JUDICIAL ETHICS

A. SOURCES:
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary (Bangalore Draft)
2. Code of Judicial Conduct
B. QUALITIES:
1. Independence- pre-requisite for the rule of law and fundamental guarantee of
a fair trial (Canon 1).
a. Individual judicial independence- focuses on each particular case and
seeks to insure his or her ability to decide cases with autonomy within the
constraints of the law
b. Institutional judicial independence- focuses on the independence of the
judiciary as a branch of government and protects judges as a class

Judges shall:
exercise functions on the basis of facts and law, independently, free from
influence from any quarter.
be independent from judicial colleagues.
refrain from influencing another court or administrative agency.
Judicial prestige should not be used to advance private interests of others.
be free from inappropriate connection with the executive and judicial
branches.
be independent in relation to society in general.
maintain and enhance institutional and operational independence of the
judiciary.
promote high standards of judicial conduct in order to promote public
confidence in the judiciary which is fundamental to the maintenance of
judicial independence.

2. Integrity- essential in the official and personal demeanor of judges. (Canon 2)

judges conduct should not only be above reproach but perceived to be
above reproach MORAL INTEGRITY; ignorance of law- indication of lack of
integrity
conduct of judges must reaffirm peoples faith in the integrity of the
judiciary.
judges should take appropriate disciplinary measures against lawyers and
court personnel.
3. Impartiality essential to the proper discharge of the judicial office. (Canon 3)
judges shall perform duties without favor, bias or prejudice.
judges should ensure that their conduct maintains and enhances the
confidence of the public in the impartiality of the judge and the judiciary.
Judges shall conduct themselves so as to minimize occasions in which it
will be necessary for them to be disqualified from hearing or deciding a
case. avoid fraternization with lawyers and litigants
Judges shall not make any comment might be expected to influence the
outcome of the proceeding before him.
Judges shall disqualify themselves in any proceedings in which they are
unable to decide the matter impartially or in which it may appear to a
reasonable observer that they are unable to decide the matter impartially.
o The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or

personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts.

The judge has previously served as a lawyer or was a material
witness in the matter in controversy.
o The judge or member of his family has an economic interest in the
outcome of the matter in controversy.
o The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or
lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a former associate of the
judge served as counsel during their association, or the judge or
lawyer was a material witness therein.
o The judges ruling in a lower court is the subject of review.
o The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant
within the sixth civil degree or to counsel within the fourth civil
degree.
o The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a financial
interest as heir, legatee, creditor, fiduciary, or otherwise, in the
subject matter in controversy, or in a party to the proceeding, or
any other interest that could be substantially affected by the
outcome of the proceedings.
If the parties and lawyer, independently of the judges participation, all
agree in writing that the reason for the inhibition is immaterial or
unsubstantial, the judge may then participate in the proceedings. The
agreement, signed by all the parties and lawyers, shall be incorporated in
the record of the proceedings.
o

DISQUALIFICATION v. INHIBITION
Disqualification - Rules enumerate specific and exclusive grounds under
which any judge or judicial officer is disqualified from acting as such;
judicial officer has NO DISCRETION to try or sit on the case
Inhibition- Rules does not expressly enumerate the specific grounds for
inhibition but merely gives a broad basis thereof; judge has SOUND
DISCRETION on the matter
4. Propriety- essential to all activities of a judge. (Canon 4)
Judges shall avoid impropriety and appearance of impropriety in all their
activities public holds judges to higher standards of integrity and ethical
conduct than lawyers and other person not invested with public trust.
o Behavior not only on the bench but also in everyday life should be
beyond reproach
o Acts not per se improper can be perceived by the larger community
as such
Judges must accept personal restrictions that might be viewed as
burdensome by ordinary citizens, and in particular conduct themselves in
a way that is consistent with the dignity of the judicial office.
In their relations with lawyers who practice regularly before their courts,
judges shall avoid situations giving rise to suspicions or appearance of
favoritism or partiality.
A judge shall not participate in determination of a case in which any
member of their family represents a litigant or is in any manner associated
with the case.
A judge shall not allow the use of his residence by members of the legal
profession to receive clients of the latter or of other members of the legal

profession.
In exercising freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly,
judges shall conduct themselves in such a manner as to preserve the
dignity, impartiality and independence of the judicial office
Judges shall inform themselves about their personal fiduciary and financial
interests and those of the members of their family.
Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance
their private interests or those of a member of their family, or any one
else.
Confidential information acquired by a judges in their official capacity shall
not be used for any other purpose related to their judicial duties.
Judges may engage in activities that do not detract from the dignity of the
judicial office or otherwise interfere with the performance of judicial
duties.
Judges shall not practice law while the holder of judicial office. - [MTC
judges as notaries public ex officio, may not notarize private docs EXCEPT:
1) when no lawyer is available in the municipality, and 2) notarial fees are
paid to the governments account; judge should not notarize affidavit of
co-habitation of persons whose marriage will be solemnized by him]
Judges may form or join associations of judges or participate in other
organization representing the interests of judges.
Judges and members of their families shall neither ask for nor accept any
gift, bequest, loan or favor in relation to anything done or to be done or
entitled to be done by him in connection with the performance of his
judicial duties.
Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff or others subject to their
influence, direction or authority, to ask for or accept any gift, bequest,
loan or favor in relation to anything done or to be done or entitled to be
done in connection with their duties and functions.
Subject to law and to any local requirements of public disclosure, judges
may receive a token gift, award or benefit as appropriate to the occasion
on which it is made, provided that such gift, award or benefit might not be
reasonably perceived as intended to influence the judge in the
performance of official duties or otherwise give rise to an appearance of
partiality.

5. Equality- essential to the due performance of judicial duties. (Canon 5)

Judges shall be aware of and understand diversity in society and
differences arising from various sources.
Judges shall not in performance of judicial duties manifest bias or
prejudice on irrelevant grounds.
Judges shall carry out judicial duties with appropriate consideration for all
persons, without differentiation on any irrelevant ground.
Judges shall not permit court staff to differentiate between persons
concerned in a matter before the judge on any irrelevant ground.
Judges shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from
manifesting bias or prejudice based on irrelevant grounds.
6. Competence and diligence- prerequisite to the due performance of judicial
duties. (Canon 6)
Judicial duties of a judge shall take precedence over all other activities.

[primary duty- hear and decide cases; must decide cases and motions on
time]
Judges shall devote their professional activity to judicial duties, which
include other tasks relevant to the judicial office or the courts operations.
[record keeping and supervision of personnel]
Judges shall take reasonable steps to maintain and enhance their
knowledge, skill and personal qualities for the proper performance of
judicial duties.
Judges shall keep themselves informed about relevant developments of
international law, including international conventions and other
instruments establishing human rights norms.
Judges shall perform all judicial duties, including the delivery of reserved
decisions, efficiently, fairly and with reasonable promptness.
[Periods for decision fixed by Constitution: counted from submission
24 months- SC
12 months- lower collegiate courts
3 months- lower courts]
Judges shall maintain order and decorum in all proceedings before the
court, and be patent, dignified and courteous in relation to litigants,
witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official
capacity.
Judges shall not engage in conduct incompatible with the diligent
discharge of judicial duties.

C. DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY

1. Members of the SC
a. Impeachment- a constitutional process of removing public servants from
office as an assurance against abusive officials in the country
Grounds:
1. Culpable violation of the Constitution
2. Treason
3. Bribery
4. Other High Crimes
5. Graft and Corruption
6. Betrayal of Public Trust (Sec. 2 Art. XI, 1987 Constitution)
b. Ethical Lessons from Former Chief Justice Coronas Impeachment
The Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, found former Chief Justice
Corona guilty of the failure to disclose to the public his statement of assets,
liabilities, and net worth as required under sec. 17, Art. XI of the 1987
Constitution, by a vote of 20-3.
It is the "obligation" of an employee to submit a sworn statement, as the
"public has a right to know" the employee's assets, liabilities, net worth and
financial and business interests. Hence, a court interpreter who failed to include
in her SALN rental payments she received from a market stall was dismissed from
service (Rabe v. Flores, A.M. No. P-97-1247, May 14, 1997). The Senator judges
ruled that the law applies to all, including the Chief Justice of the Philippines,
thus, his failure to include his dollar accounts in his SALN warrants his
impeachment from office.

1.

2.

Mandate upon the Chief Justice to disclose his SALN:

1987 Constitution - A public officer or employee shall, upon assumption of office submit
a declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth. This includes members
of the Supreme Court among others.
R.A. 6713 - Section 8. Statements and Disclosure. Public officials and employees have
an obligation to accomplish and submit declarations under oath of, and the public has
the right to know, their assets, liabilities, net worth and financial and business interests
including those of their spouses and of unmarried children under eighteen (18) years of
age living in their households.
The basis of the publics right to inquire upon the statement of assets and
liabilities or public officers rests upon the postulate of public office is a public
trust, which is institutionalized in the Constitution to protect the people from
abuse of governmental power.
Note: While providing guaranty for that right, the Constitution also
provides that the peoples right to know is limited to matters of public concern
and is further subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.
Custodians of public documents must not concern themselves with the
motives, reasons and objects of the persons seeking access to the records. While
public officers in the custody or control of public records have the discretion to
regulate the manner in which records may be inspected, examined or copied by
interested persons, such discretion does not carry with it the authority to prohibit
access, inspection, examination, or copying of the records.
Canons 3 and 4 of the new Code of Judicial Conduct mandate,
respectively, that judges shall ensure that not only is their conduct above
reproach, but that it is perceived to be so in the view of the reasonable observer
and that judges shall avoid improprieties and the appearance of impropriety in
all of their activities. These very stringent standards of decorum are demanded
of all magistrates and employees of the courts. As such, those who serve in the
judiciary, particularly justices and judges, must not only know the law but must
also possess the highest degree of integrity and probity, and an unquestionable
moral uprightness both in their public and private lives (Veloso vs. Caminade,
A.M. No. RTJ- 01- 1655, July 8, 2004)
In the Judiciary, moral integrity is more than a cardinal virtue, it is a
necessity. The exacting standards of conduct demanded from judges are
designed to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the
judiciary.
The integrity of the Judiciary rests not only upon the fact that it is able to
administer justice, but also upon the perception and confidence of the
community that the people who run the system have administered justice. In
order to create such confidence, the people who run the judiciary, particularly
judges and justices, must not only be proficient in both the substantive and
procedural aspects of the law, but more importantly, they must possess the
highest integrity, probity, and unquestionable moral uprightness, both in their
public and in their private lives. Only then can the people be reassured that the
wheels of justice in this country run with fairness and equity, thus creating

confidence in the judicial system. (Tan vs. Pacuribot, A.M. No. RTJ-06-1982,
December 14, 2007).
2. Lower court judges and justices of the CA and SB (Rule 140)
Grounds:
1. Serious misconduct and inefficiency- Sec 67 of Judiciary Act of 1948
2. Serious, less serious, and light charges- Sec 8,9, 10 of Rule 140
Serious
1. Bribery, direct or indirect
2. Dishonesty and violations of the Anti- Graft Law (RA 3019)
3. Gross misconduct constituting violations of the Code of Judicial
Conduct
4. Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment or order
5. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
6. Willful failure to pay a just debt
7. Borrowing from lawyers and litigants in a case pending before the court
8. Immorality
9. Gross ignorance of the law or procedure
10. Partisan political activities
11. Alcoholism and/ or vicious habits
Less Serious
1. Undue delay in rendering a decision or order or in transmitting the
records of the court
2. Frequent and unjustified absences without leave or habitual tardiness
3. Unauthorized practice of law
4. Violation of SC rules, directives, and circulars
5. Receiving additional or double compensation unless specifically
authorized by law
6. Untruthful statements in the certificate of service, and
7. Simple misconduct
Light
1. Vulgar and unbecoming conduct
2. Gambling in public
3. Fraternizing with lawyers and litigants with pending cases in court
4. Undue delay in delay in the submission of monthly reports
1. If guilty of Serious charge:
a. dismissal from the service,
b. forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as the Court may determine,
except accrued leave benefits;
c. disqualification from reinstatement or appointment to any public
office, including government owned or controlled corporation,
d. Suspension from office without salary and other benefits for more
than 3 but not exceeding 6 months. and
e. A fine of more than P20,000.00 but not exceeding P40,000.00.
2. If judge is guilty of a less serious charge:
a. Suspension from office without salary and other benefits for not
less than 1 nor more than 3 months, or
b. A fine of more than P10,000.00 but no exceeding P20,000.00.

3. If guilty of light charge:

a. A fine of not less than P1,000.00 but not exceeding P10,000.00,
and/or
b. Censure,
c. Reprimand,
d. Admonition with warning.
How initiated
a. Moto proprio by the SC
b. Upon verified complaint by person with personal knowledge, or
c. Anonymous complaint supported by public records of indubitable
integrity
Procedure:
a. If complain sufficient in form and substance, respondent- comment
within 10 days
b. Reference to OCA for evaluation
c. Reference for investigation retired SC justice (if respondent is CA
justice), to CA justice (respondent is RTC judge), RTC judge (respondent
is MTC judge)
3. Ethical Aspect of Impeachment
Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the
people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and
efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives (Sec. 1,
Article XI 1987 Constitution).
The principle of accountability provides that all government officials
and employees, whether they be the highest in the land or the lowliest public
servants, shall at all times be answerable for their misconduct to the people
from whom the government derives its powers.
The purpose of impeachment is to protect the people from official
delinquencies or malfeasances. It is therefore primarily intended for the
protection of the State, not for the punishment of the offender.
It is essential that responsible and competent public officers be chosen
for public office to maintain the faith and confidence of the people to the
government otherwise it becomes ineffective. No popular government can
survive without the confidence of the people. It is the lone guarantee and
justification of its existence.
4. Sanctions imposed by SC on erring members of the Judiciary
a. If guilty of Serious charge:
1. dismissal from the service,
2. forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as the Court may determine,
except accrued leave benefits;
3. disqualification from reinstatement or appointment to any public office,
including government owned or controlled corporation,
4. Suspension from office without salary and other benefits for more than
3 but not exceeding 6 months. and
5. A fine of more than P20,000.00 but not exceeding P40,000.00.

b. If judge is guilty of a less serious charge:

1. Suspension from office without salary and other benefits for not less
than 1 nor more
than 3 months, or
2. A fine of more than P10,000.00 but no exceeding P20,000.00.
c. If guilty of light charge:
1. A fine of not less than P1,000.00 but not exceeding P10,000.00, and/or
2. Censure,
3. Reprimand,
4. Admonition with warning.
D. DISQUALIFICATION OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES (Rule 137)
1. Compulsory
[Rationale: there is a conclusive presumption that the judge cannot
objectively or impartially try the case. The law expressly prohibits him and
strikes at the judges authority to hear and decide the case.]
a. The judge, or his wife, or child is pecuniarily interested as heir, legatee,
creditor
or otherwise
b. The judge is related to either party of the case within the sixth degree of
consanguinity or
affinity, or to the counsel within the fourth degree (computed according to
the rule of civil law)
c. The judge has been an executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or
counsel
d. The judge has presided in any inferior court when his ruling or decision is
the subject of review (Section 1 of Rule 317)
Exception: If despite the parties knowledge of the disqualification gave their
written consent that the otherwise disqualified judge would hear and decide
their case.
2. Voluntary
Voluntary Inhibition according to the Rules of Court states that a judge
through the exercise of sound discretion may, for just or valid reasons to
inhibit himself.
Note: A presiding judge must maintain and preserve the trust and faith of the
parties-litigants. He must hold himself above reproach and suspicion. At the
very sign of lack of faith and trust in his actions, whether well-grounded or
not, the judge has no other alternative but to inhibit himself from the case
E. POWERS AND DUTIES OF COURTS AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS (Rule 135)
GR: Courts of justice shall always be open; Justice to be promptly and
impartially administered.
Exception: Legal holidays

Requirement of public hearing:

GR: The sitting of every court of justice shall be public
Exception: When the evidence to be adduced is of such nature as to
require their exclusion in the interest of morality or decency.
Note: all trials on merits shall be conducted in open court or regular court room.
Availability to the public of court records:
GR: The records of every court of justice shall be public records and shall
be available for the inspection of any interested person, at all proper business
hours, under the supervision of the clerk having custody of such records.
Exception: Unless the court shall, in any special case, have forbidden their
publicity, in the interest of morality or decency.
Enforceability of inferior courts processes:
GR: Within the province where the municipality or city lies.
Exception: the approval of judge of Regional Trial Court of the province
where it would be enforced.
F. COURT RECORDS AND GENERAL DUTIES OF CLERKS AND STENOGRAPHER (Rule
136)
Records kept by the clerk:
-General Docket
-Judgment and Entries Book
-Execution Book
Note: records may not be taken from the clerks office except by order of
the court. However, the Solicitor General or any of his assistants, the provincial
fiscal or his deputy, and the attorneys de officio shall be permitted, upon proper
receipt, to withdraw from the clerks office the record of any case in which they
are interested.
Duties of clerks in general:
1. The clerk shall safely keep all records, papers, files, exhibits and public
property committed to his charge, including the library of the court, and the
seal and furniture belonging to his office (Sec. 7, Rule 136, Rules of Court);
2. Demand that the stenographer deliver notes of the session of the court to him
immediately after each session (Sec. 17, Rule 136, Rules of Court).
1.
2.

Furthermore, in the absence of the judge, the clerk may:

Perform all the duties of the judge in receiving applications, petitions, inventories,
reports;
Issue orders and notices(Sec. 5, Rule 136, Rules of Court)
Duty of stenographer:
It shall be the duty of the stenographer to deliver to the clerk of court,
immediately at the close of such morning or afternoon session, all the notes he
has taken, to be attached to the record of the case. (Sec. 17, Rule 136, Rules of
Court)
Note: Transcript of notes delivered to the clerk, must be duly initialed on
each page, to be attached to the record of the case.

G. LEGAL FEES (Rule 141)

1. Manner of payment
Payment should be made upon filing of the pleading or other application
and the prescribed fee to be paid in full upon filing of said same. If the fees
are not paid, the Court may refuse to proceed with the action until they are
paid and may dismiss the action or proceeding.
2. Fees in lien
If the Court awards claim not alleged or more than that claimed, the
amount shall be considered fees in lien and the party concerned shall pay the
additional fees which shall constitute a lien on the judgment in the
satisfaction of said lien.
3. Persons authorized to collect legal fees
a. Clerks of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan and Court
of Tax Appeals
b. Clerks of Regional Trial Courts
c. Clerks of Court of the First Level Courts
d. Sheriffs, process servers and other persons serving processes
e. Notaries
f. Other officers taking depositions
Note: The persons herein authorized to collect legal fees shall be
accountable officers and shall be required to post bond in such amount as
prescribed by the law.
Exempt from payment of Legal Fees:
a. Indigent litigants - the legal fees shall be a lien on any judgment
rendered in the case favorable to the indigent litigant unless the court
otherwise provides.
b. Republic of the Philippines but does not include local governments
and government- owned or controlled corporations with or without
independent charters.
H. COSTS
1. Recovery of costs (Rule 142)
a. Prevailing party
Costs shall be allowed to a prevailing party as a matter of course.
However, the court shall have power, for special reasons, to adjudge that
either party shall pay the costs of an action, or that the same be divided, as
may be equitable
Note: costs cannot be adjudged against the Republic of the Philippines.
b. Dismissed appeal or action
Court retains the power to render judgment for costs as justice may
require.
c. Frivolous appeal
Double or Treble Costs shall be imposed on the plaintiff or appellant,
which shall be paid by his attorney, if so ordered by the Court

d. False allegations
False Allegation made without reasonable cause and found untrue shall
subject the offending party to the reasonable expenses as may have been
necessarily incurred by the other part by reason of such untrue pleading.
e. Non-appearance of witness
If a Witness fails to appear at the time and place specified in the
subpoena issued by any inferior court, the costs of the warrant of arrest and
of the arrest of the witness shall be borne by him, if the court determines that
his failure to answer the subpoena was willful and without excuse.