volume vii, issue no. 28 october-december 2005

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005

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

(Continued on page 8)

Topping our list of achievements for this period are “firsts” in our continuing trainingprograms - the 1st Orientation Seminar-Workshop for newly appointed Clerks of Courtand the 1st Family Mediation Design Workshop. Prior to the latter, a study tour toCanada, under CIDA auspices, was organized to observe procedures thereat. Agama(similar to CAM) Arbitration Council Proceedings were introduced at the 4th Seminaron the Shari’a Indigenous and Local Justice System. The inclusion of non-courtemployees to this seminar was widely appreciated as an effective tool in the peace process.

Also a “first” is the introduction of the e-Library by Associate Justice Antonio T.Carpio at the Basic Computer Training for Sandiganbayan Justices. PHILJA’s Fax/Electronic Alerts have been included in the e-Library.

Making progress are our sustained efforts in providing venues for discussions andtraining seminars for lawyers and judges alike on Criminal Law, Anti-Terrorism andEvidence Gathering, Juvenile and Domestic Relations, recent developments in Tax Lawsand Jurisprudence and Environmental Law. A Multi-Sectoral Seminar-Workshop onAgrarian Justice was conducted in November, confirming the Academy’s broad andtimely embrace of issues that necessitate education and training.

Convention-Seminars held for different court personnel included workshops onthe Code of Conduct. Continuing Legal Education was held for Court of AppealsAttorneys in November. Code of Conduct Programs were also held for the Justices ofthe Court of Appeals in Manila and in Cagayan de Oro City and for the Clerks of Courtof Regions III, V and X.

Continuing orientation and re-orientation Seminars on Court-Annexed Mediation(CAM) were held for both judges and lawyers alike.

��

��

��

��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

October to December 2005 Volume VII, Issue No. 28

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

PHILJAACADEMIC PROGRAMS

38TH ORIENTATION SEMINAR-WORKSHOP

FOR NEWLY APPOINTED JUDGES

The 38th Orientation Seminar-Workshop for NewlyAppointed Judges was held on November 28 toDecember 9, 2005, at the PHILJA DevelopmentCenter, Tagaytay City. In attendance were forty-two (42) judges, comprising thirty-one (31) newlyappointed judges, nine (9) promoted judges andtwo (2) laterally transferred judges.

A. New Appointments

REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

Hon. Esteban A. Tacla, Jr.RTC Br. 208, Mandaluyong City

REGION IHon. Joseph A. PatnaanRTC Br. 35, Bontoc, Mt. Province

REGION IIHon. Felipe J. Torio IIRTC Br. 22, Cabagan, Isabela

REGION IVHon. Jaime C. BlancaflorRTC Br. 26, Sta. Cruz, LagunaHon. Ronaldo B. MartinRTC Br. 73, Antipolo, RizalHon. Dennis Patrick Z. PerezRTC Br. 67, Binangonan, Rizal

REGION V

Hon. Amy Ana L. De Villa-RoseroRTC Br. 11, Ligao City, Albay

REGION VIHon. Gloria G. MaderoRTC Br. 29, Iloilo City

REGION VIIHon. Esperanza Isabel E. Poco-DeslateRTC Br. 19, Roxas City

REGION XHon. Emmanuel E. EscatronRTC Br. 2, Butuan City, Agusan del Norte

REGION XIIHon. Sahara U. SilonganRTC Br. 15, Shariff Aguak, Maguindanao

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES

REGION IHon. Carlito A. CorpuzMTCC San Fernando City, La Union

REGION IIIHon. John Voltaire C. VenturinaMTCC Gapan City, Nueva EcijaHon. Wenceslao TreseMTCC Br. 2, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija

REGION IVHon. Dorcas Ferriols-PerezMTCC Br. 1, Batangas City

REGION VHon. Nestor M. HermidaMTCC Sorsogon City

REGION XHon. Marissa P. EstabayaMTCC Valencia City, BukidnonHon. Hector B. SaliseMTCC Br. 1, Butuan City, Agusan del NorteHon. Rodolfo D. VaporMTCC Tangub City, Misamis Occidental

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION IHon. Ruben A. CorpuzMTC Bangar, La UnionHon. Jeovannie C. OrdoñoMTC Bacnotan, La Union

REGION IIHon. Paul R. Attolba, Jr.MTC Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya

REGION IIIHon. Emmanuel Telesforo F. AfableMTC San Antonio, ZambalesHon. Maria Maruja N. MendozaMTC Calumpit, Bulacan

REGION IVHon. Myla Villavicencio-OlanMTC Padre Garcia, BatangasHon. Conrado L. ZumaragaMTC Cabuyao, LagunaHon. Paul A. BelosoMTC Sariaya, Quezon

REGION VHon. Lorna B. Santiago-UbaldeMTC Virac, Catanduanes

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

REGION IVHon. Eduardo T. AbergosMCTC Mabini-Tingloy, Batangas

REGION VHon. Angel A. TadeoMCTC San Jose, Presentacion, Camarines

REGION VIHon. Jemena A. ArbisMCTC Makato-Tangalan, Aklan

B. Promotions



Hon. Jansen R. RodriguezRTC Br. 6, ManilaHon. Luisito G. CortezRTC Br. 84, Quezon CityHon. Rosanna Fe Romero-MaglayaRTC Br. 88, Quezon CityHon. Ma. Teresa E. de GuzmanRTC Br. 131, Caloocan CityHon. Maria Rowena Modesto San PedroRTC Br. 158, Pasig City

REGION IHon. Emma S. Ines-Parajas

RTC Br. 52, Tayug, PangasinanREGION IV

Hon. Socrates A. ErasmoRTC Br. 30, San Pablo City, Laguna

REGION VHon. Rogelio LL. DacaraRTC Br. 37, Iriga City, Camarines Sur

REGION XIIHon. Milanio M. GuerreroRTC Br. 20, Tacurong, Sultan Kudarat

C. Lateral Transfers


REGION IVHon. Dinah Evangeline B. BandongMTCC Br. 2, San Pablo City, LagunaHon. Amy Melba S. BeluliaMTCC Br. 3, San Pablo City, Laguna

1ST ORIENTATION SEMINAR-WORKSHOP

FOR NEWLY APPOINTED CLERKS OF COURT

The 1st Orientation Seminar-Workshop for NewlyAppointed Clerks of Court was held on November 9to 11, 2005, at the PHILJA Development Center,Tagaytay City. In attendance were thirty-eight (38)newly appointed clerks of court.



Atty. Clemente M. ClementeRTC OCC, ManilaAtty. Rolando A. CruzRTC Br. 3, ManilaAtty. Moses V. FlorendoRTC Br. 15, ManilaAtty. Maria Theresa O. BasilioRTC Br. 34, ManilaAtty. Faustina B. FernandezRTC Br. 81, Quezon CityAtty. Noli A. De PedroRTC Br. 82, Quezon CityAtty. Rosemary B. Dela Cruz-HonradoRTC Br. 96, Quezon CityAtty. Shinglinde Desiree P. GlipoRTC Br. 218, Quezon CityAtty. Glenda B. Columna-DuyapaRTC Br. 224, Quezon CityAtty. Luis Christopher A. BallelosRTC OCC, Pasay CityAtty. Serafin S. SalazarRTC Br. 110, Pasay CityAtty. Remiebel U. MondiaRTC Br. 118, Pasay CityAtty. Janette O. Herras-BaggasRTC Br. 231, Pasay CityAtty. Connie P. Alvaro-DimaculanganRTC Br. 130, Caloocan CityAtty. Teodorico L. DiazRTC Br. 136, Makati CityAtty. Cecilio N. TobilloRTC Br. 142, Makati CityAtty. Gaile Dante A. CaraanRTC Br. 165, Pasig CityAtty. Grace M. SalamatRTC Br. 208, Mandaluyong CityAtty. Zenalfie M. CuencoRTC Br. 72, Malabon CityAtty. Kirk M. AniñonRTC OCC, Muntinlupa City

(Continued on NEXT page)

3


REGION IIAtty. Rizalina G. Baltazar-AquinoRTC Br. 33, Ballesteros, CagayanAtty. Consuelo T. ClaravallRTC Br. 16, Ilagan, IsabelaAtty. Jonathan A. CristobalRTC OCC, Santiago City, IsabelaAtty. Wilhelmino N. DalitRTC Br. 17, Ilagan, Isabela

REGION IIIAtty. Rowena H. RamaRTC Br. 76, Malolos, Bulacan

REGION IVAtty. Melville Wendell L. AureadaRTC Br. 64, Mauban, Quezon

REGION VAtty. Darwin P. DimenRTC Br. 45, Masbate, Masbate

REGION VIAtty. Ma. Asuncion A. SorianoRTC Br. 18, Roxas City, Capiz

REGION XIAtty. Thea G. GuadalupeRTC Br. 18, Digos, Davao del Sur


REGION IMr. Noel R. ManiponMTCC OCC, San Fernando City, La Union

REGION IIMr. Victor Emerito S. AgcaoiliMTCC Br. 1, Santiago City

REGION IIIMr. Arvin J. PanlilioMTCC Br. 1, San Fernando City, Pampanga

REGION IVMs. Carmen C. OncinianMTCC Br. 2, Cavite City

REGION XIMs. Maria Luisa F. Elorde-EllimaMTCC Br. 1, Island Garden City of Samal

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS

REGION IIIMs. Marian M. DiwaMTC Abucay, Bataan

REGION VMs. Rosemarie A. CortesMTC Siruma, Camarines Sur

MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

REGION VIIIMr. Leocadio P. Abaloyan, Jr.MCTC Guiuan-Mercedes, Eastern Samar

REGION XIIMs. Segundina C. OraMCTC Kauswagan-Poona-Piagapo, Lanao del Norte

RJCEP (LEVEL 4)

PHILJA conducted the 8th 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 the TenthJudicial Region on October 26 to 28, 2005, at theDynasty Court Hotel, Cagayan de Oro City. A totalof one hundred ninety (190) participants attendedthe program, comprising thirty-four (34) RegionalTrial Court judges, thirty-five (35) First Level TrialCourt judges, eighty-two (82) clerks of court andbranch clerks of court who are lawyers, and thirty-nine (39) clerks of court and branch clerks of courtswho are non-lawyers.

Moreover, eighty-six (86) Court of Appeals-Cagayan de Oro personnel consisting of lawyersand non-lawyers joined the one day activity forthe Code of Conduct for Court Personnel.

The 9th 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 the Fifth Judicial Regionwas conducted by the Academy on November 16to 18, 2005, at the Casablanca Hotel, Legaspi City.Two hundred twenty-six (226) participantsattended, comprising fifty (50) Regional Trial Courtjudges, twenty-six (26) First Level Trial Courtjudges, fifty-nine (59) clerks of court / branch clerksof court who are lawyers and ninety-one (91) clerksof court / branch clerks of court who are non-lawyers.

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005 5

RTD ON CRIMINAL LAW, ANTI-TERRORISM

AND EVIDENCE GATHERING

The Roundtable Discussion on Criminal Law, Anti-Terrorism and Evidence Gathering was conducted bythe Academy, in cooperation with the Embassy ofthe United States of America on October 6, 2005,at the Training Room, Supreme Court, Manila.Eighteen (18) participants attended the roundtablediscussion.

Professor Sara Sun Beale, Esq., Charles L.B.Lowndes Professor of Law, Duke UniversitySchool of Law, Durham, North Carolina was theguest speaker. She delivered her paper entitled,“Issues and Trends in Terrorism Prosecution:An AmericanPerspective on the Philippine Anti-Terrorism Bill.”

Issues raised and discussed during the RTDwere the problem of having two (2) definitions ofterrorism; the problem of determining intent tocommit terrorist acts; the abuse of certainprovisions regarding warrantless arrests; penaltiesfor violations of acts which are considered terroristacts; and the possibility of abuse of the proposedanti-terrorism law. The RTD also allowed adiscussion of certain provisions in American lawdealing with the prosecution of terrorist actsparticularly, the detention of “material witnesses”and combatants without a warrant or without anoffense being filed against the detained person.

4TH REGIONAL MULTI-SECTORAL SEMINAR-WORKSHOP ON JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC

RELATIONS JUSTICE (ADVANCED LEVEL)

PHILJA, in partnership with the United NationsChildren’s Fund (UNICEF), Adhikain Para SaKarapatang Pambata – Ateneo Human Rights Center(AKAP-AHRC), United States Agency forInternational Development (USAID), and The AsiaFoundation (TAF) conducted the 4th Regional Multi-Sectoral Seminar-Workshop on Juvenile and DomesticRelations Justice (Advanced Level) on October 12 to14, 2005, at the Bohol Tropics Resort, TagbilaranCity. Fifty-nine (59) participants attended theseminar from nine (9) designated Family Courtsin Regions VII, VIII & IX. They were composed of

SPECIAL FOCUS

PROGRAMS

judges, branch clerks of court,prosecutors, lawyersfrom the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO), andselected officers of the Philippine National Police(PNP) and Bureau of Jail Management andPenology (BJMP) handling women and children’scases.

Topics and activities covered by the seminar-workshop were updates on new laws on family,women, and children; dispute resolution skills; andthe drafting and validation of rules and guidelinesfor family courts, specifically on adoption,diversion, Court Appointed Special Advocate/Guardian Ad Litem (CASA/GAL), use of live linktelevision, and mediation on family law cases.

SEMINAR ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN TAX

LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE

The Academy, in cooperation with the Court of TaxAppeals (CTA) conducted the Seminar for Court ofTax Appeals Attorneys on Recent Developments in TaxLaws and Jurisprudence on October 19 to 21, 2005, atthe PHILJA Development Center, Tagaytay City.There were thirty-three (33) participants,comprising of lawyers from the Court of TaxAppeals, Department of Finance, Department ofJustice, Office of the Solicitor General, TariffCommission, Bureau of Internal Revenue, Bureauof Customs, and National Tax Research Center.

Topics discussed were the CTA Expansion Law(R.A. No. 9282); the New Expanded VAT Law (R.A.No. 9337); Updates in Tax Jurisprudence; PostEntry Audit Law (R.A. No. 9135); Tax Reliefs andRemedies; Recent Developments on Tariff andCustoms Code; Local Taxation and Real PropertyTax Law; Researching, Drafting and Writing; and

Judicial and Legal Ethics for CTA.

Designated Family Court Judges who participated at the4th Regional Multi-Sectoral Seminar-Workshop on Juvenileand Domestic Relations Justice (Advanced Level).


SEMINARS ON STRENGTHENING

THE SHARI’A COURT SYSTEM

A series of Seminars on Strengthening the Shari’aCourt System were conducted by the Academy, inpartnership with the United Nations DevelopmentProgramme (UNDP), the Mindanao EconomicDevelopment Council (MEDCo), and the ProgramManagement Office of the Supreme Court (PMO-SC).

The 3rd Seminar on Strengthening the Shari’a CourtSystem was held on November 7 to 11, 2005, at theGarden Orchid Hotel, Zamboanga City. There werefifty-three (53) participants, comprising of judges,clerks of court, legal researchers, courtstenographers, court interpreters, sheriffs, clerks,process servers, representatives from the ArmedForces of the Philippines (AFP), PhilippineNational Police (PNP), National Bureau ofInvestigation (NBI), Public Attorney’s Office(PAO), and Commission on Human Rights (CHR).

The 4th Seminar on Strengthening the Shari’a CourtSystem was conducted on November 14 to 18, 2005,also at the Garden Orchid Hotel, Zamboanga City.A total of forty-six (46) participants attended theseminar, composed of clerks of court, legalresearcher, stenographers, court interpreters,sheriffs, clerks, process servers, and representativesfrom a Non-Government Organization, AFP, PNP,PAO, and CHR.

The seminar aimed at improving the servicesof the Shari’a Court System by enhancing the skills,knowledge, and understanding of Shari’a judges,lawyers and counselors on Shari’a and PhilippineProcedural Law.

MULTI-SECTORAL SEMINAR-WORKSHOP

ON AGRARIAN JUSTICE

A Multi-Sectoral Seminar-Workshop on Agrarian Justicewas conducted by the Academy on November 8 to11, 2005, at the Development Academy of thePhilippines (DAP), Tagaytay City. The activity wasco-sponsored by the Agrarian Justice Foundation,Inc. (AJFI), in collaboration with the Departmentof Agrarian Reform (DAR), Department of Justice(DOJ), Sentro ng Alternatibong Lingap Panligal(SALIGAN), and the Philippine Ecumenical Actionfor Community Empowerment (Peace Foundation).Thirty-nine (39) participants attended the seminar-workshop, comprising of judges, prosecutors,lawyers from the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO),and representatives from the Department ofAgrarian Reform (DAR), Philippine National Police(PNP), and civil societies.

Senator Wigberto E. Tañada, President of theAgrarian Justice Foundation Inc. (AJFI) was the“Keynote Speaker.” In his speech, he remindedeveryone that barely three (3) years from now, theComprehensive Agrarian Reform Program underR.A. No. 8532 will end unless Congress still feelsthat it is the “centerpiece” program of thegovernment. He also mentioned the seeming lackof interest of many legislators who are landownersthemselves in extending the life of CARP beyondJune 2008. He urged everyone who believes inthe wisdom and necessity of agrarian reform to doall that can be done to help bring about thedistribution of as much of the remaining “carpable”lands as possible before time and money run out.

The activity focused on the Social andConstitutional Context of Agrarian Reform, SalientFeatures of Agrarian Laws, Implementation of theComprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP),Jurisdiction in Agrarian Reform Cases, andCriminal Law and Agrarian Reform.

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW SEMINAR-WORKSHOP

FOR SELECTED JUDGES

The Environmental Law Seminar-Workshop forSelected Judges in the Provinces of Cebu and Palawanwas conducted by the Academy, in partnership withThe Royal Netherlands Embassy assisted by theUnited Nations Development Programme – GlobalEnvironment Facility – Small Grants Programme


SPECIAL FOCUS

PROGRAMS

3rd Seminar on Strengthening the Shari’a Court System held onNovember 7 to 11, 2006, at the Garden Orchid Hotel, ZamboangaCity.

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005 7

CONVENTIONS

PACE

The Academy, with the Philippine Association ofCourt Employees (PACE), conducted the 3rd

Convention and Seminar of the Philippine Association ofCourt Employees (PACE) with the theme, “PublicAccountability of Court Employees,” on October 6 and7, 2005, at the New City Commercial Center(NCCC), Matina, Davao City. One thousand threehundred sixteen (1,316) delegates attended theconvention and seminar.

Ms. Rose D. Amizola accepted the responsibilityas the incoming PACE National President in herAcceptance Speech. She pledged to continue withthe unfinished plans of Mr. Claudio Hoybia,outgoing PACE President and to work for morebenefits for the PACE members.

CLAPHIL

The 2nd National Convention and Seminar-Workshop ofthe Court Librarians Association of the Philippines(CLAPHIL) with the theme,“Court Librarians:Partners in the Speedy Administration of Justice,” wasconducted by PHILJA with CLAPHIL on October12 to 14, 2005, at the Buenos Aires MountainResort, Bago City, Negros Occidental. A total oftwenty-eight (28) delegates attended theconvention-seminar, comprising twenty-three (23)court librarians from the thirteen (13) judicialregions and five (5) court personnel from the courts

of Bacolod City.

PJA

PHILJA with the Philippine Judges Association(PJA) conducted the 9th Convention and Seminar ofthe PJA on October 20 and 21, 2005, at the ManilaHotel, City of Manila. Five hundred ninety-nine(599) Regional Trial Court judges nationwideattended the convention-seminar.

Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr., inspired thejudges in his “Keynote Address.” CJ Davidestressed that “in these times it is not enough to bean instrument of justice. We must be disciples ofthe law and fervent ministers of the temple of

justice. We must be the personification of justice.And remember that justice is not in a vacuum andits inseparable companions – truth, love and peace– do not operate in a vacuum either. Therefore,the Judiciary should not operate in a vacuum.”

METCJAP

The 7th Convention-Seminar of the Metropolitan and CityJudges Association (MeTCJAP) was conducted by theAcademy and MeTCJAP on October 26 and 28,2005, at the New World Hotel, Makati City. A totalof one hundred twenty-three (123) judgesnationwide attended the three (3) day convention-seminar.

PTJLI

The Academy, in partnership with the PhilippineTrial Judges League, Inc. (PTJLI) conducted the12th Convention-Seminar of the PTJLI on November16 to 18, 2005, at the Dynasty Court Hotel,Cagayan de Oro City. The convention-seminartheme for the year was dubbed, “Judiciary in its 104th

year of Continuing Dispensation of Justice in the FirstLevel Courts.” Two hundred ten (210) judges fromthe Municipal Trial Courts (MTCs), MunicipalCircuit Trial Courts (MCTCs), and Shari’a CircuitCourts (SHCCs) nationwide attended theconvention-seminar.

(Continued from previous page)

(UNDP-GEF-SGP) International VisitorProgram – Philippines Alumni Foundation,Inc., and the Haribon Foundation through theAnest for Biodiversity Conservation in thePhilippine Project (PN-11780) on November 30to December 2, 2005, at the Cebu Business Hotel,Colon cor. Junquera St., Cebu City.

A total of twenty-five (25) participantsattended the seminar-workshop composed oftwenty (20) judges, one (1) representative fromEnvironmental Legal Assistance Center (ELAC),three (3) PAMANAKA farmers, and one (1)representative from the Department ofEnvironment and Natural Resources (DENR).

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW SEMINAR-WORKSHOP

FOR SELECTED JUDGES


1ST FAMILY MEDIATION DESIGN WORKSHOP

PHILJA conducted the 1st Family Mediation DesignWorkshop on November 11, 2005, at the AsianInstitute of Management (AIM) Conference Center,Benvidez cor. Trasierra Sts., Legaspi Village, MakatiCity.

Key actors for family mediation program wereidentified in the workshop as follows: tribal leaders,priests/ministers; present corps of mediators; courtsocial workers; branch clerks of court; legalresearchers; retired Family Court justices andjudges; judges in JURIS sites; and lawyers. Duringthe workshop, the participants also noted thatmediators and judges already have skills onmarriage counseling; psycho-social skills;spirituality; child and gender sensitivity; skills toaddress power imbalance; and legal knowledge thatonly need to be enhanced.

ON MEDIATION

ORIENTATION SEMINAR-WORKSHOPS

Under the General Santos Mediation Program, theAcademy’s Philippine Mediation Center (PMC), incooperation with the United States Agency forInternational Development (USAID), and The AsiaFoundation (TAF) conducted the OrientationSeminar-Workshop on Mediation for Judges and Lawyerson October 3 and 4, 2005, at the Casa LuisaRestaurant, General Santos City. This was attendedby fifty-five (55) participants comprising of judgesand lawyers.

BASIC SEMINAR-WORKSHOP

The Academy’s Philippine Mediation Center (PMC)conducted the Basic Seminar-Workshop on Mediationunder the Davao Mediation Program on October24 to 28, 2005, at the Royal Mandaya Hotel, DavaoCity. There were fifty-five (55) participantscomprising of lawyers, social workers, engineers,religious ministers, Local Government Unitofficials, retired professionals, businessmen,academicians, and media practitioners.

BAGUIO ADVOCACY FORUM

The Baguio Advocacy Forum was conducted by theAcademy’s Philippine Mediation Center (PMC), theJustice Reform Initiatives Support (JURIS) Project,and the National Judicial Institute (NJI) of Canadaon October 12 and 13, 2005, at the Baguio CountryClub, South Drive, Baguio City. Two hundredforty-eight (248) participants attended comprisingof judges, clerks of court, prosecutors, City Councilmembers, lawyers, media representatives,businessmen and professionals, representativesfrom the Cordillera Indigenous Peoples NGO andCordillera Religious leaders, academicians, police,and PHILJA-JURIS representatives,

The primary objective of the advocacy forumwas to inform key stakeholders in Benguet and LaUnion of court-annexed mediation, Judicial DisputeResolution (JDR) and JURIS Project as well as thePHILJA’s plan to set-up an ADR Model Court inBaguio City in 2006.

The UNICEF cited the PHILJA for itsinvaluable role in the protection of children’sand women’s rights highlighting the Academy’semphasis on diversion, the Rule on theExamination of a Child Witness, and theeffective implementation of the law on violenceagainst women and children. These werefocused on at the 4th Regional Multi-SectoralSeminar-Workshop on Juvenile and DomesticRelations Justice (Advanced Level) held inTagbilaran City in October.

Honorable Associate Justice Artemio V.Panganiban (now Chief Justice) delivered the10th Lecture at the Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide,Jr. Distinguished Lecture Series on the Totality ofReforms, a comprehensive presentation of anoverall perspective of Judicial Reforms fittinglypreceding the Panel Discussion on Challenges toProcedural Reforms.

In November, at the Baguio AdvocacyForum, a cultural immersion program on thelife and culture of the indigenous people of theCordilleras, the tribal leaders shared with JURIStheir mediation structures and systems as wellas cases involving disputes among Igorot tribes.

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)


PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005 NEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURNEW RULINGS OF THE SUPREME COURTTTTT 9

LABOR LAW

What constitutes sickness, resulting disability ordeath to be compensable; occupational disease

Thus, even if the “Takayasu’s Disease” is not listed,perhaps for being rare and still mysterious, therecan be no question that being associated with PTBwhich is a listed occupational disease, the death ofpetitioner’s husband is compensable under AnnexA of the Amended Rules on EmployeesCompensation.

Any doubt on this matter has to be interpretedin favor of the employee, considering that P.D. No.626 is a social legislation. In this case, enoughsubstantial evidence has been shown to convinceus that the surviving spouse of the deceasedworker is entitled to compensation under said P.D.No. 626, because the records show his ailment anddeath have been associated with PTB, a listedcompensable disease.

(Quisumbing, J., Precy P. Jacang v. Employees’Compensation Commission and Social SecuritySystem (Contemporary Services, Inc.), G.R. No.151893, October 20, 2005)

REMEDIAL LAW

Petition for review under Rule 43; whether it isa proper mode of appeal from a reso of theSecretary of Justice directing the prosecutor to fileinformation in criminal case; and whether theconduct of preliminary investigation by theprosecutor is a quasi-judicial function

Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure clearlyshows that it governs appeals to the Court ofAppeals from decisions and final orders orresolutions of the Court of Tax Appeals or quasi-judicial agencies in the exercise of their quasi-judicial functions. The Department of Justice is notamong the agencies enumerated in Section 1 of Rule43. Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius.

In Bautista v. Court of Appeals, we held that apreliminary investigation is not a quasi-judicialproceeding, thus: [t]he prosecutor in a preliminaryinvestigation does not determine the guilt orinnocence of the accused. He does not exerciseadjudication nor rule-making functions.Preliminary investigation is merely inquisitorial,and is often the only means of discovering thepersons who may be reasonably charged with acrime and to enable the fiscal to prepare hiscomplaint or information. It is not a trial of thecase on the merits and has no purpose except thatof determining whether a crime has beencommitted and whether there is probable cause tobelieve that the accused is guilty thereof. While thefiscal makes that determination, he cannot be saidto be acting as a quasi-court, for it is the courts,ultimately, that pass judgment on the accused, notthe fiscal.

Though some cases describe the publicprosecutor ’s power to conduct a preliminaryinvestigation as quasi-judicial in nature, this is trueonly to the extent that, like quasi-judicial bodies,the prosecutor is an officer of the executivedepartment exercising powers akin to those of acourt, and similarity ends at this point.

(Quisumbing, J., Ferdinand T. Santos, Robert JohnSobrepeña, and Rafael Perez De Tagle, Jr. v. WilsonGo, G.R. No. 156081, October 19, 2005)

With an all-encompassing 12th Lecture onThe State of the Judiciary, via webcasting, Hon.Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. auspiciouslyended the Lecture Series, barely a week fromhis official retirement from the Supreme Court.

2005 has been another busy and fulfillingyear for the Academy. Thus, we end the year,satisfied at the successful outcomes of thenumerous activities the Academy hadundertaken. We, at the PHILJA, are mostgrateful, not only to the Chief Justice, the Courten banc and the Board of Trustees, but also theother offices of the Court and our partners indevelopment, for their full support andassistance. We assure them that we are notresting on our laurels. Thank you all, my fellowworkers in the PHILJA, for your hard workand cooperation.

Greetings to all in this season of joy.

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 previous page)

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERS10

LABOR LAW

Twin requirement of notice and hearing; whetheran attitude problem is a ground for dismissingan employee; illegal dismissal

An employee who cannot get along with his co-employees is detrimental to the company for hecan upset and strain the working environment.Without the necessary teamwork and synergy, theorganization cannot function well. Thus,management has the prerogative to take thenecessary action to correct the situation and protectits organization. When personal differencesbetween employees and management affect thework environment, the peace of the company isaffected. Thus, an employee’s attitude problem is avalid ground for his termination. It is a situationanalogous to loss of trust and confidence that mustbe duly proved by the employer.

The law requires the employer to give theworker to be dismissed two (2) written noticesbefore terminating his employment, namely, (1) anotice, which apprises the employee of theparticular acts or omissions for which his dismissalis sought; and (2) the subsequent notice, whichinforms the employee of the employer’s decision todismiss him.

The letter never gave respondent anopportunity to explain herself, hence denying herdue process. Respondent was illegally dismissed,because petitioners failed to show adequately thata valid cause for terminating respondent exists, andbecause petitioners failed to comply with the twinrequirement of notice and hearing.

(Quisumbing, J., Heavylift Manila, Inc. and/orJosephine Evangelio, Administrative & FinanceManager, and Capt. Rolando Tolentino v. TheCourt of Appeals, Ma. Dottie Galay and theNational Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No.154410, October 20, 2005)

Disease as a ground for dismissal

The rule is explicit. For a dismissal on the groundof disease to be considered valid, two requisitesmust concur: (a) the employee suffers from adisease which cannot be cured within six monthsand his continued employment is prohibited bylaw or prejudicial to his health or to the health ofhis co-employees, and (b) a certification to that

effect must be issued by a competent public healthauthority.

The burden of proving the validity of thedismissal rests on the employer. As such, theemployer must prove that the requisites for a validdismissal due to a disease have been complied with.In the absence of the required certification by acompetent public health authority, this Court hasruled against the validity of the employee’sdismissal.

In Triple Eight Integrated Services, Inc. v. NLRC,we held that: The requirement for a medicalcertificate under Article 284 of the Labor Codecannot be dispensed with; otherwise, it wouldsanction the unilateral and arbitrary determinationby the employer of the gravity or extent of theemployee’s illness and thus defeat the public policyon the protection of labor….

(Ynares-Santiago, J., Manly Express Inc. and Siu EngT. Ching v. Romualdo Payong, Jr., G.R. No. 167462,October 25, 2005)

CIVIL LAW

Contract to sell distinguished from contract ofsale; whether the remedy of ejectment can belegally availed of.

It is true that persons dealing with registeredproperty can rely solely on the certificate of titleand need not go beyond it. However, as correctlyheld by the Court of Appeals, this rule does notapply to banks. Banks are required to exercise morecare and prudence than private individuals indealing even with registered properties for theirbusiness is affected with public interest. As masterof its business, petitioner should have sent itsrepresentatives to check the assigned propertiesbefore signing the compromise agreement and itwould have discovered that respondent wasalready occupying one of the condominium unitsand that a contract to sell existed betweenrespondent and PMRDC. In our view, petitionerwas not a purchaser in good faith and we areconstrained to rule that petitioner is bound by thecontract to sell.

Nonetheless, in this case, the contract to selldoes not by itself give respondent the right topossess the property. Unlike in a contract of sale,


PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005 11

CIVIL LAW (continued)

here in a contract to sell, there is yet no actual salenor any transfer of title, until and unless, fullpayment is made. The payment of the purchase priceis a positive suspensive condition, the failure ofwhich is not a breach, casual or serious, but asituation that prevents the obligation of the vendorto convey title from acquiring an obligatory force.Respondent must have fully paid the price toacquire title over the property and the right to retainpossession thereof. In cases of non-payment, theunpaid seller can avail of the remedy of ejectmentsince he retains ownership of the property.

Respondent avers that since ejectment cases aredecided merely on the basis of affidavits andposition papers, his affidavit before the MeTCsufficiently proves his full payment of the purchaseprice. Nothing could be more erroneous becauseeven though ejectment cases are governed by theRules on Summary Procedure, there is still need topresent substantial evidence to supportrespondent’s claim of full payment. Section 9 of theRules on Summary Procedure provides that partiesshall submit, together with their position papers,the affidavits of their witnesses and other evidenceon the factual issues defined. His lone affidavit isself-serving, and cannot be considered assubstantial evidence. As a general rule, one whopleads payment has the burden of proving it. Evenwhere the petitioner alleged non-payment, thegeneral rule is that the burden rests on therespondent to prove payment, rather than on thepetitioner to prove non-payment.

(Quisumbing, J., Keppel Bank Philippines, Inc., v.Philip Adao, G.R. No. 158227, October 19, 2005)

CRIMINAL LAW

Conspiracy

Conspiracy need not be proven by direct evidenceof prior agreement to commit the crime. Neither isit necessary to show all the conspirators actuallyhit and killed the victim. What has to be shown isthat all the participants performed specific acts withsuch closeness and coordination as to unmistakablyindicate a common purpose and design.

(Azcuna, J., People of the Philippines v. Juanito P.Quirol and Mario P. Quirol, G.R. No. 149259,October 20, 2005)

REMEDIAL LAW

Petitions for review under Rule 45

In petitions for review or appeal under Rule 45 ofthe Rules of Court, the appellate tribunal is limitedto the determination of whether the lower courtcommitted reversible errors. The “errors” whichare reviewable by this Court in a petition for reviewon certiorari from a decision of the Court of Appealsare only those allegedly committed by said court.It is the burden of the party seeking review of adecision of the Court of Appeals or other lowertribunals to distinctly set forth in her petition forreview, not only the existence of questions of lawfairly and logically arising therefrom, but alsoquestions substantial enough to meritconsideration, or show that there are special andimportant reasons warranting the review that sheseeks. If these are not shown prima facie in herpetition, this Court will be justified in summarilyspurning the petition as lacking in merit.

Here, petitioner ignores the dismissal of herpetition by the Court of Appeals on technicalgrounds and raises instead issues unrelated toreasons for the dismissal of her appeal by the Courtof Appeals. Petitioner had not alleged any error inthe Court of Appeals’ resolution that seeks tocorrect, except for the ruling that the Civil ServiceCommission should be impleaded as respondent.Hence, these deficiencies are sufficient grounds todeny this petition outright.

(Quisumbing, J., Grace A. Basmayor v. Loida B.Atencio, G.R. No. 160573, October 19, 2005)

Writ of preliminary attachment; who canchallenge the attachment writ and bond

A stranger to an action where property in whichhe claims to have a right is attached must resort tothe remedies available under the Rules of Court.The only exception to this rule is when the sheriffmistakenly levies on properties in which thedefendant has no interest. In such an event, asummary hearing is held upon application todetermine if he has taken hold of property notbelonging to the judgment debtor. In this case,however, the ownership of the vessels attached wasnever disputed. Petitioner must therefore followthe prescribed procedure for vindicating his claimon the vessels rather than attempt to erroneouslyshort-circuit the rules.

PHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinPHILJA BulletinDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERSDOCTRINAL REMINDERS12

REMEDIAL LAW (continued)

Section 14, Rule 57 of the 1997 Rules of CivilProcedure categorically provides specific remediesto one claiming a right to property attached in asuit in which the claimant is not a party.

(Corona J., Bernardito A. Florido v. ShembergMarketing Corporation, G.R. No. 146400, October25, 2005)

Evidence; conflicting testimonies of handwritingexperts may be completely disregarded by thecourts

Indeed, courts are not bound by expert testimonies.They may place whatever weight they choose uponsuch testimonies in accordance with the facts ofthe case. The relative weight and sufficiency ofexpert testimony is peculiarly within the provinceof the trial court to decide, considering the abilityand character of the witness, his actions upon thewitness stand, the weight and process of thereasoning by which he has supported his opinion,his possible bias in favor of the side for whom hetestifies, and any other matters which serve toilluminate his statements. The opinion of an expertshould be considered by the court in view of allthe facts and circumstances of the case. The problemof the evaluation of expert testimony is left to thediscretion of the trial court whose rulingthereupon is not reviewable in the absence of anabuse of that discretion.

(Tinga, J., Milagros Ilao-Quianay and Sergio Ilao,as Joint Administrator of the Intestate Estate ofSimplicio Ilao, and Ambrosia Ilao v. Rodolfo Mapile,G.R. No. 154087, October 25, 2005)

Writ of Preliminary Injunction

We held in Los Baños Rural Bank, Inc. v. Africa thatinjunction is a preservative remedy aimed to protectthe complainant’s substantive rights and interestsduring the pendency of the principal action. Apreliminary injunction is merely temporary. It isto be resorted to only when there is a pressingnecessity to avoid injurious consequences thatcannot be remedied under any standard ofcompensation. Injunction, like other equitableremedies, should be issued only at the instance ofa suitor who has sufficient interest in or title tothe right or the property sought to be protected.It is proper only when the plaintiff appears to be

entitled to the relief demanded in the complaint.The existence of the right and the violation thereofmust be alleged in the complaint and mustconstitute at least a prima facie showing of a rightto the final relief. Thus, there are two (2) requisiteconditions for the issuance of a preliminaryinjunction, namely, (1) the right to be protectedexists prima facie, and (2) the acts sought to beenjoined are violative of that right. It must beproven that the violation sought to be preventedwould cause an irreparable injustice.

Further, while a clear showing of the right isnecessary, its existence need not be conclusivelyestablished. In fact, the evidence required to justifythe issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction inthe hearing thereon need not be conclusive orcomplete. The evidence need only be a “sampling”intended to give the court an idea of the justificationfor the preliminary injunction, pending judgmenton the merits. Thus, to be entitled to the writ,respondents are only required to show that theyhave the ostensible right to the final relief prayedfor in their complaint.

In the case at bar, we find that TRACKWORKSsufficiently established a right to be protected by awrit of preliminary injunction. The contract withthe MRTC vested it the exclusive right to undertakeadvertising and promotional activities at the MRT3 structure. The Court of Appeals thereforecorrectly ruled that what is involved here is notan indiscriminate posting and installation ofcommercial advertisements but one sanctioned bya contract. If not restrained, the dismantling of,and prohibition from, installing advertisements atthe MRT 3 will cause irreparable injury toTRACKWORKS. This is especially so becauseTRACKWORKS is generally not entitled to recoverdamages resulting from acts of public officers donein their official capacity and in the honest beliefthat they have such power. Unless bad faith isclearly proven, TRACKWORKS will be left withoutrecourse even if petitioner is later declared withoutauthority to prohibit the posting of billboards andstreamers at the MRT 3 structure. Indeed, prudencedictates that the status quo be preserved until themerits of the case can be heard fully.

(Ynares-Santiago, J., Metropolitan ManilaDevelopment Authority v. Trackworks Rail TransitAdvertising, Vending and Promotions, Inc., G.R.No. 167514, October 25, 2005)

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005 13

SUPREME COURT

RESOLUTION of the COURT EN BANC, dated 11October 2005, on A.M. No. 05-9-03-SC

RE: REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION ONWHETHER DRUG COURTS SHOULD BEINCLUDED IN THE REGULAR RAFFLE

May special courts for drug cases be included in theraffle of civil and criminal cases other than drug relatedcases?

This is the subject of several queries received bythe Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) speciallyfrom members of the Bench who preside over courtsdesignated as special courts for drug cases.1 The OCAobserved, that conflicts of opinion on the matter arestraining relations among some judges.

The OCA is of the opinion that Section 90 of R.A.No. 9165, otherwise known as “The ComprehensiveDrugs Act of 2002,” allows drug courts to takecognizance of non-drug cases.2 However, the Courthas a policy exempting the special courts from theraffle of non-drug related cases. On this basis, the OCArecommends that special courts for drug cases shouldcontinue to be exempted from the raffle of non-druguntil further orders from this Court.3

The Court agrees with the interpretation andrecommendation of the OCA.

Section 90 of R.A. No. 9165 provides:

SEC. 90. Jurisdiction. — The Supreme Courtshall designate special courts from among theexisting Regional Trial Courts in each judicialregion to exclusively try and hear cases involvingviolations of this Act. The number of courtsdesignated in each judicial region shall be basedon the population and the number of casespending in their respective jurisdiction.

The DOJ shall designate special prosecutorsto exclusively handle cases involving violationsof this Act.

xxx xxx xxx

Trial of the case under this Section shall befinished by the court not later than sixty (60)days from the date of the filing of the information.Decision on said cases shall be rendered withina period of fifteen (15) days from the date ofsubmission of the case for resolution. (emphasissupplied)

The phrase “to exclusively try and hear casesinvolving violations of this Act” means that, as a rule,courts designated as special courts for drug cases shalltry and hear drug-related cases only, i.e., casesinvolving violations of R.A. No. 9165, to the exclusionof other courts.

The very title of Article XI of R.A. No. 9165, thearticle where Section 90 is included, reads: “JurisdictionOver Drug Cases.” It provides for the forum wheredrug cases are to be filed, tried and resolved: RegionalTrial Courts (RTCs) designated by this Court as specialdrug courts. The jurisdiction of the designated courtsis exclusive of all other courts not sc designated.

In our resolution in A.M. No. 00-8-01-SC on August1, 2000, certain branches of the RTCs were designatedas special courts for drug cases. They were tasked tohear and decide all criminal cases in their respectivejurisdictions involving violations of R.A. No. 6435, otherwise known as the “Dangerous Drugs Act of1972,” as amended,4 regardless of the quantity of drugsinvolved. Among the guidelines issued to implementsuch designation was a directive to Executive Judgesof the RTCs concerned to exclude the designated courtsfrom the raffle of other cases subsequent to theassignment or transfer of drug cases to them.

Even after the passage of R.A. No. 9165, thedesignated courts under A.M. No. 00-8-01-SC remainedas special courts for drug cases. The resolution is stillin effect insofar as it is not inconsistent with the newlaw. The fact that A.M. No. 00-8-01-SC has not beenabandoned is evident in resolutions subsequentlyissued by the Court adding or replacing drug courtsin different jurisdictions.5 These resolutions expresslystate that the guidelines set forth in A.M. No. 00-8-01-SC should be observed, if applicable.

The rationale behind the exclusion of drug courtsfrom the raffle of cases other than drug cases is toexpeditiously resolve criminal cases involvingviolations of R.A. No. 9165 (previously, of R.A. No.6435). Otherwise, these courts may be sidelined fromhearing drug cases by the assignment of non-drugcases to them and the purpose of their designation asspecial courts would be negated. The faithfulobservance of the stringent time frame imposed ondrug courts for deciding drug related cases andterminating proceedings calls for the continuedimplementation of the policy enunciated in A.M. No.00-8-01-SC.

1 These specially designated courts for drug cases are also known as “drug courts.”2 August 23, 2005 Memorandum of the OCA.3 Id.

4 This law was repealed by R.A. No. 9165.5 See June 17, 2003 Resolution in AM No. 03-4-23S-RTC: Re: Designation of Additional Special Courts for DrugsCases

and Family Courts in Makati City.


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

A.M. NO. 05-8-26-SC (continued)

The Court is mindful of a relevant provision inthe 2002 Revised Manual for Clerks of Court inconnection with the assignment and raffling of cases. It mandates Executive Judges of RTCs to excludedesignated special courts from the raffle of other cases,criminal and civil, whenever in their judgment thecaseload of these courts prevents them fromconducting a daily trial of drug cases. However, itshould not be interpreted as a blanket, albeit implied,authority for Executive Judges to include drug courtsin the raffle of non-drug related cases. Should theydeem that the load of drug courts can accommodatenon-drug related cases, or if it becomes necessary toinclude drug courts in the regular raffle to decongestthe caseload of other branches, Executive Judgesconcerned should first make the correspondingrecommendation to this Court.

WHEREFORE, Executive Judges and presidingjudges of special courts for drug cases shall herebyobserve the following guidelines:

1. Pursuant to Section 90 of R.A. No. 9165, onlycourts designated by this Court as special courts fordrug cases can take cognizance of violations of R.A.No. 9165.

2. Drug courts shall strictly adhere to the periodsimposed on them under Section 90 of R.A. No. 9165.Trial of all drug cases assigned to them shall beterminated within sixty (60) days from the date offiling of the information. Decisions on these cases shallbe rendered within fifteen(15) days from the date ofsubmission of the case for resolution.

3. While special courts for drug cases are notprohibited from hearing non-drug related cases,Executive Judges shall continue to exempt them fromthe regular raffle, i.e., from the raffle of cases which donot involve violations of R.A. No. 9165, until furtherorders from this Court.

4. If, in the opinion of Executive Judges, thecaseload of certain drug courts allows their inclusionin the regular raffle without adversely affecting theirability to expeditiously resolve the drug casesassigned to them and their inclusion in the regularraffle becomes necessary to decongest the caseload ofother branches, the concerned Executive Judges shallrecommend to this Court the inclusion of drug courtsin their jurisdiction in the regular raffle. The concerneddrug courts shall remain exempt from the regularraffle until the recommendation is approved.

5. The guidelines provided under A.M. No. 00-8-01-SC shall continue to remain in force and effectinsofar as they are not inconsistent with thisresolution.

Let copies of this resolution be furnished the Officeof the Court Administrator, the Office of the Clerk ofCourt of the Supreme Court, the Judicial and BarCouncil, the Philippine Judicial Academy, theSecretary of Justice, the Office of the Solicitor General,the Presidents of the Philippine Judges Association,Philippine Trial Judges League, Inc. and Metro and CityJudges Association of the Philippines, the IntegratedBar of the Philippines and other entities concerned.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA Clerk of Court

RESOLUTION of the COURT EN BANC, dated 15November 2005, on A.M. No. 05-11-04-SC

RE: RULE OF PROCEDURE IN CASES OF CIVILFORFEITURE, ASSET PRESERVATION, ANDFREEZING OF MONETARY INSTRUMENT,PROPERTY, OR PROCEEDS REPRESENTING,INVOLVING, OR RELATING TO ANUNLAWFUL ACTIVITY OR MONEYLAUNDERING OFFENSE UNDER REPUBLICACT NO. 9160, AS AMENDED

Acting on the letter of the Chairman of the Committeeon Revision of the Rules of Court submitting for thisCourt’s consideration and approval the Proposed Ruleof Procedure in Cases of Civil Forfeiture, AssetPreservation, and Freezing of Monetary Instrument,Property, or Proceeds Representing, Involving, orRelating to an Unlawful Activity or Money LaunderingOffense under Republic Act No. 9160, as Amended, theCourt Resolved to APPROVE the same.

The Rule shall take effect on the fifteenth ofDecember 2005 following its publication in anewspaper of general circulation in the Philippinesnot later than 20 November 2005.

15 November 2005.

DAVIDE, JR., CJ, PUNO, PANGANIBAN, QUISUMBING,YNARES-SANTIAGO, CARPIO, AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ,CORONA, CARPIO-MORALES, CALLEJO, SR.,AZCUNA, TINGA, GARCIA, JJ. concur.

SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, and CHICO-NAZARIO,JJ., onleave.



RULE OF PROCEDURE IN CASES OF CIVILFORFEITURE, ASSET PRESERVATION, ANDFREEZING OF MONETARY INSTRUMENT,

PROPERTY, OR PROCEEDS REPRESENTING,INVOLVING, OR RELATING TO AN UNLAWFULACTIVITY OR MONEY LAUNDERING OFFENSEUNDER REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9160, AS AMENDED

TITLE IAPPLICABILITY

SECTION 1. Applicability.-The Rule shall govern allproceedings for civil forfeiture, asset preservation andfreezing of monetary instrument, property, orproceeds representing, involving, or relating to anunlawful activity or a money laundering offense underRepublic Act No. 9160, as amended.

The Revised Rules of Court shall applysuppletorily when not inconsistent with theprovisions of this special Rule.

TITLE IICIVIL FORFEITURE IN THEREGIONAL TRIAL COURT

SEC. 2. Party to institute proceedings.-The Republicof the Philippines, through the Anti-MoneyLaundering Council, represented by the Office of theSolicitor General, may institute actions for civilforfeiture and all other remedial proceedings in favorof the State of any monetary instrument, property, orproceeds representing, involving, or relating to anunlawful activity or a money laundering offense.

SEC. 3. Venue of cases cognizable by the regional trialcourt.-A petition for civil forfeiture shall be filed in anyregional trial court of the judicial region where themonetary instrument, property, or proceedsrepresenting, involving, or relating to an unlawfulactivity or to a money laundering offense are located;provided, however, that where all or any portion of themonetary instrument, property, or proceeds is locatedoutside the Philippines, the petition may be filed inthe regional trial court in Manila or of the judicialregion where any portion of the monetary instrument,property, or proceeds is located, at the option of thepetitioner.

SEC. 4. Contents of the petition for civil forfeiture.-Thepetition for civil forfeiture shall be verified andcontain the following allegations:

(a) The name and address of the respondent;

(b) A description with reasonable particularityof the monetary instrument, property, orproceeds, and their location; and

(c) The acts or omissions prohibited by and thespecific provisions of the Anti-Money

Laundering Act, as amended, which arealleged to be the grounds relied upon for theforfeiture of the monetary instrument,property, or proceeds; and the reliefs prayedfor.

SEC. 5. Direct filing; action on the petition.-The petitionshall be filed directly with the executive judge of theregional trial court or, in his absence, the vice-executivejudge or, in their absence, any judge of the regionaltrial court of the same station. He shall act on thepetition within twenty-four (24) hours after its filing.

SEC. 6. Separate logbook.-The executive judge of theregional trial court shall enter the petition in a logbookspecifically designed for the purpose and assign it adocket number. He shall designate a member of hisstaff to keep the logbook under his custody andresponsibility.

SEC. 7. Confidentiality; prohibited disclosure.-Thelogbook and the entries therein shall be kept strictlyconfidential and maintained under the responsibilityof the executive judge. No person, including courtpersonnel, shall disclose, divulge or communicate toanyone directly or indirectly, in any manner or byany means, the fact of the filing of the petition for anasset preservation order, its contents and its entry inthe logbook except to those authorized by the court.Violation shall constitute contempt of court.

SEC. 8. Notice and manner of service.-

(a) The respondent shall be given notice of thepetition in the same manner as service of summonsunder Rule 14 of the Rules of Court and the followingrules:

(1) The notice shall be served on respondentpersonally, or by any other meansprescribed in Rule 14 of the Rules of Court;

(2) The notice shall contain: (i) the title of thecase; (ii) the docket number; (iii) the cause ofaction; and (iv) the relief prayed for; and

(3) The notice shall likewise contain a provisothat, if no comment or opposition is filedwithin the reglementary period, the courtshall hear the case ex parte and render suchjudgment as may be warranted by the factsalleged in the petition and its supportingevidence.

(b) Where the respondent is designated as anunknown owner or whenever his whereabouts areunknown and cannot be ascertained by diligentinquiry, service may, by leave of court, be effected uponhim by publication of the notice of the petition in a



newspaper of general circulation in such places andfor such time as the court may order. In the event thatthe cost of publication exceeds the value or amount ofthe property to be forfeited by ten percent, publicationshall not be required.

SEC. 9. Comment or opposition.-The respondent shallfile a verified comment or opposition, not a motion todismiss the petition, within fifteen days from serviceof notice or within thirty days from the publicationin case service of notice was by publication.

The comment or opposition shall (a) state whetherrespondent admits the allegations of the petition; (b)specify such inaccuracies or falsities in petitioner’sstatement of facts; and (c) state clearly and conciselythe respondent’s defense in law and the specific andpertinent provisions of the law and their applicabilityto respondent.

SEC. 10. Effect of failure to file comment or opposition.-If no comment or opposition is filed within thereglementary period, the court shall hear the case exparte and render such judgment as may be warrantedby the facts alleged in the petition and its supportingevidence.

TITLE IIIASSET PRESERVATION ORDER: EX PARTE

ISSUANCE, SUMMARY HEARING, SERVICE,RETURN AND GROUNDS FOR DISCHARGE

RAISED IN MOTION, COMMENT OR OPPOSITION

SEC. 11. Ex parte issuance of provisional assetpreservation order.-Where the executive judge of theregional trial court or, in his absence, the vice-executive judge or, in their absence, any judge of theregional trial court available in the same station, hasdetermined that probable cause exists on the basis ofallegations of a verified petition sufficient in form andsubstance, with a prayer for the issuance of an assetpreservation order, that the monetary instrument,property, or proceeds subject of the petition are inany way related to an unlawful activity as defined inSection 3(i) of Republic Act No. 9160, as amended byRepublic Act No. 9194, the court may issue ex parte aprovisional asset preservation order effectiveimmediately forbidding any transaction, withdrawal,deposit, transfer, removal, conversion, concealmentor other disposition of the subject monetaryinstrument, property, or proceeds. Such order shallbe effective for a period of twenty (20) days from therespective dates of service to respondent or any personacting in his behalf, and upon each covered institutionor government agency in accordance with Section 14of this Rule.

SEC. 12. Summary hearing.-The court shall schedulea hearing at a date and time within the twenty-day

period at which the respondent may for good causeshow why the provisional asset preservation ordershould be lifted. The court shall determine within thesame period whether the provisional assetpreservation order should be modified or lifted or anasset preservation order should issue and actaccordingly.

SEC. 13. Issuance, form and content of asset preservationorder.-The asset preservation order issued underSection 11 or 12 shall:

(a) issue in the name of the Republic of thePhilippines represented by the Anti-MoneyLaundering Council;

(b) state the name of the court, the case numberand title, and the subject order; and

(c) require the sheriff or other proper officer towhom it is directed to serve a copy of theorder upon the respondent or any personacting in his behalf and upon the coveredinstitution or government agency.

SEC. 14. Service and enforcement of asset preservationorder.-The asset preservation order shall be servedpersonally by the sheriff or other proper officerdesignated by the court in the manner provided inSections 8, 19 and 20. If personal service is notpracticable, the order shall be served in any othermanner which the court may deem expedient.

When authorized by the court, service may beeffected upon the respondent or any person acting inhis behalf and upon the treasurer or other responsibleofficer of the covered institution or the head of thecovered government agency, by facsimiletransmission (fax) or electronic mail (e-mail). In suchcases, the date of transmission shall be deemed to beprima facie the date of service.

The asset preservation order shall be enforceableanywhere in the Philippines.

SEC. 15. Duties of covered institution and governmentagencies upon receipt of asset preservation order.-Upon receiptof notice of an asset preservation order, the coveredinstitution or government agency shall immediatelypreserve the subject monetary instrument, property,or proceeds in accordance with the order of the courtand shall forthwith furnish a copy of the notice of theasset preservation order upon the owner or holder ofthe subject monetary instrument, property, orproceeds.

SEC. 16. Returns of the sheriff, covered institution orgovernment agency.-Within twenty-four (24) hours fromreceipt of an asset preservation order, the sheriff whoserved the order and the covered institution or



government agency shall submit by personal deliveryto the regional trial court which issued the order adetailed written return specifying all the relevantinformation which shall include the following:

(a) For covered institutions: The accountnumbers for financial accounts ordescription of the monetary instrument,property, or proceeds involved;

(b) For covered government agencies:

(1) Certificates of title numbers ofregistered real property and thevolumes and pages of the registrationbooks of the Register of Deeds where thesame are registered;

(2) Registration in the Primary Entry Bookand corresponding Registration Book inthe Register of Deeds for unregisteredreal property;

(3) Registration with the Register of Deedsof the enabling or master deed for acondominium project, declaration ofrestrictions relating to suchcondominium project, certificate of titleconveying a condominium and noticeof assessment upon any condominium;

(4) Tax declarations for improvementsbuilt on land owned by a different party,together with the annotation of thecontract of lease on the title of the ownerof the land as registered in the Registerof Deeds;

(5) Certificates of registration for motorvehicles and heavy equipmentindicating the engine numbers, chassisnumbers and plate numbers;

(6) Certificates of numbers for seacraft;

(7) Registration certificates for aircraft; or

(8) Commercial invoices or notarialidentification for personal propertycapable of manual delivery;

whichever are applicable;

(c) The names of the account holders, personalproperty owners or possessors, or realproperty owners or occupants;

(d) The peso value of the monetary instrument,property, or proceeds as of the time the assetswere ordered seized and preserved;

(e) All relevant information as to the nature ofthe monetary instrument, property, or

proceeds; and

(f) The date and time when the assetpreservation order was served.

SEC. 17. Grounds for discharge of asset preservation order.-The respondent or the party, whose personal or realproperty has been preserved pursuant to an assetpreservation order, may raise in a motion or in thecomment or opposition the grounds for its discharge.

For this purpose, the motion, comment oropposition shall:

(a) Identify the specific property sought to bedischarged;

(b) State the respondent’s interest in suchproperty; and

(c) Be subscribed under oath.

The following grounds for the discharge of theasset preservation order may be raised:

(a) The order was improperly or irregularlyissued or enforced;

(b) Any of the material allegations in thepetition, or any of the contents of anyattachment to the petition thereto, or itsverification, is false; and

(c) The specific personal or real propertyordered preserved is not in any mannerconnected with the alleged unlawfulactivity as defined in Section 3(i) of RepublicAct No. 9160, as amended by Republic ActNo. 9194.

No counterbond to discharge the assetpreservation order shall be allowed except forcompelling reasons.

TITLE IV

ASSETS SUBJECT TO PRESERVATION ORDER,GUIDELINES IN SERVING ASSET PRESERVATION

ORDER, AND RECEIVERSHIP

SEC. 18. Assets subject to preservation order.-

(a) Monetary instrument.-The term “monetaryinstrument” includes:

(1) Coins or currency of legal tender of thePhilippines or of any other country;

(2) Credit instruments, including bankdeposits, financial interest, royalties,commissions and other intangible personalproperty;

(3) Drafts, checks and notes;




(4) Stocks or shares, or an interest therein, ofany corporation or company;

(5) An interest in any corporation, partnership,joint venture or any other similarassociation or organization for profit orotherwise;

(6) Securities or negotiable instruments, bonds,commercial papers, deposit certificates,trust certificates, custodial receipts ordeposit substitute instruments, tradingorders, transaction tickets andconfirmations of sale or investments andmoney market instruments;

(7) Contracts or policies of insurance, life ornon-life, and contracts of suretyship; and

(8) Other similar instruments where titlethereto passes to another by assignment,endorsement or delivery;

(b) Property.-The term “property” refers to:

(1) Personal property, including proceedsderived therefrom, traceable to anyunlawful activity as defined in Section 3(i)of Republic Act No. 9160, as amended byRepublic Act No. 9194, includes but is notlimited to:

(i) Cash;

(ii) Jewelry, precious metals, and othersimilar items;

(iii) Works of art such as paintings,sculptures, antiques, treasures andother similar precious objects;

(iv) Perishable goods; and

(v) Vehicles, vessels or aircraft, or any othersimilar conveyance.

(2) Personal property, used asinstrumentalities in the commission of anyunlawful activity defined in Section 3(i) ofRepublic Act No. 9160, as amended byRepublic Act No. 9194, such as:

(i) Computers, servers and other electronicinformation and communicationsystems; and

(ii) Any conveyance, including any vehicle,vessel and aircraft.

(3) Real estate, improvements constructed orcrops growing thereon, or any interesttherein, standing upon the record of theregistry of deeds of the province in the nameof the party against whom the asset

preservation order is issued, or notappearing at all upon such records, orbelonging to the party against whom theasset preservation order is issued and heldby any other person, or standing on therecords of the registry of deeds in the nameof any other person, which are:

(i) Derived from, or traceable to, anyunlawful activity defined in Section 3(i)of Republic Act No. 9160, as amendedby Republic Act No. 9194; or

(ii) Used as an instrumentality in thecommission of any unlawful activity asdefined in Section 3(i) of Republic ActNo. 9160, as amended by Republic ActNo. 9194.

(c) Proceeds.-The term “proceeds” refers to anamount derived or realized from an unlawful activity,which includes, but is not limited to:

(1) All material results, profits, effects and anyamount realized from any unlawful activity;

(2) All monetary, financial or economic means,devices, documents, papers or things usedin or having any relation to any unlawfulactivity; and

(3) All moneys, expenditures, payments,disbursements, costs, outlays, charges,accounts, refunds and other similar itemsfor the financing, operations andmaintenance of any unlawful activity.

SEC. 19. Guidelines in serving asset preservation order on perishable property.-When perishable property ispreserved, and the same is liable to deteriorate invalue and price by reason of delay in its dispositionor is disproportionately expensive to keep, thefollowing guidelines are to be strictly followed:

(a) The petitioner may file a verified motionpraying for the sale at public auction of saidperishable property setting forth all the factsshowing such sale to be necessary;

(b) If the court grants the motion, the sale shallbe conducted in the same manner asproperty sold under execution as providedin the Rules of Court:

(1) Written notice must be given, before thesale, by posting of the time and place ofthe sale in three public places,preferably in conspicuous areas of themunicipal or city hall, post office andpublic market in the municipality orcity where the perishable property is



located and where the sale is to takeplace, for such time as may bereasonable, considering the characterand condition of the property; and

(2) The proceeds shall be deposited withthe Clerk of Court to be disposed ofaccording to the final judgment of thecourt.

SEC. 20. Guidelines in serving asset preservation orderon real estate property.-When real estate property isordered preserved, the following guidelines are to bestrictly followed:

(a) Real property shall not be physically seizedbefore a final order of forfeiture;

(b) The owners, if known, and occupants of thereal property shall not be evicted from, orotherwise deprived of the use andenjoyment of, real property that is thesubject of a pending forfeiture action;

(c) Notice of the asset preservation order shallbe served in accordance with Section 14 ofthis Rule on the owners, if known, andoccupants of the real property along with acopy of the petition; and

(d) The sheriff shall also post in a conspicuousplace on the real property a copy of the assetpreservation order.

SEC. 21. Designation of receiver.-Upon verifiedmotion, the court may order any person in control orpossession of the monetary instrument, property, orproceeds to turn over the same to a receiver appointedby the court under such terms and conditions as thecourt may deem proper in the following instances:

(a) When it appears that the party applyingfor the appointment of a receiver has aninterest in the property or fund and thatsuch property or fund is in danger of beinglost, removed or materially injured;

(b) When it appears that the property is indanger of being wasted or dissipated ormaterially injured;

(c) After judgment, to preserve the propertyduring the pendency of an appeal, or todispose of it according to the judgment orto aid execution when the execution hasbeen returned unsatisfied or the judgmentobligor refuses to apply his property insatisfaction of the judgment, or otherwiseto carry the judgment into effect; and

(d) Whenever in other cases it appears that the

appointment of a receiver is the mostconvenient and feasible means ofadministering or disposing of the propertyin litigation.

TITLE VPRE-TRIAL

SEC. 22. Pre-trial.-

(a) Pre-trial mandatory.-Pre-trial is mandatory. If acomment or an opposition is filed, the court shallforthwith send notice of pre-trial conference to theparties.

(b) Purpose.-The court shall consider:

(1) The possibility of obtaining stipulationsor admissions of facts and of documentsto avoid unnecessary proof;

(2) The simplification of the issues;

(3) The necessity or desirability ofamendments to the pleadings;

(4) The limitation of the number ofwitnesses;

(5) The advisability of a preliminaryreference of issues to a commissioner;

(6) The propriety of rendering judgment onthe pleadings, or summary judgment,or of dismissing the action should avalid ground therefor be found to exist;and

(7) Such other matters as may aid in theprompt disposition of the action.

(c) Notice of pre-trial conference.-The notice of pre-trial conference shall contain:

(1) The date of the pre-trial conference whichshall be set within thirty(30) days from thedate of receipt by the court of the commentor opposition; and

(2) An order directing the parties to file andserve their respective pre-trial briefs. Theparties shall ensure the receipt of the pre-trial brief by the adverse party at least three(3) days before the date of pre-trial.

(d) Separate service of notice; appearances.-The noticeshall be served separately on the parties and theirrespective counsel, both of whom shall appearpersonally at the pre-trial conference. It shall be theduty of the counsel to inform his client of the pre-trialconference. The failure of a party to appear may beexcused only if a valid cause is shown therefor or if a




representative shall appear in his behalf, fullyauthorized in writing to enter into stipulations oradmissions of facts and of documents.

SEC. 23. Contents of the pre-trial brief.-The pre-trialbrief shall contain the following:

(a) A full and complete statement of therespective claims of the parties with acitation of the applicable laws andauthorities;

(b) A statement of the admitted facts andproposed stipulations of facts, as well as thedisputed factual and legal issues;

(c) Copies of the documents or exhibits to bepresented, stating their purpose;

(d) The names and number of witnesses, andthe substance of their respective testimony;and

(e) Such other matters as may aid in the promptdisposition of the case.

Failure of a party to file a pre-trial brief or tocomply with its required contents shall have the sameeffect as failure to appear at the pre-trial conference.

SEC. 24. Effect of failure to appear at the pre-trialconference.-Failure of the petitioner or counsel to appearat the pre-trial conference shall be cause for dismissalof the petition. The dismissal shall be with prejudice,unless otherwise ordered by the court. A similarfailure on the part of the respondent or counsel shallbe cause to allow the petitioner to present its evidenceex parte and the court to render judgment on the basisthereof.

SEC. 25. Pre-trial order.-

(a) Upon termination of the pre-trial conference,the court shall issue a pre-trial order which shall recitein detail the matters taken up, the actions thereon, theamendments allowed on the pleadings, the agreementsor admissions made by the parties on any of thematters considered, including any provisional orderthat may be necessary or agreed to by the parties.

(b) In case the court determines the need forfurther hearing, the pre-trial order shall contain arecital of the following:

(1) Facts admitted or undisputed;

(2) Facts disputed;

(3) Factual and legal issues to be resolved;

(4) Evidence, including objects and documents,that have been marked and are to bepresented;

(5) The witnesses to be presented and thesubstance of their respective testimony;

(6) Schedule of the presentation of evidence byboth parties which shall be as expeditiousas possible; and

(7) Such other matters as may aid in the promptdisposition of the case.

(c) The parties shall not be allowed to raise issuesor present witnesses and evidence other than thosestated in the pre-trial order. The order shall controlthe trial of the case, unless modified by the court toprevent manifest injustice.

(d) The parties shall have ten (10) days fromreceipt of the pre-trial order to propose corrections ormodifications.

SEC. 26. Prohibited procedures.-The rules on amicablesettlement, mediation and other alternative mode ofdispute resolution shall not apply.

TITLE VITRIAL, JUDGMENT AND REVIEW

SEC. 27. No prior charge, pendency or convictionnecessary.-No prior criminal charge, pendency of orconviction for an unlawful activity or moneylaundering offense is necessary for the commencementor the resolution of a petition for civil forfeiture.

SEC. 28. Precedence of proceedings.-Any criminal caserelating to an unlawful activity shall be givenprecedence over the prosecution of any offense orviolation under Republic Act No. 9160, as amended,without prejudice to the filing of a separate petitionfor civil forfeiture or the issuance of an assetpreservation order or a freeze order. Such civil actionshall proceed independently of the criminalprosecution.

SEC. 29. Trial.-The trial shall proceed in accordancewith the applicable provisions of Rule 30 of the Rulesof Court.

SEC. 30. Business records as exception to the hearsayrule.-A memorandum, report, record or datacompilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions ordiagnoses, made by electronic, optical or other similarmeans at or near the time of or from transmission orsupply of information by a person with knowledge,as a regular practice, and kept in the normal course ofconduct of a business activity, as shown by thetestimony of the custodian or other qualified witness,is excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence.

SEC. 31. Factors to determine where lies preponderance ofevidence.-In rendering judgment, the court mayconsider the following factors to determine where lies



the preponderance of evidence:

(a) That the monetary instrument, property, orproceeds are represented, involved, orrelated to an unlawful activity or a moneylaundering offense:

(1) If the value or amount involved is notcommensurate with the business,financial or earning capacity of theperson;

(2) If any transaction indicates a cleardeviation from the profile or previoustransactions of the person;

(3) If a person opens, maintains or controlsan account with a covered institutionnot in his own name or registeredbusiness name unless authorized under existing law;

(4) If a person has structured transactionsin order to avoid being the subject ofreporting requirements under Republic Act No. 9160, as amended; or

(5) If any transaction exists that has noapparent underlying legal or tradeobligation, purpose or economicjustification;

or

(b) That the monetary instrument, property, orproceeds, the sources of which originatedfrom or are materially linked to monetaryinstruments, properties, or proceeds usedin the commission of an unlawful activityor money laundering offense, are related tothe said unlawful activity or moneylaundering offense.

SEC. 32. Judgment.-The court shall render judgmentwithin thirty (30) days from submission of the casefor resolution. It shall grant the petition if there ispreponderance of evidence in favor of the petitionerand declare the monetary instrument, property, orproceeds forfeited to the State or, in appropriate cases,order the respondent to pay an amount equal to thevalue of the monetary instrument or property andadjudge such other reliefs as may be warranted.

SEC. 33. Service and enforcement of judgment.-Acertified copy of the judgment issued shall be servedupon the parties or persons acting in their behalf andupon the covered institution or government agencyas the court may direct.

SEC. 34. Appeal.-

(a) Notice and period of appeal.-An aggrieved party

may appeal the judgment to the Court of Appeals byfiling within fifteen days from its receipt a notice ofappeal with the court which rendered the judgmentand serving a copy upon the adverse party.

(b) Procedure on appeal.-The parties shall file, in lieuof briefs, their respective memoranda within a non-extendible period of thirty days from receipt of thenotice issued by the clerk of court to the parties thatall the evidence, oral and documentary, are attachedto the record.

The failure of the appellant to file hismemorandum within the period therefor may be aground for dismissal of the appeal.

TITLE VIICLAIMS AGAINST FORFEITED ASSETS

SEC. 35. Notice to file claims.-Where the court hasissued an order of forfeiture of the monetaryinstrument or property in a civil forfeiture petitionfor any money laundering offense defined underSection 4 of Republic Act No. 9160, as amended, anyperson who has not been impleaded nor intervenedclaiming an interest therein may apply, by verifiedpetition, for a declaration that the same legitimatelybelongs to him and for segregation or exclusion of themonetary instrument or property correspondingthereto. The verified petition shall be filed with thecourt which rendered the order of forfeiture withinfifteen days from the date of finality of the order offorfeiture, in default of which the said order shall beexecutory and bar all other claims.

SEC. 36. How to file a claim; contents.-In his petition,the claimant must state the complete facts, attach theaffidavits of his witnesses, supporting documents andother evidence, and personally verify the claim. Theclaimant shall file the petition with the clerk of court,pay the docket and other lawful fees and submit proofof service of a copy of the claim upon the petitioner.

SEC. 37. Effect of non-compliance with requirements.-The court may dismiss the claim outright if it is notsufficient in form and substance and is manifestly filedfor delay. Otherwise, it shall issue a notice to thepetitioner to file its comment on the claim.

SEC. 38. Notice to file comment.-Within fifteen (15)days after notice, petitioner shall file a commentadmitting or denying the claim specifically, and settingforth the substance of the matters which are reliedupon to support the admission or denial. If thepetitioner has no knowledge sufficient to enable it toadmit or deny specifically, it shall state such want ofknowledge. The petitioner in its comment shall allege




in offset any fees, charges, taxes and expenses due toit. A copy of the comment shall be served on theclaimant.

SEC. 39. Disposition of admitted or uncontested claim.-The court may, without hearing, issue an appropriateorder approving any claim admitted or not contestedby the petitioner.

SEC. 40. Hearing on contested claim.-Upon the filingof a comment contesting the claim, the court shall setthe claim for hearing within thirty (30) days withnotice to all parties.

SEC. 41. Final order.-The court shall issue a finalorder on the contested claim within thirty (30) daysfrom submission.

SEC. 42. Appeal.-An appeal to the Court of Appealsmay be taken in the same manner as prescribed inSection 34 of this Rule.

TITLE VIIIPETITIONS FOR FREEZE ORDER

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

SEC. 43. Applicability.-This Rule shall apply topetitions for freeze order in the Court of Appeals. The2002 Internal Rules of the Court of Appeals, asamended, shall apply suppletorily in all other aspects.

SEC. 44. Party to file petition.-The Republic of thePhilippines, through the Anti-Money LaunderingCouncil, represented by the Office of the SolicitorGeneral, may file ex parte with the Court of Appeals averified petition for a freeze order on any monetaryinstrument, property or proceeds relating to orinvolving an unlawful activity as defined underSection 3(i) of Republic Act No. 9160, as amended byRepublic Act No. 9194.

SEC. 45. Form of application.-An application for afreeze order shall be in the form of a verified petitionaccompanied by a sworn certification against forumshopping personally signed by an authorized officialof the Anti-Money Laundering Council and asprovided in the fourth paragraph of Section 3, Rule46, Rules of Court.

SEC. 46. Contents of the petition.-The petition shallcontain the following allegations:

(a) The name and address of the respondent;

(b) A specific description with particularity of themonetary instrument, property or proceeds,their location, the name of the owner, holder,lienholder or possessor, if known;

(c) The grounds relied upon for the issuance of afreeze order; and

(d) The supporting evidence showing that thesubject monetary instrument, property, orproceeds are in any way related to or involvedin an unlawful activity as defined underSection 3(i) of Republic Act No. 9160, asamended by Republic Act No. 9194.

The petition shall be filed in seven clearly legiblecopies and shall be accompanied by clearly legiblecopies of supporting documents duly subscribedunder oath.

SEC. 47. Direct filing and docketing.-To ensure theconfidentiality of an application for a freeze order, thepetition shall be filed directly with the PresidingJustice in Manila or the Executive Justices in Cebu Cityor Cagayan de Oro City, who shall enter the same in alogbook specifically designed for the purpose, andassigned a docket number. In the absence of any of theaforenamed justices, the petition may be filed withthe next available senior justice, who shall act on thepetition as provided in this Rule.

SEC. 48. Separate logbook.-There shall be a logbookunder the custody and responsibility of a designatedmember of the staff of the Presiding Justice orExecutive Justices. The petition shall be docketed inthe logbook and the name of the assigned justiceentered thereon.

SEC. 49. Confidentiality; prohibited disclosure.-Thelogbook and the entries therein shall be kept strictlyconfidential and maintained under the responsibilityof the Presiding Justice or the Executive Justices, asthe case may be. No person, including Courtpersonnel, shall disclose, divulge or communicate toanyone directly or indirectly, in any manner or byany means, the fact of the filing of the petition for freezeorder, its contents and its entry in the logbook exceptto those authorized by the Court. Violation shallconstitute contempt of court.

SEC. 50. Raffle.-The petition shall be raffledimmediately on the same day it is filed. The raffleshall be personally conducted by the Presiding Justiceor the Executive Justices in the presence of theChairmen of the second and third divisions in Manila,Cebu City or Cagayan de Oro City. The petition shallbe raffled to a specific justice actually present in theCourt from among the members of the first threedivisions in Manila, Cebu City or Cagayan De OroCity, for study and report.

SEC. 51. Action by the Court of Appeals.-All membersof the Division of the Court to which the assignedjustice belongs shall act on the petition within twenty-four (24) hours after its filing. However, if one memberof the Division is not available, the assigned justice


and the other justice present shall act on the petition.If only the assigned justice is present, he shall actalone. The action of the two (2) justices or of theassigned justice alone, as the case may be, shall beforthwith promulgated and thereafter submitted onthe next working day to the absent member ormembers of the Division for ratification, modificationor recall.

If the Court is satisfied from the verifiedallegations of the petition that there exists probablecause that the monetary instrument, property, orproceeds are in any way related to or involved in anyunlawful activity as defined in Section 3(i) of RepublicAct No. 9160, as amended by Republic Act No. 9194,it shall issue ex parte a freeze order as hereinafterprovided.

If the Court finds no substantial merit in thepetition, it shall dismiss the petition outright, statingthe specific reasons for such dismissal.

When the unanimous vote of the three (3) justicesof the Division cannot be obtained, the PresidingJustice or the Executive Justice shall designate two (2)justices by raffle from among the other justices of thefirst three (3) divisions to sit temporarily with themforming a special division of five justices. Theconcurrence of a majority of such special division shallbe required for the pronouncement of a judgment orresolution.

SEC. 52. Issuance, form and contents of the freeze order.-The freeze order shall:

(a) Issue in the name of the Republic of thePhilippines represented by the Anti-MoneyLaundering Council;

(b) Describe with particularity the monetaryinstrument, property or proceeds frozen,as well as the names of their owner orowners; and

(c) Direct the person or covered institution toimmediately freeze the subject monetaryinstrument, property or proceeds or itsrelated web of accounts.

SEC. 53. Freeze order.-

(a) Effectivity; post-issuance hearing.-The freeze ordershall be effective immediately for a period of twenty(20) days. Within the twenty-day period, the courtshall conduct a summary hearing, with notice to theparties, to determine whether or not to modify or liftthe freeze order, or extend its effectivity as hereinafterprovided.

(b) Extension.-On motion of the petitioner filedbefore the expiration of twenty (20) days from

issuance of a freeze order, the court may for good causeextend its effectivity for a period not exceeding six (6)months.

SEC. 54. Notice of freeze order.-The court shall orderthat notice of the freeze order be served personally, inthe same manner provided for the service of the assetpreservation order in Section 14 of this Rule, upon therespondent or any person acting in his behalf and suchcovered institution or government agency. The courtshall notify also such party in interest as may haveappeared before the court.

SEC. 55. Duty of respondent, covered institution orgovernment agency upon receipt of freeze order.-Upon receiptof a copy of the freeze order, the respondent, coveredinstitution or government agency shall immediatelydesist from and not allow any transaction,withdrawal, deposit, transfer, removal, conversion,other movement or concealment of the accountrepresenting, involving or relating to the subjectmonetary instrument, property, proceeds or its relatedweb of accounts.

SEC. 56. Consolidation with the pending civil forfeitureproceedings.-After the post-issuance hearing requiredin Section 53, the Court shall forthwith remand thecase and transmit the records to the regional trialcourt for consolidation with the pending civilforfeiture proceeding.

SEC. 57. Appeal.-Any party aggrieved by thedecision or ruling of the court may appeal to theSupreme Court by petition for review on certiorariunder Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The appeal shallnot stay the enforcement of the subject decision orfinal order unless the Supreme Court directsotherwise.

TITLE IXCOMMON PROVISIONS

SEC. 58. Costs and fees.-Petitioner is exempted fromthe payment of costs and other lawful fees prescribedin the Rules of Court.

SEC. 59. Transitory provision.-This Rule shall applyto all pending civil forfeiture cases or petitions forfreeze order.

SEC. 60. Effectivity.-This Rule shall take effect onthe fifteenth of December 2005, following itspublication in a newspaper of general circulation inthe Philippines not later than 20 November 2005.

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

SUPREME COURT

ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 68-2005

AUTHORIZING EXECUTIVE JUDGESOF FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL COURTS

TO APPROVE REQUESTS OF THEBUREAU OF JAIL MANAGEMENT AND

PENOLOGY TO TRANSFER OR CHANGEPLACE OF DETENTION OF HIGH-RISK

OR HIGH-PROFILE DETAINEES

WHEREAS, Sections 61 and 63 of Republic Act No.6975 entitled An Act Establishing the Philippine NationalPolice Under a Reorganized Department of Interior and LocalGovernment, and for Other Purposes, provide that theBureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP)which exercises supervision and control over all cityand municipal jails, shall be under the supervision ofthe Department of Interior and Local Government(DILG);

WHEREAS, the BJMP is mandated to establish andmaintain a secured, clean, adequately equipped andsanitary detention facility for the custody andsafekeeping of city and municipal prisoners, anyfugitive from justice, or person detained awaitinginvestigation, trial, or transfer to the nationalpenitentiary;

WHEREAS, pursuant to and by virtue of its powerof supervision and custody, the BJMP has the authorityto direct the transfer or change of place of detention ofdetainees;

WHEREAS, the BJMP has issued various circularsdirecting assistant regional directors and jail wardensto work out for the transfer of high-risk or high-profiledetainees should it be deemed that the jails in whichthey are currently detained are not well securedagainst planned attempts for their rescue by fellowgang members, relatives or any other person;

WHEREAS, the BJMP in its Memorandum dated12 September 2003, has directed that no transfer ofinmates to another jail shall be effected without a courtorder or approval;

WHEREAS, the court order or approval of suchtransfer is administrative in nature and falls withinthe duty and function of the Executive Judge to visitand inspect local jails and the detained prisonerswithin the area of his or her administrativesupervision.

NOW, THEREFORE, to ensure speedy and efficientadministrative action by the courts on requests of theBJMP through the City or Municipal Jail wardensrelative to the transfer of high-risk or high-profiledetainees to better secured jails, the Supreme Courthereby directs that:

1. All requests for such transfer shall besubmitted for appropriate action to theExecutive Judge who has administrativesupervision over the court in the placewhere the local jail in which the prisoner iscurrently detained; and

2. The Executive Judge shall act forthwith onthe requests, with notice to the PresidingJudge of the court before which the case ofthe detained prisoner is pending.

This Circular shall take effect immediately.

Issued this 27th day of October 2005.

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

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 112-2005

5. The guidelines provided under AM. No. 00-08-01-SC shall continue to remain in forceand effect insofar as they are notinconsistent with this resolution.

For the information and guidance of allconcerned.

25 October 2005.

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

divisions of the Court with copies of this MemorandumCircular for the information and guidance of allconcerned.

This Memorandum Circular shall take effect upon itsissuance.

Issued this 25th day of June 2003.

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

The provision of the above MemorandumCircular shall likewise apply to all trial courts toserve as a guide for similar requests of studentsand as reflective of the policy of the Court on thematter.

For the information and guidance of allconcerned.

25 October 2005.


(Continued from page 27)


24

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005


TO: ALL TRIAL JUDGES

SUBJECT: GUIDELINES FOR THE SPECIALPROCESSING PRIVILEGES FOR THEFIREARMS OF THE JUDGES

The Supreme Court En Banc in its Resolution dated 4October 2005 in A.M. No. 04-6-18-SC, Re: Position Paperon Continuing Assassinations/Intentional Killings of Judgeswhile in the Performance of Their Duties, Resolved toAPPROVED the following Guidelines for the SpecialProcessing Privileges for the Firearms of the Judges,as the proposed by the OCA Committee on Securityfor Lower Court Judges, to wit:

I. Responsibilities of the OCA SecurityCommittee

A. Evaluation of Applications for PTCFOR

1. Judges who wish to apply for PTCFORwith the endorsement of the OCAshall submit the following to the OCASecurity Committee

a. Application form with 2x2 IDpicture (form may be secured inthe Camp Crame, the Office of thePNP Regional Commander or theOffice of the Provincial PoliceDirector);

b. Neuro-Psychiatric (NP) Clearance;

c. Drug Test Clearance;

d. Duly authenticated copy of oathof office/appointment of applicant;

e. Photocopy of valid firearmslicense;

f. Certification that the applicanthas undergone basic firearmshandling, gun safety seminar andproficiency firing, from a dulyaccredited gun club or from theOCA Security Committee;

g. Certification on the authenticityand genuineness of the documentssubmitted; and

OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR


TO: ALL JUDGES OF FAMILY COURTS

SUBJECT: COMMITMENT OF JUVENILES INCONFLICT WITH THE LAW

The attention of this Office has been called to thecontinued practice of judges of immediatelycommitting youthful offenders to provincial, city andmunicipal jails despite the presence of Department ofSocial Welfare and Development (DSWD) offices, youthdetention centers or local rehabilitation centerswithin the jurisdiction of the courts. Judges must takeinto consideration that jail facilities, at present, areseverely congested and are beset with manpower,logistical and budgetary constraints.

Judges are reminded that the Court, in seeking topromote the best interests of the child in conformitywith Philippine laws and the United Nation’sConvention on the Rights of the Child, passed theResolution dated February 28, 2002 in A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC, approving the Rule on Juveniles in Conflictwith the Law.

Quoted hereunder is the pertinent provision ofthe Rule relative to the commitment of youthfuloffenders, to wit:

“Sec. 18. Care of Juveniles in Conflict with the Law.- The juvenile charged with havingcommitted a delinquent act, held for trial orwhile the case is pending appeal, if unable tofurnish bail or is denied bail, shall, from thetime of his being taken into custody, becommitted by the Family Court to the care ofthe DSWD, a youth detention center, or a localrehabilitation center recognized by thegovernment in the province, city ormunicipality within the jurisdiction of thesaid court. The center or agency concernedshall be responsible for the juvenile’sappearance in court whenever required. Inthe absence of any such center or agencywithin a reasonable distance from the venueof the trial, the juvenile shall be detained inthe provincial, city or municipal jail whichshall provide adequate quarters for thejuvenile separate from adult detainees anddetainees of the opposite sex.”

October 6, 2005.

For your information and guidance.

(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Court Administrator (Continued on NEXT page)

25

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

h. Payment in cashier ’s/managerscheck or postal money order in theinitial amount of Php150.00,subject to reasonable increases asthe PNP may impose.

2. The Security Committee, incoordination with the PhilippineJudicial Academy, shall undertake toconduct basic firearms handling, gunsafety seminars and proficiency firingfor those members of the Judiciarywho wish to apply for PTCFOR incoordination with the enforcementagencies, and issue certifications forthose applicants for PTCFOR whoattend the same.

3. The Security Committee shallevaluate within one (1) week fromreceipt thereof applications forPTCFOR of members of the judiciaryand ensure that only applications ofthose who are qualified, competent,and who have submitted thecomplete required documents shall beendorsed by the OCA to the PNP.

4. Applications endorsed by theSecurity Committee shall be filed atthe FED, Camp Crame, Quezon City,by the liaison officer of the OCA.

II. Responsibilities of the PNP

A. Processing of Applications Endorsed byOCA

1. Applications for the PTCFORendorsed by the OCA shall be limitedto handguns. In extreme cases ofthreats and imminent danger to one’slife, high-powered rifles/shotgunsmay be allowed, as determined bythe PNP.

2. The PNP shall fast track the printingand issuance of the PTCFOR ID Cardof the members of the judiciary, whichshall be valid for a duration of one (1)year from the date of the approval bythe Chief, PNP; PROVIDED: that theperiod of one (1) year may beshortened upon recommendation ofthe OCA.

3. The PNP shall deliver to the OCASecurity Committee all approvedPTCFOR ID cards of members of thejudiciary after payment of theappropriate fee. The OCA SecurityCommittee shall be responsible forthe distribution and release of thecards to the applicants.

B. Revocation and cancellation of thefirearms license and PTCFOR

1. The PNP shall provide for theguidelines to be observed in therevocation and cancellation of thefirearms license and PTCFOR ofmembers of the judiciary pursuant toexisting laws and regulations for thefollowing causes, and such othercauses as they see fit:

a. Loss of firearm throughnegligence;

b. Carrying of firearm in prohibitedplaces;

c. Conviction of a crime involvingmoral turpitude or any otheroffense where the penaltyimposed is more than six (6)months imprisonment or a fineof at least Php10,000.00;

d. Dismissal for cause from theservice;

e. Commission of a crime where afirearm is used; and

f. Violation of the conditions thePTCFOR is issued.

2. The OCA Security Committee mayrecommend the revocation of thePTCFOR to the PNP if warranted bythe circumstance.

For your information and guidance.

October 19, 2005.


26

PHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSPHILJA NEWSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSRESOLUTIONS, ORDERS AND CIRCULARSOctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005OctoberOctoberOctoberOctoberOctober-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005-December 2005


TO: THE COURT OF APPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN,

COURT OF TAX APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIALCOURTS, SHARI’A DISTRICT COURTS,METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS,MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES,MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPALCIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI’A CIRCUITCOURTS

SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 5-2003Re: PROHIBITING THE ACCOMMO-DATION OF STUDENTS TO UNDERGOON-THE-JOB TRAINING/PRACTICUMIN THE DIFFERENT OFFICES OF THECOURT

The Supreme Court En Banc in its Resolution dated 6September 2005, in A.M. No. 05-7-16-SC, Re: Analysisof the Current Judicial System Using Information Technologyby Students of the De La Salle University, Resolved to directthe undersigned to CIRCULARIZE to all lower courtsMemorandum Circular No. 05-2003 dated 25 June 2003,to wit:

“MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR No. 5-2003

PROHIBITING THE ACCOMMODATIONOF STUDENTS TO UNDERGO

ON-THE-JOB TRAINING/PRACTICUMIN THE DIFFERENT OFFICES OF THE COURT

It is observed that some offices of the Court allow studentsof different colleges and universities to undergo on-the-job training/practicum without authority or approval bythe Chief Justice.

Due to security reasons which prompted the Court to denyprevious requests of colleges and universities for on-the-job training/practicum, it is noted that the practice of someoffices allowing students to undergo on-the-job training/practicum jeopardizes not only the functions of some officesbut also their confidential records. Notably, theaccommodation of these students pose as a security risk

ACCORDINGLY, in order to ensure the security ofofficials and employees of the Court as well as its records,all Chiefs of Offices/Services/Divisions of the Court,including those of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal,Judicial and Bar Council and the Philippine JudicialAcademy, are hereby directed to disallow on-the-jobtraining/practicum in their respective offices/services/divisions.

The Chief Administrative Officer of the Court, who shallsee to it that this Memorandum Circular is strictly compliedwith, is hereby directed to Furnish all offices, services and


TO: ALL EXECUTIVE JUDGES AND PRESIDINGJUDGES OF SPECIAL COURTS FOR DRUGCASES

SUBJECT: GUIDELINES TO BE OBSERVED BYTHE EXECUTIVE JUDGES ANDPRESIDING JUDGES OF SPECIALCOURTS FOR DRUG CASES

The Supreme Court En Banc in its Resolution dated 11October 2005, in A.M. No. 05-9-03-SC, RE: REQUESTFOR CLARIFICATlON ON WHETHER DRUG COURTSSHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE REGULAR RAFFLE,provided the following guidelines to be observed bythe Executive Judges and Presiding Judges of specialcourts for drug cases, to wit:

1. Pursuant to Section 90 of R.A. No. 9165, onlycourts designated by this Court as a specialcourt for drug cases can take cognizance ofviolations of R.A. No. 9165.

2. Drug courts shall strictly adhere to the periodsimposed on them under Section 90 of R.A. No.9165. Trial of all drug cases assigned to themshall be terminated within sixty (60) daysfrom the filing of the information. Decisionson these cases shall be rendered within fifteen(15) days from the date of submission of thecase for resolution.

3. While special courts for drug cases are notprohibited from hearing non-drug relatedcases, Executive Judges shall continue toexempt them from the regular raffle, i.e., fromthe raffle of cases which do not involveviolations of R.A. No. 9165, until furtherorders from this court.

4. If, in the opinion of the Executive Judges, thecaseload of certain drug courts allows theirinclusion in the regular raffle withoutadversely affecting their ability toexpeditiously resolve the drug cases assignedto them and their inclusion in the regular rafflebecomes necessary to decongest the caseloadof other branches, the concerned ExecutiveJudges shall recommend to this Court theinclusion of drug courts in their jurisdictionin the regular raffle. The concerned drugcourts shall remain exempt from the regularraffle until the recommendation is approved.

(Continued on page 24) (Continued on page 24)

27

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

2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 Upcoming PHILJA Events2005 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

volume vii, issue no. 28 october-december 2005

Documents