Combating judicial corruption

P-Noy, in his continuing war against corruption and the struggle for eliminating poverty, said in a recent speech:

“That is why we will continue with our reform agenda , no matter how much noise our enemies make, and no matter how difficult it may be to uproot the corruption that has wormed its way deep into our systems.

“The reforms we are implementing in the Bureau of Customs are proof positive. Think about it. An estimated P200 billion was lost from our nation’s coffers because of the transactionalism, patronage, and blatant corruption that have long plagued Customs. It became clear to us: if we only shuffled officials among different positions, and allowed them to remain where they could still do harm, nothing would ever come of our efforts.

“Our answer: a reset button for an agency that has long been the face of corruption in government. Five new deputy commissioners have been appointed. I signed two EOs to inject new blood into the agency – together with fresh ideas and new ways of doing things. Together with these efforts, an order has been issued for detailed employees to return to their mother units.

“Kaya kung may natitira pa ring mga latak na nais kumapit sa lumang kalakaran: Sige po, subukan na lang po ninyo, at tignan natin ang inyong paglalagyan.”

As part of the massive reorganization at the Customs, Secretary Purisima organized what he called as the revenue cluster. The end result was that the BIR and Customs were effectively placed under Kim Henares.

The new revenue cluster head organized the Customs Policy Research Office and assigned or promoted or exiled (choose your own term) 15 District Collectors to the new office or freezer or Siberia (choose your own term). However, Presidential Spokesman Lacierda made it very clear that the reassigned Collectors were not demoted and their salary was not reduced. But this meant that there was no diminution in their legitimate earnings.

Perhaps what happened next should not have surprised any of us. But I still get depressed by this type of news.

Executive Judge Marino de la Cruz Jr. of the Manila Regional Trial Court issued a 72-hour Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) stopping the Bureau of Customs from transferring 15 District Collectors to the Customs Policy Research Office.

Then Judge Felicitas Laron-Cacanindin of the Manila City Regional Trial Court Branch 17 extended the 72-hour TRO to 17 days.

This is reminiscent of the TRO issued by three Court of Appeals Justices last May 9 which effectively prevented the Department of Justice from going ahead with its P5-billion smuggling case against Phoenix Petroleum CEO Dennis Ang Uy and his customs broker Jorian Capiin Cabanes.

By what seemed to be a strange coincidence, during these past weeks, there has been a lot of talk on the topic of “Hoodlums in Robes.”

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Maria Lourdes Sereno, in a speech before the Philippine Bar Association, urged lawyers to help her unmask these “hoodlums in robes,” referring to corrupt judges who have been giving a bad name to the judiciary. She admitted that talks about bribery and extortion have become common in legal circles.

The Chief Justice challenged lawyers to come forward and file administrative cases. But perhaps CJ Sereno may not admit but her biggest problem is that the office responsible for accepting and processing these charges is the Office of the Court Administrator under this Jose Midas Marquez.

 I am not a lawyer, But lawyer friends of mine keep telling me that when administrative cases against judges are filed in the office of Midas Marquez, like the old song goes “they just lie there and they die there.”

If the Chief Justice is sincere she should begin by reforming the Office of the Court Administrator and pay serious attention to the proposal in a Philippine STAR editorial which proposed that a mechanism must be set up to facilitate anonymous reporting of anomalies in the judiciary.

I have been proposing greater transparency in the judiciary. Transparency International has proposed certain measures to increase transparency in the judiciary. They include the following:

A  transparent organization wherein the judiciary must publish an annual report of its activities and spending and provide the public with reliable information about its governance and organisation.

Freedom of expression wherein journalists must be able to comment fairly on legal proceedings and report suspected or actual corruption or bias.  Laws that criminalize defamation or give judges discretion to award crippling compensation in libel cases inhibit the media from investigating and reporting suspected criminality and should be reformed.

The public should have reliable access to court judgments, court procedures, judicial vacancies, recruitment criteria, judicial selection procedures and reasons for judicial appointments.

Judges should make periodic asset disclosures especially where other public officials are required to do so. This means judges should also file their SALNs which should be made available to the public.

Aside from transparency, failure to appoint judges on merit leads to the selection of pliant and corruptible judges. Unfair or ineffective processes for the discipline or removal of corrupt judges will only perpetuate systemic corruption in the judiciary.

A corrupt judiciary is a primary obstacle to institutionalizing the rule of law. These “hoodlums in robes” must be removed if we want a society where there is equal opportunity for All Filipinos to live a life of human dignity.

*      *      *

E-mail: elfrencru0z@gmail.com