Volume VII, Issue No. 26 April-June 2005

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSApril-June 2005April-June 2005April-June 2005April-June 2005April-June 2005April-JunApril-JunApril-JunApril-JunApril-Juneeeee 20052005200520052005

Table of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of Contents

This quarter was a study in contrasts.

On the one hand, success stories took the form of highly-rated programs andconvention-seminars. The Roundtable Discussion for the Bangko Sentral Hearing Officersand the Basic Seminar Workshops on Mediation [PHILJA 492 AND PHILJA 514] allshowed a profitability rating of 100%.

The Settlement Period for the month of June disclosed, thus far, a success rate of84.5% for cases which underwent mediation, and an overall total success rate of 71.6%.The performance of provincial PMCs, however, was only 50% of that of Metro ManilaPMCs.

Two (2) new academic departments were added – the Shari’a and IslamicJurisprudence Department, and the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Department.The Shari’a Department is expected to strengthen Shari’a courts. The ADR Departmentwill focus on enhancing the course content of training programs for mediators and ontraining mediation trainers as well.

Former Supreme Court Justice Justo P. Torres, Jr., joined the Academy as ViceChancellor. Former Court of Appeals Justice Francisco S. Tantuico, came in asConsultant. A Financial Management Manual is Justice Tantuico’s special project, whichis expected to improve financial transactions and compliance with accounting/auditingrules and procedures.

Two (2) of our Faculty members, Justice Oscar M. Herrera, Sr., Chair of the RemedialLaw Department, and Justice Hilarion L. Aquino, Chair of the Department of Ethicsand Judicial Conduct, have been selected by the Board of Trustees as recipients of the2004 Metrobank Professorial Chair Awards in Remedial Law. They are submitting aHandbook on Injunctive Reliefs and Conflict of Jurisdiction.

FFFFFrom the Chancellor’rom the Chancellor’rom the Chancellor’rom the Chancellor’rom the Chancellor’s Desks Desks Desks Desks Desk

From the Chancellor’s Desk...................................PHILJA News..........................................................New Rulings of the Supreme Court ..................Doctrinal Reminders ............................................Resolutions, Orders and Circulars

Supreme CourtResolution on A.M. No. 03-03-13-SC - Ruleon Administrative Procedure in SexualHarassment Cases ......................................Resolution on A.M. No. 05-3-6-SC - ProposedGuidelines for the Forfeiture of RealProperty Bonds .............................................Administrative Order No. 52-2005 - PresidingOver the Mobile Court ................................

Administrative Circular No. 20-2005 - CriminalCases Subject of Automatic Review ............

Office of the Court AdministratorOCA Circular No. 28-2005 - Dismissal of DrugCases ..................................................................OCA Circular No. 37-2005 - Collection ofMediation Fees .................................................OCA Circular No. 39-2005 - ExpeditiousDisposition of Agrarian Case .........................OCA Circular No. 50-2005 - Designation ofSpecial Courts to Take Cognizance of Casesinvolving Admiralty and Maritime Laws ....

Upcoming PHILJA Events ...........................................

1289

11

14

19

20

20

22

22

2324

(Continued on page 7)

��

��

��

��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

April to June 2005 Volume VII, Issue No. 26

EEEEExxxxxccccceeeeelllllllllleeeeennnnnccccceeeee

iiiiinnnnn

ttttthhhhheeeee

JJJJJuuuuudddddiiiiiccccciiiiiaaaaarrrrryyyyy

EEEEExxxxxccccceeeeelllllllllleeeeennnnnccccceeeee

iiiiinnnnn

ttttthhhhheeeee

JJJJJuuuuudddddiiiiiccccciiiiiaaaaarrrrryyyyy

SUPREME COURT

RE

PU

BLIC

OF THE PHILIP

PI N

ES

BATAS AT BAYAN

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWS2

PHILJA

ACADEMIC PROGRAMS

RJCEP (LEVEL 4)

PHILJA held the 3rd Regional Judicial CareerEnhancement Program (RJCEP, Level 4) for Judges,Clerks of Court and Branch Clerks of Court of the RegionalTrial Courts and First Level Trial Courts of Region VIIon April 27 to 29, 2005, at the Crown RegencyHotel, Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu. This was attendedby Regional Trial Court judges, First Level TrialCourt judges, clerks of court lawyers, and clerks ofcourt non-lawyers, or a total of two hundred fifty-three (253) participants.

The 4th Regional Judicial Career EnhancementProgram (RJCEP, Level 4) for Judges, Clerks of Courtand Branch Clerks of Court of the Regional Trial Courtsand First Level Trial Courts of Region XII was conductedon May 11 to 13, 2005, at the Garden Orchid Hotel,Zamboanga City. One hundred six (106) judges andcourt personnel attended the seminar-workshop,comprising First Level Trial Court judges, RegionalTrial Court judges, lawyer clerks, and non-lawyerclerks.

Justice Hilarion L. Aquino, Chairman ofPHILJA’s Department of Ethics and JudicialConduct, encouraged the participants to view theseminar as an opportunity for their professionaldevelopment in the law.

SPECIAL FOCUS

PROGRAMS

SEMINAR ON LAWS AND RULES

ON GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES AND

PROPERTY SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

PHILJA, in collaboration with the Commission onAudit (COA) and assisted by the Supreme Court –Office of Administrative Services (SC-OAS),conducted its 1st Seminar on Laws and Rules onGovernment Expenditures and Property and SupplyManagement on April 11 to 15, 2005, at the TrainingCenter, Centennial Bldg., Supreme Court, Manila.This was attended by a total of fifty-seven (57)participants from the Academy, Finance

Management and Budget Office, Internal Audit,Financial Service Division, Program ManagementOffice, SC - Administrative Services Office, OCA -Administrative Services Office, Property Division,and Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Office.

The training highlighted topics onProcurement; Forecasting, Ordering, Delivery andPayment; Custodianship; Issuance and Utilization;Disposal; Internal Control Over Property SupplyManagement; Laws and Rules on Expendituresand Disbursements of Funds; Personal Services;Travel Expenses; Maintenance and Other OperatingExpenses; and Capital Outlay. The COAProfessional Development Committee prepared thetraining program and the lecturers were all COAexperts.

Justice Francisco S. Tantuico, Jr., UnitedNations Development Programme (UNDP)National Consultant and Consultant of theCommission on Audit - Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency (COA-CIDA), and theProfessional Regulation Commission (PRC)proposed three (3) working plans for PHILJA. First,to find ways and means to craft a Manual forFinancial Management; second, after becomingaware of the rules, to thresh out issues with theresident auditor on the COA rules; and third, topay particular attention on the proper function ofCOA. He said that the rudiments of performanceaudit, the interplay of efficiency, effectiveness, andeconomy of governance expenditure should beexamined.

Dr. Hermogenes Pascual Pobre, former COACommissioner said “that education is a life-longprocess, reaching no saturation point.” He stressedthe importance of seminars since these enhancethe knowledge of participants and benefit thegovernment and public as well. He remindedeveryone that in the disbursement of funds, wemust be guided by the acronym ALAE whichstands for Appropriation, Legality of the purposeof expenditure, Approval of the authorized headof agency, and Evidence enumerated in the voucher.In the pursuit of PHILJA’s mandate, he highlightedthe need for a benchmark of effectiveness andefficiency, which can only be achieved by properplanning or target setting at the beginning of theyear. Thus, he encouraged “Management byObjectives” that sets performance indicators forgauging the success of PHILJA’s endeavors onthree points – efficiency, effectiveness, and economy.

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSApril-June 2005April-June 2005April-June 2005April-June 2005April-June 2005April-JunApril-JunApril-JunApril-JunApril-Juneeeee 20052005200520052005 3

CONVENTIONS

COSTRAPHIL

The 4th Convention and Seminar of the CourtStenographic Reporters Association of the Philippines(COSTRAPHIL), with its theme “Court Stenographersas Vital Cogs in Maintaining Trust and Confidence in theJudiciary Through the Delivery of Speedy, Fair, andEquitable Justice for All,” was held on April 13 to 15,2005, at the Central Philippine University, Jaro,Iloilo City. Two thousand eighty-four (2,084)stenographers attended the convention-seminar.

The convention’s Keynote Address was read byCourt Administrator Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., onbehalf of Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. JusticeVelasco said that the Chief Justice recognizes theimportant role court stenographers play in thedispensation of justice. citing the Chief Justsice,the Court Administrator said that “without cogs,the wheel will not move; without these cogs,machines will not move; sublime values that ensurethe efficient, effective and independent delivery ofjustice.” Court Stenographers should therefore liveto the true meaning of the acronym “Vital Cogs”in the judiciary which stands for Competence;Oneness; Golden Rule, Qualities, and Goodness;and Selfless Sacrifice.

RTC CLERKS OF COURT

ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES

PHILJA, in cooperation with the ProgramManagement Office and the Regional Trial CourtClerks of Court Association of the Philippines,conducted the 4th Convention and Seminar of the RegionalTrial Court Clerks of Court Association of the Philippineson May 18 to 20, 2005, at the Guimaras Tourismand Economic Center, Jordan, Guimaras, Iloilo,with its theme, “The RTC Clerks of Court: A Vital Cogin the Wheels of Justice.” A total of two hundredseventy-five (275) RTC Clerks of Court attended theconvention.

The seminar highlighted on Court-AnnexedMediation and Enhanced Court Involvement inMediation Process, Code of Conduct for CourtPersonnel, Violence Against Women and TheirChildren (VAWC), Implementing Rules andRegulations, Rules of Procedure, SexualHarassment, and Court Environment.

SCOPHIL

The 13th Convention and Seminar of the SheriffsConfederation of the Philippines (SCOPHIL) was heldon April 27 to 29, 2005, at the Quezon ConventionCenter, Lucena City, Quezon. SCOPHIL’s themewas “A Re-evaluation of the Professionalism, Competenceand Moral Fitness of Sheriffs in their Bounden Duty tothe Community and the Public in General.” Sevenhundred eight (708) sheriffs attended theconvention-seminar.

In her Keynote Address, Supreme Court JusticeConsuelo Ynares-Santiago said that sheriffs shouldremain dedicated to public service. Justice Ynares-Santiago also took note of the relevance of the themeto the times, i.e., to re-assess the service of thesheriffs to the public.

On the other hand, Court AdministratorPresbitero J. Velasco, Jr., addressed the sheriffs tore-examine the functions given to them. He saidthat as court personnel, they are expected to be fitand qualified.

FLECCAP

The 7th Convention and Seminar of the First LevelClerks of Court Association of the Philippines(FLECCAP) was held on June 22 to 24, 2005, atthe Development Academy of the Philippines,Tagaytay City. A total of two hundred ninety-nine(299) FLECCAP delegates attended the seminar.

Court Administrator Justice Presbitero Velasco,Jr., reminded the participants of greater dedicationso that efficient and effective judicial service can beattained.

Acting FLECCAP President, Auxencio JosephClemente, traced the history of the association andexpressed his vision to build a mutual benefitassociation and to work for the RepresentationAllowance and Transportation Allowance (RATA)of the members.

Justice Justo P. Torres, Jr., PHILJA ViceChancellor, on the other hand, said that the workof the clerks of court is a decisive factor in theadministration of justice, quoting the late PopeJohn the XII, he said:

To the holy man, sanctity is a taste of infinity; tothe warrior, victory is all there is to it; but to aman of the law, justice combines all these. Letus be engaged in the pursuit of justice becausethe people deserve no less.

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWS

ORIENTATION WORKSHOP

ON CODE OF CONDUCT

The 3rd Orientation-Workshop on the Code of Conduct forCourt Personnel was conducted by the PhilippineJudicial Academy, in collaboration with the ProgramManagement Office (PMO), Office of AdministrativeServices (OAS), U.S. Agency for InternationalDevelopment (USAID), and the American BarAssociation – Asia Law Initiative (ABA-Asia) onApril 7 and 8, 2005, at the Oasis Hotel, Angeles City.A total of three hundred sixty-three (363)participants attended the seminar. Participants forthe first day session comprised nineteen (19) legalresearchers, thirty-seven (37) interpreters, seventy-nine (79) clerks/cash clerks, forty-four (44) processservers, and ten (10) sheriffs, also twenty-three (23)sheriffs, one hundred thirty-four (134) courtstenographers, eight (8) court social workers, three(3) records officers, one (1) librarian, three (3)cashiers, and two (2) administrative officersparticipated on the second day.

ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION ON

NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

PHILJA, in collaboration with the ProgramManagement Office, conducted the RoundtableDiscussion on the New Code of Judicial Conduct for thePhilippine Judiciary with the Court of Appeals Justices ofCebu City on April 28, 2005, at the Crown RegencyHotel, Cebu City. Seven (7) Justices of the Court ofAppeals in Cebu City attended the roundtablediscussion.

A two-day Orientation-Workshop on the Code ofConduct for Court Personnel of Court of Appeals for CebuCity and Other Lower Court Personnel of the RegionalTrial Courts and First Level Courts of the Cities of Cebu,Lapu-Lapu, and Mandaue was also conducted on April28 to 29, 2005, at the Crown Regency Hotel, CebuCity. A total of three hundred twenty-three (323)court employees attended the seminar. Participantsfor the first day comprised seventy-four (74) Courtof Appeals personnel and sixty-five (65) lower courtspersonnel. For the second day, participants werecomprised of sixty-three (63) Court of Appealspersonnel and one hundred twenty-one (121) lowercourt personnel.

ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION FOR

BANGKO SENTRAL HEARING OFFICERS

A Roundtable Discussion for Bangko Sentral HearingOfficers was conducted by PHILJA, incollaboration with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas(BSP), on June 7 to 9, 2005, at the MeralcoManagement and Leadership DevelopmentCenter, Antipolo City. Twenty-eight (28) hearingofficers/lawyers of Bangko Sentral completed theprogram.

The roundtable discussion was conducted toenhance, develop, and strengthen the expertiseof the members of the hearing and prosecutorialpanels of the BSP particularly on the recent trendsand practices on substantive and procedural dueprocess being observed and applied by quasi-judicial agencies. Its Rules of Procedure onAdministrative Cases Involving Directors andOfficers of Banks, Quasi-Banks and Trust Entitieswas promulgated and approved to guide theprosecution and hearing panel of the BSP in theconduct of its administrative proceedings.

Among the topics discussed were the Conflictof Jurisdiction in Administrative HearingsInvolving Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) / CivilService (CS) Rules / Philippine Deposit Insurance(PDIC) / Securities and Exchange Commission(SEC) / National Labor Relations Commission(NLRC) Cases, Due Process in Quasi-JudicialProceedings Before Regulatory Agencies,Investigation Techniques, Fact-finding onAdministrative Proceedings and EvidentiaryConsideration, Judicial Review of Decisions ofAdministrative Agencies under Rules 43, 45, and65 of the Revised Rules of Court, the Conduct ofHearing Officers: Ethical and Legal Standards,Moot Court, and Decision Writing.

QUASI-JUDICIAL

SEMINARS

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

FOR COURT PERSONNEL

4


CREATION OF THE ADR AND

SHARI’A AND ISLAMIC JURISPRUDENCE

DEPARTMENTS

The Supreme Court En Banc approved on April 5,2005 two (2) PHILJA resolutions: A.M. No. 05-3-24-SC-PHILJA or the creation of the Departmentof Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and A.M.No. 05-3-30-SC-PHILJA or the conversion of theShari’a Law and Jurisprudence Committee into theDepartment of Shari’a and Islamic Jurisprudence.

These two (2) Departments are new additionsto the twelve (12) regular departments of PHILJA’sAcademic Council, namely the Departments ofConstitutional Law, Civil Law, Remedial Law,Criminal Law, Court Management, Ethics andJudicial Conduct, Commercial Law, Internationaland Human Rights Law, Jurisprudence and LegalPhilosophy, Legal Method and Research, SpecialAreas of Concern, and Court Technology.

The Department of Alternative DisputeResolution is composed of:

Chairman: Professor Alfredo F. Tadiar

Vice-Chairman: Dean Eduardo D. de los Angeles

The Department of Shari’a and IslamicJurisprudence is composed of:

Chairman: Justice Jainal D. Rasul

Members: Justice Japar B. DimaampaoJustice Hakim S. AbdulwahidJustice Omar U. Amin

Resource Persons: Justice Jose C. VitugJustice Alicia V. Sempio-DiyDean Pacifico A. Agabin

2004 METROBANK

PROFESSORIAL CHAIR AWARDEES

Justice Oscar M. Herrera, Sr., Chair of the PHILJARemedial Law Department and Justice Hilarion L.Aquino, Chair of the PHILJA Ethics and JudicialConduct Department, were recommended by thePHILJA Board of Trustees in its Resolution No. 05-02 as recipients of the 2004 Metrobank ProfessorialChair Award in Remedial Law. This was approved

by Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. in A.M. No.05-3-23-SC-PHILJA on April 5, 2005.

The Metrobank Foundation, Inc., in itsMemorandum of Agreement with PHILJA signedon December 9, 2002, offered the sponsorship oftwo Professorial Chairs in Law. The purpose ofthe Professorial Chair Award is to provide theAcademy assistance to develop and enhance itsprograms in judicial education by encouraging itsCorps of Professors to author and publish treatiseson innovative concepts and approaches indesignated areas of law, thereby promotingcompetence, excellence, and efficiency in thePhilippine justice system.

NEW APPOINTEES

PHILJA welcomed Supreme Court Justice Justo P.Torres, Jr., (ret.) as its new Vice Chancellor andCourt of Appeals Justice Francisco S. Tantuico (ret.)as Consultant.

Justice Torres was appointed by the SupremeCourt En Banc (A.M. No. 05-3-31-SC-PHILJA) asVice Chancellor effective May 9, 2005. He is also aProfessor of Law at San Beda College; SpecialLecturer on Corporate Law and Practice, UP LawCenter, Diliman; Special Lecturer, Institute ofJudicial Administration, U.P. Law Center, Diliman;Trustee, De La Salle University in Dasmariñas andDempa (Asia) in Tokyo, Japan; Vice Chairman,Manila Floating Hotel and Restaurant; SupremeCommander Emeritus, Order of the Knights ofRizal; Chairman, Julugan Fraternal Foundation;and Chairman, Board of Regents, Pamantasan ngLungsod ng Maynila.

Justice Tantuico was appointed by the SupremeCourt En Banc (A.M. No. 05-5-05-SC-PHILJA) asPHILJA Consultant effective June 1, 2005. He isalso a National Consultant of the United NationsDevelopment Program (UNDP) under the project,Enhancing the Public Accountability Program ofthe Philippine Commission on Audit, Consultantof the Commission on Audit-CanadianInternational Development Agency (CIDA) PolicyTraining and Technical Assistance Facility(PTTAF), and Consultant of the ProfessionalRegulation Commission (PRC). He also served asChairman of the Commission of Audit from 1975to 1986.

ON PHILJA

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWS6

ON MEDIATION

2ND PHASE OF THE COURT OF APPEALS

MEDIATION PROJECT

The 2nd Phase of the Court of Appeals Mediation Project:Internship Program for Newly-Trained Mediators in theCourt of Appeals is now in progress. Pursued bythe Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) throughthe Philippine Mediation Center (PMC), and incooperation with The Asia Foundation (TAF), theproject will run from March 7 to November 30,2005, which aims to institutionalize the Academy’sinitial undertakings in the Court of AppealsMediation.

PHILJA, in the implementation of the 2nd Phaseof the Court of Appeals Mediation Project, isexpected to carry out the establishment of thePMC–CA Unit, to perform case inventory, selectcases for mediation, prepare case briefs, brief newly-trained mediators, and hold Settlement Months orthe Internship Proper.

PHILJA initiated this project through the PilotTesting of Mediation in the Court of Appeals (CA)Project, which was approved by the SupremeCourt En Banc in A.M. No. 02-2-17-SC, dated April16, 2002. Among its objectives are to prove theviability of Mediation in appealed cases before theCourt, to test the rules governing the Mediationprocess in appealed cases, and to discover the mostefficient manner to implement the Mediationprogram.

In its pilot project, the PMC was tasked tohandle all Court-Annexed Mediation cases andother alternative dispute mechanisms, while theCourt of Appeals provided over-all control andsupervision of the project.

A “Settlement Month” was conducted fromOctober 15 to November 16, 2002 to pilot-test theefficacy of Mediation in settling disputes in theCourt of Appeals.

The success of the pilot-test showed theacceptability and efficacy of mediation in resolvingdisputes even in the appellate stage. Results showedthat, of the total 105 cases that underwentmediation, 70 cases or 67% reached a compromiseagreement, while 35 cases or 33% failed to arrive ata settlement. The said settlement rate equals the

adjudicative rate of one (1) whole division of theCourt of Appeals. It also contributed to thereduction of cases congesting the court system sincecases settled under the Mediation program can nolonger be appealed to the Supreme Court. Withthe success rate of the pilot test, the Supreme Courtapproved the Revised Guidelines for theImplementation of Mediation in the Court ofAppeals on March 23, 2004. This was consideredto be one of the Academy’s major breakthroughstowards the institutionalization of mediation inthe CA.

The initial steps towards theinstitutionalization of Mediation in the CA wereenhanced further in the project, Strengthening theTraining Capability of PHILJA to Develop Court AppealsMediators, implemented last year. This project wasconsidered the first phase of the Mediation project,which trained twenty (20) Mediation Trainers andrecruited forty-nine (49) Mediators.

TRAINING THE TRAINERS

The Training the Trainers for Mediation Program, underthe Justice Reform Initiatives Support (JURIS)Project, was conducted on April 19 to 22, 2005, atthe Crown Regency Suites, Lapu-Lapu City,Mactan Island, Cebu. Two (2) representatives fromPHILJA-JURIS, twelve (12) Bacolod mediators,twelve (12) San Fernando mediators, two (2)representatives from National Judicial Institute(NJI)-Philippines, two (2) NJI Consultants, one (1)representative from NJI Canada, three (3) non-JURIS mediators, four (4) judges from Bacolod andPampanga, and one (1) representative fromPHILJA-Judicial Reforms Office, participated in thetraining.

The program was comprehensive and skills-based specifically tailored to educate the participantsto become trainers in mediation. It focused on thetheory and application of adult learning principles,training methodologies and aids, platform skills,trainer’s decorum, and on the administrative andethical responsibilities of a trainer. It integratedseveral learning methodologies, such as actionlearning, caselets, role plays, surveys, multiple-intelligence energized lectures, projects and self-teaching action group exercises.


MANILA AND CEBU WORKSHOPS

The 2nd Batch of the Basic Seminar Workshop on Mediationunder the Metro Manila Mediation Program wasconducted by the Academy, in coordination withthe Philippine Mediation Center, on April 4 to 5,2005, at the Training Center, Centennial Bldg.,Supreme Court, Manila. A total of forty (40)mediator-trainees attended the seminar workshop,composed of lawyers, academicians, businessmen,legal researchers, retired professionals, clerks ofcourt, court interpreters, managers, medicalpractitioners, intelligence and investigating officers,Lupon members / Hearing Officers, ExecutiveAssistants, Volunteer Counselors,Psychometricians/Psychologists, and otherprofessionals.

Under the Cebu Mediation Program, the 1st

Batch of the Basic Workshop on Mediation was held onMay 23 to 27, 2005, at the Sarrosa InternationalHotel, Cebu City. Thirty-nine (39) participantsattended the seminar workshop, composed oflawyers, academicians, medical doctors,government employees, retired employees, certifiedpublic accountants, and businessman.

The objective of the program was to trainmediators on the various concepts of AlternativeDispute Resolution (ADR) and Court-AnnexedMediation (CAM), stressing the importance of CAMas an effective ADR mechanism in the trial courts.

CAGAYAN DE ORO PMC INAUGURATED

The Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) and thePhilippine Mediation Center (PMC), in cooperationwith the United States Agency for InternationalDevelopment (USAID), and The Asia Foundation(TAF), successfully conducted a series of activitiesfor the Court-Annexed Mediation Program lastMay 19 to 20, 2005, at V.I.P. Hotel, Cagayan de OroCity.

Among the activities held were the RefresherCourse for Mediators where forty (40) participated,composed of four (4) Court of Appeals justices, one(1) judge, and thirty-five (35) mediators. Theprogram highlighted topics on how to deliver aneffective opening statement, best practices on howto break an impasse, and effective writing ofcompromise.

An Evaluation Program for Mediators andStakeholders was also undertaken where the

stakeholders of the activity included one (1) Courtof Appeals Justice, six (6) judges, thirty-five (35)mediators, three (3) lawyers, three (3) partylitigants, and ten (10) court personnel. Themediators and stakeholders focused theirevaluation on mediation fees schedule and rate ofpayment, process, scope, policy, PMC structure,mediator’s fee, and social acceptability, among otherthings.

Meanwhile, the Philippine Mediation CenterInauguration and Mediators Oath-Taking Ceremony wasconducted on May 20, 2005. The affair wasattended by Hon. Oscar S. Moreno, Governor ofthe Province of Misamis Oriental; Hon. Vicente Y.Emano, Mayor of Cagayan de Oro City; Atty.Carolyn Mercado, TAF Senior Program Officer;PHILJA Officials; and other guests. The oath-taking of accredited mediators was administeredby Hon. Teresita Dy-Liacco Flores, ExecutiveJustice, Court of Appeals of Cagayan de Oro City.This was followed by a symbolic unveiling of thePMC marker by the PHILJA Chancellor, ExecutiveJustice Flores, DCA Bernardo Ponferrada, andCagayan de Oro City Vice Mayor Juan Sia.

FFFFFrom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’rom the Chance l l o r’s Desks Desks Desks Desks Desk

(Continued from page 1)

More judges and graduates of the Pre-Judicature Programs are enrolling in themasteral course in the San Beda Graduate Schoolof Law, with whom we have a consortium.

On the other hand, brickbats have beenreceived from some of our Mediators who haveequated the delay in the issuance of some CourtResolutions as indifference on PHILJA’s part totheir needs. The needed Court Resolution has,thankfully, been released and mediators’ fees arenow being paid posthaste. Other plaints haveto do with inadequate equipment and supplieswhich cannot, as yet, be supplied until a fullstudy is made of availability of funds for theoverall Mediation program, and completion ofthe CPRM study on the PMC. In the meantime,requests for the establishment of MediationCenters from different areas keep pouring in.

PHILJA will stay on course, pursuing itsmandate, and surmounting problems that comeits way.

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURTTTTT8

CRIMINAL LAW

Penalties; A.C. No. 12-2000 as clarified by A.C.No. 13-2001 merely establishes a rule ofpreference in imposing penalties for violationof B.P. 22.

Administrative Circular 12-2000, as clarified byAdministrative Circular 13-2001, merely establishesa rule of preference in imposing penalties forviolations of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, the BouncingChecks Law. When the circumstances of both theoffense and the offender indicate good faith or aclear mistake of fact without taint of negligence,the imposition of a fine alone – instead ofimprisonment – is the preferred penalty. As theCircular requires a review of the factualcircumstances of a given case it applies only topending or future litigations. It is not a penal law;hence, it does not have retroactive effect. Neithermay it be used to modify final judgments ofconviction.

The determination of the circumstance thatwarrant the imposition of a fine rests upon the trialjudge only. Should the judge deem thatimprisonment is appropriate, such penalty may beimposed. The Circular did not delete the alternativepenalty of imprisonment.

(Panganiban, J., Susan Go and the People v.Fernando Dimagiba, G.R. No.151876, June 21, 2005)

TAXATION LAW

Tax credit; tax deduction; definitions of anddifference between.

Although the term is not specifically defined in ourTax Code (R.A. No. 8424 as amended) by R.A. Nos.8761 and 9010, tax credit generally refers to anamount that is substracted directly from one’s totaltax liability. It is an allowance against the tax itself,or a deduction from what is owed by a tax- payerto the government. Examples are withheld taxes,payments of estimated tax, and investment of taxcredits.

Tax deduction is a substraction from incomefor tax purposes or an amount that is allowed bylaw to reduce income prior to the application of thetax rate to compute the amount of tax which is due.An example of a tax deduction is any of theallowable deductions enumerted in Sec. 34 of theTax Code.

Tax credit differs from a tax deduction. Theformer reduces the tax due, while the latter reducesthe income that is subject to tax. A tax credit isused only after the tax has been computed; a taxdeduction, before. Since a tax credit is used toreduce directly the tax that is due, there ought tobe tax liability before the tax credit can be applied.

(Panganiban, Jr., J., Commissioner of InternalRevenue v. Central Luzon Drug Corporation, G.R.No. 159647, April 15, 2005)

COURT OF APPEALS (Manila for Luzon cases, CebuStation for Visayas cases, and Cagayan de OroStation for Mindanao cases) the records of criminalcases whose decisions are subject to:

(a) automatic review because the penalty imposedis death, or

(b) ordinary appeals (by notices of appeal) becausethe penalty imposed is either reclusion perpetuaor life imprisonment, notwithstanding astatement in the notice of appeal that the appealis to the Supreme Court.

This Administrative Circular shall take effectimmediately. The Office of the Court Administratorshall take such measures as may be necessary forits full and faithful compliance.

Issued this 19th day of April 2005.

(Sgd.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR. Chief Justice

Under the Rule, pauper litigants are exemptfrom contributing to the Mediation Fund, providedthat the unpaid contribution to the Mediation Fundshall be considered a lien on any monetary awardin a judgment favorable to the pauper litigant. Anaccused-appellant is also exempt from contributingto the Mediation Fund.

The mediation fee is akin to the UP LegalResearch Fee.

You are hereby reminded to collect mediationfees as per Sec. 9, Rule 141 of the Revised Rules ofCourt.

For strict compliance.

6 April 2005.

(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Court Administrator

ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 20-2005(Continued from page 20)

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 37-2005(Continued from page 22)

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJune-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005 DOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERS

CIVIL LAW

Contract of sale; Elements of a perfectedcontract of sale.

A contract of sale is a consensual contract, thus,it is perfected by mere consent of the parties. Itis born from the moment there is a meeting ofminds upon the thing which is the object of thesale and upon the price. Upon its perfection, theparties may reciprocally demand performance,that is, the vendee may compel the transfer ofthe ownership and to deliver the object of thesale while the vendor may demand the vendeeto pay the thing sold. For there to be a perfectedcontract of sale, however, the following elementsmust be present: consent, object, and price inmoney or its equivalent. In the case of Leonardov. Court of Appeals, et al., we explained the elementof consent, to wit:

The essence of consent is the agreementof the parties on the terms of the contract,the acceptance by one of the offer madeby the other. It is the concurrence of theminds of the parties on the object and thecause which constitutes the contract. Thearea of agreement must extend to all pointsthat the parties deem material or there isno consent at all.

To be valid, consent must meet thefollowing requisites:

(a) it should be intelligent, or with anexact notion of the matter to whichit refers;

(b) it should be free; and

(c) it should be spontaneous.Intelligence in consent is vitiated byerror; freedom by violence,intimidation or undue influence;spontaneity by fraud.

In this jurisdiction, the general rule is that hewho alleges fraud or mistake in a transaction mustsubstantiate his allegation as the presumption isthat a person takes ordinary care for his concernsand that private dealings have been entered into

fairly and regularly. The exception to this rule isprovided for under Article 1332 of the Civil Codewhich provides that “[w]hen one of the parties isunable to read, or if the contract is in a languagenot understood by him, and mistake or fraud isalleged, the person enforcing the contract mustshow that the terms thereof have been fullyexplained to the former.”

(Chico-Nazario, J., Perpetua vda. De Ope v. CAand Generosa Cawit vda. De Lumayno, G.R. No.133638, April 15, 2005.)

CRIMINAL LAW

A court trying a criminal case cannot awarddamages in favor of the accused

A court trying a criminal case cannot awarddamages in favor of the accused. The task of thetrial court is limited to determining the guilt ofthe accused and if proper, to determine his civilliability. A criminal case is not the properproceedings to determine the privatecomplainant’s civil liability if any.

The appellate court erred in affirming the trialcourt’s award of damages by justifying it as acounterclaim. Nothing in the records shows thatrespondent spouses filed or attempted to file acounterclaim. The 2000 Rules on CriminalProcedure prohibit counterclaims in criminalcases. Sec. 1 of Rule 111 provides that may befiled by the accused in the criminal case, but anycause of action which could have been the subjectthereof may be litigated in a separate civil action.

(Carpio, J., Oscar Moccay and AdelaidaPotenciano v. Spouses Prudencio Nobela andSerlina Nobela, G.R. No. 145828, March 31,2005)

9

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERS

REMEDIAL LAW

Party in interest; capacity to sue; indispensableparties

The settled rule is that every action must beprosecuted or defended in the name of the realparty in interest. Where the action is allowed tobe prosecuted or defended by a representativeacting in a fiduciary capacity, the beneficiary mustbe included in the title of the case and shall bedeemed to be the real party in interest. The nameof such beneficiaries shall, likewise, be includedin the complaint.

Sec. 4 Rule 8 of the Rules of Court providesthat facts showing the capacity of a party to sueor be sued, or the authority of a party to sue orbe sued in a representative capacity must beaverred in the complaint. In order to maintainan action in a court of justice, the plaintiff musthave an actual legal existence, that is, he or sheor it must be a person in law and possessed of alegal entity as either a natural or an artificialperson, and no suit can lawfully be prosecutedin the name of that person. The party bringingsuit has the burden of proving the sufficiency ofthe representative character that he claims. If acomplaint is filed by one who claims to representa party as plaintiff but who in fact is notauthorized to do so, such complaint is not deemedfiled and the court does not acquire jurisdictionover the complaint. An unauthorized complaintdoes not produce any legal effect. Corollary, thedefendant can assail the facts alleged thereinthrough a motion to dismiss on the ground thatthe plaintiff has no capacity to sue under Sec.1(d) of Rule 16 of the Rules of Court, that is, thathe does not have the representative he claims.

Under Sec. 7 of Rule 3 of the Rules of Court,the presence of all indispensable parties is acondition sine qua non for the exercise of judicialpower. It is precisely when an indispensable partyis not before the court that the action should bedismissed. The plaintiff is mandated to impleadall indispensable parties; and the absence of onerenders all subsequent actions of the court nulland void for want of authority to act, not only asto the absent parties, but even as to those present.

(Callejo, Sr., J., Ramon P. Aron, v. Francisco Realonet al, G.R. No. 159156, January 31, 2005)

Final and executory judgments are immutableand unalterable; exceptions.

Nothing is more settled in the law than that whena final judgment becomes executory, it therebybecomes immutable and unalterable. Thejudgment may no longer be modified in anyrespect, even if the modification is meant tocorrect what is perceived to be an erroneousconclusion of fact or law, and regardless ofwhether modification is attempted to be madeby the court rendering it or by the highest Courtof the land. The only recognized exceptions are(1) the correction of clerical errors, (2) making ofthe so-called nunc pro tunc entries which causeno prejudice to any party, and (3) where thejudgment is void.

(Azcuna, J., Luisa Briones-Vasquez v. CA andHeirs of Maria Mendoza vda. de Ocampo, G.R.No. 144882, February 4, 2005)

Motions; Notice of hearing to the adverse partyis a form of due process.

Sec. 4, Rule 13 requires that adverse parties beserved copies of all pleadings and similar papers.Sec. 4, Rule 15 requires a movant to set his motionfor hearing, unless it is one of those which a courtcan act upon without prejudicing the rights ofthe other party. The prevailing doctrine is that amotion without a notice of hearing addressed tothe parties is a mere scrap of paper. The logic forsuch a requirement is simple: a motion invariablycontains a prayer which the movant makes to theCourt, which is usually in the interest of theadverse party to oppose. The notice of hearingto the adverse party is, therefore, a form of dueprocess; it gives the other party the opportunityto properly vent his opposition to the prayer ofthe movant.

However, the same cannot be said formanifestations which, unless otherwise indicated,are usually made merely for the information ofthe court; the manifesting party is just making astatement for the knowledge of the court. Thereis nothing in the Rules as in jurisprudence thatrequires judges to disregard a manifestation thatdoes not have proof of service.

(Corona, J., Atty. Julius Neri v. Judge Jesus delaPeña, A.M. No. RTJ-05, 1896, April 29, 2005.)

10

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJune-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005 RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARS

SUPREME COURT

RESOLUTION of the COURT EN BANC, dated 14December 2004, on A.M. No. 03-03-13-SC

RE: RULE ON ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDUREIN SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASES ANDGUIDELINES ON PROPER WORK DECORUMIN THE JUDICIARY

Acting on the report of the Committee on Revisionof the Rules of Court submitting for this Court’sconsideration and approval the Proposed Rule onAdministrative Procedure in Sexual HarassmentCases and Guidelines on Proper Work Decorum inthe Judiciary, the Court Resolved to APPROVE thesame.

The Rule shall take effect on January 3, 2005following its publication in a newspaper of generalcirculation not later than December 20, 2004.

December 14, 2004.

(Sgd.) DAVIDE, JR., CJ, PUNO, PANGANIBAN,QUISUMBING, YNARES-SANTIAGO, SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, CARPIO, AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ,CORONA (on leave), CARPIO-MORALES, CALLEJO, SR.(on leave), AZCUNA, TINGA, CHICO-NAZARIO,GARCIA, JJ.

RULE ON ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDUREIN SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASES AND

GUIDELINES IN PROPER WORK DECORUMIN THE JUDICIARY

SECTION 1. Coverage. - This Rule shall applyto all officials and employees of the Judiciaryincluding those in the Presidential ElectoralTribunal, the Office of the Court Administrator andthe Philippine Judicial Academy. It shall not,however, apply to the members of the SupremeCourt, who can only be removed by impeachmentunder the Constitution, and the members of theJudicial and Bar Council.

SEC. 2. Objectives. - The objectives of this Ruleare: to promote full respect for human rights; touphold the dignity of every individual, especiallyemployees and applicants for employment in theJudiciary; and to enhance the development of thehuman resources of the State by promoting theirright to a humane, just and safe work environmentand improving their morale and efficiency in theworkplace.

SEC. 3. Work-related Sexual harassment; Definition.- Work-related sexual harassment is committed byan official or employee in the Judiciary who, having

authority, influence or moral ascendancy overanother in a work environment, demands, requestsor otherwise requires any sexual favor from theother, regardless of whether the demand, requestor requirement for submission is accepted by thelatter.

SEC. 4. Work-related Sexual harassment; howcommitted. Work-related sexual harassment iscommitted when:

(a) The sexual favor is made as a condition inthe hiring or in the employment, re-employmentor continued employment of said individual, or ingranting said individual favorable compensation,terms, conditions, promotions, or privileges; or therefusal to grant the sexual favor results in limiting,segregating or classifying the employee which inany way would discriminate, deprive or diminishemployment opportunities or otherwise adverselyaffect said employee. It shall include, but shall notbe limited to, the following modes:

1. Physical, such as malicious touching, overtsexual advances, and gestures with lewdinsinuation.

2. Verbal, such as requests or demands forsexual favors, and lurid remarks.

3. Use of objects, pictures or graphics, lettersor written notes with sexual underpinnings.

4. Other acts analogous to the foregoing.

(b) The above acts would impair the employee’srights or privileges under existing laws; or

(c) The above acts would result in anintimidating, hostile or offensive environment forthe employee.

SEC. 5. Persons liable. - Any person who (a)directly commits sexual harassment; (b) induces ordirects another person to commit such harassment;or (c) cooperates through an act without whichsexual harassment would not have beenaccomplished shall be administratively liable forsexual harassment.

SEC. 6. Creation of the Committee on Decorum andInvestigation (CODI). - The Chief Justice shall appointthe members of the Supreme Court Committee onDecorum and Investigation (SC-CODI), while thePresiding Justices of the Court of Appeals, theSandiganbayan and the Court of Tax Appeals shall

(Continued on next page)

11

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARS

appoint the members of their respective CODIs. Inthe Court of Appeals Divisions in Cebu City andCagayan de Oro City, the Executive Justices shallappoint the members of their respective CODIs. Inthe lower courts, the Executive Judges shall appointthe members of their CODIs.

The SC-CODI shall have jurisdiction overwork-related sexual harassment cases committedby the officials and employees of the Supreme Courtproper, the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, theOffice of the Court Administrator, the PhilippineJudicial Academy and the employees of the Judicialand Bar Council.

SEC. 7. Committee on Decorum and Investigation-Composition, Voting and Term of Office. - The SC-CODIshall be composed of the Clerk of Court asChairperson; a representative from the Office of theCourt Administrator as Vice-Chairperson; and arepresentative each from the Office of the ChiefAttorney, the Office of Administrative Services, theMedical and Dental Services, the Supreme CourtAssembly of Lawyer- Employees, Inc. (SCALE), andthe Supreme Court Employees Association (SCEA).The representatives of the SCALE and the SCEAshall be designated by their respective governingboards from among officials or members in goodstanding.

The CODIs of the Court of Appeals, theSandiganbayan and the Court of Tax Appeals shallbe composed of the Presiding Justice asChairperson; the Clerk of Court as Vice-Chairperson; and one representative each from theemployees’ associations duly accredited by the Officeof the Court Administrator.

The CODIs of the Court of Appeals Divisionsin Cebu City and Cagayan de Oro City shall becomposed of the Executive Justice as Chairperson;the Clerk of Court as Vice Chairperson; and onerepresentative each from the employees’ associationsduly accredited by the Office of the CourtAdministrator.

In multi-sala lower courts, the CODIs shall becomposed of the Executive Judge as Chairperson;the Clerk of Court as Vice-Chairperson; and onerepresentative each from the employees’ associationsduly accredited by the Office of the CourtAdministrator. In the case of single sala lowercourts, the Office of the Court Administrator shallcluster them for the purpose of forming theirrespective CODIs.

A majority of the members of the CODI shallconstitute a quorum. A vote of a majority of theCODI members present, there being a quorum, shallbe necessary for the issuance of a recommendation.No CODI member shall participate in anyproceeding where he or she is either a complainantor a respondent, or is related by consanguinity oraffinity within the third civil degree to thecomplainant or the respondent.

In case the Chairperson is disqualified orinhibits himself, the Assistant Clerk of Court in theSupreme Court, the most senior Associate Justicein the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan andCourt of Tax Appeals, or the Vice-Executive Judgein the lower courts shall serve as the ActingChairperson of the CODIs in their respective courts.

The members of the CODI shall serve for a termof two years from their date of appointment.

SEC. 8. Jurisdiction, powers and responsibilities ofthe CODIs. - The CODIs shall have Jurisdiction overall complaints for sexual harassment committed byofficials and employees of the Judiciary. They shall:

(a) Receive the complaint, investigate itsallegations, and submit a report andrecommendation to the proper court orauthority, as provided for in Section 18 of thisRule;

(b) Conduct meetings at least once a year with therepresentatives of the different offices for thepurpose of recommending to the appropriatebody measures that shall increase and promoteunderstanding and prevent incidents of sexualharassment; and

(c) Perform such other functions as may benecessary and incidental to the achievement ofthe objectives of R.A. No. 7877.

SEC. 9. Complaint. - A complaint for sexualharassment shall be in writing, under oath, andaccompanied by a certificate of non-forum-shopping. It shall be supported by theaffidavits of witnesses, if any, and other evidence ofthe complainant. It shall be filed with the Office ofthe Clerk of Court in which the respondent is anofficial or employee. A docket number shall beassigned to each complaint filed.

SEC. 10. Action on the complaint. - If the Committeefinds the complaint sufficient in form and substance,a copy thereof shall be served upon the respondentwho shall be required to submit an answer under

A.M. No. 03-03-13 SC (continued)

12

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSJune-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005June-April 2005 RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARS 13

oath and supported by the affidavits of his witnessesand other evidence and furnish a copy thereof tothe complainant, within five working days fromdate of service. The complainant may file a replywithin five working days from receipt of theanswer.

If the complaint is insufficient in form orsubstance, the CODI shall recommend its dismissal.The dismissal is without prejudice to the filing ofadministrative, civil or criminal charges against thecomplainant and the assisting counsel, if any, if thecomplaint is manifestly frivolous and filed only forpurposes of harassment.

SEC. 11. Withdrawal of complaint. - Thecomplainant will not be allowed to withdraw thecomplaint if such withdrawal would prejudice theinterest of the service and its ethical standards.

SEC. 12. Failure to file answer. - In case no answeris filed without any justifiable cause, the respondentshall be deemed to have waived the right to presentevidence. The respondent may, however, be allowedto attend the hearings and cross-examine adversewitnesses.

SEC. 13. Pre-hearing Conference. - Upon receiptof the answer, the CODI shall call the parties to apre-hearing conference to consider the following:

(a) stipulation of facts;

(b) simplification of issues;

(c) identification and marking of evidence;

(d) waiver of objections to admissibility ofevidence;

(e) limitation of the number of witnesses;

(f) dates of subsequent hearings; and

(g) such other matters as may aid in the promptand just disposition of the complaint.

The parties may file position papers andthereafter submit the case for disposition based onthe result of the pre-hearing conference withoutany need for further hearing.

SEC. 14. Formal Hearing. - The formal hearingshall be conducted by not less than the majority ofthe members of the CODI present.

The CODI may order the exclusion from thehearing room of all persons who do not have adirect interest in the case. The order may be made ifthe CODI determines on the record that requiring

a party or any witness to testify in open courtwould not enhance the ascertainment of truth;would cause the party or witness psychologicalharm or inability to effectively communicate dueto embarrassment, fear, or timidity; would violatethe right of a party to privacy; or would be offensiveto decency or public morals.

No copy shall be taken nor any examinationor perusal of the records of the case or parts thereofbe made by any person other than a party orcounsel of a party, except by order of the court.

SEC. 15. Preventive Suspension. - Upon motion ofthe complainant, or motu proprio, the CODI mayrecommend to the proper court or authority thepreventive suspension of the respondent for a periodof thirty days. It may also recommend its extension.

An order of preventive suspension may beissued to temporarily remove the respondent fromthe scene of the misfeasance or malfeasance and topreclude the possibility of respondent’s exertingundue influence or pressure on the witnesses ortampering of documentary evidence on file.

SEC. 16. Remedy of party from the order of preventivesuspension or its denial. - The aggrieved party mayfile a motion for reconsideration with the propercourt or authority within fifteen days from receiptof the order of preventive suspension or its denial.

SEC. 17. Penalty. - In recommending the penaltyto be imposed, the CODIs shall consider the totalityof the circumstances, including the followingfactors:

(a) nature or character of the act;

(b) frequency of occurrence of the act;

(c) abuse of authority;

(d) degree of moral influence or ascendancy;

(e) concealment of the act;

(f) effect on the victim; and

(g) other analogous factors.

SEC. 18. Report and Recommendation. - Withintwenty working days from the termination of thehearing, the CODI shall submit to the proper courtor authority its report and recommendation withthe complete record of the case. In the SupremeCourt, a Division of the Court shall decide the case;however, where the recommended penalty is

(continued on next page)


PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARS14

dismissal from the service, suspension for morethan one year, or fine of more than twentythousand pesos (P20,000.00), the Court en banc shalldecide the case.

In the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan andCourt of Tax Appeals, a Division shall decide thecase within sixty days from the date of filing of thelast pleading, brief, or memorandum required bythe court, regardless of the recommended penalty,subject to review by the Supreme Court, inaccordance with the preceding paragraph.

In the lower courts, the Office of the CourtAdministrator shall decide the case within sixtydays from the date of filing of the last pleading,brief, or memorandum required by it, regardless ofthe recommended penalty, subject to review by theSupreme Court, in accordance with the firstparagraph herein.

SEC. 19. Effect of proceeding on civil and criminalliabilities. - The proceedings taken under this Ruleon the imposition of the appropriate penalty shallnot interrupt or bar any civil or criminal actionwhich the complainant has filed or may file againstthe respondent.

SEC. 20. Guidelines on Proper Work Decorum. -Members, officials and employees of the Judiciaryshall be guided on the matter of decorum by (a)the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards forPublic Officials and Employees; (b) the New Codeof Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary; (c)the Code of Professional Responsibility; (d) the Codeof Conduct for Court Personnel, and (e) otherrelated issuances of the Court

SEC. 21. Transitory Provision. - All administrativecases of sexual harassment against officials andemployees of the Judiciary filed after the effectivityof this Rule shall be investigated by the newly-constituted CODIs. Cases already filed before theeffectivity of this Rule but not yet heard shall beforwarded to the proper CODIs. Those already filedand undergoing hearings before the effectivity ofthis Rule shall continue to be heard, and shallthereafter be decided by the court where the casehas been filed and heard.

SEC. 22. Effectivity. - This Rule shall take effecton January 3, 2005 following its publication in anewspaper of general circulation not later thanDecember 20, 2004.


RESOLUTION of the COURT EN BANC, dated 12April 2005, on A.M. No. 05-3-06-SC

“A.M. No. 05-3-06-SC,- Re: Proposed Guidelinesfor the Forfeiture of Real Property Bonds andDisposal of the Forfeited Real Property.- The CourtResolved to APPROVE the following Guidelines forthe Forfeiture of Real Property Bonds and Disposalof the Forfeited Real Property, as, proposed by theCommittee on Disposal of Forfeited Real PropertyBonds, to wit:

PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR THEFORFEITURE OF REAL PROPERTY BONDS

AND DISPOSAL OF THE FORFEITEDREAL PROPERTY

WHEREAS, the proceeds of the sale of forfeitedproperty bonds offered in criminal cases for thetemporary liberty of accused persons are part of theJudiciary Development Fund;

WHEREAS, a partial inventory of the propertybonds confiscated by the lower courts in criminalcases shows that a number of these bonds remainundisposed due either to lack of funds for therequired publication, failure of bidding, or lack ofinterested buyers;

WHEREAS, there is a need to provide clear-cutguidelines on the forfeiture and effective disposalof such bonds including the procedure for thedisposal thereof in the event of failure of the auctionsale;

Whereas, to achieve the foregoing purpose,Court issued Administrative Circular No. 42-2004on the 7th day of September 2004 Creating aCommittee on the Disposal of Forfeited RealProperty Bonds;

NOW, THEREFORE, in compliance with theCourt’s directive, the Committee on the Disposal ofForfeited Real Property Bonds has drafted andhereby submits its proposed guidelines for theforfeiture of real property bonds.

I. GENERAL STATEMENTS

A. Definition of Terms:

I. “Property Bond” is an undertakingconstituted as lien on the real propertygiven as security for the amount of the bailrequired of an accused. It secures theconditional release of an accused.

2. “Bondsman” or “Surety” refers to a


property owner who offers his/her propertyas property bond for the conditional releaseof an accused in a criminal case.

3. “Committee” refers to the Committee onDisposal of Forfeited Real Property Bonds.

II. COVERAGE

These guidelines shall cover all real propertybonds posted to secure the conditional releaseof an accused and which have been duly forfeitedby the courts.

III. PROCEDURE

A. General Requirements/Responsibilities

I. Annotation of Lien.- The lien over a propertyposted as bond should be annotated onthe title, if the property is registered. Ifunregistered, annotation shall be made inthe Registration Book of the Registry ofDeeds for the province or city where theland lies, and on the corresponding taxdeclaration. (Sec. 11, Rule 114, Revised Rulesof Criminal Procedure)

2. Qualifications of sureties in property bond.-Theowner or the real property given assecurity for the amount of bail must be aresident owner of real estate within thePhilippines. His real estate must be worthat least the amount of the undertaking. Ifthere are two or more sureties, each mayjustify in all amount less than thatexpressed in the undertaking, provided thatthe combined amount must be equivalentto the whole amount of the bail demanded.Every surety must be worth the amountspecified in his own undertaking over andabove all just debts, obligations andproperties exempt from execution. (Sec. 12,Rule 114, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)

3. Duty of judge before approving property bonds.- Every surety shall justify by affidavittaken before the judge that he possesses thequalifications prescribed in the preceding,section. He shall describe the propertygiven as security, stating the nature of histitle, its encumbrances, the number and,amount of other bails entered into by himand still undischarged, and his otherliabilities. The court may examine thesureties upon oath concerning theirsufficiency in such manner as it may deem

proper. No bail shall be approved unlessthe surety is qualified. (Sec. 13, Rule 114,Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.)

The judge shall cause the verification orthe title offered as property bond with theRegister of Deeds of the place where theproperty is registered. If the title is foundto be spurious, the application for bailshould be automatically denied. He shouldthen refer the matter to the Office of theCity Prosecutor having jurisdictionthereon for investigation.

B. When Property Bond Forfeited

1. Forfeiture of Property Bonds. - When thepresence of the accused is required by theCourt or the Revised Rules on CriminalProcedure, his bondsmen shall be notifiedto produce him before the court on a givendate and time. If the accused fails to appearin person as required, his bail shall bedeclared forfeited and the bondsmen giventhirty (30) days within which to producetheir accused and to show cause why nojudgment should be rendered against themfor the amount of their undertaking. Theperiod of thirty (30) days shall start to runfrom the time the bondsman/men receivedthe Order of the judge requiring him/themto produce the accused within the saidperiod, the bondsmen must:

(a) Produce the body of the accused or givethe reason for his non-production; and

(b) Explain why the accused did not appearbefore the court when first required todo so.

Failing, in these two requisites, a judgmentshall be rendered against the bondsmen,jointly and severally, for the amount of thebail. The court shall not reduce orotherwise mitigate the liability of thebondsmen, unless the accused has beensurrendered or is acquitted. (Sec. 21, supra,with amendments.) The bondsmen shall havesixty (60) days from their receipt of thejudgment within which to pay the amounthe/they justified.

2. Report of forfeited property bonds. - the Courtshall furnish the Committee with a copy of




diligence to locate him, the notice of auctionsale shall be published once a week for two(2) consecutive weeks in a newspaper ofgeneral circulation in the province or citywhere the forfeited property is located.Publication shall be made in accordancewith applicable laws and Supreme Courtissuances.

3. Procedure to be followed in the disposal offorfeited real property bond if the value of theproperty is more than Php50,000.00. - If thebondsman fail to pay the amount of thebail within sixty (60) days provided above,the real property bond the value of whichis more than Php50,000.00, shall be sold inaccordance with the following procedure,to wit:

(a) Sale of the real property shall beconducted through public auction. Forthis purpose, a written notice of sale shallbe given to the property owner/s as wellas the occupants thereof at least twenty(20) days before the date of the auction.

(b) The notice of sale shall also be publishedonce a week for two (2) consecutiveweeks in a newspaper of generalcirculation in the province or city wherethe, property is located. Publicationshall be made in accordance withapplicable Supreme Court issuances.

(c) Copies of the notice of sale shall also beposted for sixty (60) days in three (3)conspicuous public places in the city ormunicipality where the property islocated preferably in conspicuous areasof the municipal or city hall, post office,and public market. A copy of the noticeof sale shall also be posted on theproperty itself for the same period.

(d) The notice of sale shall state the exactdate, place and time of the auction sale.The sale shall be conducted in the Officeof the Clerk of Court of the RegionalTrial Court or First Level Court thatissued the order forfeiting the property.The auction sale shall be held not earlierthan nine o’clock in the morning andnot later than two o’clock in theafternoon.

(e) The notice shall also include another


all its Orders confiscating property bonds.A report of all confiscated property bondsshall be filed with the Office of theCommittee Chairman at the end of eachquarter.

C. Procedure to be followed in the Disposal ofForfeited Property Bond

1. Disposal of real property bond if the value of theproperly is not more than Fifty Thousand Pesos(Php50,000.00). - If the bondsmen fail to paythe amount of the bail within sixty (60)days as provided above, the real propertybond the value of which is not more thanPhp50,000.00, shall be sold at publicauction in accordance with the followingprocedure:

(a) The Clerk of Court and Ex Officio Sheriffor any of his/her deputies shall set a datefor the auction sale of the forfeitedproperty. A written notice of such saleshall be given to the property owner/sat least twenty (20) days before the dateof the auction sale. A copy of the noticeof sale shall likewise be furnished theoccupant of the property within thesame period.

(b) Copies of the notice shall also be postedfor sixty (60) days in three (3)conspicuous public places in the city ormunicipality where the property islocated, preferably in conspicuous areasof the municipal or city hall, post office,and public market. It shall likewise beposted on the property itself for thesame period.

(c) The notice of sale shall state the exactdate, place and time of the auction sale.The sale shall be conducted in the Officeof the Clerk of Court of the RegionalTrial Court or First Level Court thatissued the order forfeiting the propertyand shall be held not earlier than nineo’clock in the morning and not laterthan two o’clock in the afternoon.

2. Publication required if the property owner/bondsman can no longer be found. - In theevent that the property owner/bondsmanis no longer residing at the address givento the court and can no longer be foundnotwithstanding the exercise of due


date during which a second auction salemay be conducted in the event of afailure of bidding during the firstauction sale. The second date shall notbe later than thirty (30) days from thedate of the first auction sale.

D. Procedure in Case of Failure of Bidding

There is failure of bidding when there is nobidder for the real property sold at publicauction, or the highest bid is for an amountlower than the required minimum bid.

1. Failure of bidding if the value of the property isnot more than Php50,000.00. - In case of failureof bidding of the property the value ofwhich is not more than Php50,000.00, thesale shall be rescheduled and held withinthirty (30) days from the date of the firstauction sale. A written notice of the saleshall be given to the owner/s of theproperty as well as to the occupants thereofat least three (3) days before the date of thesecond auction sale, copies of the noticeshall also be posted for a period of ten (10)days before the second auction sale in three(3) conspicuous public places in the city ormunicipality where the property is located,preferably in the places cited in the previoussections. A notice shall likewise be postedon the property itself for the same period.

2. Failure of bidding if the value of the property ismore than Php50,000.00. - If the property thevalue of which is more than Php50,000.00is not disposed of during the auction sale,a second auction sale shall be held on thedate indicated in the published notice ofsale. A written notice of the second saleshall be given to the property owner/s aswell as the occupants thereof at least three(3) days before the date of the secondauction sale. Copies shall also be posted forten (10) days before the auction sale in three(3) conspicuous public places in the city ormunicipality where the property is locatedand on the property itself.

E. Procedure in Case of Failure to Dispose ofForfeited Property After Holding the SecondAuction Sale

1. In case of failure to dispose of the property afterthe second auction sale. - Where there is nobidder for the real property twice exposed

for public auction, or the highest bid is foran amount lower than the requiredminimum bid, the officer conducting thesale shall declare a failure of bidding orauction sale and shall make a return of hisproceedings to the court within three (3)days from the date of the failed auction sale.

2. Duty of Court upon receipt of the return reportingfailed auction sale. – Upon the receipt of thereturn above-mentioned, the Court shallimmediately issue an order directing theRegister of Deeds where the property islocated to transfer without cost the title ofthe forfeited property to the Governmentin the name of the Supreme Court of thePhilippines and issue the correspondingtitle. Within five (5) days from the issuanceof the Order, the Court shall submit a reportcovering all real properties the titles towhich have been transferred to theSupreme Court.

The Court that forfeited the property shalltransmit the title to the Committee onDisposal of Real Property Bonds in theSupreme Court for safekeeping immediatelyupon its issuance.

F. Duties of the Committee on Disposal ofForfeited Real Property Bonds

I. Monitor the forfeiture of real property bonds anddisposal of the property involved. - TheCommittee shall monitor the due forfeitureof real property bonds and disposal of theproperty involved. The Chairman maydirect any member of the Committee toconduct an audit to ascertain that forfeitedproperties are disposed of in accordancewith these rules.

2. Take Custody of Title to Forfeited Real Properties.- The Chairman of the Committee onDisposal of Real Property Bonds shall actas custodian of the titles to real propertiesthat have been forfeited in favor of theGovernment in the name of the SupremeCourt of the Philippines. He shall make aquarterly report of all such titled propertiesto the Chief Justice and the CourtAdministrator.

3. Evaluate and recommend appropriate action overconfiscated properties. - Immediately upon its




transferred in the name of the SupremeCourt due to failure of the second auctionsale, the owner of the property shall havethe right to repurchase the same within aperiod of one (1) year from the date of theregistration thereof in the name of theSupreme Court and after paying theamount of the bail. He shall also pay for alladministrative expenses incurred by thecourt in the forfeiture and sale of theproperty. However, if the bondsman orproperty owner fails to redeem the subjectproperty within the required period, thecourt shall issue an order declaring theforfeiture as absolute and confirming theconsolidation of title to the Government,represented by the Supreme Court of thePhilippines.

I. Procedure in Case the Bid Price is More thanthe Amount of Bail Secured

If the bid price is more than the bail secured by theproperty. - In the event that the bid price ismore than the amount of the bail secured bythe property, the amount in excess of the bailshall be delivered to the bondsman/owner ofthe property after deducting the reasonableadministrative expenses incurred by the courtin conducting the sale thereof. In the eventthe bondsman can no longer be located, theamount shall be deposited in the Court’sfiduciary account to be held in trust for suchbondsman.

J. Mode of Payment

1. Mode of payment by winning bidder. - Thewinning bidder shall pay the bid amountto the cashier of the court conducting theauction sale in cash or through amanager’s/cashier’s check payable to suchcourt.

2. Certificate of sale. - The sheriff whoconducted the sale shall immediately issuea certificate of sale upon the winningbidder’s payment of the bid amount. Ifpayment is made through a manager’s/cashier’s check, the Sheriff shall immediatelyconfirm its validity with the issuing bank.Thereafter, the court shall issue an orderconfirming the sale a certified copy ofwhich, together with the certificate of saleshall be registered in the registry of deeds.


receipt of the lower court’s report coveringall real properties the title to which havebeen transferred to the Supreme Court ofthe Philippines, the Committee shallrecommend to the Court the appropriateaction for their disposal.

The committee shall determine theappropriate mode of disposal of the forfeitedreal properties and recommend to theCourt, through the Chief Justice, itsimplementation. The Committee may alsorecommend that the forfeited real propertybe considered for use in the Judiciary as asite for a Hall of Justice, or for theconstruction of a warehouse for storingcourt records and other properties incustodia legis capable of manual delivery,unserviceable properties not yet disposedof, and any other similar governmentalpurpose, or be transferred to anothergovernment agency or entity.

G. Proceeds of the Sale

Proceeds of the sale of forfeited property. - Theproceeds of the sale of the forfeited property,either through public auction or negotiationwhen applicable, shall accrue to the JudiciaryDevelopment Fund in accordance withSupreme Court En Banc Resolution in A.M.No. 99-8-01-SC.

H. Procedure for the Owner ’s Right toRepurchase of Forfeited Property

1. If property is sold at public auction. - If theproperty is sold at public auction, theowner of the property shall have the rightto repurchase the property within a periodof one (1) year from the date of theregistration of the sale and after paying theamount paid by the highest bidder withlegal interest. He shall also pay for alladministrative expenses incurred by thecourt in the forfeiture and sale of theproperty. However, if the bondsman orproperty owner fails to redeem the subjectproperty within the required period, thecourt shall issue an order declaring theforfeiture as absolute and confirming theconsolidation of title to the highest bidder.

2. If title to property is transferred in the name ofthe Supreme Court due to the failure of secondauction sale. - If title to the property is


The register of deeds shall not cancel thebondsman/property owner’s certificate oftitle but shall make a brief memorandumregarding the sale at the back of thecertificate of title. The second and thirdparagraphs of Sec. 7, Rule 68 of the Rulesof Court shall be strictly applied.

3. Applicability of other provisions of the Rules ofCourt. - The use of the premises during theone (1) year redemption period shall be inaccordance with the provisions of Secs. 31and 32, Rule 39.

K. Expenses for Publication

1. Cash advance to cover expenses for publicationof the sale of forfeited property the value of whichis more than P50,000.00 - The Clerk of Court(OCC) shall submit to the FinancialManagement Office (FMO), Office of theCourt Administrator (OCA) a request forcash advance to pay for the publication ofthe sale of property the value of whichexceeds Php50,000.00. The request mayinclude the reasonable transportationexpenses, which the sheriff expects to incurin posting and delivering notices of the saleand in conducting the sale of the forfeitedproperty. A canvass from three (3)newspapers of general circulation in theplace where the property is located statingthe cost of publication shall accompanysuch request. In the event that reasonabletransportation expenses have beenincurred, the sheriff may request the FMOto reimburse any amount he may haveadvanced for this purpose. The circularissued by the Court concerning travelallowances and transportation expensesshall govern any claim of transportationexpenses for duties or services renderedunder these guidelines.

2. Cash advance to cover transportation expensesin the auction sale of registered property. - TheClerk of Court may also request the FMO,OCA for cash advance to cover thereasonable transportation expenses that asheriff is expected to incur in posting anddelivering the notices for the sale of theproperty and in conducting the auction saleof a registered property. A list of the placeswhere he intends to deliver and post thenotice of auction sale, and the amount he


needs to perform such duties shallaccompany the request.

3. Liquidation of Cash Advance. - The Clerk ofCourt shall liquidate the cash advancewithin thirty (30) days from the receipt ofthe same. He/she shall attach to his/herliquidation papers three (3) copies of thenewspaper that published the notice ofauction sale together with the affidavit ofpublication.

The liquidation of any cash advanceobtained under these rules shall be inaccordance to the guidelines issued by theCourt concerning travel allowances andtransportation expenses.

4. Effect of failure to liquidate the cash advancessecured under Letter K, numbers 1 and 2 hereof.- Failure to liquidate the cash advancessecured under letter K, numbers 1 and 2hereof shall be a ground for administrativesanctions.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNOClerk of Court

By: (Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA Assistant Clerk of Court

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 52-2005

For a more effective administration of justice andpursuant to Sec. 5(3) Art. VIII of the Constitution,the Presiding Judges of the Metropolitan TrialCourts in Manila shall preside over the mobile courtwhen the latter will operate in the City of Manila.They shall conduct hearings of cases assigned totheir respective courts, especially those cases wherethe accused are detained at the City Jail of Manila.They shall be assisted by their respective Clerks ofCourt and one (1) Court Stenographer.

The judges shall be entitled to an expenseallowance of Five Hundred Pesos (Php500) whilethe Clerks of Court and Court Stenographers shallbe entitled to an expense allowance of TwoHundred Pesos (Php200), for each day served inthe mobile court.

14 April 2005.

(Sgd.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR. Chief Justice


OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 28-2005

TO: ALL JUDGES OF THE REGIONAL TRIALCOURTS

SUBJECT: DISMISSAL OF DRUG CASES FORLACK OF AUTHORITY OFOPERATING PERSONNEL

It has come to the attention of this Office that drugcases are being dismissed on the ground that theoperating personnel involved therein are notmembers of the Philippine Drug EnforcementAgency (PDEA), which is the authorized agencyto conduct drug operations under R.A. No. 9165.

For the information and guidance of allconcerned, on 02 June 2003, the PDEA has enteredinto a Memorandum of Agreement with thePhilippine National Police (PNP) for the latter’ssupport in the anti-drug campaign. Under the Sec.4 (B) of the MOA, the PNP has the followingspecific roles on operational matters:

(a) Continue to conduct general lawenforcement operations against illegaldrugs through supply/demand reductionprograms pursuant to its LOI BANAT inconformity with the pertinent provisionsof R.A. No. 9165 and in close coordinationwith the Barangay Anti-Drug AbuseCouncils (BADACs);

(b) Create a PNP Task Force to be headed by aranking/ qualified police officer which willassist the PDEA in its anti-illegal drugsoperation down to barangay level to beoperationalized during the transitionperiod;

(c) Ensure that all operations against illegaldrugs shall be carried out in coordinationwith and/ or under the direction andcontrol of the PDEA;

(d) Assist the PDEA in collecting, processingand analyzing information on illegal drugactivities by submitting periodic reports tothe PDEA through the PDEA RegionalOffices;

(e) Support the National Drug IntelligenceSystem maintained by the PDEA and allowits integration with PNP databases;

(f) Assist in intelligence operations conducted

ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 20-2005

DIRECTING REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS TODIRECTLY FORWARD TO THE COURT OFAPPEALS RECORDS OF CRIMINAL CASESWHICH ARE SUBJECT OF AUTOMATIC REVIEWOR REGULAR APPEALS

WHEREAS, in the decision of 7 July 2004 in G.R.Nos. 147678 to 87 (People v. Efren Mateo y Garcia), theSupreme Court, in the exercise of its power topromulgate rules of procedure in all courts underSec. 5, Article VIII of the Constitution:

(a) Modified Secs. 3 and 10 of Rule 122, Sec. 13 ofRule 124, Sec. 3 of Rule 125 of the Revised Rulesof Criminal Procedure and any other rule insofaras they provide for direct appeals from theRegional Trial Courts to the Supreme Court incases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusionperpetua, or life imprisonment, as well as theresolution of the Supreme Court, dated 19September 1995, in Internal Rules of the SupremeCourt in Cases Involving the Death Penalty; and

(b) Allowed an intermediate review by the Court ofAppeals before such cases are elevated to theSupreme Court;

WHEREAS, conformably with the said decision,the Supreme Court has been transferring to theCourt of Appeals criminal cases where the penaltyimposed by the trial courts is death, reclusion perpetua,or life imprisonment;

WHEREAS, in view of the said decision, theSupreme Court promulgated on 28 September 2004in A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC a resolution formallyamending Secs. 3 and 10 of Rule 122 and Secs.12and 13 of Rule 124 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure,as amended. The amendments took effect on 15October 2004;

WHEREAS, despite the aforementionedamendments, criminal cases on automatic review oron appeal where the penalty imposed by the trialcourts is either death, reclusion perpetua, or lifeimprisonment are still forwarded to the SupremeCourt by lower courts.

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant the resolutionof the Court of 5 April 2005 in A.M. No. 05-2-16-SC,all Regional Trial Courts concerned, through thePresiding Judges and Clerks of Court, are herebyDIRECTED to henceforth DIRECTLY forward to the

SUPREME COURT



by the PDEA through the utilization of itspersonnel, informants and other resourceson a case-to-case basis;

(g) Assist in counter-intelligence andinvestigation efforts of the PDEA especiallyregarding PNP personnel involved in illegaldrug activities;

(h) Assist the PDEA in investigation andprosecution of drug cases;

(i) Assist the PDEA in the examination andcustody of all seized, confiscated, andsurrendered dangerous drugs, precursorsand essential chemicals through the PNPCrime Laboratory until such time that thePDEA has established its own forensiclaboratory in every province and city asprovided for in R.A. No. 9165;

(j) Assist the PDEA in the formation of anationwide organization, which shallcoordinate and supervise all activitiesagainst drug abuse in every province, city,municipality and barangay;

(k) Assist the PDEA in coordinating withforeign counterparts through theutilization of the Police Attaches until suchtime that the Agency can field its ownforeign liaison officers;

(l) Support the National Anti-Drug Programof Action (NADPA) as mandated byPresidential Letter of Instruction Number1 issued by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and updated by the DangerousDrugs Board; and

(m) Extend other operational assistance as maybe necessary or upon request of PDEA.

The provincial, city and municipal chiefs ofpolice are concurrently the PDEA provincial, cityand municipal officers, respectively, during thetransition period stated in R.A. No. 9165considering that the PDEA still lacks the requiredpersonnel at this phase. Based on the said MOA,the anti-drug operations of the law enforcementagencies covered by said agreement are clearly insupport of and in coordination with PDEA. Thisis buttressed by the provisions of the ImplementingRules and Regulations of R.A. No. 9165, specificallySec. 86 thereof, which states that other law

enforcement agencies may conduct drug operationsin coordination with the PDEA, to wit:

Sec. 86. Transfer, Absorption, and Integrationof All Operating Units on Illegal Drugs into thePDEA and Transitory Provisions

xxx xxx xxx

(a) Relationship/Coordination betweenPDEA and Other Agencies - The PDEA shall bethe lead agency in the enforcement of the Act,while the PNP, the NBI and other lawenforcement agencies shall continue to conductanti-drug operations in support of the PDEA;Provided, that the said agencies shall, as far aspracticable, coordinate with the PDEA prior toanti-drug operations; Provided, further, that, inany case, said agencies shall inform the PDEAof their anti-drug operations within twenty-four (24) hours from the time of the actualcustody of the suspects or seizure of said drugsand substances, as well as paraphernalia andtransport equipment used in illegal activitiesinvolving such drugs and/or substances, andshall regularly update the PDEA on the statusof the cases involving the said anti-drugoperations conducted by the PNP, the NBI, andother law enforcement agencies prior to theapproval of this IRR shall be valid andauthorized; Provided, finally, that nothing inthis IRR shall deprive the PNP, NBI, and otherlaw enforcement personnel and the personnelof the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP)from effecting lawful arrests and seizures inconsonance with the provisions of Sec. 5, Rule113 of the Rules of Court.

From the foregoing, members of the PNP, NBIand other law enforcement agencies who areworking in coordination with PDEA are consideredas authorized PDEA personnel in anti-drugoperations.

Please be guided accordingly.

28 March 2005.


OCA Circular No. 28 (continued)



TO: JUDGES OF ALL SPECIAL AGRARIANCOURTS AND ALL TRIAL COURTJUDGES

SUBJECT: EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSITION OFAGRARIAN CASES

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program(CARP) is a reform measure that seeks to bringabout a more equitable sharing of productiveresources in the Philippine countryside. Its majorcomponents include land tenure improvement,program beneficiaries’ development and deliveryof agrarian justice.

Your attention is called to Secs. 50 and 57 ofR.A. No. 6657 subject of Administrative CircularNo. 29-2002 dated 01 July 2002, delineatingjurisdiction over agrarian disputes in order toavoid conflict of jurisdiction with the Departmentof Agrarian Reform (DAR) or the Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resources (DENR)which provisions are hereby reproduced:

Sec. 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR.- The DAR is hereby vested with primaryjurisdiction to determine and adjudicateagrarian reform matters and shall haveexclusive original jurisdiction over mattersinvolving the implementation of agrarianreform, except those falling under theexclusive jurisdiction of theDepartment ofAgriculture (DA) and the Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resources(DENR).

Sec. 57. Special Jurisdiction - The SpecialAgrarian Courts (Regional Trial Courts)shall have original and exclusivejurisdiction over all petitions for thedetermination of just compensation to landowners, and the prosecution of all criminaloffenses under this Act. The Rules of Courtshall apply to all proceedings before theSpecial Agrarian Courts, unless modified bythis Act.

The Special Agrarian Courts shall decide allappropriate cases under their specialjurisdiction within thirty (30) days fromsubmission of the case for decision.

With the foregoing, it is imperative thereforethat all special agrarian courts be enjoined to


TO: ALL CLERKS OF COURT OF REGIONALTRIAL COURTS AND FIRST LEVEL COURTS

SUBJECT: COLLECTION OF MEDIATION FEES

Under Sec. 9.A. of the revised Rule 141 of the RevisedRules of Court, approved by the Supreme Court on20 July 2004, Clerks of Court of the Regional TrialCourts and the First Level Courts shall collect theamount of FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (Php500.00):(1)upon the filing of a Complaint or an Answer with amediatable permissive or compulsory counterclaimor cross-claim, complaint-in-intervention, third-party complaint, fourth-party complaint, etc. in civilcases, a Petition, an Opposition and a Creditors’ Claimin Special Proceedings; (2) upon the filing of aComplaint/Information for offenses covered by theKatarungang Pambarangay Law, violation of B.P. Blg.22, estafa and libel cases where damages are sought;and (3) upon the filing of a Complaint/Informationfor quasi-offenses under Title 14 of the Revised PenalCode.

Sec. 9 of the revised Rule 141 of the Revised Rulesof Court provides for the contribution to theMediation Fund, and explains the purpose andtreatment of the same. The rule states:

The Fund shall be utilized for the promotionof court-annexed mediation and other relevantmodes of alternative dispute resolution (ADR),training of mediators, payment of mediator’sfees, and operating expenses of the PhilippineMediation Center (PMC) units includingexpenses for technical assistance andorganizations/individuals, transportation/communication expenses, photocopying,supplies and equipment, expense allowance andmiscellaneous expenses, whenever necessary,subject to auditing rules and regulations. Inview thereof, the mediation fees shall not formpart of the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF)under P.D. No. 1949 nor of the specialallowances granted to justices and judges underR.A. No. 9227.

The Rule does not provide that the absence of aPhilippine Mediation Center exempts a party fromcontributing to the Mediation Fund. The Fund is notonly for the mediation services rendered but also forthe establishment and maintenance of PMC units.Thus, mediation fees are to be collected even if thereis no operating PMC unit in the area.


OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR


Likewise, Administrative Circular No. 38-2002dated 28 August 2002 reminded all trial judges tostrictly observe Sec. 68, of R.A. No. 6657, infurtherance of the Court’s policy to expedite theresolution of cases involving agrarian disputewhich provision is quoted hereunder:

Sec. 68. Immunity of Government Agenciesfrom Undue Interference. - No injunction,restraining order, prohibition or mandamusshall be issued by the lower courts againstthe Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR),Department of Agriculture (DA), theDepartment of Environment and NaturalResources (DENR), and the Department ofJustice (DOJ) in their implementation of theprogram.

Lastly, you are also reminded of OCA CircularNo. 79-2003 dated 12 June 2003 re: Remindingjudges to exercise utmost caution, prudence andjudiciousness in issuance of temporary restrainingorders and writs of preliminary injunctions,wherein TROs or preliminary injunctions maynot be issued. Specifically, Sec. 55 of R.A.No. 6657which provides:

Sec. 55. No Restraining Order orPreliminary Injunction. - No court in thePhilippines shall have jurisdiction to issueany restraining order, or writ of preliminaryinjunction against the PARC or any of itsduly authorized or designated agencies inany case, dispute or controversy arisingfrom, necessary to, or in connection withthe application, implementation,enforcement, or interpretation of this Actand other pertinent laws on agrarianreform.


4 May 2005


OCA Circular No. 39 (continued)


TO: ALL EXECUTIVE JUDGES AND PRESIDINGJUDGES OF SPECIAL COURT FORCOMMERCIAL CASES AND CLERKS OFCOURT OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

SUBJECT: DESIGNATION OF SPECIAL COURTSTO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF CASESINVOLVING ADMIRALTY ANDMARITIME LAWS

For the information and guidance of all concerned,quoted hereunder is pertinent portion of the CourtEn Banc resolution dated 12 April 2005 inAdministrative Matter No. 05-4-05-SC Re: Requestfor the Designation of Special Courts to TakeCognizance of Cases Involving Admiralty andMaritime Laws, to wit:

A.M. No. 05-4-05-SC.- Re: Request for theDesignation of Special Courts to TakeCognizance of Cases Involving Admiralty andMaritime Laws.- The Court Resolved, upon therecommendation of the Office of the CourtAdministrator, to

(a) DENY the request of the Maritime LawAssociation of the Philippines for the designationof special courts in the Regional Trial Courts inthe Cities of Manila, Davao and Cebu toexclusively take cognizance of cases involvingadmiralty and maritime laws; and

(b) DESIGNATE instead the Special Courtsfor Commercial Cases to try and decide casesinvolving admiralty and maritime laws.

In this connection and effective immediately,all cases involving admiralty and maritime lawsfrom the ordinary courts shall be transferred tothe designated Special Commercial Courts exceptthose which have already undergone the pre-trialstage in civil cases and arraignment stage incriminal cases, in which case the same shall beretained by the court previously assigned to trythem. The unloaded cases transferred to theSpecial Commercial Courts shall be consideredas raffled to them to maintain an equaldistribution of cases.


03 May 2005


adjudicate cases dispatch to implement the visionof agrarian reform and further the sustainableagricultural development for the Philippines.

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWS

2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events2006 Upcoming PHILJA Events

3rd Floor, Supreme Court Centennial BuildingPadre Faura St. cor. Taft Ave., Manila, Philippines1000

PRIVATE OR UNAUTHORIZED USE TO AVOIDPAYMENT OF POSTAGE IS PENALIZED BY FINE ORIMPRISONMENT OR BOTH.PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA Bulletin

20020020020020066666 Upcoming PHILJA EventsUpcoming PHILJA EventsUpcoming PHILJA EventsUpcoming PHILJA EventsUpcoming PHILJA Events

Documents

Volume VII, Issue No. 26 April-June 2005