SC asked to check survey on corruption in judiciary

Regional Trial Court Executive Judge Fortunato de Gracia has formally asked the Supreme Court to look into a recent survey result and the supporting admission of an RTC judge that corruption exists in the judiciary.

De Gracia personally handed over his letter-request to Court Administrator Christopher Lock who happened to be in Cebu yesterday. While Lock''s visit was said to be personal, De Gracia said the court administrator had read in the papers the statement of RTC Judge Meinrado Paredes that corruption exists in the courts.

Paredes made the statement as keynote speaker in a gathering last Friday wherein the Legal Alternatives for Women Center unveiled its recent survey result, which said that the trial courts in the cities of Cebu, Mandaue and Lapu-Lapu are no longer credible because of alleged corruption.

"As the charge severely discredits the judiciary, coming as it did from one of its own, I recommend immediate probe of its verity through an immediate investigation and the imposition of sanctions whenever warranted," De Gracia''s letter reads.

While Paredes said the supposed corruption is still "not pervasive", De Gracia felt it is but appropriate for the Supreme Court, through the Office of the Court Administrator, to determine the veracity of the survey result.

In an interview with reporters yesterday, De Gracia admitted Paredes'' admission had ushered certain awkwardness among the judges. Judges usually gather together after the flag ceremony during Mondays and such atmosphere of awkwardness was reportedly manifested yesterday morning.

Apart from his request for investigation, De Gracia also sent a separate letter to Justice Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez, chairperson of the Society for Judicial Excellence recommending for "immediate intervention" to quantify the recent controversy.

"I was besieged by several calls from enrolled members of the Society for Judicial Excellence, expressing disgust at the brazen and public denigration of the award as ''badges and plaques, when undeserved, mislead the public'' and the Society suffers from lack of credibility," the letter reads.

The Society bestows awards for judicial excellence for members of the bar who are nominated for their exceptional service in the judiciary.

De Gracia said that even if he himself was among the Society''s past awardees, intervention is necessary if only to uphold the integrity of the award, which is being placed on the line "because of the frank and bare-knuckled assault."

The survey, conducted by LAW Inc. and the University of Cebu College of Law, showed that 68 percent of the respondents preferred to settle their cases by bribing the aggrieved party.

Conducted in the second quarter of 2006, the survey had 300 respondents composed of party litigants, practicing lawyers, public prosecutors, public defenders, media practitioners, NGO members, church people, members of the academe, and businessmen.

The results showed that 44 percent believed that they would be able to obtain a favorable decision if they bribe the judge.

Positive notes were reflected however in that 87 percent believed that the factors that will likely influence the judge in rendering a decision is still based on the competence of the judge.

Eighty-six percent said it is on professionalism and objectivity of the judge, 81 percent said it is on evidence presented, 63 percent said it is on influence of a superior court officer, and 54 percent said it is on politician''s influence.

The survey also showed that 54 percent believed that the patronage system in appointing judges accounts for a bigger influence in the level of corruption in the judiciary.

Fifty-two percent said it is due to judges'' abuse of discretion in making decision, 51 percent said it is the Supreme Court''s lack of control in the judiciary, and 48 percent pointed out the lavish lifestyle of lawyers.

Forty-six percent blamed it on the inability of the judges to control and punish corrupt court personnel and bribing litigants; 45 percent on the lack of transparency in appointing judges; 43 percent on nepotism; 42 percent on lack of a credible monitoring of courts; and 34 percent on political pressure over the judges.

Court personnel are the most susceptible to bribery during judicial proceedings, said 63 percent of the respondents. Fifty-eight percent pointed to the judge''s relatives and friends while 55 percent said they are the judges themselves.

On bribery, 63 percent said that court personnel directly solicits money and sell tickets or merchandise to litigants, 50 percent said that stenographers and court sheriffs asked for money to speed up the process, while 42 percent said they never experienced a judge asking money from them. - Joeberth M. Ocao with Bettina Makabenta, UP Comm. Arts intern/MEEV