CANON 1 – INDEPENDENCE

- Judicial independence is a pre requisite to the rule of law and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial. A
judge shall therefore uphold and exemplify judicial independence in both its individual and instructional
aspects.

POSSIBLE SOURCES OF INFLUENCE:

 Internal – biases, prejudices, preconceived notions

 External – political, social, familial
Ex. Judge dismissed criminal case on vague grounds, upon his receipt of death threats.

Case: Ramirez vs Corpuz-Macandog A.M R351-RTJ Sept 26, 1986

Libarios vs. Dabalos A.M. RTJ-89-286 July 11, 1991

Sec 2. In performing judicial activities. Judges shall be independent from judicial colleagues in respect of
decisions which the judges is obliged to make independently. Regardless of good relations, camaraderie,
and companerismo among judges, they shall not be influenced by their fellow judges.

Q: What are collegiate courts?

Sec 3. Judges shall refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of litigation dispute before
another court or administrative agency.

Case: OCA vs Judge Floro, AM no. RTJ-99-1460, 31 Mar 2006

Sec 4. Judges shall not allow family, social or other relationships to influence judicial conducts or
judgment. The prestige of judicial office shall not be used or lent to advance the private interests of
others, nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to
influence the judge.

Q: what is influence peddling? (use sec 4)

Definition of “Family” under the NEW CODE – those related by blood or marriage within the 6th civil
degree, as well as persons who are companions or employees of the judges who live in the judge’s
household. TN
 This section is to discourage and avoid influence-peddling by members of the judge’s inner circle
 In some U.S. States, e.g. Denver and Florida, judges were advised to drop lawyer friends in social
networking websites.

Sec 5. Judges shall not only be free from inappropriate connections with, and influenced by, the
executive and legislative branches of government, but must also appear to be free therefrom to a
reasonable observer. (New Section)
 Considering that the appointments, promotions and movements of judges are subject to
executive approval, and that the organization, budget and resources of the judiciary are matters
that require legislative grace – Judges should still uphold their duty to render justice freely
without any obligation to reciprocate whatever beneficiaries that might have been bestowed on
them by the two other branches.
 READ ONLY SEC 6 & 7.

Sec 8. Judges hall exhibit and promote high standards of conduct in order to reinforce public
confidence in the judiciary which is fundamental to the maintenance of a judicial independence.
- Conduct of judges, in or out of court, should be beyond reproach as they are the visible
representations of law and the judiciary.

CANON 2. INTEGRITY

- Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge of the judicial office but also to the personal
demeanor of judges. Duty to Disclose to the JBC and appointing authority. Disclose all disciplinary
criminal and civil cases.

Sec 1.judges shall ensure that not only is their conduct above reproach, but that it is perceived to be so
in the view of a reasonable observer.
 Judges have been disciplined for lack of good moral character, both in their public and private
capabilities.
 Accepting bribes: going to cockpits, casinos, racetracks to bet on horses; fraternizing with
litigants and their lawyers; delay in rendering decisions ignorance of the law.

-Ignorance of the Law- is a mark of incompetence; and where the law involved is elementary, ignorance
thereof is considered an indicium of lack integrity. The judge is either too incompetent or undeserving of
the title he holds, or he is too vicious that the oversight was deliberately done resulting to a travesty of
justice.

Sec2. The behavior and conduct of judges, must reaffirm the people’s faith in the integrity of the
judiciary. Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be done. Judges must not render
just, correct and impartial decisions, but must do so in a manner free of any suspicion as to their
fairness, impartiality and integrity.

Cases:
- judge forcibly kissed court employees
- habitual gambling and frequenting casinos and cockpits
-punching fellow judges in the face after a disagreement over the use of an office table
-having sex with a 15 year old minor.

Sec 3. Judges should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against lawyers or court
personnel for unprofessional conduct of which the judge may have become aware.
- Judges are administrators and protects of the administration of justice. Their vigilance should
go beyond themselves, but also to the staff, subordinates, and to the lawyers who are officer’s of the
court.

CANON 3. IMPARTIALITY

-Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial office. It applies not only to the decision
itself but also to the process by which the decision is made.
Extrajudicial Source Rule – To sustain a claim of bias or prejudice, the resulting opinion or decision of the
court must be based upon an extrajudicial source; that is, some influence other than the facts and law
presented in the courtroom.

Sec 2. Judges shall ensure that his or her conduct, both in and out of court, maintains and enhances the
confidence of the public, the legal profession and litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of the
judiciary.
 There is a high price in exchange of the judge’s exalted judicial position.
 Judges should be like Caesar’s wife should be above suspicion.

Sec3. Judges shall, so far as is reasonable, so conduct themselves as to minimize the occasions on which
it will be necessary for them to be disqualified from hearing or deciding cases.
 Judges should regulate their business, social and other extra-judicial activities to avoid possible
disqualification from hearing cases.

-AM no. MTJ-02-1452 April 6, 2005

- the judge acted as broker together with the complainant in the sale of lots to the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint Inc. “By allowing himself to act as agent in the sale of the subject
property, respondent judges has increased the possibility of his disqualification to act as an impartial
judge in the event that a dispute involving the said contract of sale arises.

Sec 4. Judges shall not knowingly, while a proceeding is before, or could come before them make any
comment that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome of such proceeding or impair the
manifest fairness of the process. Nor shall judges make any comment in public or otherwise that might
affect the fair trial or any person or issue.
 Judges should avoid publicity for personal vainglory.
 Trial by publicity; there must be allegation and proof that the court has been unduly influenced
by the barrage of publicity.

Example: Judge who advises parties to plea-bargain or to compromise

Sec 5. Judges shall disqualify themselves from participating in any proceeding s 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, such proceedings include, but are not limited to, instances where:

a. The judge has actual basis or prejudice concerning a party personal knowledge of disputed
evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings;
b. The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a material witness in the matter in
controversy:
c. The judge, or a member of his or her family, has an economic interest in the outcome of the
matter in controversy;
d. The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or 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;
e. The judge’s ruling in a lower court is the subject of review;
f. The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within the 6th civil degree or
to counsel within the fourth civil degree; or;
 g. 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.

-Rule 137, ROC (disqualification of judicial officers)

Sec 1. Disqualification of judges – no judge or judicial officer shall sit in any case in which he, or his wife
or child, is peculiarly interested as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise, or in which he is related to either
party within the 6th degree of consanguinity or affinity, or to counsel within the 4th degree, computed
according to the rules of the guardian, trustee or counsel, or in which he has presided in review, without
the written consent of all parties in interest, signed by them and entered upon the record.

A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just or
valid reasons other than those mentioned above.

1st par. Sec 1, Rule 137; Mandatory disqualification

2nd par. Sec 2, Rule 137; voluntary inhibition

 Strictly a matter of conscience

 Standard to be followed by judge. Whether a losing party could entertain a reasonable belief
that the judge was partial to the prevailing party. It is not whether the judge was actually partial
or not.
 E.g. Utang na loob,counsel is also the judges’ counsel in a separate case, analogous instances.
 Not grounds for voluntary inhibition; counsel for a party has filed an administrative case against
the judge, mere friendship, counsel is a classmate of the judge.
 Voluntary inhibition cannot be compelled by mandamus

Sec 3, 4 and 5 just read.

Sec 6. A judge is disqualified as stated above may instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose
on the records the basis of disqualification on the records the basis of disqualification. If, based on such
disclosure, the parties and lawyers independently of the judge’s participation, all agree in writing that
the reason for the inhibition is immaterial or unsubstantial, the judge may then participate in the
proceeding. The agreement, signed by all parties and lawyers, shall be incorporated in the record of the
proceedings.

Requisites for Remittal of Disqualification

 Parties and their lawyers agree independently of the judge’s participation

 Reason for inhibition is immaterial or unsubstantial
 Agreement reduced to writing, signed by parties and lawyers, entered upon the records of the
case.

CANON 4. PROPRIETY.

Sec 1. Judges shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
Eg.
  Photos of judge and subordinate going out of hotel
 Judge heard a motion while on vacation, in his room, wearing a polo jacket.
 Judge privately met litigant in a resort.
 Judge held office and conducted hearings at his residence.
 Judge held hand of his interpreter (distant relative), kissed by her lips, as he missed it for she
wiggled out.

Sec 2. As a subject of constant public scrutiny, judges accept personal restrictions that might be viewed
as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. In particular, judges
conduct themselves in a way that is consistent with the dignity of the judicial office.

Ex. Use of intemperate language, getting drunk in a party, judge who confronted former
boyfriend and the latter’ female companion in a restaurant.

A judge should regulate his activities to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial duties (Canon 5, CJC)

Extrajudicial activities:
 Financial
- refrain from business dealings that will affect partially or interfere with the performance of
judicial functions,
 Vocational, civic and charitable activities
 Fiduciary
 Practice of law and other profession
 Extra-judicial appointments
 Political
 Write lecture, teach, speak on non legal subjects
 Engage in sports, arts, and other recreational activities
 Officer, director, trustee, or non legal advisor of a non profit, non political, educational,
religious, charitable, fraternal, civic, organization
 Must not conflict or degrade judicial functions