House backs bigger budget for judiciary

MANILA, Philippines - Members of the House of Representatives have expressed their support for a bigger budget for the judiciary, saying insufficient funding is the primary cause of delays and problems in the judicial system.

Rep. Rodante Marcoleta of party-list 1Sagip and Rep. Vicente Veloso of Leyte said since 2010, the budget proposals of the judiciary had been cut and this affected the judiciary’s capacity to solve problems plaguing the judicial system.

Marcoleta cited that in 2010, the judiciary asked for a budget of P60 billion, but got only P30 billion. Subsequently, it asked for P21 billion but got only P14 billion; and it then asked for P20 billion but got P15 billion.

 For 2017, the judiciary asked for a budget of P40.4 billion but got only P32.5 billion.

“This is a very serious concern because there were many issues raised on the ability of the judiciary to respond to the requirements and realities of time like delays (in resolution of cases),” Marcoleta said in a recent budget hearing attended by judiciary officials.

 “But the truth is, the budgetary requirements of the judiciary are not met. I’d like to believe this is the principal constraint why the judiciary is not able to address the problems confronting the judicial system,” he added.

Veloso, on the other hand, cited the backlog of cases which, he said, is caused by the lack of courts which is caused by insufficient funding.

Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr. said that decades-old cases gathering dust in the judiciary are still not hopeless. There will be progress in their resolution if only the national government will create more trial courts and appoint corresponding number of judges.

Velasco cited the case of Bacoor City in the province of Cavite where 10 additional regional trial courts were created, but these were reportedly not yet funded.

“Once a law is passed, it should be immediately funded. That’s what I heard from them, these courts are not yet funded,” Velasco told the House committee on appropriations.

 “To my mind, we should have very efficient judges. That is the only way by which we can expedite cases,” the magistrate told Kabayan party-list Rep. Harry Roque who inquired why cases drag too long.

He said a regional trial court judge “on the average” must have a “manageable case load” of only 300 cases.

 “If the judge has more than that, I think he will really have a problem. That’s why we are always happy if trial courts are created,” he added.

“There may be some vacancies in the courts but they are still functional because we designate acting judges to cover them,” Deputy Court Administrator Raul Villanueva told the House’s appropriations committee headed by Davao City Rep. Karlo Alexei Nograles.  

 But Veloso said the designation of acting judges is more of a problem than a solution because when the judiciary assigns a judge to another branch, then it deprives him of important time to attend to his own cases.

Roque, a former UP law professor and practicing lawyer, said the problem “has to be addressed by all branches of government,” noting that the Asian Development Bank once complained it took 10 years for a graft case in the Sandiganbayan to be resolved.

 Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang refuted the observation, saying the “average number of years” in the anti-graft court takes 7.5 years at most.

 She said the 15 Sandiganbayan justices made representations to the Supreme Court to allow a modified trial procedure in order to expedite the process, which they hope will “lessen the delay by one year if approved by the Supreme Court.”