Array
(
    [results] => Array
        (
            [0] => Array
                (
                    [ArticleID] => 948357
                    [Title] => EDITORIAL - Work in progress
                    [Summary] => 
Reforming the judiciary is a work in progress.

                    [DatePublished] => 2013-05-31 00:00:00
                    [ColumnID] => 0
                    [Focus] => 0
                    [AuthorID] => 
                    [AuthorName] => 
                    [SectionName] => Opinion
                    [SectionUrl] => opinion
                    [URL] => 
                )

            [1] => Array
                (
                    [ArticleID] => 298873
                    [Title] => Selective judiciary austerity, or plain iniquity?
                    [Summary] => About a year ago today, a constitutional gridlock nearly occurred following the impeachment of the chief justice by the young Turks of the NPC faction of the Lower House.


What triggered it was the alleged illegal over-spending of the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) from which court employees have been drawing their varied allowances.


However, the proximate cause could have been their discontent over their exclusion from RA 7229 increasing the magistrates' allowances by 100 percent over their basic pay, despite prior assurances of inclusion.


                    [DatePublished] => 2005-09-27 00:00:00
                    [ColumnID] => 133156
                    [Focus] => 0
                    [AuthorID] => 1471332
                    [AuthorName] => Lorenzo Paradiang Jr.
                    [SectionName] => Freeman Opinion
                    [SectionUrl] => opinion
                    [URL] => 
                )

        )

)

MAGISTRATES

Array
(
    [results] => Array
        (
            [0] => Array
                (
                    [ArticleID] => 948357
                    [Title] => EDITORIAL - Work in progress
                    [Summary] => 
Reforming the judiciary is a work in progress.

                    [DatePublished] => 2013-05-31 00:00:00
                    [ColumnID] => 0
                    [Focus] => 0
                    [AuthorID] => 
                    [AuthorName] => 
                    [SectionName] => Opinion
                    [SectionUrl] => opinion
                    [URL] => 
                )

            [1] => Array
                (
                    [ArticleID] => 298873
                    [Title] => Selective judiciary austerity, or plain iniquity?
                    [Summary] => About a year ago today, a constitutional gridlock nearly occurred following the impeachment of the chief justice by the young Turks of the NPC faction of the Lower House.


What triggered it was the alleged illegal over-spending of the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) from which court employees have been drawing their varied allowances.


However, the proximate cause could have been their discontent over their exclusion from RA 7229 increasing the magistrates' allowances by 100 percent over their basic pay, despite prior assurances of inclusion.


                    [DatePublished] => 2005-09-27 00:00:00
                    [ColumnID] => 133156
                    [Focus] => 0
                    [AuthorID] => 1471332
                    [AuthorName] => Lorenzo Paradiang Jr.
                    [SectionName] => Freeman Opinion
                    [SectionUrl] => opinion
                    [URL] => 
                )

        )

)

abtest

EDITORIAL - Work in progress

May 31, 2013 - 12:00am

Reforming the judiciary is a work in progress.

Opinion

Selective judiciary austerity, or plain iniquity?

By Lorenzo Paradiang Jr. | September 27, 2005 - 12:00am

About a year ago today, a constitutional gridlock nearly occurred following the impeachment of the chief justice by the young Turks of the NPC faction of the Lower House. What triggered it was the alleged illegal...

Freeman Opinion