THE JUDICIAL

DEPARTMENT
chapter 12

Judicial Department
plays

an indispensable role in the government

as the administrator of justice.
The without the judiciary.
It prgovernment and consequently the State
will not survive eserves the cohesiveness of
the different governmental organs, always
seeing to it that they function in accordance
with the Constitution.
And inasmuch as the Philippines is a
government of laws and not of men, the
judiciary protects the very essence of
democracy being guardian of rights and legal
processes.

Independence of the
Judiciary
In

order for the judiciary to function

effectively and impartially, the
Constitution provides safeguards for its
independence, to wit:

1.

2.

The Supreme Court, as a constitutional

body, cannot be abolished by law
passed by the Congress;
Members of the Supreme Court can only
be removed through impeachment;

3.
4.

5.

6.

The Supreme Court cannot be deprived of

its minimum and appellate jurisdiction;
appellate jurisdiction of the SC may not
be increased without its advice or
concurrence;
Appointees to the judiciary are now
nominated by the Judicial and Bar Council
and no longer subject to confirmation by
the Commission on Appointments
The Supreme Court has administrative
supervision over all inferior courts and
personnel;

SC has exclusive power to discipline

judges/justices of inferior courts;
8. Members of the judiciary have security of
tenure;
9. Members of the judiciary may not be
designated to any agency performing quasijudicial or administrative functions;
10.Salaries of judges may not be reduced;
11.The judiciary enjoys fiscal autonomy;
12.The Supreme Court alone can initiate the Rules
of Court;
13.It alone may order temporary detail of judges;
and
14.It can appoint all officials and employees of the
judiciary.
7.

Judicial Power
The

judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme

Court and in such lower courts as may be established

by law.
Judicial

power includes the duty of the courts of

justice to settle actual controversies involving rights

which are legally demandable and enforceable, and
to determine whether or not there has been a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction

on

the

part

of

any

instrumentality of the Government.

branch

or

Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction

is the power and

authority of the court to hear and
decide cases. Judicial power is
exercised by the various courts
within their respective jurisdictions,
so that if judicial power is exercised
without or in excess of jurisdiction,
then the decisions of the courts are
said to be null and void.

Role of Congress.
The

various courts have their

respective jurisdiction.
Each jurisdiction is defined, prescribed,
and apportioned by the Congress,
except that of the Supreme Court
whose jurisdiction (as enumerated in
Section 5, Article VIII) is
Constitutionally prescribed so that it
cannot be lessened or taken away by
the Congress.

Kinds of Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction

could be general or limited,

original or appellate, and exclusive or
concurrent.
A court has a general jurisdiction when it is
empowered to hear and decide all disputes
filed before it except those falling in the
jurisdiction of other courts
EXAMPLE: Regional Trial Court
A court is said to have a limited jurisdiction
if it can hear and decide specific cases only.
EXAMPLE: Court of Tax Appeals

court has an original jurisdiction if

it is empowered to hear and decide
cases filed for the first time
EXAMPLE: Municipal Trial Court, for
instance, has original jurisdiction
over forcible entry cases
a court has appellate jurisdiction if it
can review a decision rendered by a
lower court.
EXAMPLE: Regional Trial Court has
appellate jurisdiction to review the
decisions of the Municipal Trial Court.

court has exclusive jurisdiction if it

alone has authority to hear and
decide a case filed before it
EXAMPLE: Regional Trial Court acting as
Family Courts has exclusive
jurisdiction over family cases
A court has concurrent jurisdiction if
other courts can hear and decide a
case which could be filed before it.
EXAMPLE: (Regional Trial Court) has
current jurisdiction with the Court of
Appeals and Supreme Court over
habeas corpus cases.

Appointments
Art.

VIII, Sec. 9

The members of the SC and judges of lower courts

shall be appointed by the President from the list of
at least 3 nominees prepared by the JBC for
vacancy.

Such

appointments

need

no

confirmation.
For the lower courts, the President shall issue the
appointments w/in 90 days from the submission of
the list

Qualifications
Article

VIII provides the qualifications of a Member of the

Supreme Court or any lower collegiate court:
a. He must be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines;
b. Be at least forty years of age;
c. Must have been a judge of a lower court or engaged in
the practice of law in the Philippines for fifteen years or
more; and
d. must be a person of proven competence, integrity,
probity, and independence.
. The

qualifications of judges in lower courts shall be

prescribed by Congress, but the qualifications must
include Philippine citizenship and membership in the
Philippine Bar.

Tenure
Justices and judges can hold
office until they reach the age of
seventy or become
incapacitated to discharge the
duties of their office.
They must be in good behavior
during their tenure; otherwise
they (judges) may be disciplined
or dismissed by the Supreme
Court (sitting en banc).

Judicial and Bar Council

The

Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) is a constitutional body

under the supervision of the Supreme Court that has the
principal function of recommending appointees to the
Judiciary.
The Justices or Members of the Supreme Court and judges
of the lower courts are among the officials who are
appointed by the President.
For their appointments to be valid, they must first be
nominated by the JBC.
For every vacant seat in the judiciary, the Council prepares
a list of at least three nominees from which the President
shall select and appoint.
If there is a vacancy for judgeship in a court, the JBC must
first provide a list of at least three nominees. From the list
the President shall select whom he shall appoint.

Composition.
The

JBC is composed of seven

members:
a. The Chief Justice as ex officio Chairman;
b. The Secretary of Justice as an ex officio
member;
c. A representative of the Congress as ex
officio member;
d. A representative of the Integrated Bar;
e. A professor of law;
f. A retired Member of the Supreme Court;
and
g. A representative of the private sector.

The

ex officio members are the Chief

Justice, Secretary of Justice, and
representative of the Congress.
The four others are called regular
members.
The ex officio members are those who by
reason of their office are also members of
the Council.
The regular members are appointed by the
President for a term of four years with the
consent of the Commission on
Appointments.
The Secretary of the Council, who shall be
in-charge with the records keeping, is the
Clerk of the Supreme Court.

Fiscal Autonomy
Art.

Vlll, Sec. 3 of the 1987

Constitution states that "the
Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal
autonomy. Appropriations for
the judiciary may not be
reduced by the legislature below
the amount appropriated for the
previous year and, after
approval, shall be automatically
and regularly released".

 Section

3 seeks to insure the independence the

judiciary. The appropriations for the judiciary may

not be reduced as provided above but they may be
increased. The constitution takes into account the
fact that the administration f justice, in the past, has
always been at the bottom list of priorities in
government

budgetary

appropriations.

The

prohibition against reduction by Congress of the

appropriation for the judiciary below the amounts
appropriated for the previous year assures, at least,
that

the

minimal

judiciary will be met.

finding

requirements

of

the

Salaries of Judges/Justices
Fixed

by law; may not be decreased during

their continuance in office.

annual

salary of the Chief Justice of the SC =

40K
Associate Justices of the Supreme Court = 32K
annual salary of the Presiding Justice of the
Court of Appeals = 26K
officials with the rank of secretary of
department, the Associate Justices of the Court
of Appeals and officials with equivalent rank =
24K

Composition of the Supreme

Court
The

Supreme Court is composed

of 15 members:
1. Chief Justice; and
2. fourteen Associate Justices.

Any

vacancy must be filled within

ninety days from its occurrence.

How Cases are Heard

In

hearing cases, the SC may

either sit en banc or in division of
three, five, or seven Members.
if it sits en banc, majority of the
members who actually took part
in the deliberations of the case
must concur or come up with the
same vote, in order to resolve the
case.

En banc cases
En

banc cases include those involving constitutionality

of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or

law, those involving the constitutionality, application,
or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations,
orders, instructions, ordinances, and other regulations.
Also,

only the Court sitting en banc can modify or

reverse a doctrine or principle which it itself laid down.

Discipline

and dismissal of judges are likewise decided

by the Court sitting en banc.

Bayan Muna v. Romulo

The

rule on the needed vote for the

declaration of unconstitutionality of a treaty in
1987 Constitution requires the concurrence
of a majority of the Members who actually
took part in the deliberations on the issues in
the cases and voted thereon
Previously no less than 2/3 of the Court were
needed for a declaration of
unconstitutionality, now as few as 5 members
of the Court can declare unconstitutionality,
this number being a majority of the quorum of
8 of the 15 member Court.

Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the

Philippines
The SC stressed that the fact that it6s
previous decision was based on a slim vote
of 8-7 does not, cannot, have the effect of
making our ruling any less effective or
binding. Regardless of how close the voting
is, so long as there is concurrence of the
majority of the members of the en banc who
actually took part in the deliberations of the
case, a decision garnering only 8 votes out of
15 members is still a decision of the SC en
banc and must be respected as such

Division Case
If

the Court sits in division, at least three members must take

part in the deliberations and hearings of the case, and must
have the same vote thereon in order to resolve the case.
If the required number is not obtained, the case shall be
decided en banc.
EXAMPLE
If the Court sits in division of seven, then at least three of the
members must actually deliberate the case and have the same
stand thereon.
If only two concurred or have the same vote, then the case will
now be decided by the Court en banc, meaning majority of all
the fifteen Justices must take part in the deliberations and
majority of those who took part must have the same stand on
the case.
Nonetheless, if Court sits in division of three, all the members
must take part in the deliberations and come up with the same
vote in order to resolve the case. This is because the at least
three members requirement must also be followed.

Fortich v. Corona
The

petitioners filed motions for reconsideration of a 3-2

decision of the Special Second Division that were denied

by a 2-2 vote. As a denial was not supported by a majority
of the decision, they asked for the elevation of the issue
to the banc in accordance with the above quoted
provision.
The

court held that following the rule of reddendo singula

singulis, the word decided must refer to cases, while

the word resolved must refer to matters. This rather
strained interpretation militates against another rule of
construction, w/c is that one must not distinguish if the
Constitution does not.

Prohibitions
It

must be noted that the Members of the Supreme Court and the lower

courts cannot be designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or

administrative functions.
An

agency is said to perform a quasi-judicial function if it acts like a

court in that it hears and decides cases even if it is not a court.

Administrative

agencies are under the executive branch and may be

delegated quasi-judicial powers in deciding specific cases which it

could competently and efficiently resolve.
Justices

and judges cannot be designated to these agencies in

accordance with the principle of separation of powers.

If

they are allowed to be designated to administrative agencies, then

they are likewise performing executive function, thus violating the said
principle.

Requisites of the Judicial

Inquiry
These

requisites are the

following:
1. There must be an actual case or
controversy;
2. The question of constitutionality
must be raised by the proper
party
3. The constitutional question must
be raised at the earliest possible
opportunity; and
4. The decision of the constitutional

Actual case
An

actual case or controversy

involves a conflict of legal rights,
an assertion of opposition legal
claims susceptible of judicial
resolution.
The case must not be moot or
academic or based on extra-legal
or other similar considerations
not cognizable by a court of
justice.

Senate v. Ermita

The

court

proceeded

to

resolve

the

petitions

questioning the constitutionality of Executive Order

No. 464, w/c allowed President Arroyos subordinates
not to appear before Congress in connection w/ its
legislative inquiries, despite the absence of any
showing that she had actually invoked it or prohibited
them

from

participating

in

said

legislative

investigations. The court found the assertion that

the President has not w/held her consent or prohibited
the appearance of the officials concerned immaterial
in determining the existence of an actual case or
controversy insofar as E.O 464 is concerned.

Proper Party
Proper

party is one who has

sustained or is in immediate
danger of sustaining an injury as
a result of the act complained of

Tileston v. Ullmann
A

physician questioned the constitionality of

a law prohibiting the use of contraceptives,

upon

the

ground

that

it

might

prove

dangerous to the life or healht of some of his

patients whose physical condition would not
enable them to bear the rigors of childbirth.
The court dismissed the challenge, holding
that the patients of the physician not the
physician himself were the proper parties.

PHILCONSA v. Gimenez
An

organization of taxpayers and

citizens was held to be a proper
party to question the
constitutionality of a law
providing for special retirement
benefits for members of the
legislature.

Earliest Opportunity
The

rule that the constitutional

question must be raised at the

earliest possible opportunity, such
that if it is not raised in the
pleadings, it cannot be considered
at the trial, and, if not considered
at the trial, it cannot be considered

This

general rule, however, is subject to the

following exceptions:
1. In criminal cases, the constitutional question
can be raised at any time in the discretion of
the court.
2. In civil cases, the constitutional question can be
raised at any stage if it is necessary to the
determination of the case itself.
3. In every case, except where there is estoppel,
the constitutional question may be raised at any
stage if it involves the jurisdiction of the court

Necessity of Deciding
Constitutional Question
The

reason why courts will as much

as possible avoid the decision of a

constitutional

question

can

be

traced to the doctrine of separation

of powers w/c enjoins upon each
department a proper respect for
the acts of the other departments

Laurel v. Garcia
The

court will not pass upon a

constitutional

question

although

properly presented by the record if

the case can be disposed of on
some other ground such as the
application of a statute or general
law.

Effects of a declaration of
unconstitutionality
Have

two views: orthodox view and modern

view
In

Orthodox view, unconstitutional act is

not a law; it confers no rights, it imposes no

duties; it affords no protection; it creates no
office and considered never existed at all.
In

Modern view, it simply refuses to

recognize the constitutionality of a statute.

Partial Unconstitutionality
Requisites:

1. The Legislature must be willing

to retain the valid
portion(s),
usually shown by the presence of
a separability clause in the law;
and
2. The valid portion(s) can stand
independently as a law.

Powers of the Supreme Court

The

powers of the Supreme Court are

expressly provided in Section 5, Article VIII.

Its powers are classified into:
1. its original jurisdiction;
2. its appellate jurisdiction;
3. power to temporarily assign judges; (
4. power to change venue;
5. rule-making power;
6. power to appoint court personnel; and
7. administrative supervision over lower courts.

Original jurisdiction
means

the authority to settle cases filed

for the first time.

Among

the cases which can be filed and

settled for the first time in the Supreme

Court are:
1) cases affecting ambassadors, other public
ministers and consuls; and
2) petitions for certiorari, prohibition,
mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.

 The

first set of cases involves diplomatic agents, who under

international law are considered representatives of the States where

they are nationals.
An

ambassador, being a representative or extension of a sovereign

State, has immunity from suits in the receiving state.

The immunity is based on the international law doctrine of State

immunity and the equality of sovereign states

EXAMPLE the ambassador of U.S. cannot be sued for a criminal

offense committed in the Philippines, unless the immunity or
privilege is waived.
NOTE: Filipino ambassadors are not immune from suits here in the
Philippines.
A consul, likewise, although a diplomatic agent, has no diplomatic
immunity.

Certiorari

is a special civil action

which is filed by a person who is
aggrieved by any tribunal, board or
officer exercising judicial or quasijudicial functions that had acted
without or in excess of its or his
jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess
of jurisdiction, and there is no plain and
speedy remedy in the ordinary course
of law.
its purpose is to INVALIDATE a
judgment rendered without or in excess
of authority or jurisdiction.

 Prohibition

person

is a special civil action filed by a

aggrieved

in

the

proceedings

of

any

tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person,

whether
ministerial

exercising
functions,

judicial,
which

quasi-judicial
proceedings

or
are

without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with

grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction, and there is no plain and
speedy remedy in the ordinary course of law.
its

purpose is to STOP a tribunal or person from

further engaging in proceedings done without or in

excess of authority or jurisdiction.

Mandamus

is a special civil action filed

by a person aggrieved by any tribunal,
corporation, board, officer or person, who
unlawfully neglects the performance of an
act which the law specifically enjoins as a
duty resulting from office, trust, or station,
or unlawfully excludes another from the
use and enjoyment of a right or office to
which such other is entitled, there is no
plain, adequate, and speedy remedy in
the ordinary course of law.
Its purpose is TO COMPEL the
performance of a ministerial duty or duty
mandated by law to be performed under
certain circumstances.

Quo

Warranto is a special civil action instituted by the

Philippine Government against a person, public officer, or

association which usurps, unlawfully holds, intrudes into an
office, position, or franchise.
Its

purpose is TO RECOVER an office or position from a

usurper or from an officer, who has forfeited his office, and

a franchise from a false corporation (one without legal
personality).
Habeas

corpus is a special proceeding the purpose of

which is to grant speedy remedy for the release of a person

illegally confined or detained, or for the grant of rightful
custody over a child or person to someone from whom the
custody is withheld or to whom it rightfully belongs.

Appellate jurisdiction

refers

to the authority to review decisions of a lower court.

The Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction over final

judgments and orders of lower courts in:
1. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty,

international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree,

proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in
question.
2. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or

toll, or any penalty imposed in relation thereto.

3. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.
4. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion

perpetua or higher.
5. All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.

Temporary Assignment of Judges

The

Supreme Court also has the power to assign temporarily judges of

lower courts to other stations as public interest may require.

Such

temporary assignment shall not exceed six months without the

consent of the judge concerned.

This power reinforces the independence of the Supreme Court from the
Executive Department as well as

balances

the powers

of the

government.
Even

if he is the appointing authority, the President has no power to

temporarily assign or transfer at his pleasure judges to other courts.

Under

the law and the present rules, only the Supreme Court has the

power to do so and under the conditions that the temporary assignment

results to a better administration of justice, faster disposition of cases,
and impartial decision making.

Change of Venue
The

Court is empowered to order a change of venue or place of trial to

avoid a miscarriage of justice.

Venue
The

refers to the place where the trial is conducted.

Rules of Court provide the rules on venue, which are clearly

intended for the speedy, impartial, and convenient disposition of cases.

If instead of being convenient, venue causes miscarriage of justice, the
Supreme Court has the power to change the venue. Even if venue is
jurisdictional in criminal cases, the Supreme Court still has the power to
change the same.
EXAMPLE,

venue maybe changed by the Supreme Court to allow a

witness to give an objective testimony without fear of retaliation from

the adverse party. The venue may also be changed when there is
danger to the life of the accused.

Rule-Making Power
The

Court has the power to promulgate rules concerning:

(a) The protection and enforcement of constitutional rights;

(b) Pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts;
(c) The admission to the practice of law;
(d) The Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and
(e) Legal assistance to the under-privileged.
Such

rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for

the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the
same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive
rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies
shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.
This

power of the Supreme Court is the basis for making the Rules of

Court.

Power to Appoint Its Own

Personnel
The

Court has the power to appoint all officials

and employees of the Judiciary in accordance

with the Civil Service Law. Although the power
to appoint is vested in the President, the
Supreme Court has the power to appoint
officials and employees of the Judicial
Department. However, the appointment must
be in accordance with the Civil Service Law.

Administrative
Supervision.
Section 6, Article VIII states that the Supreme Court has

administrative supervision over all courts and its personnel.

This is one of the constitutional safeguards for the
independence of the judiciary.
During

the

effectivity

of

the

1935

Constitution,

the

Department of Justice had administrative supervision over

the lower courts which compromised the independence of
the courts as their decisions were often swayed by the
executive department.
But

with the transfer of supervision to the Supreme Court,

courts

are

empowered

and

freed

pressures of the executive branch.

from

the

political

Decisions of the Supreme

Court

Consultation

The

Supreme Court is a collegiate court, in that it is

composed of many members and its decisions are reached

through

consultation

or

thorough

deliberation

of

its

members.
Consultation

is necessary before the case is assigned to a

member for the writing of the opinion of the Court. Justices

of the Court must discuss with each other and vote on the
settlement of the case before a certification is given
assigning the writing of the opinion to a member.
For

members who did not participate, abstained, or

dissented from a decision or resolution, they must explain

and state their reason for it. The same requirements must
also be observed by lower collegiate courts.

Constitutional
Requirement
In rendering a decision, the

Court must express

clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which

the

decision

is

based.

The

purpose

of

this

constitutional requirement is to inform the parties,

most especially the adversely affected party, the
reasons why the judgment is rendered as such. The
Court must, therefore, state the factual and legal
basis of its decision. In the same way, resolutions
refusing a petition for review or denying a motion
for reconsideration of a court decision must state
the legal basis for it.

Period for Rendering Judgments.

After

the trial and parties already

submitted the case for decision, the

court is duty bound to render the
decision within a certain period of time.

A case or matter is deemed submitted

for decision or resolution upon the filing
of

the

last

pleading,

brief,

or

memorandum required by the Rules of

Court or by the court itself.

 From

date of submission, the Supreme Court

must decide the case or resolve any matter

within twenty-four months, and lower courts must
decide and resolve within twelve months, unless
reduced by the Supreme Court.
If

the court fails to render a decision within the

applicable mandatory period, it must still decide

or resolve the case or matter without further
delay and without prejudice to such responsibility
incurred because of the delay.

Annual Report
SC

the

to submit, within 30 days from

opening

of

each

regular

session of Congress, to the Pres.

and to Congress an annual report
on the operations and activities
of the Judiciary (Sec. 16, Art. VIII)

END