed. Lim, member of our
Commercial Law Department and Senior CoManaging Partner of the Angara Abello Concepcion
Regala & Cruz Law Offices (ACCRALAW).
By way of our Special Focus Programs, the
following activities were held: Capacity Building on
Environmental Law and the Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases for the Court of Appeals in
Tagbilaran, Bohol; Seminar-Workshop for Judges on
Various Laws Relating to Court Technology (for
Regions I and II, III, IV and V); Lecture Fora on the
New Judicial Affidavit Rule for judges, court
personnel, prosecutors, public attorneys and IBP
members in the Ilocos Region, Tacloban City, Samar
and Leyte, as well as in Misamis Oriental, BaguioBenguet, La Union, and Pangasinan.
ISSN 2244-5862
Contents
From the Chancellor’s Desk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Trainings, Programs and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
New Rulings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 8
Doctrinal Reminders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9
Orders
Administrative Order No. 27-2013 . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Circulars
OCA Cir. No. 05-2013 – Modification of the Public
Prosecutors’ Compliance with the Provisions on
the Judicial Affidavit Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2
OCA Cir. No. 07-2013 – Timely Submission of
Certificates of Service of Judges and Daily Time
Records (DTRs)/Bundy Cards of Personnel of the
Lower Courts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3
OCA Cir. No. 08-2013 – Reiterating Security
Protocol for the First and Second Level Courts . . 2 4
OCA Cir. No. 18-2013 – Guidelines in the
Implementation of the Automated Payroll System
in the Multi-Sala Regional Trial Courts Outside the
National Capital Judicial Region and the Municipal
Trial Courts in Cities in All Judicial Regions . . . . . . . . . 2 5
OCA Cir. No. 24-2013 – Guidelines on the Use of
Mobile Broadband Sticks and Official Email . . . . . 2 7
OCA Cir. No. 40-2013 – Issuance of Mittimus or
Commitment Order, Other Documents Needed
for the Transfer of Insular Prisoners from the
Bureau of Jail Management and Penology to the
New Bilibid Prison of the Bureau of Corrections in
Compliance with OCA Circular No. 4-92-A . . . . . . . . 2 8
OCA Cir. No. 41-2013 – Dangerous Drugs Board,
Board Regulation No. 3, Series of 2008 . . . . . . . . . 2 9
OCA Cir. No. 44-2013 – Amendment of OCA Circular
No. 74-2010 Guidelines in the Submission of
Applications for Appointment in the Lower Courts. . 3 0
Upcoming PHILJA Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2
(Next page)
2
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
From the Chancellor’s Desk
(Continued from page 1)
In addition, the Academy also conducted the
following: Personal Security Training for Selected
Judges at the PHILJA Training Center in Tagaytay City;
training on Increasing Judicial Efficiency: SeminarWorkshop for Judges on the Effective Use of the
Benchbook for Philippine Trial Courts (revised and
expanded); Seminar-Workshop on Strengthening
Judicial Integrity and Rule of Law for Executive Judges
and Single Sala Court Judges of Regions X, XI and XII;
Competency Enhancement Training (CET) for Judges
and Court Personnel Handling Cases Involving
Children; and the roll-out of the Competency
Enhancement Training for Judges, Prosecutors, Social
Workers and Law Enforcement Investigators Handling
Trafficking in Persons Cases (CET-TIP) for Cebu City, in
partnership with the International Justice MissionCebu.
We also partnered with the Philippine Women
Judges Association (PWJA) for the conduct of their
18th National Convention and Seminar in Palo, Leyte,
the theme of which was Kababaihan para sa
Katarungan at Kalikasan.
PHILJA also continued to support the Court’s
Enhanced Justice on Wheels (E-JOW) Program with
the conduct of Information Dissemination through a
Dialogue with Barangay officials and Court officials in
Binangonan, Rizal.
The Academy, thru the Philippine Mediation
Center Office (PMCO), conducted a number of
activities in support of Alternative Dispute Resolution
such as: a Refresher/Advanced Course for CourtAnnexed Mediators for the Camarines Sur Mediation
Program; an Orientation Conference with
Stakeholders on Court-Annexed Mediation for the
Bohol Mediation Program, as well as the Orientation
and Screening of Prospective Mediators and PMC Unit
Staff, also in Bohol; and a Judicial Settlement
Conference for Judges on Judicial Dispute Resolution
in Tagaytay City.
We likewise continued taking note of new rulings
of the Supreme Court and kept up with the doctrinal
reminders, as well as newly issued Court orders,
resolutions, and circulars in our website. We also took
note of new OCA circulars.
In closing, I would like to quote the Knight’s Oath
from Kingdom of Heaven, a film about Jerusalem
during the Crusades:
Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave
and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth
always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the
helpless and do no wrong—that is your oath.
All the best.
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA
Chancellor
PHILJA Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna, Justice Delilah V. Magtolis, Chief of Office for Academic Affairs, and Court of Appeals
Justice Myra G. Fernandez with the participants of the 65th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed Judges.
3
TRAININGS, PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES
Lecture–Forum on the
New Judicial Affidavit Rule
On September 4, 2012, the Supreme Court En Banc
approved the Judicial Affidavit Rule in A.M. No. 128-8-SC which took effect on January 1, 2013. The
adoption of the Rule was recommended by the
Supreme Court Committee on the Revision of the
Rules of Court, headed by Senior Associate Justice
Antonio T. Carpio, and its Subcommittee, headed by
Associate Justice Roberto A. Abad. The Rule seeks to
fully address case congestion and delays in courts,
given the volume of cases filed each year and the
slow and cumbersome trial process.
The Philippine Judicial Academy conducted four
lecture–forums which aimed to familiarize judges and
stakeholders with the salient features of the new
Rule and to open for discussion possible issues and
concerns in its implementation. It ensures to
accomplish the very main objective – the efficient,
effective and expeditious disposition of cases.
Justice Abad discussed the salient points of the
new Rule including: functions of judicial affidavits;
how and when the affidavits are submitted; language
to be used for the affidavits; contents of the affidavits;
consequence of false attestation; and application of
the rule to criminal actions. An open forum capping
each activity gave the participants opportunity to
raise questions on the new Rule.
Below is a summary of participants comprising
judges, clerks of court, prosecutors, PAO lawyers,
and IBP members who attended the lecture–forums:
Date of
Lecture-Forum
Venue
Area
No. of
Participants
Jan. 18, 2013
Fort Ilocandia
Laoag City
Region I
153
(49 judges)
Jan. 25, 2013
The Oriental
Leyte Hotel
Palo, Leyte
Region VIII
208
(44 judges)
March 1, 2013
Mallberry Suites
Business Hotel
Cagayan de
Oro City
Region X
244
(68 judges)
March 8, 2013
Forest Lodge
The Manor
Camp John Hay
Baguio City
Baguio256
Benguet
(57 judges)
La Union
Pangasinan
Ninth Metrobank Foundation
Professorial Chair Lecture
The Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair Lecture is
endowed by the Metrobank Foundation, Inc. to assist PHILJA’s
judicial education programs by providing grants to its Corps of
Professors to write and publish treatises with innovative
concepts and approaches in designated areas of law. Since 2004,
nine PHILJA Professors have delivered professorial chair lectures
in various fields of law.
On January 25, 2013, PHILJA conducted the Ninth
Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair Lecture featuring the
topic “Toward a More Forward-Looking Insolvency System.” The
lecture was delivered by Professor Francis Ed. Lim, the 2012
holder of the Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair in
Commercial Law. In attendance were 336 participants
comprising justices of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals,
Sandiganbayan and Court of Tax Appeals; SC, CA and PHILJA
officials and personnel; selected judges of the NCJR; and other
guests.
In his opening remarks, Justice Arturo D. Brion mentioned
that the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act (FRIA) of
2010 (RA No. 10142) is “an innovation as it redefined courtsupervised and pre-negotiated rehabilitation; introduced outof-court rehabilitation; and has incorporated into our legal
system the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency of the United
Nations Center for International Trade and Development.” The
subcommittee that drafted FRIA’s implementing rules,
composed of Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe, Justice Japar B.
Dimaampao, Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr., Judge Reynaldo
B. Daway, IPO Director General Ricardo Blancaflor, and
Professor Lim, is waiting for the completion of responses from
major stakeholders. The Rules are expected to be approved,
promulgated, and made effective by June of this year. Professor
Lim discussed the topics: importance of having an effective
insolvency system; international best practices; Philippine
Insolvency Law under Republic Act No. 10142; and additional
key components for an effective insolvency system. Senator
Edgardo J. Angara and Atty. Monico V. Jacob, Former
Commissioner of the Securities and Exchange Commission, gave
their reactions to the lecture.
4
17th PHILJA Founding Anniversary
The Philippine Judicial Academy commemorated its 17th
Founding Anniversary with a sportsfest held at the PHILJA
Training Center (PTC) in Tagaytay City on March 12, 2013.
The sportsfest, with the theme “In Pursuit of Fitness
and Wellness,”kicked off with a parade of colors by the
representatives of the different teams and lighting of the
torch by Ms. Bea Azcuna. PHILJA Chancellor Adolfo S.
Azcuna delivered the Welcome Remarks and
administered the Oath of Sportsmanship to the athletes.
After the teams’ cheering performances, the basketball,
badminton, billiards, and table tennis games were held
simultaneously. The activity culminated with a recognition
program for the personnel at the PTC auditorium.
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
The Model Employees were: Supervisory Level — Atty.
Eric Voltaire A. Pablo, Programming and Monitoring Division,
Academic Affairs Office; and Non-Supervisory Level — Mr.
Joel F. Balatucan, Corporate Planning Division, Administrative
Office.
The Chancellor’s Award was granted to Atty. Ronald M.
Garcia of the Vice Chancellor’s Office.
The Loyalty Awardees (10 years) were: Reynaldo A.
Daclan, Philippine Mediation Center Office (PMCO); Cloyd
D. Garra, PMCO; Eduardo M. Irigayen, Jr., PMCO;
Armando A. Marinduque, PHILJA Training Center Office
(PTCO); Ciriaco M. Martos, PTCO; Ma. Christina M. MoloRecio, Administrative Office; and Vilma L. Velchez, PTCO.
Chancellor Azcuna (center) tosses the
ball between Joselito Quines (Red
team) (left) and Dean Sedfrey M.
Candelaria (Blue team) (right).
5
6
Roll-out of the Competency
Enhancement Training for Judges,
Prosecutors, Social Workers
and Law Enforcement Investigators
Handling Trafficking
in Persons Cases
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
office until he shall have successfully completed all
necessary steps, through the appropriate adversarial
proceedings in court, to show that he is a natural-born
Filipino citizen and correct the records of his birth and
citizenship.”
·
Justice Ong filed a petition with RTC Br. 264 Pasig
City, docketed as S.P. No. 11767-SJ entitled In Re:
Amendment/Correction/Supplementation or
Annotation of an Entry in the Certificate of Birth
of Gregory Santos Ong – Gregory Santos Ong,
Petitioner v. The Civil Registrar of San Juan, Metro
Manila, et. al., Respondents. On October 24, 2007,
the Court granted Justice Ong’s petition and
recognized him as a natural-born citizen of the
Philippines.
PHILJA conducted a roll-out of the Competency
Enhancement Training for Judges, Prosecutors, Social
Workers and Law Enforcement Investigators Handling
Trafficking in Persons Cases on March 19–21, 2013.
This is the first competency enhancement training held
for such stakeholders.
The lectures covered topics such as Overview of
Trafficking in Persons (TIP); Dynamics of Victimization/
The Profile of a Trafficked Victim; Salient Features of
RA No. 9208 and RA No. 10364; How to Interview TIP
Victims; Psychosocial Trauma of Trafficking Victims;
How to Investigate a Case of Trafficking; Special Orders
and Warrants; and Putting It All Together: Prosecuting
a TIP Case. The viewing of the module videos, and the
participation in the workshops and practicums
complemented the participants’ learnings on the
lectures.
Forty-nine participants, composed of judges,
prosecutors, court social workers, police investigators
from Cebu, and representatives from the National
Bureau of Investigation and Alternative Law Groups,
attended the activity.
Incumbency Status of Hon. Gregory Ong as
Associate Justice of the Sandiganbayan
On March 5, 2013, the Supreme Court issued Court En Banc
Resolution A.M. No. 07-8-02-SB re: Letter-Query of Special
Prosecutor Dennis M. Villa-Ignacio on the Incumbency
Status of Hon. Gregory S. Ong as Associate Justice of the
Sandiganbayan ruling that Justice Ong shall continue to
hold office as Member of the Sandiganbayan. The letterquery was sent to the Court in July 2007 from where SP
Villa-Ignacio sought guidance on whether Justice Ong could
continue to sit as a Member of the Sandiganbayan after
the Court’s promulgation of the decision in G.R. No. 177721
enjoining him “from accepting an appointment to the
position of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court or
assuming the position and discharging the functions of that
Special Proceedings No. 11767-SJ
·
G.R. No. 179895
In September 2007, Ferdinand Topacio sought to
prevent Justice Ong from further exercising the
powers, duties, and responsibilities of an Associate
Justice of the Sandiganbayan because of his
Chinese citizenship (Topacio v. Ong). The Court
dismissed Topacio’s petition for being an improper
collateral attack on a public officer’s title and it
held that it could not, “upon the authority of the
present petition, determine said question on the
citizenship of Justice Ong without encroaching on
and pre-empting the proceedings emanating from
the RTC case.”
·
G.R. No. 180543
In July 2010, the Court dismissed the petition for
certiorari and prohibition filed by Sen. Jovito R.
Salonga, representing Kilosbayan Foundation and
Bantay Katarungan Foundation, assailing the
decision rendered in S.P. No. 11767-SJ and the
several orders issued by Presiding Judge Leoncio
Janolo, Jr. of the RTC Br. 264, Pasig City. The Court
held that Sen. Salonga failed to prove the prejudice
of Presiding Judge Janolo, Jr. with clear and
convincing evidence.
The pronouncements in both G.R. No. 179895 and G.R.
No. 180543 and the finality of the decision rendered by
RTC Br. 264 Pasig City on October 24, 2007, in S.P. No.
11767-SJ recognizing Justice Ong as a natural-born citizen
of the Philippines and directing the correction of the
existing records of his birth and citizenship definitively
settled the query of SP Villa-Ignacio.
7
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS
Orientation
64th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for
Newly Appointed Judges
Date: January 22–31, 2013
Venue: PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City
Participants: 36 newly appointed and 4 promoted judges,
namely:
A. NEW APPOINTMENTS
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
REGION III
Hon. Maximo B. Ancheta, Jr.
RTC, Br. 66, Baler, Aurora
Hon. Marifi P. Chua
RTC, Br. 70, Iba, Zambales
Hon. Merideth D. Delos Santos-Malig
RTC, Br. 51, Guagua, Pampanga
Hon. Corazon A. Domingo-Rañola
RTC, Br. 10, Malolos City, Bulacan
Hon. Hermenegildo C. Dumlao II
Hon. Mirasol O. Dychingco
Hon. Roline M. Ginez-Jabalde
RTC, Br. 74, Olongapo City, Zambales
Hon. Mildred V. Hernal
RTC, Br. 35, Gapan City, Nueva Ecija
Hon. Ana Marie C. Joson-Viterbo
RTC, Br. 24, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija
REGION IV
Hon. EImer H. Alea
MTC, San Jose, Batangas
Hon. Michelle C. Manaig-Calumpong
MTC, San Juan, Batangas
REGION X
Hon. Rosalie D. Platil
MTC, Mainit, Surigao del Norte
MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS
REGION III
Hon. Jane T. Yap-Evangelista
3rd MCTC: Victoria-La Paz, Tarlac
Hon. Araceli R. Soñas-Crisostomo
5th MCTC: Apalit-San Simon, Pampanga
REGION IV
Hon. Ronilo A. Beronio
6th MCTC: Roxas-Caganyancillo, Palawan
REGION VI
Hon. Steven P. Cercado
11th MCTC: Janiuay-Badiangan, Iloilo
REGION VIII
Hon. Angelo M. Raagas
7th MCTC: Guiuan-Mercedes, Eastern Samar
REGION XI
Hon. Carlos L. Espero II
RTC, Br. 9, Davao City
Hon. Retrina E. Fuentes
RTC, Br. 10, Davao City
REGION XII
Hon. Renato B. Gleyo
RTC, Br. 19, Isulan, Sultan Kudarat
REGION III
Hon. Rowena R. Chavez
MTC, Paombong, Bulacan
Hon. Ma. Arabella G. Eusebio-Rodolfo
MTC, Clark Field, Pampanga
Hon. Vicente S. Fernandez, Jr. *
MTC, San Felipe, Zambales
IN
CITIES
REGION III
Hon. Kelly B. Belino
MTCC, Br. 1, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija
Hon. Esmeralda B. David
MTCC, Br. 4, Olongapo City, Zambales
Hon. Rosalind R. Jungco-Abrigo
MTCC, Br. 3, Olongapo City, Zambales
Hon. Zamita T. Mationg
MTCC, Science City of Muñoz, Nueva Ecija
REGION IV
Hon. Rean G. Arizala-Joaquin
MTCC, Br. 3, San Pablo City, Laguna
Hon. Petronila P. Tañas-Arguelles
MTCC, Br. 1, Batangas City
REGION X
Hon. Dante R. Corminal
5th MCTC: Tubod-Alegria, Surigao del Norte
Hon. Celenito N. Daing
4th MCTC: Jimenez-Sinacaban, Misamis Occidental
Hon. Ali Joseph Ryan C. Lloren
5th MCTC: Jasaan-Claveria, Misamis Oriental
REGION XI
Hon. Alona T. Labtic
4th MCTC: Lupon-Banay-Banay, Davao Oriental
Hon. Minerva P. Pepino-Estremos
1st MCTC: Carmen-Sto. Tomas-Braulio E. Dujali, Davao del Norte
Hon. Ferdinand R. Villanueva
1st MCTC: Compostela-New Bataan, Compostela Valley
REGION XII
Hon. Gil A. De La Banda
1st MCTC: Makilala-Tulunan, North Cotabato
* Incomplete Attendance
8
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
B. PROMOTIONS
REGION II
Hon. Neljoe A. Cortes
RTC, Br. 6, Aparri, Cagayan
REGION IV
Hon. Manolito Y. Gumarang
RTC, Br. 17, Cavite City
REGION X
Hon. Richard D. Mordeno
RTC, Br. 22, Cagayan de Oro City
Hon. Vincent Filomeno B. Rosales
RTC, Br. 23, Cagayan de Oro City
Newly Appointed Judges
Date: March 5–14, 2013
Participants: 37 newly appointed and 3 promoted judges,
namely:
A. NEW APPOINTMENTS
REGION I
Hon. Romeo U. Habbiling
RTC, Lagawe, Ifugao
Hon. Emmanuel C. Rasing
RTC, Br. 3, Baguio City
REGION II
Hon. Cicero B. Jandoc
RTC, Br. 29, Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya
REGION IV
Hon. Leah D.R. Baguyo
RTC, Br. 48, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan
Hon. Beatrice A. Caunan-Medina
RTC, Br. 75, San Mateo, Rizal
Hon. Ambrosio B. De Luna
RTC, Br. 51 , Puerto Princesa City, Palawan
Hon. Napoleon E. Matienzo
RTC, Br. 62, Gumaca, Quezon
Hon. Lily Ann M. Padaen
RTC, Br. 68, Binangonan, Rizal
Hon. Emmanuel R. Recalde
RTC, Br. 38, Boac, Marinduque
Hon. Luvina P. Roque
RTC, Br. 29, San Pablo City, Laguna
REGION V
Hon. Ignacio C. Barcillano, Jr.
RTC, Br. 13, Ligao, Albay
Hon. Pedro M. Redoña
RTC, Br. 83, Calabanga, Camarines Sur
IN
CITIES
REGION I
Hon. Maria Celestina M. Cabaguio
MTCC, Candon City, IIocos Sur
REGION IV
Hon. Maria Christine Isabel Z. Falguera-Guerrero
MTCC, Br. 2, San Pablo City, Laguna
Hon. Mederlyn P. Mangalindan
MTCC, Br. 1, Cavite City
Hon. Barry Boy A. Salvador
MTCC, Br. 1, Antipolo City
Hon. Evangeline C. Santos
MTCC, Br. 2, Antipolo City
REGION I
Hon. Rachelle B. Asuncion-Palen
MTC, Bolinao, Pangasinan
Hon. Bonhoefer V. Bernardez
MTC, Bantay, IIocos Sur
Hon. Jesse P. Cabrillos
MTC, Balaoan, La Union
Hon. Rhea S. Gallevo
MTC, Agoo, La Union
REGION II
Hon. Herson S. Valmores
MTC, Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya
REGION IV
Hon. Eric S. Fortaleza
MTC, Sta. Cruz, Laguna
Hon. Katherine C. Jambaro-Altubar
MTC, Angono, Rizal
Hon. Lily D. Labarda
MTC, Kawit, Cavite
Hon. George Andy B. Pantanosas
MTC, Br. 2, Binangonan, Rizal
REGION V
Hon. Rene M. Dela Cruz
MTC, Daet, Camarines Sur
Hon. Maria Christine A. Imperial-Bernarte
MTC, Calabanga, Camarines Sur
Hon. Maria Kristina C. Malanyaon
MTC, Buhi, Camarines Sur
Hon. Maria Gracia P. Valenciano
MTC, Pili, Camarines Sur
Hon. Salvador C. Villarosa, Jr.
MTC, Labo, Camarines Sur
REGION I
Hon. Redan A. Acal
10th MCTC: Cervantes-Quirino, IIocos Sur
9
Hon. Modesto D. Bahul, Jr.
2nd MCTC: Lamut-Kiangan-Tinoc-Asipulo, Ifugao
Hon. Gerely C. Rico
4th MCTC: San Fabian-San Jacinto, Pangasinan
REGION II
Hon. Heherson A. Casareno
15th MCTC: Jones-San Agustin, Isabela
Hon. Nerissa E. Leal-Rasing
2nd MCTC: Dupax del Norte-Dupax del Sur- Alfonso
Castañeda, Nueva Vizcaya
REGION X
Hon. Melinda B. Mantilla
4th MCTC: Claver-Gigaquit, Surigao del Norte
B. PROMOTIONS
REGION I
Hon. Maria Laarni R. Parayno
RTC, Br. 68, Lingayen, Pangasinan
Hon. Mervin Jovito S. Samadan
RTC, Br. 40, Dagupan City, Pangasinan
REGION II
Hon. Cresencio I. Maliwat
RTC, Br. 21, Santiago City, Isabela
Newly Appointed Clerks of Court
Date: March 19–22, 2013
Participants: 80 newly appointed clerks of court, namely:
NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
Atty. Rio Nila Licudine Abiang
RTC, OCC, Valenzuela City
Atty. Evelyn Tolbe Agravante-Avila
RTC, Br. 41, Manila
Atty. Rizza Abella Aquino
RTC, Br. 98, Quezon City
Atty. Jasmin Samonte Cabansag
RTC, Br. 21, Manila
Atty. Joan Kathlyn Calingasan Caguete
RTC, Br. 194, Parañaque City
Atty. Cynthia Celestino Corpuz
RTC, Br. 172, Valenzuela City
Atty. Vida Adviento Cortez
RTC, Br. 209, Mandaluyong City
Atty. Mary Joyce Cruz Diño-Santos
RTC, Br. 10, Manila
Atty. Reigi Pura Estillero
RTC, Br. 261, Pasig City
Atty. Marc John Sta. Ana Estrellado
RTC, Br. 157, Pasig City
Atty. Maribel M. Fernandez
RTC, Br. 270, Valenzuela City
Atty. Rosette Moreno Hernandez
RTC, Br. 6, Manila
Atty. Gilbert Ilagan Isabedra
RTC, Br. 263, Marikina City
Atty. Maria Carla C. Laynes
RTC, Br. 202, Las Piñas City
Atty. Michelle Karla C. Manese
Atty. Francisco Sandino Atienza Marco
RTC, Br. 4, Manila
Atty. Charlene Mae See Migriño
Atty. Renato Victoria Peralta
RTC, OCC, Las Piñas City
Atty. Pamela Elaine B. Quinay
Atty. Ronaldo Genuino Rodriguez
RTC, Br. 13, Manila
Atty. Stephen Ivan Matibag Salinas
Atty. Maria Cecilia Gertrudes R. Salvador
Atty. Phillip Charles Garcia Santos
RTC, Br. 18, Manila
Atty. Kelly Adarlo Sarmiento
RTC, Br. 258, Parañaque City
Atty. Roderick Borlagdan Tagnia
RTC, Br. 204, Muntinlupa City
Atty. Jennie A. Trinidad
RTC, Br. 75 Valenzuela City
Atty. Maria Cielo S. Vidal
Atty. Ferdinand Yarra Vista
RTC, Br. 38, Manila
REGION I
Atty. Leila R. Jose
RTC, Br. 42, Dagupan City
Atty. Maribel B. Macario
RTC, Br. 8, La Trinidad, Benguet
Atty. Reden Balmores Pulmano
RTC, Br. 70, Burgos, Pangasinan
Atty. Lilybeth Tactay Sindayen-Libiran
RTC, Br. 62, La Trinidad, Benguet
REGION II
Atty. Jerome Butic Bantiyan
RTC, Br. 34, Banaue, Ifugao
Atty. Bernard Dominia Paat
RTC, Br. 16, Ilagan, Isabela
Atty. Joycee Requimin Sabben
RTC, Br. 7, Aparri, Cagayan
REGION III
Atty. Maricez Joson Ablola-Labang
RTC, Br. 1, Balanga, Bataan
10
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
Atty. Lady Jane Galindez Batisan
RTC, Br. 40, Palayan City, Nueva Ecija
Atty. Paolo Miguel Tumada Borja
RTC, OCC, Gapan City, Nueva Ecija
Atty. Leah Abello De Guzman
Atty. Marianette Aquino Galang
Atty. Joanna Patrice David Gomez
RTC, Br. 49, Guagua, Pampanga
Atty. Roehl Gonzalez Joson
Atty. Edmond Baluyot Lorenzo
Atty. Louise Batenga Madriaga
RTC, Br. 89, Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija
Atty. Jerome A. Matas
Atty. Ryan Scott Fiesta Robiños
RTC, Br. 63, Tarlac City, Tarlac
Atty. Janette Sanqui Santiago
Atty. Arlynne T. Saludez-Esteban
RTC, OCC, Tuguegarao City, Cagayan
REGION IV
Atty. Hazel Valiente Abagat
RTC, Br. 61, Gumaca, Quezon
Atty. Beethoven M. Alban
RTC, Br. 81, Romblon, Romblon
Atty. Maria Theresa Obeña Avila
RTC, Br. 53, Lucena City, Quezon
Atty. Imee B. Baurile-Malabanan
RTC, Br. 18, Tagaytay City, Cavite
Atty. Marizon Cenidoza Catameo
RTC, Br. 95, Antipolo City, Rizal
Atty. Fridah Lara M. De Leon
RTC, Br. 86, Taal, Batangas
Atty. Juan Clarete Manalo
RTC, Br. 4, Batangas City, Batangas
Atty. Julius Cabarles Mila
RTC, Br. 98, Antipolo City, Rizal
Atty. Norberto Mediante Mingao, Jr.
RTC, OCC, Antipolo City, Rizal
Atty. Joycee Mendoza Pabellano
RTC, Br. 56, Lucena City, Quezon
Atty. Regulus Recio Rocafort
RTC, Br. 85, Lipa City, Batangas
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS
Atty. Elmer D. Cabrera
MeTC, Br. 81, Valenzuela City
Atty. Cheryll S. De Mesa
MeTC, Br. 88, Parañaque City
Atty. Rosario C. Del Rosario-Jusay
MeTC, Br. 92, Marikina City
Atty. Marneolin L. Estebal-Bagaporo
Atty. Helen M. Evangelista
MeTC, Br. 82, Valenzuela City
Atty. Glen Galopa Evasco
Atty. Maria Theresa Cainglet Gonzales
MeTC, Br. 53, Caloocan City
Atty. Rommel Fragante Liban
Atty. Rolando Alog Panaligan
Atty. Ligaya V. Reyes
IN
CITIES
REGION I
Mr. Andres M. Fernandez
MTCC, Dagupan City, Pangasinan
Ms. Bernadith Dequito Del Fierro
MTC, Pagbilao, Quezon
Ms. Susan Tuazon Gapasin
MTC, Alicia, Isabela
Ms. Sonia Comia Lapatha
MTC, Dolores, Eastern Samar
Mr. Emmanuel Garcia Santiago
MTC, San Leonardo, Nueva Ecija
REGION I
Mr. Paul Anthony Kibatay Adais
MTC, Itogon, Benguet
Ms. Eloisa Liberty Rosete Nebre
MTC, Agno, Pangasinan
REGION III
Mr. Lynyrd Andres Medina
MTC, Clarkfield, Pampanga
Ms. Nelda Garcia Tolentino
MTC, Guagua, Pampanga
REGION I
Ms. Ma. Gemma Radoc Dela Rosa
2nd MCTC: Labrador-Sual, Pangasinan
Ms. Frances Cayetano Guerero
8th MCTC: Paoay-Currimao, Ilocos Norte
Continuing Legal Education
Continuing Legal Education for Court Attorneys
Date: February 6–7, 2013
Venue: Pryce Plaza Hotel, Cagayan de Oro City
Participants: 39 CA (Mindanao Station) lawyers
11
Venue: Radisson Blu Hotel, Cebu City
Participants: 48 CA (Visayas Station) lawyers
Participants: 64 SB and CTA lawyers
Career Development Program (CDP)
CDP for Court Legal Researchers
Venue: Avenue Plaza Hotel, Naga City
Participants: 63 court legal researchers of Region V
Date: March 20–21, 2013
Venue: Montebello Villa Hotel, Cebu City
Participants: 60 court legal researchers of Region VII
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
Judicial Career Enhancement Program (JCEP)
Nicolas B. Medenilla II
Gilbert U. Medrano
Miguel L. Mergal
Norbert Bong S. Obedoza
Sinforoso N. Ordiz, Jr.
Rigor R. Pascual
Doris A. Rabang-Briones
Sheila R. Rafanan
Geraldine B. Ramos
Ronces Anne S. Reyes-De Leon
Lean Rico-Obal
Corazon L. Rodriguez-Bondoc
Bernard D. Rosario
Russell D. Sabado
Alexander A. Tordilla
Buenagracia D. Umali
Geronimo I. Ventura III
Erika Frances S. Buluran-Monzon (attended on
February 13 only)
29th Pre-Judicature Program
JCEP for Judges
Date: February 27–March 1, 2013
Venue: Dakak Park and Beach Resort, Dapitan City
Participants: 45 RTC, MTCC, MTC, MCTC, and SHCC judges of
Region IX
Date: March 13–15, 2013
Participants: 59 RTC judges of Region III
Pre-Judicature Program
Venue: Traders Hotel, Pasay City
Participants: 36 lawyers, namely:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Eileen Eleanor D. Adaza
Mylene May G. Adube-Cabuag
Don Ace Mariano V. Alagar
Candice Guada Cresilda C. Almodovar
Ivy V. Asetre
Rosa P. Besedillas
Leizl L. Calimaran-Soriano
Pacito M. Canonoy, Jr.
Larry B. Cabero
Misael Raymundo C. Dinsay
Marilou M. Dulalas-Pascual
Gorgonio B. Elarmo, Jr.
Kerwyn D. Garcia
Philger Noel B. Inovejas
Jeanylene T. Isip-Fukai
Jesusa R. Lapuz
Hesiquio R. Mallillin
Sarah C. Marcos-Martin
Date: March 11–22, 2013
Venue: The Bayleaf, Intramuros, Manila
Participants: 96 lawyers, namely:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
Juanita Lilet D. Abuel
Leonard Rey A. Aguinaldo
Christine Ann Marie R. Alcazar-Batacan
Jezebel L. Almodal-Espinosa
Charisse Gail D. Apatan
Marivic C. Arriola
Cherrie G. Balderama
Christopher A. Batacan
Vanessa F. Bernardo-Agawin
Elizabeth G. Bringas
Ma. Theresa C. Bueno
Isabelo P. Bulos
Filipina C. Cabauatan
Melody Anne E. Calo-Villar
Edwin B. Carabbacan
Nepomuceno Z. Caylao
Jenny J. Cera-Bayangos
Arnel P. Cezar
Denise A. Dacanay-Sagun
Rhodalyne E. Dapul-Artazo
Katherine Faye Darvin-Dizon
Sheba V. De la Cruz-Javier
Raymond C. De Lemos
Maricar P. Dela Cruz-Buban
Joeven D. Dellosa
Cresencio Endozo
Irene M. Espina
Jocelyn T. Fabian
Maritess E. Fabila-Vizconde
Kristine A. Ferrer
Pagwadan S. Fonacier
12
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
Joyce B. Gaballo-Llacer
Isser Josef V. Gatdula
Reyes G. Geromo
Cyrus B. Goco
Maria Lina P. Gonzaga
Sherry R. Gonzalvo
Linda B. Gumabol
Dante Gil D. Gumpal
Ricardo C. Ibarreta, Jr.
Grace P. Ignacio
Rey P. Inciong
Roy P. Inciong
Gil Rose C. Inovejas
Joel J. Jabal
Zharone Fritz M. Japzon-Ferreras
Alvin B. Landicho
Alma Grace M. Lee-Omengan
Maria Teresa L. Lee-Rafols
Melissa N. Leonardo-Rodriguez
Emery Joy M. Ma
Emma D. Madronio
Maricel M. Magpantay-Ng
Lita T. Maligaya
Grandis Rem T. Manalabe
Remedios P. Marcos
Marilyn M. Martin
Mischelle Maulion-Jocson
Arnaldo C. Mendieta
Kristine Joy M. Meñez-Macalalad
Camilo A. Oliva
Jennifer Cabanban Ong
Rima B. Orbon-Ortega
Angelina M. Orendain
Dennis Galahad C. Orendain
Alejandra P. Paningbatan
Edmar D. Pascua
Alexander L. Paulino
Valerie Love V. Pelayo-Ilagan
Maria Fatima P. Pepinas-Neri
Donna Michelle I. Pinlac-Reyes
Marietta M. Ramirez
Maybelle C. Ramos-Tolentino
Francis B. Reyes
Purissa M. Reyes
Marietta M. Rodriguez
Ariel N. Ruiz
Jeanne Marie A. Sabio
Annalyn O. Salvatierra-Rodrigazo
Thyrone Z. Sanchez
Henry C. Santos
Isabelito E. Sicat
Ivalene E. Sigua
Aura Clarissa B. Tabag-Querubin
Shirley M. Tagao-Gumiran
Glenda G. Togonon
Ma. Lisa L. Tolentino
Jewelyne Jovette B. Valenton-Carreon
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
Leah Angeli Vasquez-Abad
Lissa Belle M. Villanueva
Marlyn C. Willy-Galasa
Anne Marie U. Yao
Maria Cleza A. Zamora
Randy P. Zarate
Clarence G. Zerrudo
Marizen B. Grutas
Special Lecture
Ninth Metrobank Foundation Professorial Chair Lecture
“Toward a More Forward-Looking Insolvency System”
Date: January 25, 2013
Venue: Court of Appeals Auditorium, Court of Appeals
Participants: 336 comprising SC, CA, SB, and CTA justices, SC,
CA, and PHILJA officials and personnel, selected judges of
the NCJR judges, and other guests
Special Focus Programs
Capacity Building on Environmental Laws and the Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases for the Court of Appeals
Venue: Flushing Meadows Resort, Panglao, Bohol
Participants: 22 CA-Cebu justices
Seminar-Workshop for Judges on Various Laws Relating
to Court Technology
Venue: Fort Ilocandia Resort Hotel, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte
Participants: 34 RTC judges of Regions I and II
Venue: Pan Pacific Hotel, Manila
Participants: 38 RTC judges of Regions III and IV
Date: March 19–20, 2013
Venue: Hotel Venezia, Legaspi City
Participants: 35 RTC judges of Region V
Lecture–Forum on the New Judicial Affidavit Rule
Venue: Fort Ilocandia Resort Hotel, Laoag City, Ilocos Norte
Participants: 153 comprising selected RTC, MTCC, MTC,
and MCTC judges, clerks of court, prosecutors, IBP
members and PAO lawyers, and law student of Ilocos Norte
and Ilocos Sur
Venue: The Oriental Hotel Leyte, Palo, Leyte
Participants: 208 selected RTC, MTCC, MTC, and MCTC
judges, clerks of court, prosecutors, IBP (Samar and Leyte
Chapters) members, and PAO lawyers of Tacloban City,
Samar, and Leyte
13
Date: March 1, 2013
Venue: Mallberry Suites Business Hotel, Cagayan de Oro City
Participants: 250 selected RTC, SDC, MTCC, MTC, and
MCTC judges of Region X, clerks of court, prosecutors, IBP
(Misamis Oriental and Bukidnon Chapters) members and
PAO lawyers of Misamis Oriental
Date: March 8, 2013
Venue: Forest Lodge, Camp John Hay, Baguio City
Participants: 256 selected RTC, MTCC, MTC, and MCTC
judges, clerks of court, prosecutors, IBP members and PAO
lawyers of Baguio, Benguet, La Union, and Pangasinan
Increasing Judicial Efficiency: Seminar-Workshop for
Judges on the Effective Use of the Benchbook for Philippine
Trial Courts (Revised and Expanded)
Venue: Harolds Hotel, Cebu City
Participants: 54 RTC, MTCC, MTC and MCTC judges of
Regions VII and VIII (Batch 2)
For Judges, Prosecutors, Social Workers and Law
Enforcement Investigators Handling Trafficking in
Persons Cases
Date: March 19–21, 2013
Venue: Harolds Hotel, Cebu City
Participants: 49 RTC judges, prosecutors, social workers,
and representatives from PNP, NBI and ALG
Convention-Seminar
18th National Convention and Seminar of the Philippine
Women Judges Association (PWJA)
Theme: “Kababaihan para sa Katarungan at Kalikasan”
Venue: The Oriental Hotel Leyte, Palo, Leyte
Participants: 290 women judges
On ADR/Mediation/JDR
Date: February 12, 2013
Venue: Fort Ilocandia Hotel, Laoag City
Regions I and II (Batch 2)
Date: March 14, 2013
Venue: L’ Fisher Hotel, Bacolod City
Region VI (Batch 2)
Personal Security Training for Judges
Participants: 46 RTC and MCTC judges
Information Dissemination Through A Dialogue Between
Barangay Officials and Court Officials
Venue: Casimiro A. Ynares, Sr. Gym, Binangonan, Rizal
Participants: 275 barangay officials of the Province of Rizal
Seminar-Workshop on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and
Rule of Law for Executive Judges and Single Sala Court
Judges of Regions X, XI, and XII
Venue: Mallberry Suites Business Hotel, Cagayan de Oro City
Participants: 35 RTC judges
Competency Enhancement Training (CET)
For Judges and Court Personnel Handling Cases
Involving Children
Venue: The Bayleaf, Intramuros, Manila
Participants: 36 RTC judges, clerks of court, court
interpreters, prosecutors, and PAO lawyers
Refresher/Advanced Course for Court-Annexed Mediators
(Camarines Sur Mediation Program)
Venue: Villa Caceres Hotel, Naga City
Participants: 10 mediators
Orientation Conference with Stakeholders on CourtAnnexed Mediation (Bohol Mediation Program)
Venue: Bohol Tropics Resort, Tagbilaran City, Bohol
Participants: 92 RTC, MTC, and MCTC judges, clerks of court,
and stakeholders from the IBP, National Prosecution
Service, PAO, LGUs, business, academe, media and NGOs
Orientation and Screening of Prospective Mediators and
PMC Unit Staff (Bohol Mediation Program)
Venue: Hall of Justice, Carmen Bohol and Hall of Justice,
Talibon, Bohol
Participants: 48 mediators and staff applicants
Faculty Workshop for the Judicial Settlement Conference
for Judges on Judicial Dispute Resolution (Skills-Based
Course)
Date: March 19, 2013
Participants: 17 lecturers and facilitators
Judicial Settlement Conference for Judges on Judicial
Dispute Resolution (Skills-Based Course)
Date: March 20–22, 2013
Participants: 59 RTC, MeTC, MTCC, MTC, and MCTC judges
14
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
PHILJA Chief of Academic Affairs Office Justice Delilah V. Magtolis (seated far left) and PHILJA Professor Justice
Oswaldo D. Agcaoili (seated far right) with participants of the Capacity Building on Environmental Laws and the Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases for the Court of Appeals held on January 9–11, 2013, at the Flushing Meadows Resort,
Panglao, Bohol.
Participants of the Judicial Career Enhancement Program for Regional Trial Court Judges of Region III held on March 13–15,
2013, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.
CA Jose Midas P. Marquez (seated center, second row) with the participants of the Personal Security Training for Judges held
on March 13–15, 2013, at the PHILJA Training Center, Tagaytay City.
15
Justice Edilberto G. Sandoval (ret.) and Justice Rodolfo G. Palattao (ret.) (seated) with participants of the Career Development
Program for Court Legal Researchers held on March 20–21, 2013, at the Montebello Villa Hotel, Cebu City.
Judge Divina Luz P. Aquino-Simbulan
(seated, center) with participants of the
Refresher/Advanced Course for Court-Annexed
Mediators (Camarines Sur Mediation Program)
held on January 30–31, 2013, at the Villa
Caceres Hotel, Naga City.
8_ejow binangonan
Justice Oswaldo D. Agcaoili lectures during the Information Dissemination Through a Dialogue Between Barangay and Court
Officials held on February 14, 2013, at the Casimiro A. Ynares, Sr. Gym, Binangonan, Rizal.
16
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
Associations of Judges and Court Personnel
Philippine Women Judges Association (PWJA)
Officers and Directors Directory 2013–2015
Justice Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro, President
Justice Remedios A. Salazar-Fernando, Executive Vice President
Justice Amelia C. Manalastas, Vice President – Appellate Courts
Judge Ma. Theresa M. Arcega, Vice President – RTC
Judge Maria Zoraida S. Zabat-Tuazon, Vice President – MeTC/MTCC
Judge Myla M. Villavicencio-Olan, Vice President – MTC/MCTC
Judge Tita P. Villordon, Secretary
Judge Ma. Bernardita J. Santos, Treasurer
Judge Sylva G. Aguirre-Paderanga, Auditor
Judge Josefina E. Siscar, Public Relations Officer
Judge Rosalyn M. Loja, NCR – District 1
Judge Perpetua Atal-Paño, NCR – District 2
Judge Emma M. Torio, Region I
Judge Precious Lovely Olivia A. Sales-Jao, Region II
Judge Josefina D. Farrales, Region III – District 1
Judge Sita J. Clemente, Region III – District 2
Judge Amy Melba S. Belulia, Region IV – District 1
Judge Lorelle Moana R. Hitosis, Region IV – District 2
Judge Cecilia R. Borja-Soler, Region V
Judge Alicia Cruz Barrios, Region VI
Judge Ester M. Veloso, Region VII
Judge Evelyn P. Riños-Lesigues, Region VIII
Judge Deborah P. Garcia-Nazario, Region IX
Judge Evelyn G. Nery, Region X
Judge Loida S. Posadas-Kahulugan, Region XI
Judge Lily Lydia A. Laquindanum, Region XII
17
JUDICIAL MOVES
Hon. EDWARD B. CONTRERAS
Associate Justice
Court of Appeals
appointed on March 1, 2013
Before the signing of President Aquino on March 1, 2013
of the appointment of Hon. Edward B. Contreras as
Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals, he was
Executive Judge of the RTC in Roxas City and presided
over Branch 17, therein. He rose from being presiding
judge of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court and Municipal
Trial Court in Cities up to his appointment as Executive
Judge of the Regional Trial Court. As trial judge, Justice
Contreras was cited in the PHILJA Bulletin, April–June
2003 issue, for rendering 22 full-length decisions on long–
pending cases within the first 20 days of his assumption
to duty. In 2005, he was nominated for Judicial Excellence
as Outstanding RTC Judge by the Office of the Court
Administrator.
He had also served for 29 years in local government
units and in the judiciary, including a brief stint as
confidential attorney to Supreme Court Justice Josue N.
Bellosillo from whom he received rigid training in research
and decision writing.
In his student days, he was a prolific writer, an editor
in chief of his school’s publication, a student leader, and
chairman of the student council.
Hon. ROMAN G. DEL ROSARIO
Presiding Justice
Court of Tax Appeals
appointed on March 13, 2013
Hon. Roman G. Del Rosario was appointed by President
Benigno S. Aquino III on March 13, 2013, as Presiding
Justice of the Court of Tax Appeals.
Justice Del Rosario obtained his law degree from
the University of the Philippines College of Law in 1981.
He earned his AB Economics degree from the University
of Santo Tomas. In 1998 and 2000, he attended the
Harvard Law School Program of Instruction for lawyers.
After a brief stint with the Bureau of Internal
Revenue as Technical Assistant to the Planning and Policy
Service Chief, Justice Del Rosario joined the Office of the
Solicitor General (OSG) in 1983, starting as a Trial
Attorney I until his appointment as Assistant Solicitor
General in 1994. He headed the OSG team representing
the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) since its
creation in 2001. He was speaker or participant in various
fora, both here and abroad, particularly on the role of
the OSG in the litigation of anti-money laundering
matters. He also served as the Executive Director of the
special committee on Naturalization at the OSG.
Hon. JENNY LIND R.
ALDECOA-DELORINO
Deputy Court Administrator
Office of the Court
Administrator
appointed on January 10, 2013
DCA Delorino hails from Dumaguete City, Negros
Oriental. A consistent academic scholar, at Silliman
University, she earned her Bachelors Degrees in Arts,
major in Political Science (magna cum laude), and
Bachelor of Laws (cum laude). At the same time, she
honed her vocal performance skills in the School of Music
and Fine Arts.
In 2002, she was appointed as Presiding Judge of
Branch 37, RTC, Dumaguete City, and, in 2005, she was
transferred to Branch 137, RTC, Makati City, where she
also served as a Vice Executive Judge. In a span of eight
years, she presided over a court of general jurisdiction,
as well as those specially designated to handle cases of
heinous crimes, Family Court cases, and Commercial Court
cases.
18
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
We agree with the CA that the legislature clearly
intended to shorten the period of redemption for juridical
persons whose properties were foreclosed and sold in
accordance with the provisions of Act No. 3135.
Civil Law
Section 47 of RA No. 8791 is constitutional.
Petitioner’s contention that Section 47 of RA No. 8791
violates the constitutional proscription against impairment
of the obligation of contract has no basis.
The purpose of the non-impairment clause of the
Constitution is to safeguard the integrity of contracts
against unwarranted interference by the State. As a rule,
contracts should not be tampered with by subsequent laws
that would change or modify the rights and obligations of
the parties. Impairment is anything that diminishes the
efficacy of the contract. There is an impairment if a
subsequent law changes the terms of a contract between
the parties, imposes new conditions, dispenses with those
agreed upon or withdraws remedies for the enforcement
of the rights of the parties.
Section 47 did not divest juridical persons of the right
to redeem their foreclosed properties but only modified
the time for the exercise of such right by reducing the oneyear period originally provided in Act No. 3135. The new
redemption period commences from the date of foreclosure
sale, and expires upon registration of the certificate of sale
or three months after foreclosure, whichever is earlier.
There is likewise no retroactive application of the new
redemption period because Section 47 exempts from its
operation those properties foreclosed prior to its effectivity
and whose owners shall retain their redemption rights
under Act No. 3135.
Petitioner’s claim that Section 47 infringes the equal
protection clause as it discriminates mortgagors/property
owners who are juridical persons is equally bereft of merit.
The equal protection clause is directed principally
against undue favor and individual or class privilege. It is
not intended to prohibit legislation which is limited to the
object to which it is directed or by the territory in which it
is to operate. It does not require absolute equality, but
merely that all persons be treated alike under like conditions
both as to privileges conferred and liabilities imposed. Equal
protection permits of reasonable classification. We have
ruled that one class may be treated differently from another
where the groupings are based on reasonable and real
distinctions. If classification is germane to the purpose of
the law, concerns all members of the class, and applies
equally to present and future conditions, the classification
does not violate the equal protection guarantee.
The difference in the treatment of juridical persons
and natural persons was based on the nature of the
properties foreclosed – whether these are used as
residence, for which the more liberal one-year redemption
period is retained; or used for industrial or commercial
purposes, in which case a shorter term is deemed necessary
to reduce the period of uncertainty in the ownership of
property and enable mortgagee-banks to dispose sooner
of these acquired assets. It must be underscored that the
General Banking Law of 2000, crafted in the aftermath of
the 1997 Southeast Asian financial crisis, sought to reform
the General Banking Act of 1949 by fashioning a legal
framework for maintaining a safe and sound banking
system. In this context, the amendment introduced by
Section 47 embodied one of such safe and sound practices
aimed at ensuring the solvency and liquidity of our banks. It
cannot therefore be disputed that the said provision
amending the redemption period in Act No. 3135 was based
on a reasonable classification and germane to the purpose
of the law.
This legitimate public interest pursued by the legislature
further enfeebles petitioner’s impairment of contract
theory.
The right of redemption being statutory, it must be
exercised in the manner prescribed by the statute, and
within the prescribed time limit, to make it effective.
Furthermore, as with other individual rights to contract
and to property, it has to give way to police power exercised
for public welfare. The concept of police power is wellestablished in this jurisdiction. It has been defined as the
“state authority to enact legislation that may interfere with
personal liberty or property in order to promote the general
welfare.” Its scope, ever-expanding to meet the exigencies
of the times, even to anticipate the future where it could
be done, provides enough room for an efficient and flexible
response to conditions and circumstances thus assuming
the greatest benefits.
The freedom to contract is not absolute; all contracts
and all rights are subject to the police power of the State
and not only may regulations which affect them be
established by the State, but all such regulations must be
subject to change from time to time, as the general wellbeing of the community may require, or as the
circumstances may change, or as experience may
demonstrate the necessity. Settled is the rule that the non-
(Continued on page 31)
19
Remedial Law
Jurisdiction over the person of defendant; how
acquired.
In civil cases, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
may be acquired either by service of summons or by the
defendant’s voluntary appearance in court and submission
to its authority.
In this case, the MeTC acquired jurisdiction over the
person of respondent Hertz by reason of the latter’s
voluntary appearance in court.
In Philippine Commercial International Bank v. Spouses
Dy, we had occasion to state:
Preliminarily, jurisdiction over the defendant in a
civil case is acquired either by the coercive power
of legal processes exerted over his person, or his
voluntary appearance in court. As a general
proposition, one who seeks an affirmative relief is
deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the
court. It is by reason of this rule that we have had
occasion to declare that the filing of motions to
admit answer, for additional time to file answer,
for reconsideration of a default judgment, and to
lift order of default with motion for reconsideration,
is considered voluntary submission to the court’s
jurisdiction. This, however, is tempered by the
concept of conditional appearance, such that a
party who makes a special appearance to
challenge, among others, the court’s jurisdiction
over his person cannot be considered to have
submitted to its authority.
Prescinding from the foregoing, it is thus clear that:
(1) Special appearance operates as an exception
to the general rule on voluntary appearance;
(2) Accordingly, objections to the jurisdiction of
the court over the person of the defendant
must be explicitly made, i.e., set forth in an
unequivocal manner; and
(3) Failure to do so constitutes voluntary
submission to the jurisdiction of the court,
especially in instances where a pleading or
motion seeking affirmative relief is filed and
submitted to the court for resolution.
(emphases supplied)
In this case, the records show that the following
statement appeared in respondent’s Motion for Leave to
File Answer:
[I]n spite of the defective service of summons, the
defendant opted to file the instant Answer with
Counterclaim with Leave of Court, upon inquiring
from the office of the clerk of court of this Honorable
Court and due to its notice of hearing on March 29,
2005, application for TRO/Preliminary Mandatory
Injunction was received on March 26, 2006.
(emphasis supplied)
Furthermore, the Answer with Counterclaim filed by
Hertz never raised the defense of improper service of
summons. The defenses that it pleaded were limited to litis
pendentia, pari delicto, performance of its obligations and
lack of cause of action. Finally, it even asserted its own
counterclaim against Optima.
Measured against the standards in Philippine
Commercial International Bank, these actions lead to no
other conclusion than that Hertz voluntarily appeared
before the court a quo.
We therefore rule that, by virtue of the voluntary
appearance of respondent Hertz before the MeTC, the trial
court acquired jurisdiction over respondent’s.
Sereno, CJ, Optima Realty Corporation v. Hertz Phil. Exclusive Cars,
Inc., G.R. No. 183035, January 9, 2013.
Interlocutory order; appeal from interlocutory order
not allowed; remedies against an interlocutory order.
Under Section 1, Rule 41 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil
Procedure, as amended, appeal from interlocutory orders
is not allowed. Said provision reads:
SECTION 1. Subject of appeal. — An appeal may be
taken from a judgment or final order that completely
disposes of the case, or of a particular matter
therein when declared by these Rules to be
appealable.
No appeal may be taken from:
(a) An order denying a motion for new trial or
reconsideration;
(b) An order denying a petition for relief or
any similar motion seeking relief from
judgment;
(c) An interlocutory order;
(d) An order disallowing or dismissing an
appeal;
(e) An order denying a motion to set aside a
judgment by consent, confession or
compromise on the ground of fraud,
mistake or duress, or any other ground
vitiating consent;
(f) An order of execution;
(g) A judgment or final order for or against
20
Doctrinal Reminders
Remedial Law (continued)
one or more of several parties or in
separate claims, counterclaims, crossclaims and third-party complaints, while
the main case is pending, unless the court
allows an appeal therefrom; and
(h) An order dismissing an action without
prejudice;
In all the above instances where the
judgment or final order is not appealable, the
aggrieved party may file an appropriate special
civil action under Rule 65. (emphasis supplied)
The remedy against an interlocutory order not subject
of an appeal is an appropriate special civil action under
Rule 65 provided that the interlocutory order is rendered
without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of
discretion. Having chosen the wrong remedy in questioning
the subject interlocutory orders of the RTC, petitioner’s
appeal was correctly dismissed by the CA.
V illarama, Jr., J., Ma. Carminia C. Calderon represented by her
Attorney-In-Fact, Marycris V. Baldevia v. Jose Antonio F. Roxas and
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 185595, January 9, 2013.
Local government officials may properly secure the
services of private counsel.
In Alinsug v. RTC Br. 58, San Carlos City, Negros Occidental,
the Court ruled that in instances like the present case where
personal liability on the part of local government officials is
sought, they may properly secure the services of private
counsel, explaining:
It can happen that a government official, ostensibly
acting in his official capacity and sued in that
capacity, is later held to have exceeded his
authority. On the one hand, his defense would have
then been underwritten by the people’s money which
ordinarily should have been his personal expense.
On the other hand, personal liability can attach to
him without, however, his having had the benefit of
assistance of a counsel of his own choice. In Correa
v. CFI, the Court held that in the discharge of
governmental functions, ‘municipal corporations
are responsible for the acts of its officers, except if
and when, and only to the extent that, they have
acted by authority of the law, and in conformity
with the requirements thereof.
In such instance, this Court has sanctioned the
representation by private counsel. In one case, We
held that where rigid adherence to the law on
representation of local officials in court actions
could deprive a party of his right to redress for a
valid grievance, the hiring of a private counsel
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
would be proper. And in Albuera v. Torres, this Court
also said that a provincial governor sued in his
official capacity may engage the services of private
counsel when “the complaint contains other
allegations and a prayer for moral damages, which,
if due from the defendants, must be satisfied by
them in their private capacity. (citations omitted)
Consequently Attys. Fandiño and Saulon had the
authority to represent petitioner at the initial stages of the
litigation and this authority continued even up to his appeal
and the filing of the petition for certiorari with the CA
respecting the execution of the RTC judgment. It was
therefore an error for the CA to have dismissed the said
petition for certiorari on the ground of unauthorized
representation.
Perlas-Bernabe, J., Romeo A. Gontang, in his Official Capacity
as Mayor of Gainza, Camarines Sur v. Engr. Cecilia Alayan,
G.R. No. 191691, January 16, 2013.
Party’s duty to inform the court of its counsel’s demise.
In Mojar, et al. v. Agro Commercial Security Service Agency,
Inc., the Court explained that it is the party’s duty to inform
the court of its counsel’s demise, and failure to apprise the
court of such fact shall be considered negligence on the
part of said party. Expounding further, the Court stated:
x x x It is not the duty of the courts to inquire, during
the progress of a case, whether the law firm or
partnership representing one of the litigants
continues to exist lawfully, whether the partners
are still alive, or whether its associates are still
connected with the firm.
x x x They cannot pass the blame to the court, which
is not tasked to monitor the changes in the
circumstances of the parties and their counsel.
xxxx
In Ampo v. Court of Appeals, this Court explained
the vigilance that must be exercised by a party:
xxxx
Litigants who are represented by counsel
should not expect that all they need to do
is sit back, relax and await the outcome of
their cases. Relief will not be granted to a
party who seeks avoidance from the effects
of the judgment when the loss of the
remedy at law was due to his own
negligence. The circumstances of this case
plainly show that petitioner only has
himself to blame. Neither can he invoke
due process. The essence of due process
is simply an opportunity to be heard. Due
process is satisfied when the parties are
Doctrinal Reminders
Remedial Law (continued)
afforded a fair and reasonable opportunity
to explain their respective sides of the
controversy. Where a party, such as
petitioner, was afforded this opportunity
to participate but failed to do so, he cannot
complain of deprivation of due process. If
said opportunity is not availed of, it is
deemed waived or forfeited without
violating the constitutional guarantee.
Thus, for failure of petitioner to notify the CA of the
death of its counsel of record and have said counsel
substituted, then service of the CA Decision at the place or
law office designated by its counsel of record as his address,
is sufficient notice. The case then became final and
executory when no motion for reconsideration or appeal
was filed within the reglementary period therefor.
Peralta, J., O. Ventanilla Enterprises Corporation v. Adelina
S. Tan and Sheriff Reynante G. Velasquez, Presiding Judge,
G.R. No. 180325, February 20, 2013.
Inhibition of judges must be for just and valid causes.
In Gochan v. Gochan, the Court elucidated further:
Verily, the second paragraph of Section 1 of Rule
137 does not give judges the unfettered discretion
to decide whether to desist from hearing a case.
The inhibition must be for just and valid causes.
The mere imputation of bias or partiality is not
enough ground for them to inhibit, especially when
the charge is without basis. This Court has to be
shown acts or conduct clearly indicative of
arbitrariness or prejudice before it can brand them
with the stigma of bias or partiality.
In a string of cases, the Supreme Court has said
that bias and prejudice, to be considered valid
reasons for the voluntary inhibition of judges, must
be proved with clear and convincing evidence. Bare
allegations of their partiality will not suffice. It
cannot be presumed, especially if weighed against
the sacred oaths of office of magistrates, requiring
them to administer justice fairly and equitably–
both to the poor and the rich, the weak and the
strong, the lonely and the well-connected.
(emphasis and underscoring supplied)
The Court applied the same precept in Pagoda
Philippines, Inc. v. Universal Canning, Inc. where the judge’s
right to inhibit was weighed against his duty to decide the
case without fear of repression. Indeed, the automatic
granting of a motion for voluntary inhibition would open
the floodgates to a form of forum-shopping, in which
litigants would be allowed to shop for a judge more
21
sympathetic to their cause, and would prove antithetical
to the speedy and fair administration of justice.
A judge must decide based on a rational and logical
assessment of the circumstances prevailing in a case brought
before him. In the present case, petitioners cite public
respondent’s affiliation with an alumni association as the
sole ground to which they anchor their motion for the
voluntary inhibition of public respondent.
Before the trial court, petitioners alleged that the law
school ties among public respondent, Ong and his counsel,
they having graduated from San Beda College of Law, albeit
years apart, spell partiality.
Inhibition is not allowed at every instance that a
schoolmate or classmate appears before the judge as
counsel for one of the parties, however. In one case, the
Court ruled that organizational affiliation per se is not a
ground for inhibition.
Membership in a college fraternity, by itself, does
not constitute a ground to disqualify an
investigator, prosecutor or judge from acting on
the case of a respondent who happens to be a
member of the same fraternity. A trial Judge,
appellate Justice, or member of this Court who is
or was a member of a college fraternity, a university
alumni association, a socio-civic association like
Jaycees or Rotary, a religion-oriented organization
like Knights of Columbus or Methodist Men, and
various other fraternal organizations is not
expected to automatically inhibit himself or herself
from acting whenever a case involving a member
of his or her group happens to come before him or
her for action.
A member in good standing of any reputable
organization is expected all the more to maintain
the highest standards of probity, integrity, and
honor and to faithfully comply with the ethics of
the legal profession. (underscoring supplied)
The added fact that the law school’s alumni association
published statements in support of Ong’s application cannot
lend credence to the imputation of bias on the part of pubic
respondent. No clear and convincing evidence was shown
to indicate that public respondent actively sponsored and
participated in the adoption and publication of the alumni
association’s stand. It is inconceivable to suppose that the
alumni association’s statement obliged all its members to
earnestly embrace the manifesto as a matter of creed.
Arbitrariness cannot be inferred either from the fact
that public respondent resolved the motion for voluntary
inhibition one day after it was filed. Since the personal
22
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
OCA Circular No. 05-2013
Administrative Order No. 27-2013
WHEREAS, under Section 4 of A.M. No. 03-11-16-SC (2),
the Chief Justice shall be the Ex Officio Chairman of the
JBC;
WHEREAS, under the same section, the Ex Officio Chairman
shall exercise, among others, decision-making authority
over all operational matters, and may delegate such
authority to lower level management personnel.
WHEREAS, under Section 4(a) of A.M. No. 03-11-16-SC (2),
the Ex Officio Chairman shall exercise overall administrative
authority in the execution of the JBC’s mandate;
WHEREAS, under Section 4(d) of A.M. No. 03-11-16-SC (2),
the Ex Officio Chairman may delegate authority for the
performance of any operational functions to officials and
employees of the Council in accordance with existing laws
and rules and resolutions of the Council En Banc;
WHEREAS, under Section 6, the JBC Executive Officer is
directly under the supervision of the Ex Officio Chairman;
WHEREAS, under Section 6(a) of A.M. No. 03-11-16-SC (2),
the JBC Executive Officer shall assist the Ex Officio Chairman
in providing direct executive supervision over the
operations of the various offices and personnel;
WHEREAS, under Section 8 of A.M. No. 03-11-16-SC (2),
the heads of the operating units or officers of the JBC shall
report directly to and are under the administrative
supervision of the JBC Executive Officer;
WHEREAS, in a Memorandum from Regular Members
dated January 2, 201 3, it was proposed that certain offices
of the JBC be under the direct supervision of the Regular
Members;
TO: ALL JUSTICES OF THE COURT OF APPEALS,
SANDIGANBAYAN AND COURT OF TAX APPEALS, JUDGES
OF THE TRIAL COURTS, THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS
AND BODIES AUTHORIZED BY THE SUPREME COURT TO
RECEIVE EVIDENCE, INCLUDING THE INTEGRATED BAR
OF THE PHILIPPINES AND ARBITERS OF SPECIAL COURTS
AND QUASI-JUDICIAL BODIES WHOSE RULES OF
PROCEDURE ARE SUBJECT TO DISAPPROVAL OF THE
SUPREME COURT, INSOFAR AS THEIR EXISTING RULES
OF PROCEDURES CONTRAVENE THE PROVISIONS OF THIS
RULE
SUBJECT: MODIFICATION OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTORS’
COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS ON THE JUDICIAL
AFFIDAVIT RULE
On January 8, 2013 the Supreme Court En Banc issued a
Resolution modifying the public prosecutors’ compliance
with the provisions set forth on the Judicial Affidavit Rule
for a period of one year, from January 1 to December 31,
2013, quoted hereunder as follows:
A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC (Judicial Affidavit Rule) — Acting
on the petition of the Prosecutors’ League of the
Philippines dated December 12, 2012 for the
deferment of the effectivity of the Judicial Affidavit
Rule insofar as the prosecution of criminal cases
is concerned, the Court resolves not to defer the
effectivity of the Rule in such cases but instead to
modify the public prosecutors’ compliance with
its provisions for a period of one year, from January
1 to December 31, 2013, as follows:
1.
The public prosecutors shall use, for the
purpose of complying with the Judicial
Affidavit Rule in the first and second level
courts during the one-year period, the sworn
statements that the complainant and his or
her witnesses submit during the initiation of
the criminal action before the office of the
public prosecutor or directly before the trial
court. In such cases, the attending public
prosecutor shall, when presenting the witness,
require him or her to affirm the truth of what
the sworn statement contains and ask the
witness only those additional direct
examination questions that have not been
amply covered by the sworn statement.
2.
The one-year modified compliance here
granted shall not apply where the complainant
is represented by private prosecutor duly
empowered in accordance with the Rules of
Court to appear in court and prosecute the
NOW, THEREFORE, the following Regular Members shall
assist the Ex Officio Chairman in the supervision of the
following offices in accordance with and to the extent not
inconsistent with A.M. No. 03-11-16-SC (2) and pertinent
laws, rules and regulations:
Office of the
Executive Officer
Justice Regino C. Hermosisima, Jr.
Office of Recruitment,
Selection, and Nomination
Justice Aurora Santiago-Lagman
Office of Administrative
and Financial Services
Atty. Jose V. Mejia
Office of Policy Development
and Research
Atty. Maria Milagros N.
Fernan-Cayosa
February 1, 2013.
(Sgd.) MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO
Chief Justice
23
OCA Circular No. 05-2013 (continued)
case. The private prosecutor shall be charged
in the applicable cases with the duty to prepare
the required judicial affidavits of the
complainant and his or her witnesses and
cause the service of copies of the same upon
the accused.
3.
4.
The Court expects the public prosecutors in
both first and second level courts to take steps
during the one-year modified compliance
period (i) to seek the needed augmentation of
their ranks; and (ii) to develop methods and
systems that would enable them to fully comply
with the requirements of the Judicial Affidavit
Rule when the modified compliance period
ends. The Court notes that 80 percent of the
backlog in the first and second level courts
involve criminal cases, and that delays in
those cases are caused mainly by lack of
prosecutors, absence of the prosecution
witnesses, and lack of PAO lawyers.
The judicial affidavit rule shall remain in full
force and effect in all other cases and
situations not covered by this resolution.
This resolution shall take effect immediately
(underscoring supplied).
Any prior circular from the Office of the Court
Administrator on this matter which is contrary to the
foregoing is hereby superseded.
For your information, guidance and strict compliance.
January 10, 2013.
(Sgd.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ
Court Administrator
TO: ALL JUDGES AND COURT PERSONNEL OF THE LOWER
COURTS
SUBJECT: TIMELY SUBMISSION OF CERTIFICATES OF
SERVICE OF JUDGES AND DAILY TIME RECORDS (DTRs)/
BUNDY CARDS OF PERSONNEL OF THE LOWER COURTS
All judges and personnel of the lower courts are hereby
ENJOINED to strictly observe the following guidelines in
the submission of the Certificates of Service of judges and
Daily Time Records (DTRs) / Bundy Cards of personnel of
the lower courts, viz:
1. After the end of each month, every personnel of the
lower courts shall accomplish the DTRs (Civil Service
Form No. 48)/Bundy Cards, indicating therein truthfully
and accurately the time of arrival in and departure
from the office. The judges shall accomplish a Certificate
of Service;
2. DTRs/ Bundy Cards shall be certified correct by the
concerned employee and verified by the Executive
Judge (for those in the Office of the Clerk of Court) or
the Presiding Judge (for those in the court branches) or
the Clerk of Court, as delegated by the Executive
Judge/ Presiding Judge in writing.
3. Every Clerk of Court in the Office of the Clerk of Court
(OCC) and in the respective branches shall:
3.1 maintain a registry book of attendance (logbook)
in which all officials and employees of that court
must log in chronologically by signing and indicating
therein their time of arrival in and departure from
the office;
3.2 check the accuracy of the entries in the DTRs/
Bundy Cards by comparing them with the entries
in the logbook and ensuring that the time
appearing in the DTRs/Bundy Cards tallies with
the time recorded in the logbook; and,
3.3. prepare a Monthly Report on Absences, Tardiness
and Undertime.
4. If there are entries in the DTRs/Bundy Cards which the
Executive Judge, Presiding Judge, or the Clerk of Court
finds questionable even after comparing them with
the entries in the logbook, the subject DTRs/Bundy
Card shall still be signed to confirm the entries which
are not in question, with a notation “with reservation”
beside the signature. Insofar as the questionable
entries are concerned, the Executive Judge, Presiding
Judge, or the Clerk of Court shall attach to the subject
DTRs/Bundy Cards a letter informing the Office of the
Court Administrator (OCA), through the Office of
Administrative Services (OAS), of the particular dates
of the entries in question and the basis or reason/s
therefor so that appropriate action can be taken on
the matter.
5. The Clerk of Court in the OCC and in the respective
branches shall thereafter forward, within the first five
days after the end of each month, the Certificates of
Service and DTRs/Bundy Cards, together with the
properly accomplished application/s for leave (Civil
Service Form No.6), if applicable, of all employees in
the office/branch, and the Monthly Report on
Absences, Tardiness and Undertime in one batch, to
the:
Employees’ Leave Division
Office of Administrative Services
Office of the Court Administrator
Supreme Court 1000 Manila
(Next page)
24
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
6. To avoid overpayment, the salaries and benefits of
judges and personnel of the lower courts whose
Certificates of Service and DTRs/Bundy Cards,
respectively, are not received by the Employees’ Leave
Division (ELD), OAS, OCA, within the next two
succeeding months shall be withheld without prior
notice beginning March 2013. All Certificates of Service
and DTRs/Bundy Cards and leave applications of the
previous months which have not yet been submitted to
the ELD, OAS, OCA, must be received by the said office
on or before March 29, 2013.
7. The term Daily Time Record shall include the computer
print-out of the attendance record of those using the
biometric time clock.
8. Those whose salaries and benefits have been withheld
for two consecutive months or at least twice within a
period of six months shall be required to explain in
writing their failure to comply with the foregoing
directives and their explanation shall be referred to
the Legal Office, OCA for appropriate disciplinary action.
This Circular shall serve as notice to all concerned.
All prior circulars, orders, and other issuances
inconsistent with this OCA circular are hereby revoked.
WHEREAS, the Committee on Security for the Judiciary
x x x has resolved to provide the judges of the first
and second level courts with an interim security
protocol to improve security and safety measures
inside the courtrooms and halls of justice (HOJ);
NOW THEREFORE, pending the issuance of
comprehensive security protocol for the lower
courts and in the interest of the service, the following
interim measures are hereby adopted and shall be
immediately implemented:
1.
All court employees are required to wear and
prominently display their identification cards
(lD) at all times while on official duty. Only
judges are exempted from wearing ID.
2.
All law enforcement officers on official
business should wear and display their official
IDs while inside the HOJs and building which
house courtrooms.
3.
During hearings, the court shall coordinate
with the appropriate agency which has custody
of detention prisoners, (e.g., Bureau of Jail
Management and Penology, Philippine National
Police, National Bureau of Investigation, etc.)
on the trial calendar and schedule of criminal
cases involving these detention prisoners.
4.
During trials of detention prisoners, the
Executive Judge (EJ) shall request the PNP to
assign or detail at least two uniformed
policemen to secure and patrol the hallways of
the HOJs and court houses and their premises.
5.
Where applicable, the HOJ shall only have one
entry and exit point for visitors.
6.
The EJs shall secure a holding area in the HOJs
or in the court house where detention prisoners
shall be temporarily detained while awaiting
trial. When no holding area is available, the
detention prisoners shall be detained in the
bus, van, or vehicle that they used as transport,
or any secure place outside the HOJs or court
houses. The detention prisoners shall be
brought to the courtroom only when their cases
are heard.
7.
Before leaving the holding area or temporary
detention area, the custodians shall conduct a
thorough body frisking of detention prisoners
to ensure that they have no concealed weapon
on them.
8.
While in the court’s premises, detention
prisoners shall always be handcuffed, unless
the Presiding Judge (PJ) directs otherwise.
9.
In HOJs, EJs shall ensure that the court security
personnel (CSP) keep a logbook of the name,
address, purpose of visit and signature of
guests who enter the premises. All visitors
including law enforcement officers shall be
For immediate compliance.
January 16, 2013.
Court Administrator
TO: ALL JUDGES AND COURT PERSONNEL OF THE FIRST
AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS
SUBJECT: REITERATING SECURITY PROTOCOL FOR THE
FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS
In the wake of the recent shooting incident that occurred
in the Palace of Justice, Cebu City, Memorandum Order No.
42-2007 providing for an interim security protocol for the
first and second level courts, is hereby REITERATED. The
pertinent provisions of Memorandum Order No. 42-2007
are as follows:
WHEREAS, members of the judiciary especially the
judges of the first and second level courts are
continuously exposed to violent attacks from wouldbe assassins and there are no existing security
protocols for the safety of the judges and other court
employees;
25
required to log-in before allowed entry. All
visitors are required to present adequate
identification documents which they shall
leave with the CSP in exchange for a court ID to
be worn at all times while inside the HOJ.
10. For courts not in the HOJs, the sheriff, process
server, or other staff member shall be assigned
by the PJ to provide security inside the
courtroom.
11. All persons who wish to enter the courtroom
shall be subjected to body frisking by the
court’s sheriff, process server, or other court
personnel, before entry. A female guest shall
be frisked only by a female court employee. In
addition, all bags and other things brought
inside the room shall be thoroughly inspected.
12. All firearms and objects which may be used as
weapons, except those belonging to law
enforcement officers who are on official
business, shall be deposited with the guardon-duty of the HOJs, or with the sheriff or in
the latter’s absence, the Branch Clerk of Court,
for courts not found in the HOJs.
13. Any illegal weapon or article, under the
Revised Penal Code or existing laws, shall be
confiscated and surrendered to the police
officers assigned to patrol the hallways. In their
absence, these things shall be surrendered to
the nearest police station.
14. Where applicable, the PJ shall specify an area
in the courtroom for detention prisoners. No
one, except lawyers, shall be allowed to talk
to or go near the detention prisoners.
15. The PJ shall place the witness stand at least
one and a half meters (1 ½ m) away from his
seat. When the prisoner is on the witness
stand, the custodian shall stand between the
judge and the prisoner.
16. The PJ shall assign the Sheriff, Process Server,
or other court employee to be present during
court hearings for orderly and safe
proceedings in the courtroom.
17. Finally, PJs whose lives are endangered or
threatened, shall immediately inform any of
the following officials:
Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez
Court Administrator
Office of the Court Administrator
G/F, Old Supreme Court Building
Supreme Court
Taft Avenue corner Padre Faura Street
Ermita, Manila
Attention: Atty. Leah M. Enriquez
Telephone Nos.
Office: 5257143
Mobile: 0917 8278872
Fax No.: 5232315
E-mail Address: [email protected]
Atty. Nonnatus Ceasar R. Rojas
Director
National Bureau of Investigation
Taft Avenue, Ermita, Manila
Attention: Atty. Reynaldo O. Esmeralda
Deputy Director
Telephone Nos.
Office: 5238231/5246232
E-mail Address: [email protected]
This order shall take effect immediately upon its signing.
January 24, 2013.
Court Administrator
TO: ALL JUDGES AND CLERKS OF COURT OF MULTI-SALA
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS OUTSIDE THE NATIONAL
CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION AND MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS
IN CITIES IN ALL JUDICIAL REGIONS
SUBJECT: GUIDELINES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
AUTOMATED PAYROLL SYSTEM IN THE MULTI-SALA
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS OUTSIDE THE NATIONAL
CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION AND THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL
COURTS IN CITIES IN ALL JUDICIAL REGIONS
Pursuant to the existing Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) between the Supreme Court and the Landbank of
the Philippines (LBP) dated October 25, 2006, which
became the basis for the Automated Payroll System (APS)
in the Supreme Court and in the trial courts in the National
Capital Judicial Region, and in view of the objective to
automate the payroll system in the entire Judiciary, the
following guidelines shall be observed in the
implementation of the APS in the Multi-Sala Regional Trial
Courts outside the National Capital Judicial Region and the
Municipal Trial Courts in Cities in all Judicial Regions:
1. All judges and court personnel shall open their
respective ATM Payroll Savings Accounts with the
branch of the LBP nearest their official station.
Executive Judges and Clerks of Court shall coordinate
with the LBP Branch Manager as to the opening of the
individual ATM Payroll Savings Account of judges and
court personnel.
(Next page)
26
2. The requirements for the opening of an individual ATM
Payroll Savings Account are as follows:
a. A duly accomplished application form and
specimen card by the judge and court
personnel properly authenticated by the
Executive Judge;
b. Photocopies of two valid identification cards
which include the Supreme Court ID; and
c.
1 x 1 recent ID picture.
3. After the opening of the accounts of the judges and
court personnel, the Clerks of Court shall submit the
list of the ATM Account Numbers with the photocopies
of the ATM cards to the Office of Administrative
Services (OAS), Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).
Thereafter, the OAS-OCA shall submit the list to the
LBP-SC Extension Office for validation before inclusion
of the names of judges and court personnel in the APS
Masterlist Payroll.
4. The APS shall cover the releases for the payment of
salaries, regular allowances as authorized by the
General Appropriations Act (GAA) as well as allowances
and other fringe benefits, if any, as may be authorized
by the Chief Justice.
5. The ATM Payroll Savings Account shall be subject to
the initial opening and maintaining balance of P100,
and a minimum balance requirement of P500 to earn
interest. Judges and court personnel shall have the
option to open a current account with ATM access,
with a maintaining balance of P5,000.
6. Inquiry on individual bank balances and statements of
account can be effected through enrollment in the IAccess facility of the LBP for savings account and current
account. Inquiries can likewise be made through the
LBP Phone Banking Facility.
7. The ATM Payroll Savings Account shall be subject to
service charges imposed by the Expressnet/Megalink/
BancNet member banks on the usage of their ATMs or
those that may be imposed in the future.
8. The Clerk of Court is hereby held accountable to
immediately report to the OAS-OCA, copy furnished
the Financial Management Office (FMO), OCA, and the
LBP branch where the accounts were opened, the
names of judges and court personnel who have ceased
their services in the court due, but not limited, to
resignation, retirement, death, transfer, long or
unauthorized leave of absence. After receipt of the
notice from the clerks of court, the names of the judges
or court personnel shall forthwith be excluded from
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
the payroll with notice to the LBP for the termination
of the accounts.
9. Release of salaries and allowances which were
previously directed to be withheld shall only be credited
one month after receipt of the notice of release.
10. Non-crediting of salaries and allowances which are
directed to be withheld shall only be for a period of six
months. Thereafter, the name of the judge or court
personnel shall already be excluded from the payroll.
11. The payroll credit dates are as follows:
Regular Salaries
–
RATA
–
EME
–
every 12th and 27th of the
month
on or before the 7th working
day of every month
on or before the 7th day of
the following month
Regular Allowances –
as may be provided
for by the GAA
as may be authorized by the
Chief Justice
Other allowances
and fringe benefit,
if any
as may be authorized by the
Chief Justice
–
However, the payroll credit dates of the regular
salaries and allowances provided for under the GAA
shall strictly be subject to the release of cash allocation
from the national government. If the payroll credit
date falls on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, crediting
shall be on the Friday or the day before the holiday.
12. All judges and court personnel are directed to timely
submit to the OAS-OCA their Certificates of Services/
Daily Time Records to avoid withholding of salaries and
regular allowances.
13. Newly appointed judges and court personnel shall
individually open their ATM Payroll Savings Account
with the LBP Branch nearest their official station.
Thereafter, they shall submit to OAS-OCA, the
photocopies of their ATM cards for validation and for
inclusion in the APS payroll.
14. The List of ATM Account Numbers and the photocopy
of the ATM cards shall be submitted to the OAS-OCA
on or before the last working day of March 2013.
Concerned judges and court personnel shall be
informed accordingly on the commencement of the
APS. Thereafter, no checks for payment of the regular
salaries and other allowances shall be released.
For strict compliance.
February 8, 2013.
Court Administrator
27
TO: ALL LOWER COURT JUDGES, CLERKS OF COURT, AND
LIBRARIANS
SUBJECT: GUIDELINES ON THE USE OF MOBILE
BROADBAND STICKS AND OFFICIAL EMAIL
WHEREAS, there is a need for all lower courts to access
the Supreme Court website which contains the latest
jurisprudence, Court issuances and latest news about the
courts, and which is also a portal for, among others, the
Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) website, the
Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) website, the Judicial
and Bar Council (JBC) website, the Supreme Court e-Library,
and the Judiciary Webmail;
WHEREAS, to access the Supreme Court website, all courts
must have internet connection;
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court, after the required bidding,
purchased PLDT mobile broadband sticks for the use of the
lower courts;
WHEREAS, these mobile broadband sticks are designed to
meet the needs of lower courts for internet connection to
access the Supreme Court website;
5. Also included in the mobile broadband stick package
are the following documents:
a. Memorandum of Dispatch which must be
stored for future reference;
b. Memorandum Receipt in four copies: one
copy to be retained, while the other three
copies to be received, signed, and returned;
c. Endorsement of Property Form in two copies:
one copy to be retained, while the other copy
to be received, signed, and returned;
6. The quick-start guide provided in the mobile broadband
stick package contains the necessary steps to begin
using the mobile broadband stick;
7. For official email correspondence, Judges, Clerks of
Court, and librarians must activate their individual
Judiciary Webmail accounts which the Management
Information Systems Office of the Supreme Court has
created;
8. The Judiciary Webmail may be accessed by typing
https://webmail.judiciary.gov.ph into the web browser,
and by subsequently entering the username and
password, and by selecting the server (see Figure 1);
WHEREAS, there is a need to maximize the use of said
mobile broadband sticks;
THEREFORE, to maximize the use of said PLDT mobile
broadband sticks, the following guidelines shall be observed;
1. The mobile broadband stick package is issued by the
Supreme Court for the official use only of the Judges,
Clerks of Court, personnel, and librarians of lower
courts throughout the country;
2. It shall be used for, but not limited to research,
accessing the Supreme Court website, the OCA
website, the PHILJA website, the JBC website, the
Supreme Court e-Library, the Judiciary Webmail, the
transmission of monthly reports, and other official
correspondence;
3. The mobile broadband stick package must be directly
received from the PLDT by the person it is intended for
in accordance with the list provided by the Supreme
Court. In the event that the recipient is not available
to receive the mobile broadband package, it will be
delivered to the Clerk of Court and the intended
recipient must claim it from said Clerk of Court;
4. The mobile broadband stick package contains the
following:
a.
b.
c.
d.
One mobile broadband stick;
One USB connector cable;
One SIM card package;
One quick-start guide;
Figure 1
9. The username shall be comprised of the following:
initial of first name, initial of middle name, and
surname (e.g., if full name is Jose Protacio Rizal,
then the username shall be jprizal);
10. The password shall be comprised of the eight-digit
employee number, and date of birth. Months shall
be in the standard three-letter abbreviation (e.g.,
if date of birth is June 19, 1861, password shall be
1234567819jun61);
11. The server selected shall be lower court;
12. The complete Judiciary Webmail address shall be
comprised of the username followed by the
d o m a i n , @ l c . j u d i c i a r y. g o v. p h ( e . g . ,
[email protected]);
(Next page)
28
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
13. For confidentiality and exclusivity, the Judiciary
Webmail password must be changed immediately upon
the first login. This may be done by clicking on Settings
on the upper right hand corner (see Figure 2), and
then by clicking on password on the left pane (see
Figure 3). Once a new password is entered twice it is
confirmed by clicking on save. The new password will
take effect on the succeeding login;
TO: ALL JUDGES OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS,
SHARI’A DISTRICT COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL
COURTS; MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL
TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS AND
SHARI’A CIRCUIT COURTS
SUBJECT: ISSUANCE OF MITTIMUS OR COMMITMENT
ORDER, OTHER DOCUMENTS NEEDED FOR THE TRANSFER
OF INSULAR PRISONERS FROM THE BUREAU OF JAIL
MANAGEMENT AND PENOLOGY TO THE NEW BILIBID
PRISON OF THE BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS IN
COMPLIANCE WITH OCA CIRCULAR NO. 4-92-A
The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP)
through its Jail Chief Superintendent and Officer in Charge,
Mr. Diony D. Mamaril CES(E), has invited the attention of
this Court regarding the non-issuance of mittimus or
commitment order, and the non-submission of the same
and other documents consisting of decision, certificate of
non-appeal or notice of appeal, certificate of non-pending
case, certificate of detention and detainee’s manifestation
of some trial courts to the BJMP. This is in connection with
the BJMP’s accumulated 700 more or less insular prisoners
nationwide, whose transfer to the New Bilibid Prison of the
Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) is still pending due to noncompliance of said requirements.
Figure 2
Figure 3
14. Once the password has been changed, the Judiciary
Webmail administrator will no longer be able to
recover such password;
15. Upon completion of the above mentioned steps, the
mobile broadband stick and Judiciary Webmail are
ready for use;
16. The SIM card package must be stored properly for
future reference of pertinent account numbers;
17. For any technical concerns regarding the PLDT mobile
broadband stick that may not be addressed by the
quick-start guide, users may call 177 toll free, and must
be ready to provide the unit’s MIN# indicated on the
SIM package;
18. For any technical concerns regarding Judiciary
Webmail,
users
may
contact
[email protected];
This circular shall take effect immediately.
February 13, 2013.
Court Administrator
In view thereof, and in order for the BJMP to adhere to
the BuCor’s policy of not accepting convicts for service of
sentence without the aforesaid complete documents, and
ultimately to decongest the provincial, city and municipal
jails nationwide, all trial judges concerned are hereby
DIRECTED to STRICTLY COMPLY with OCA Circular No.
4-92-A and ISSUE the corresponding mittimus or
commitment order of national prisoners immediately after
their conviction, and SUBMIT the same, together with the
necessary documents in support thereof, such as the
decision, certificate of non-appeal or notice of appeal,
certificate of non-pending case, certificate of detention
and detainee’s manifestation, as cited above, to the
nearest BJMP within their respective adjudicative
territorial jurisdiction, so that they may be remitted or
transferred to the New Bilibid Prison of the BuCor.
Strict compliance is hereby enjoined.
March 13, 2013.
Court Administrator
29
Dangerous Drugs, Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals, InstrumentsIParaphernalia and/or Laboratory
Equipment in connection with cases under investigation,
preliminary investigation or reinvestigation;
TO: ALL REGIONAL TRIAL COURT JUDGES
SUBJECT: BOARD REGULATION NO. 3, SERIES OF 2008
(AMENDING BOARD REGULATION NO. 1, SERIES OF 2007
ENTITLED “GUIDELINES ON THE DISPOSITION OF
CONFISCATED, SEIZED AND/OR SURRENDERED
DANGEROUS DRUGS, PLANT SOURCES OF DANGEROUS
DRUGS, CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND ESSENTIAL
CHEMICALS, INSTRUMENTSIPARAPHERNALIA, AND/OR
LABORATORY EQUIPMENT IN CONNECTION WITH
CASES UNDER INVESTIGATION, PRELIMINARY
INVESTIGATION OR REINVESTIGATION”)
WHEREAS, several queries from PDEA and other law
enforcers were received asking to clarify the issue of who
the proper prosecutors that will sign the petition for
destruction of seized drug-related pieces of evidence in case
the search warrant was issued by a Court from other judicial
jurisdiction;
Pursuant to Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise
known as “The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002,” the Dangerous Drugs Board issued Board Regulation
No. 3, Series of 2008, amending the Board Regulation No.1,
Series of 2007, entitled “Guidelines on the Disposition of
Confiscated, Seized and/or Surrendered Dangerous Drugs,
Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs, Controlled Precursors
and Essential Chemicals, Instruments/Paraphernalia, and/
or Laboratory Equipment in connection with Cases under
Investigation,
Preliminary
Investigation
or
Reinvestigation.”
WHEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, as it is hereby RESOLVED, to
amend the DDB Regulation No 1, Series of 2007 as herein
provided:
The copy of the said Board Regulation No. 3, Series of
2008 is appended herein as “Annex A” for your easy
reference and guidance.
For strict compliance.
March 13, 2013.
Court Administrator
Annex “A”
DANGEROUS DRUGS BOARD
BOARD REGULATION NO. 3
Series of 2008
SUBJECT:
AMENDING BOARD REGULATION NO. 1, SERIES
OF 2007 ENTITLED “GUIDELINES ON THE
DISPOSITION OF CONFISCATED, SEIZED AND/OR
SURRENDERED DANGEROUS DRUGS, PLANT
SOURCES OF DANGEROUS DRUGS, CONTROLLED
PRECURSORS AND ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS,
INSTRUMENTS/PARAPHERNALIA, AND/OR
LABORATORY EQUIPMENT IN CONNECTION
WITH CASES UNDER INVESTIGATION,
PRELIMINARY
INVESTIGATION
OR
REINVESTIGATION
WHEREAS, Section 3 of Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB)
Regulation No. 1, Series of 2007, provides the procedure for
the disposal of the Confiscated, Seized and/or Surrendered
WHEREAS, there is a need to amend Section 3 para. (a) of
Board Regulation No. 1, Series of 2007, to clarify and
designate the concerned prosecutor that will confirm or sign
the conformity in the Petition for Destruction of Confiscated/
Seized or Surrendered drug-related evidence;
S EC . 3. Disposal of Seized Dangerous Drugs,
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals,
Instruments/Paraphernalia, and/or Laboratory
Equipment. – Dangerous drugs, controlled precursors
and essential chemicals, instruments/paraphernalia,
and/or laboratory equipment confiscated, seized and/
or surrendered and covered by this Regulation shall
be disposed of as follows:
a.
Upon the receipt of the final certification of
the forensic laboratory examination results
issued by the government forensic laboratory,
pursuant to Section 21 of RA No. 9165 and
Section 4 of Board Regulation No. 1, Series of
2002, the PDEA may file a petition for the
immediate destruction of the confiscated,
seized and/or surrendered dangerous drugs,
plant sources of dangerous drugs, controlled
precursors
and
essential
chemicals,
instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory
equipment with the Regional Trial Court
presided over by the Executive Judge of the
province or city where the confiscation/seizure
and/or surrender took place. If the
confiscation, seizure or surrender was by virtue
of a search warrant, the appropriate motion
shall be filed with the prior written conformity
of the Provincial or City Prosecutor “OF THE
PROVINCE OR CITY, AS THE CASE MAY BE, WHERE
THE
CONFISCATION/SEIZURE
and/or
SURRENDER TOOK PLACE OR THE CHIEF STATE
PROSECUTOR OR HIS DULY DESIGNATED
REPRESENTATIVE” which shall be indicated in
the pleading. The trial court where the criminal
case is subsequently filed shall take judicial
notice of the proceedings thereof.”
x x x x
This Regulation shall take effect 15 days after
its publication in two newspapers of general
circulation and after its registration with the Office
of the National Administrative Register (ONAR), UP
(Next page)
30
JANUARY-MARCH 2013
Judge/Presiding Judge shall provide the
applicant/s with a checklist of requirements
to be submitted to the OAS-OCA after the same
period of one month following the expiration
of the 10-day period for posting. Thereafter,
the OAS-OCA shall evaluate all the applications
and shall submit the list to the Selection and
Promotion Board-Lower Courts (SPB-LC) within
15 days. Those with incomplete form or lacking
requirement/s shall be included in the list to
be submitted to the SPB-LC with a notation as
to the lacking form or requirement/s. If after
assessment of competence and qualification
of candidates, the applicant found by the SPBLC to be the most qualified for the position
applied for has incomplete form and/or lacking
requirement/s, the SPB-LC shall require the said
applicant to accomplish the incomplete form
and/or to submit the lacking requirement/s.
Law Center, Quezon City.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this 2nd of October,
in the year of Our Lord, 2008 in Quezon City.
(Sgd.) Secretary VICENTE C. SOTTO III
Chairman, Dangerous Drugs Board
Attested by:
(Sgd.) Undersecretary EDGAR C. GALVANTE
Secretary of the Board
TO: ALL JUDGES AND COURT PERSONNEL
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF OCA CIRCULAR NO. 74-2010 –
GUIDELINES IN THE SUBMISSION OF APPLICATIONS FOR
APPOINTMENT IN THE LOWER COURTS
To expedite the processing and filling of vacant positions,
Item Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5 of OCA Circular No. 74-2010, dated
May 21, 2010, are hereby amended to read as follows:
2.
3.
The notice of vacancy shall be posted in three
conspicuous places in the court’s premises and
in other public places for at least 10 calendar
days. It shall include the qualification
standards for the position and the checklist of
requirements prepared by the OAS-OCA,
necessary for the evaluation of the application.
Within one month from the expiration of the
10 day period for posting, the applicant/s shall
submit the requirements to the judge where
the vacancy exists.
All applications, together with the complete
or incomplete requirements received by the
Executive Judge/Presiding Judge, shall be
indorsed to the OAS-OCA within 10 days after
the lapse of one month from the expiration of
the 10-day period of posting. The indorsement
shall be accompanied by a certification, under
oath, by the Executive Judge/Presiding Judge
that the list submitted contains the name/s of
all applicant/s who applied for the position.
The date of mailing shall be the
determining factor to consider whether the
indorsement was sent after the one-month
period. For application/s personally filed
before the OAS-OCA, the date of receipt by the
OAS-OCA is the controlling factor.
4.
All application/s directly filed with the OASOCA personally or sent through mail within
the one-month period, shall be referred to the
Executive Judge or Presiding Judge for comment
and/or appropriate action within five days
from receipt of the application/s. The Executive
5.
All application/s received from the OAS-OCA
or personally filed with the Executive Judge/
Presiding Judge after the aforesaid one-month
period may still be endorsed by the Executive
Judge/Presiding Judge to the OAS-OCA for
submission to the SPB-LC. The name/s of the
aforesaid applicant/s shall be included in the
list of candidate/s as long as the resolution
containing the list of candidate/s has not yet
been submitted to the Court by the SPB-LC. A
notation that the aforesaid application/s was/
were submitted after the one-month period
shall be indicated.
Before transmitting the documentary
requirements of the applicant/s to the OASOCA, the Executive Judge/Presiding Judge,
through the Clerk of Court, should make sure
that all the documents provided in the checklist
of requirements have been properly
accomplished and submitted by applicant/s.
Documents which require the signature of the
Presiding Judge/Executive Judge and/or the
Clerk of Court must be duly signed by said
officials. Those documents which will not be
signed by them shall be included in the list of
lacking requiremens of the applicant/s. Refusal
by the concerned official to sign the document
will not, however, cause the disqualification
of the applicant/s concerned. On a case to case
basis, his/her application will still be given
due course after notice to the OAS-OCA of such
refusal to sign.
For the information and guidance of all concerned. This
circular shall take effect immediately.
Issued this 18th day of March 2013.
Court Administrator
31
New Rulings
Civil Law (continued from page 18)
impairment clause of the Constitution must yield
to the loftier purposes targeted by the
Government. The right granted by this provision
must submit to the demands and necessities of
the State’s power of regulation. Such authority to
regulate businesses extends to the banking
industry which, as this Court has time and again
emphasized, is undeniably imbued with public
interest.
Having ruled that the assailed Section 47 of
RA No. 8791 is constitutional, we find no reversible
error committed by the CA in holding that
petitioner can no longer exercise the right of
redemption over its foreclosed properties after
the certificate of sale in favor of respondent had
been registered.
Villarama, Jr., J., Goldenway Merchandising Corporation v.
Equitable PCI Bank, G.R. No. 195540, March 13, 2013.
2013
Upcoming
PHILJA
Events
(Continued from page 32)
JCEP for RTC Judges
Region VII, April 24-26, Tagaytay City
Region XII, May 15-17, Tagaytay City
Region II, June 19-21, Tagaytay City
Increasing Judicial Efficiency: Seminar-Workshop for Judges
on the Effective Use of the Benchbook for Philippine Trial
Courts (Revised and Expanded)
Regions IV and V, Batch 2, April 25, Naga City
Region III, Batch 2, June 14, Pampanga
Seminar-Workshop on Dangerous Drugs Law for Judges,
Prosecutors and Law Enforcers
Region III, May 6–8, Angeles City
Judicial Settlement Conference for Judges on JDR
(Skills-Based Course)
May 7–10, Tagaytay City
Seminar for Executive Judges
(RTC Single Sala Judges of Mindanao)
May 8–9, Davao City
Career Development Program for Court Legal Researchers
Region I, May 22–23, Baguio City
1 st Orientation Seminar-Workshop for Newly Appointed
Sheriffs and Process Servers
May 22–24, Tagaytay City
Regional Stakeholders Dialogue on the Revision of the
Doctrinal Reminders
Remedial Law (continued from page 21)
process of “careful self-examination” is essentially
a matter of conscience, the judge may decide as
soon as the factual basis of the motions has been
clearly laid before the court because from there
on the resolution of the motion enters the
subjective phase.
That public respondent, Ong and his counsel
former Senator Rene Saguisag are all graduates
of San Beda College of Law was clearly and early
on established. Hence, this sole ground relied
upon by petitioners in their motion, it bears
repeating, no longer required a hearing or called
for the submission of a comment or opposition,
and the absence thereof did not prejudice
petitioners.
Carpio Morales, J., Kilosbayan Foundation and Bantay
Katarungan Foundation, as represented by Jovito R. Salonga
v. Leoncio M. Janolo, Jr., Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 264,
Pasig City; Gregory S. Ong, Associate Justice,
Sandiganbayan; and the Local Civil Registrar of San Juan,
Metro Manila, G.R. No. 180543, July 27, 2010.
Rules of Civil Procedure
Visayas, May 28, Cebu City
Mindanao, May 31, Davao City
Luzon, June 3, Makati City
Internship Mediation Trainees (Bohol)
May-June, Tagbilaran City
Orientation Conference with Stakeholders on CAM
Albay Mediation Program, June 5, Legaspi City
Sorsogon Mediation Program, June 6, Sorsogon City
Launch and Video Conferencing of Global Distance Learning
Center (GDLC)
June 13, Tagaytay City
PHILJA Founding Chancellor Emeritus Justice Ameurfina A.
Melencio Herrera Award for the 2013 Most Outstanding
Professorial Lecturer Justice Hilarion L. Aquino
Topic: Revisiting Legal and Judicial Ethics: Challenges and
Perspectives
June 13, Tagaytay City
June 17–28, Manila
Presentation of the First Draft of the Proposed Revisions on the
Rules of Civil Procedure
June 18, Manila
Seminar of Election Laws for RTC Judges
June 27, Manila
National Conference for the
Revision of the Rules of Civil Procedure
June 27–30, Tagaytay City
3rd Floor, Supreme Court Centennial Building
Padre Faura Street corner Taft Avenue, Manila 1000
Philippines
PRIVATE OR UNAUTHORIZED USE TO AVOID
PAYMENT OF POSTAGE IS PENALIZED BY FINE OR
IMPRISONMENT OR BOTH
2013 Upcoming PHILJA Events
Refresher/Advanced Course for
Court-Annexed Mediators (Samar
Provinces, Southern Leyte and
Biliran Mediation Program)
April 2-3, Palo, Leyte
PST for Judges
April 3-5, Tagaytay City
Orientation of Clerks of Court and
Branch Clerks of Court on Judicial
Dispute Resolution
April 5, Antipolo City
April 11, Tagaytay City
June 26, Batangas City
Orientation of Public Prosecutors,
Public Attorneys, and Law
Practitioners on Judicial Dispute
Resolution
April 5, Antipolo City
April 11, Tagaytay City
9 th National Convention and
Election of Officers of the
PROSAPHIL
April 10-12, Iloilo City
Work Orientation and Skills
Assessment Seminar (WOSES) for
PMC Unit Staff (Batch 1)
April 11-12, Tagaytay City
Lecture Forum on the New Judicial
Affidavit Rule
April 12, Puerto Princesa City
April 26, Naga City
May 17, Dagupan City
Basic Mediation Course
Bohol Mediation Program
April 15-18, Tagbilaran City
Seminar-Workshop on Various
Laws Relating to Court Technology
Region IX, April 16-17, Zamboanga City
17 th National Convention and
Seminar of the SCOPHIL
April 16-18, Baguio City
Seminar for Single Sala RTC
Judges Acting as Executive
Judges of the Visayas
April 17-18, Cebu City
Chief Justice Artemio V.
Panganiban Professorial Chair
on Liberty and Prosperity Lecture
featuring the topic “Supreme
Court Decisions on the Economic
Provisions of the Constitution”
by Chancellor Adolfo S. Azcuna
April 18, Makati City
Pre-Internship Orientation and
Meeting with Judges, Clerks of
Court, Branch Clerks of Court,
Mediator-Trainees, and PMCU Staff
April 18, Tagbilaran City
E-JOW
Province of Capiz
April 18, Roxas City
Province of Iloilo
April 19, Barotac Viejo, Iloilo
May 23, Tagbilaran City
May 24, Talibon, Bohol
June 20, Batac City, Ilocos Norte
June 21, Candon City, Ilocos Sur
CET for Judges and Court
Personnel Handling Cases
Involving Children
April 24-26, Manila
June 5-7, Manila
Career Enhancement Program for
First Level Clerks of Court
Region VII, April 24-25, Cebu City
Region VIII, May 8-9, Palo, Leyte
Region I, Batch I, June 4-5, Laoag City
Region I, Batch II, June 6-7, Laoag City
Region V, June 19-20, Legazpi City
Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna
Chancellor
Professor Sedfrey M. Candelaria
Editor in Chief
Editorial and Research Staff
Atty. Orlando B. Cariño
Atty. Ma. Melissa Dimson-Bautista
Arsenia M. Mendoza
Armida M. Salazar
Jocelyn D. Bondoc
Ronald P. Caraig
Judith B. Del Rosario
Christine A. Ferrer
Joanne Narciso-Medina
Charmaine S. Nicolas
Sarah Jane S. Salazar
Jeniffer P. Sison
Circulation and Support Staff
Romeo A. Arcullo
Lope R. Palermo
Daniel S. Talusig
Printing Services
Leticia G. Javier and Printing Staff
The PHILJA Bulletin is published
quarterly by the Research,
Publications and Linkages Office
of the Philippine Judicial
Academy, with office at the 3rd
Floor of the Supreme Court
Centennial Building, Padre Faura
Street corner Taft Avenue, Manila.
Tel: 552-9524; Fax: 552-9621; Email: [email protected];
[email protected]; Website:
http://philja.judiciary.gov.ph

Volume XV, Issue No. 57 January-March 2013

Transcription

Similar documents

Volume XII, Issue No. 48 October-December 2010

Volume XIV, Issue No. 56 October

Meeting Minutes - City of Langley

Volume XII, Issue No. 52 October-December 2011

SPONSORED BY MULTICULTURAL CENTER AND THE CENTER

HON Has Lead Role In Extreme Makeover: Home Edition

Volume XV, Issue No. 59 July-September 2013

for sub-lease

Slideshow presentation from 2015 Judges Clinic

RTC ISPF Client

An Effective Method of Sharing Heterogeneous Components of

Volume IX, Issue No. 35 July-September 2007