News Editor

THE unsavory reputation of the Court of Appeals owing to the misbehaving members in its ranks is traceable to the nonobservance by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) of its own rules and the culture of accommodation among its members when these errant justices were nominated.

The JBC has a set of rules promulgated on October 18, 2000, providing for the criteria, guidelines and procedure for screening and dominating applicants for membership into the Judiciary.

Among the council’s 10 rules with 40 sections are rules for determining integrity, competence, probity-independence and sound physical, mental and emotional condition. The Constitution requires that members of the Judiciary must be of proven competence, integrity and independence.

Rule 3 provides the guidelines in determining competence based on educational preparation, experience, performance for those in the government service and other accomplishments, such as authorship of law books, treatises and other legal writings.

Rule 4 deals with integrity while Rules 5 and 6 deal with probity-independence and sound physical, mental and emotional condition.

With the issue of integrity now focused on the Court of Appeals owing to the grave misconduct of certain members, it is clear that of the qualifications prescribed by the Constitution, integrity appears to be the qualification that has been most ignored. For this flaw, more than Malacañang, it is the JBC, which screens and nominates applicants for judicial positions, that is to blame. The president only chooses from the JBC’s nominees her appointees.

Section 1 of Rules on Integrity requires that “the Council shall take every possible step to verify the applicant’s record of and reputation for honesty, integrity, incorruptibility, irreproachable conduct and fidelity to sound moral and ethical standards,” while Section 2 of the said rules states that “the Council may order a discreet background check on the integrity, reputation and character of the applicant, and receive feedback thereon from the public, which it shall check or verify to validate the merits thereof.”

It is reasonable to conclude that the JBC is not observing these requirements. If these requirements were being complied with, why are applicants so notorious for extortion in bench and bar circles being nominated?

If the notoriety of certain applicants, among them incumbent trial court judges  and prosecutors, is of common knowledge, is it possible for JBC members—whose duty under the Constitution is to determine who meets the requirements for appointment to the Judiciary—not to know the notoriously unfit for nomination?

For instance, an aspirant for the Supreme Court, so well-known in bench and bar circles for misusing his administrative authority over trial court judges, even obtained the unanimous vote of all JBC members.

To ensure the nomination of only qualified and honest aspirants for judicial positions, Section 2 of Rule 10 of the Rules of the Judicial and Bar Council provides that: “In every case where the integrity of an applicant who is not otherwise disqualified is raised or challenged, the affirmative vote of all the members of the Council must be obtained for the favorable consideration of his nomination.”

Under this rule, even if an applicant who is notorious obtains the vote of majority of the council’s eight members, one member can override or veto the nomination of that notoriously undesirable applicant. More than the ex-officio political members of the JBC, it is the council’s regular members, namely, the retired justice, academe’s, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines’ and the private sector’s representatives with fixed terms of office, and the Chief Justice as the body’s ex-officio chairman, who are expected to invoke Section 2 of Rule 10 when called for.

If the JBC had observed Sections 1 and 2 of Rule 4 on Integrity and Section 2 of Rule 10, the Judiciary would not now be infested with dishonest members. The Court of Appeals, in particular, would not have acquired its present unsavory reputation. The worst scandal to affect the second-highest judicial body in its 73-year history would not have happened.

With vacancies regularly occurring in the Court of Appeals, and with six Supreme Court justices retiring next year, the JBC should now shape up before more unfit aspirants are nominated and appointed to the highest judicial bodies of the land.

Editorial: Roads to prosperity

The Chinese have a saying: If you want to get rich, build a road. Following Deng Xiaoping’s launch of the Four Modernizations Program in 1978, the People’s Republic did just that.

Nonnie L. Pelayo: CA mess: Whose fault?

THE unsavory reputation of the Court of Appeals owing to the misbehaving members in its ranks is traceable to the nonobservance by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) of its own rules and the culture of accommodation among its members when these errant justices were nominated.

Dispatches from the Enchanted Kingdom: Just a piece of paper?

‘It’s just a piece of paper. There’s nothing to worry about,” replied Fr. Joaquin Bernas when asked by the Philippine Daily Inquirer about the memorandum of agreement (MOA) between the Arroyo administration and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).  

The Way Forward: A peace that could lead to war

IN its alarming provisions for an enlarged Moro homeland and the way it was negotiated in the dark, the memorandum of agreement on ancestral domain between the GRP (Government Republic of the Philippines and the MILF (Moro Islamic Liberation Front) deserves to die in the water.

Market Files: Bangko Sentral disclosure

The disclosure by the Bangko Sentral Pilipinas (BSP) of the banking industry’s P89-billion exposure to the collapsing collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) in the subprime market in the United States is commendable.

Philip M. Lustre Jr.: Responsible mining is a myth

As mining activities take an upswing, bigger environmental woes loom, offsetting gains that have been made by the mining sector. The heavy social cost of a mining boom is to be expected. Mining growth and environmental degradation, or “ecological terrorism,” as an observer aptly puts it, are two sides of the same coin; one side goes with the other side.

Inter Press Service: WTO talks collapse and the birth of a new world order

OSLO—There is a clear lesson to be drawn from the unsuccessful World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations held in Geneva from July 21 to 29: The world is witnessing a shift of power in the arena of the world economy and world trade. New states with growing economies and political ambitions are asserting themselves.