Malleable justice

There’s another long-running complaint of investors that cannot be cured by Charter change: a compromised Philippine justice system.

An official of one of the country’s biggest trading partners once described the system to me as “malleable.”

Foreign business groups have openly decried corruption in the judiciary, apart from the notoriously slow and unpredictable administration of justice. They lament, for example, that temporary restraining orders in this country are anything but temporary.

The champion of opaqueness in government is the ombudsman himself, a former Supreme Court justice, who will always be remembered for keeping public officials’ statements of assets, liabilities and net worth under lock and key.

We’re told that the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo is cracking down on corruption and unethical conduct in the judiciary and members of the Bar. Eyebrows are still raised, but the crackdown has shown some noteworthy results.

There’s that lawyer who was disbarred last year for abandoning his wife and child and flaunting his extramarital affair. If this crackdown intensifies, the country could lose a lot of lawyers. Or else the country might finally legalize absolute divorce.

Then there’s the lawyer working for the Bureau of Customs, who was sacked for claiming authority to sell vehicles seized by the BOC and pocketing P1.4 million paid by a woman.

The most interesting case is the SC’s dismissal of a regional trial court judge in Roxas City, Mindoro Oriental. The story behind the ouster of Edralin Reyes as RTC judge in October last year confirms what many have all along suspected about the rot in the judiciary.

*     *      *

Reyes, who may face criminal charges, has claimed innocence. But based on the SC’s order, he had sought favors from lawyers and parties with cases pending before his court.

These reportedly included pocket money or “pabaon” from a private lawyer when attending seminars, and granting bail to two murder suspects upon the instruction of a town mayor in Oriental Mindoro. The two were later acquitted.

The SC chanced upon Reyes’ activities through sheer luck. He had served for a year as acting presiding judge in one of the salas in the Roxas City RTC, and had used a court-issued laptop during his stint. When a regular judge was appointed to the court, Reyes turned over the laptop to her. The new judge sent the laptop to the SC’s Management and Information Systems Office (MISO) for repair or replacement.

Inspecting the laptop, MISO techies found that it was linked to Reyes’ iPhone, whose messages could be retrieved in the computer. The SC traced the owners of the phone numbers in the incriminating message threads with the help of Globe Telecom Inc.

And that was how the SC built a case against Reyes, who argued that the phone messages retrieved through the laptop were covered by privacy laws and could not be used against him. He is likely to use this defense in case he faces criminal indictment.

The SC, however, ruled that a government-issued device, which must be used only for official business, is not covered by privacy laws. Also, the SC noted that the laptop was not confiscated by the government, but turned over voluntarily by Reyes.

Apart from the message threads involving the mayor and private lawyers, the judicial audit team deemed “suspicious” Reyes’ dismissal of about 50 cases attributed to failure to prosecute, or because complainants were no longer interested in pursuing the case.

*     *      *

Apart from catching crooks – which is difficult, as we are seeing – and imposing punishment, what else can be done?

Reforms should start at the recruitment stage. As in many other aspects of life in our weak republic, appointments to the judiciary are often based not on merit but on connections – mostly political or to the religious mafia – or through fraternity ties.

Local government executives want a say in the appointment of judges (as well as prosecutors and police officials) in their turf. In our land with a twisted concept of utang na loob or debt of gratitude, this gives the political patron power over the justice system. It’s one of the reasons why we have politicians who murder their rivals with impunity: they believe they can get away with it (and sadly, they often do).

While there is a Judicial and Bar Council that vets nominees, the JBC includes politicians, and the president, who has the final say, can disregard the nominations.

In nearly every administration, the current one included, there is a law firm with strong connections to Malacañang, which becomes the shadow vetter for appointments in the judiciary and prosecution service.

Reyes was sacked from the judiciary for gross misconduct for soliciting money and fraternizing with lawyers, in violation of the New Code of Judicial Conduct. He lost all retirement benefits (quite hefty for judges) and is perpetually disqualified from public office. He still faces disbarment.

He was also fined P17,500 for “simple misconduct” in another case, based on a Philippine National Police probe that showed he had taken several guns held as evidence in cases pending in his court. Such guns are supposed to be turned over to the PNP Firearms and Explosives Office.

“His casual interactions with lawyers and litigants who have pending cases in his sala, even if there be no evidence of a payoff, only serve to heighten the public’s doubts on the credibility of the judiciary to discharge its mandate,” the SC stated in its ruling.

It added: “His unethical behavior does not only damage his reputation and qualifications but also tarnishes the image of the judiciary as it sends the message that justice can be bought for a price. He thus lost and should be stripped of the honor of wearing the judicial robe.”

Let’s hope the lesson learned here by legal professionals is to abide by laws on integrity, rather than to clean up your court-issued laptop before giving it back to the government.