Part 6 of a Series
In this upcoming elections in the Philippines, what are the agenda of the presidential candidates in relation to issues and concerns of our criminal justice system? We hope that as voters, we include these concerns as we choose who will lead our nation.
---- The Philippine judiciary faces at least three pressing problems that presidentiables in the upcoming elections in May 2022 need to address: lack of judicial independence, unequal treatment between the rich and the poor, and prolonged trial which is the longest in the world. The presidentiables must stake out their positions and come up with a clear agenda on how to improve these pathetic and depressing conditions. Appointments in the judiciary is made by the President. Though the Judicial and Bar Council vets and selects applicants based on merits, still, the last word in the appointment is Malacanang. Filipino cultural values, which is manifested as "kababayan," "kaibigan," "kakilala," "kamag-anak," "ka-brod," "kakampi," or "kapanalig" and other claims of affinity, eventually become the operational and final criteria in securing the appointments. While a number of court actors are truly professional and independent minded, the politico-administrative culture engulfs the appointee in an unstated but compelling expectation to be beholden to the appointer. Thus, judicial independence is compromised, and despite best efforts to overcome this malaise, it is a continuing trait of the Philippine judiciary. The presidentiables must declare this practice abhorrent--instead, they should recognize and sanctify the outputs and recommendations of the Judicial and Bar Council, a body that strives to be non-partisan and merit based. This should limit the influence of Malacanang in the workings of the judiciary and hopefully eliminates the politicization of the judiciary where critics of Malacanang can easily be criminalized and detained. There is also a dual treatment for the rich and the poor who are being tried in the court system. The rich can easily avail of bail even when charged with plunder based on a "humanitarian grounds" (ala Juan Ponce Enrile); they can post bail even when convicted based on old age (ala Imelda Marcos); and they could be released on house and hospital arrests even when charged with non-bailable offenses based on medical conditions (ala Erap Estrada and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo). But the poor will languish in jail for three years for stealing PhP20 worth of "bentelog" (sinangag at itlog) due to powerlessness and ignorance of the workings of the judicial system (ala Mr. Awitan); they can be put to an informal death penalty and die of diseases in the overcrowded and unsanitary detention centers and jails (40 inmates die every month in the Metro Manila alone before the Covid19 pandemic); and they can end up dead for resisting arrest or "nanlaban," even if they are not yet proven guilty. The presidentiables must work hand in hand with the Supreme Court and the local courts in addressing this iniquitous judicial system--reviewing and reforming the financial bail system, use of alternatives to incarceration, and improving free access to legal service, by providing more resources to the Public Attorneys Office, should be a priority for the presidentiables. This will give life to the old adage: "the less should have more in law." Finally, the Philippines has the dubious recognization as the slowliest pace of court litigation. Coupled by the fact that many defendants cannot post bail, this leads to the longest period of pretrial detentions in the world, where they can stay in detention for as long as 15 to 20 years and still unconvicted. Thus, many inmates end up pleading guilty to a lesser offense even if innocent, just to be released through probation system, which is also overwhelmed by the number of pleaders. There are numerous reasons for the delay in case proceedings: structural reasons (lack of judges and court staff, lack of court resources such as computers and internet), organizational reasons (such as lack of computerized data management for calendar hearings; lack of coordination with other agencies leading to postponement of hearings) and cultural reasons (such as purposeful delay of cases; delaying tactics, use of pretrial detention to informally punish the accused, etc). All these add up leading to the slowliest pace of court litigation in the whole world which furthers legal cynicism or the distrust to the legal system and its actors. The presidentiables should incorporate in their campaign agenda a provision to create more regional and metropolitan trial courts, address court vacancies; to improve the court personnel capacities through trainings on the principles of effective court management; and improve the selection, hiring, appointment and promotion of judges guided by the principles of merit and dedication to the rule of law. The presidentiables should outline their vision on how to improve the Philippine Judicial system. The success of their presidency hinges on the efficiency, effectiveness, and equity of the court actors. To the electorates: these are the questions we should ask our candidates. Don't be mesmerized and fooled by their drama.
Comments