Jeryl Grace C. Fortuna Atty. Joel Famador

Jeryl Grace C. Fortuna Atty. Joel Famador

JD II-M5 Civil Procedure Professor

A DAY IN COURT: EXPECTATION VS. REALITY

INTRODUCTION

Due process for the accused in a criminal case or a plaintiff/defendant in a civil case entails a day in court to have an opportunity to be heard. By analogy, at least a day in court is due process enough for a law student like me so that I have the opportunity to observe what really happens in the actual setting of the practice of law.

Perhaps my view that most of the things that I saw did not really conform to what i have learned in the four corners of the room does not deviate that much from the opinion of the majority. But I guess that was the very purpose of the activity-to compare and contrast my expectation versus reality.

Anyhow, not everything that I witnessed departed from the rules that I have learned. There were things that awed me because all along I just read about them in law books and there I was, seeing them first-hand.

ONLY A JUDGE HAS THE RIGHT TO BE JUDGMENTAL

Do not judge a book by its cover. A saying that i have heard since time immemorial. Do not judge if you are not a judge. We often say that as a way trying to elicit a sense of humor out of a serious situation. The thing is I have encountered the word judge in ordinary settings but it was only on that day that I appreciated the word judge in its real sense and as an officer of the courts of law.

Immersing ones self in a sala of a judge like Judge Veloso will make you realize that not at all times do your expectations are different from reality. At the outset, she really had that sense of authority that everyone in her sala will not think twice of giving respect to her. It was in her sala that you can appreciate the roles of every officer of a court. There was a stenographer who seemed to be diligently making her notes; an interpreter who was bringing his list of the cases, taking down some important dates and translates form Visayan to English and vice versa; and counsels who were seated on each side of the court in their dignified-looking attires. Everyone seemed to move and talk without the slightest intention to be held in contempt of court. Everything in the process seemed to be orderly and in control.

Perhaps the highlight of my observation was how Judge Veloso really exercised her contempt powers. There was a party who intentionally/unintentionally raised her voice. Judge Veloso warned her not to repeat the same or else she will be heald in contempt of court. She also mentioned about them being inside the court of law and everyone is duty-bound to give respect. It can be argued that being a party in case, one can have lots of burden and sometimes we can be carried away because of the intensity of the situation we are in plus the fact that not everyone is educated as to how should a person acts in court. To my mind, to pay respect is a universal rule and it does not take a high level of education to be respectful.

It was also in that sala where I was able to witness a case of a declaration of nullity of marriage. I had the chance to see how the counsel made the direct examination through a judicial affidavit. My imagination had a throwback of thinking what might had happened when the person affirming the contents of the judicial affidavit were swearing in front of the priest that only death do us part. And now, he was swearing not to start but to end the marriage-and just like that.

IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO

What happened in RTC Branch 22 was both entertaining and disappointing. I concluded it was a family court because i saw faces of declaration of nullity of marriage cases. Among all of them, I noticed two outstanding cases.

The first one was this unfortunate case of a foreigner who filed a declaration of nullity of marriage because he not only doubted but questioned the paternity of his child. He was obviously American and his wife was a Filipina but their son was every inch a Chinese-looking. It sounds funny but being there will make you sad because you can think it was a hopeless case. With all due respect, I fearfully but willingly submit that the counsel for the foreigner was not able to really do his homework as a counsel. I have no background yet in the study of Evidence but it seemed odd when he presented the picture of the child as an evidence of the questionable paternity for the first time during the trial. It was a good thing it was accepted in the discretion of the judge. To my mind, it was such a very strong evidence that could substantiate their allegation and should not have been placed under the risk of being rejected merely because of technicalities.

Then here comes the issue of the ownership of their property. The respondents counsel made him read the date on the title. His counsel objected on the ground that he did not have the competence to do so. The judge overruled. And so it was revealed that the property was bought before his marriage to his wife and obviously under his wifes name. Aside from I was able to see the actual version of what I saw in court dramas on television, I had an occasion to remember what I learned in Land Titles and Deeds that a certificate of title cannot be collaterally attacked. Also, I remembered the in pari delicto rule where the law leaves the parties as it is. It is well-settled that a foreigner cannot acquire real properties in the Philippines and as a way of circumventing the law, he indirectly acquired it through his wife who was his girlfriend at that time. Now that he is claiming infidelity on the part of his wife, the law leaves the property to his wife as it is. I also have learned that the defect can only be cured if the property is passed to a third person who is a Filipino which is sadly not the situation in the case at bar.

Finally, the scenario that was an exact mirror of what my professor vehemently warned that the psychologists in declaration of nullity cases are biased in favor of the party who sought them. There was this psychologist who seemed to be regularly hired in declaration of nullity cases. Her statements seemed to be so rehearsed and most often than not, she speaks confidently as if she was really able to examine both parties. One thing that really made my eyebrows rise was her statement that she was not able to physically see the petitioners husband but later on she diagnosed him with of lots of personality disorders(how come?). And yes, the narcissistic and dependent personality disorders were the most abused. But one thing that was really both sad and disappointing was the fact that the public prosecutor did not even object to the psychologists contradicting statement and in fact asked leading questions that would affirm the husbandss alleged psychological incapacity.

CONCLUSION

Justice is a myth in the Philippines. I have long heard that and though I agreed, it was only on that day that I had the urge to add the statement with because of corruption.

Justice is a myth in the Philippines because of corruption. Philippines has a tripartite system of government because it has has the executive, legislative and judicially branches of government which exercises co-equal powers - of corrupting. To me, corruption need not always involve money. Corroborating, conspiring, confederating to achieve a common end contrary to justice and equity is on its face, corruption. Omission to perform ones duty to favor a cause is also corruption. Corruption, indeed, is everywhere.

Nevertheless, for a law student like me, I am aware that at this stage, I only have to know the rules and the standards first. However, it is good to know what really happens in real practice so that I will be oriented this early. In that way, I have an ample opportunity to immunize myself from the harsh realities in the real world.

Indeed, expectation is almost always different from reality. The key is not to avoid the reality but to understand that in the end, the choice lies within you. You have the option to take part or not to take part on the very same thing that you condemn.