Names: Cajulao, Mikaella J.

Date: November 26, 2024

Carbilledo, Michael
Cueva, April Mae Q.
Maloloy – on, Jonathan
Instructor: Prof. Jewel Oliveros Course: PA - 103

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH

INTRODUCTION
Under Article VIII, §1 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the judicial power shall be
vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be provided by law. This
power includes the duty to settle actual controversies involving rights that are legally
demandable and enforceable and to determine if any branch or instrumentality of government
has acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of excess of jurisdiction.

STRUCTURE
Philippine Court System

The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has both original and appellate jurisdiction. It exercises original
jurisdiction (cases are directly filed with the SC in the first instance without passing through
any of the lower courts) over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls,
and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.
(Art. VIII, §5(1)). It also has original jurisdiction over writs of amparo, habeas data and the
environmental writ of kalikasan. It exercises appellate jurisdiction to review, revise, reverse,
modify, or affirm final judgments, and orders of the lower courts in:

a. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international

or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction,
ordinance, or regulation is in question.
b. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any
penalty imposed in relation thereto
c. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue
d. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or
higher.
 e. All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.
The Supreme Court has administrative supervision over all courts and court
personnel. (Article VIII, §6) It exercises this power through the Office of the Court
Administrator.
Composition of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate
Justices. It may sit en banc or, in its discretion, in divisions of three, five, or seven members.
(Art. VIII, §4) Its members shall be appointed by the President from a list of at least three
nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council for every vacancy, without need of
confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. (Art. VIII, §9) Members of the Supreme
Court are required to have proven competence, integrity, probity and independence; they
must be natural-born citizens of the Philippines, at least forty years old, with at least fifteen
years of experience as a judge of a lower court or law practice in the country. (Art. VIII, §7)
Justices shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of seventy years, or
become incapacitated to discharge the duties of office. (Art. VIII, §11)

Rule-Making Powers

The Supreme Court has the exclusive power to promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all
courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the
underprivileged. Any such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the
speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not
diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and
quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court. (Art.
VIII, §54(5))

The Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals was established on February 1, 1936 by virtue of

Commonwealth Act No. 3 and is considered as the second highest tribunal in the country. It
is composed of one presiding justice and 68 associate justices, all of which are appointed by
the President from a shortlist submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council. The associate
justices shall have precedence according to the dates (or order, in case of similar appointment
dates) of their respective appointments. The qualifications for the justices of the Supreme
Court also apply to members of the Court of Appeals.
 The Court of Appeals’ principal mandate is to exercise appellate jurisdiction on all
cases not falling within the original and exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Its
decisions are final except when appealed to the Supreme Court on questions of law. The j

urisdiction of the Court of Appeals are as follows:

1. Original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari,

habeas corpus, and quo warranto, and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not
in aid of its appellate jurisdiction;
2. Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgements of
Regional Trial Courts; and
3. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgements, resolutions, orders
or awards of Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities,
boards or commission.
The Court of Appeals shall also have the power to try cases and conduct hearings,
receive evidence and perform acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases
falling within its original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and
conduct new trials or proceedings.

The Sandiganbayan

Both the 1973 and 1987 Constitution contain provisions on the present anti-graft court
known as the Sandiganbayan. It has jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases involving graft
and corrupt practices and such other offenses committed by public officers and employees,
including those in government-owned or controlled corporations, in relation to their office as
may be determined by law. The jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is perhaps one of the most
often amended provision from the 1973 Constitution to Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8249.
Before R.A. No. 8249, jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan was determined on the basis of the
penalty imposable on the offense charged. Thereafter, it was amended such that regardless of
the penalty, so long as the offense charged was committed by a public officer, the
Sandiganbayan was vested with jurisdiction. Under R.A. No. 8249, to determine whether the
Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction, a person must look into two (2) criteria, namely, the nature
of the offense and the salary grade of the public official.

The Court of Tax Appeals

 The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) was created on June 16, 1954, through the
enactment of Republic Act No. 1125 (R.A. 1125). Its jurisdiction and composition have been
increased with passage of several legislations. With the enactment of Republic Act (R.A.)
No. 9282 on April 23, 2004, the CTA became an appellate Court, equal in rank to the Court
of Appeals. The composition of the Court increased to six (6) Justices with one (1) Presiding
Justice and five (5) Associate Justices.

R.A. No. 9503 took effect on July 5, 2008, which further enlarged the organizational
structure of the CTA. The CTA is now composed of one (1) Presiding Justice and eight (8)
Associate Justices. The CTA may sit en banc or in three (3) divisions with each division
consisting of three (3) Justices. A decision of a division of the CTA may be appealed to the
CTA En Banc, and the latter’s decision may further be appealed by verified petition for
certiorari to the Supreme Court.

The Second Level Courts

Regional Trial Courts are also known as Second Level Courts, which were established
among the thirteen Judicial regions in the Philippines consisting of Regions I to XII and the
National Capital Region (NCR). There are as many Regional Trial Courts in each region as
the law mandates. RTCs were formerly called as the Court of First Instance since the Spanish
era. It was only in the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 that its name was changed from
being called the Court of First Instance to Regional Trial Court.

The First Level Courts

Each city and municipality in the Philippines has its own trial court. These First Level
Courts are more commonly referred to as Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTC), Municipal Trial
Courts in Cities (MTCC), Municipal Trial Court (MTC), and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts
(MCTC). The MeTCs are the first level courts in the Metropolitan Manila area. First level
courts in cities outside Metropolitan Manila are referred to as the MTCCs. The MTCs are
first level courts that cover only one municipality, whereas MCTCs cover multiple
municipalities.

The Shari'a District & Circuit Courts

The Shari’a District Courts are equivalent to the Regional Trial Courts in rank, which
were established in certain provinces in Mindanao where the Muslim Code on Personal Laws
is being enforced. On the other hand, the Shari’a Circuit Courts are the counterpart of the
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts established in certain municipalities in Mindanao.

FUNCTIONS AND POWERS

Pursuant to the provisions of the 1987 Constitution, the Supreme Court is composed
of a chief Justice and 14 associate justices who serve until the age of 70. The court may sit en
banc or in one of its three divisions composed of five members each. The chief justice and
associate justices are appointed by the President of the Philippines, chosen from a shortlist
submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council. The president must fill up a vacancy within 90
days of occurrence.

Article VIII, Section 4 (2) of the constitution explicitly provides for the cases that
must be heard en banc, and Section 4 (3) for cases that may be heard by divisions.

The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 transferred the administrative supervision

of all courts and their personnel from the Department of Justice to the Supreme Court. This
was affirmed by Article VIII, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution. To effectively discharge
this constitutional mandate, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) was created under
Presidential Decree No. 828, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 842 (and its functions
further strengthened by a resolution of the Supreme Court en banc dated October 24, 1996).
Its principal function is the supervision and administration of the lower courts throughout the
Philippines and all their personnel. It reports and recommends to the Supreme Court all
actions that affect the lower court management. The OCA is headed by the court
administrator, three deputy court administrators, and three assistant court administrators.

According to the 1987 Constitution, Article VIII, Section 5, the Supreme Court
exercises the following powers:
1. Exercise jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers
and consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and
habeas corpus.
2. Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm, on appeal or certiorari, as the law
or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of the lower courts in:
1. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty,
international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order,
instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question;
2. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll,
or any penalty imposed in relation thereto;
3. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue;
4. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua
or higher;
5. All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved;
3. Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations as public interest
may require. Such temporary assignments shall not exceed six months without the consent of
the judge concerned.
4. Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.

Judicial Power and Jurisdiction

Under Article VIII, §1 of the Constitution, the judicial power shall be vested in one
Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be provided by law. This power includes the
duty to settle actual controversies involving rights that are legally demandable and
enforceable and to determine if any branch or instrumentality of government has acted with
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of excess of jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court has both original and appellate jurisdiction. It exercises original
jurisdiction (cases are directly filed with the SC in the first instance without passing through
any of the lower courts) over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls,
and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas
corpus. (Art. VIII, §5(1)). It also has original jurisdiction over writs of amparo, habeas data
and the environmental writ of kalikasan. On the other hand, the SC has appellate jurisdiction
to review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm final judgments, and orders of the lower courts
in:
(a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or
executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or
regulation is in question.
(b) All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any
penalty imposed in relation thereto.
(c) All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.
 (d) All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.
(e) All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved. (Art. VIII, §5(1),
(2))
The Supreme Court has administrative supervision over all courts and court
personnel. (Article VIII, §6) It exercises this power through the Office of the Court
Administrator.

Rule-making Power
The Supreme Court has the power to promulgate rules concerning the protection and
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the
admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the
underprivileged. Any such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the
speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not
diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and
quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court. (Art.
VIII, §54(5), Constitution)

APPOINMENT AND TERMS

The appointment of members to the Judiciary in the Philippines is governed by
specific provisions of the 1987 Constitution, statutory laws, jurisprudence, and established
procedures, which ensure that the Judiciary remains independent and competent. This process
is primarily guided by the principles of judicial independence, integrity, and competence.
Below is a detailed breakdown of the laws, procedures, and related legal doctrines concerning
appointments to the Judiciary:
1. Constitutional Provisions on Judicial Appointments
Article VIII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution outlines the rules on the appointment
of judges and justices, particularly for the Supreme Court and lower courts.
A. Judicial and Bar Council (JBC)
Section 8(5), Article VIII of the Constitution creates the Judicial and Bar Council
(JBC). The JBC plays a pivotal role in the selection and nomination of members of the
judiciary, acting as a body that screens applicants to judicial positions to ensure the
competence and integrity of appointees.
Composition of the JBC:
 a. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (Ex Officio Chairman)
b. The Secretary of Justice (Ex Officio Member)
c. A representative of Congress (Ex Officio Member)
d. A representative of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
e. A professor of law
f. A retired member of the Supreme Court
g. A representative from the private sector
The JBC prepares a list of at least three (3) nominees for every vacancy in the
judiciary. From this list, the President appoints justices or judges.

B. Supreme Court Justices

Under Section 9, Article VIII, the President appoints members of the Supreme Court
and judges of the lower courts from a list of at least three nominees prepared by the JBC for
every vacancy.
These appointments do not require confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments, ensuring the judiciary’s independence from political interference by Congress.
Qualifications of Supreme Court Justices:
 Natural-born citizen of the Philippines
 At least 40 years of age
 Must have been a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in
the Philippines for at least 15 years
 Must be of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.
C. Lower Court Judges
The same process applies to judges of the lower courts. Judges are appointed by the
President from a list of nominees submitted by the JBC.
The appointment to lower courts includes positions in Regional Trial Courts (RTC),
Municipal Trial Courts (MTC), Court of Appeals (CA), and Sandiganbayan, among others.

2. Qualifications for Appointments

The Constitution provides for specific qualifications for members of the Judiciary,
which differ depending on the court to which the individual is appointed. These qualifications
are designed to ensure the competence and independence of the judiciary.
A. Supreme Court and Collegiate Courts
 Must be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines.
  Must be at least 40 years of age at the time of appointment.
 Must have been a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in
the Philippines for at least 15 years.
 Must possess proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.
 B. Lower Courts
The Constitution does not specify exact qualifications for lower court judges, but
applicants must still demonstrate competence, integrity, probity, and independence.
For certain courts like the Sandiganbayan and Court of Appeals, additional legal
experience and expertise in specific areas, such as anti-graft laws for Sandiganbayan, may be
considered.

3. Role of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC)

The JBC is integral to the appointment process for judges and justices. Its mandate is
to ensure that those appointed to the judiciary meet the constitutional standards of
competence and integrity.
A. Nomination Process
 The JBC accepts applications and nominations for judicial positions, then
screens and interviews candidates.
 After careful deliberation, the JBC prepares a shortlist of at least three names
for each vacancy. This list is submitted to the President.
 The President cannot appoint anyone to the judiciary who is not on this
shortlist.
B. Standards Applied by the JBC
 The JBC evaluates candidates based on their track record, legal expertise,
ethical behavior, integrity, and ability to remain independent.
 The JBC conducts background checks, interviews, and considers public
comments on the applicants.
 The Council also considers the financial records and lifestyle of the candidates
to ensure that they have not been involved in corrupt practices.

4. President's Power of Appointment

The President of the Philippines has the exclusive authority to appoint members of the
judiciary, but this power is not absolute, as it is subject to the constraints set forth by the
Constitution and the JBC process.
A. Appointment Without Congressional Confirmation
Unlike many other appointments in government, judicial appointments do not require
confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. This insulates the judiciary from political
influence and maintains its independence.
B. Timeframe for Appointments
Under Section 9, Article VIII, the President is mandated to make appointments within
90 days from the occurrence of the vacancy.
This provision ensures that vacancies in the judiciary are filled promptly, preventing
prolonged vacancies that could impair the administration of justice.

5. Prohibition Against Midnight Appointments

The Constitution prohibits certain actions by an outgoing President in relation to
judicial appointments:
A. Section 15, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution:
The President is prohibited from making appointments during the period of two
months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of their term,
except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies could
prejudice public service or endanger public safety.
B. Doctrine of Midnight Appointments (De Castro v. JBC, G.R. No. 191002, March 17,
2010):
In the De Castro case, the Supreme Court ruled that this prohibition does not apply to
judicial appointments. Thus, an outgoing President may still appoint members of the Supreme
Court even during this period. The decision affirms the independence of the judiciary by
ensuring that vacancies in the highest court can be filled at all times.

IMPORTANCE OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

Judicial independence is also the 'cornerstone' of the rule of law. The rule of law
implies an independent and impartial judiciary in the adjudicating function also with respect
to the State and its representatives. Only by defining judicial independence and impartiality
with respect to the State, can the judge act as an impartial 'third party' in disputes between the
State and the citizens (for instance in criminal trials or administrative cases). Without coming
under pressure from the State, the judiciary can then become an effective check on the way
public functions are performed. Without rule of law and independent and impartial judges
there would be a perversion in the functioning of the State. An independent judiciary is
therefore essential for the upholding of the rule of law and ensuring an effective and
accountable political structure.
Basic Principle of Judicial Independence
1. The independence of the judiciary shall be guaranteed by the State and enshrined in the
Constitution or the law of the country. It is the duty of all governmental and other institutions
to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary.

2. The judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and in
accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements,
pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.

3. The judiciary shall have jurisdiction over all issues of a judicial nature and shall have
exclusive authority to decide whether an issue submitted for its decision is within its
competence as defined by law.

4. There shall not be any inappropriate or unwarranted interference with the judicial process,
nor shall judicial decisions by the courts be subject to revision. This principle is without
prejudice to judicial review or to mitigation or commutation by competent authorities of
sentences imposed by the judiciary, in accordance with the law.

5. Everyone shall have the right to be tried by ordinary courts or tribunals using established
legal procedures. Tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal
process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts or
judicial tribunals.

6. The principle of the independence of the judiciary entitles and requires the judiciary to
ensure that judicial proceedings are conducted fairly and that the rights of the parties are
respected.

7. It is the duty of each Member State to provide adequate resources to enable the judiciary to
properly perform its functions.

Judicial Independence and Security of Tenure

To safeguard judicial independence, members of the judiciary enjoy security of
tenure. Once appointed, justices and judges hold office during good behavior and can only be
removed through the following mechanisms:
A. Impeachment (for Supreme Court Justices)
 Justices of the Supreme Court may be removed only by impeachment, which
is the sole method provided by the Constitution for the removal of high-ranking officials.
  Grounds for impeachment include culpable violation of the Constitution,
treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.

B. Disciplinary Actions (for Lower Court Judges)

 Judges of lower courts may be subjected to disciplinary proceedings and, if
warranted, may be removed by the Supreme Court under its supervisory authority over all
courts.

Conclusion
The structure, functions, and power, along with the appointment and terms, and judicial
independence of the Philippine Judicial Branch are vital to maintaining the rule of law,
ensuring justice, and upholding democracy. A well-defined structure and clearly delineated
functions enable efficient judicial processes. Proper appointment mechanisms and fixed terms
safeguard competence and stability, while judicial independence protects the judiciary from
external influence, ensuring impartiality and fairness. Together, these elements ensure a
judiciary that serves as an effective guardian of the Constitution and the rights of the people.
References
https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/about/gov/judiciary/
Katharina.kiener-Manu. (n.d.). Crime Prevention & Criminal Justice Module 14 Key Issues:
Topic 1 - General issues. Judicial independence as a fundamental value of the rule of law
and of constitutionalism.
https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/crime-prevention-criminal-justice/module-14/key-issues/1--
general-issues--judicial-independence-as-a-fundamental-value-of-the-rule-of-law-and-of-
constitutionalism.html#:~:text=Without%20rule%20of%20law%20and,effective%20and
%20accountable%20political%20structure.
Philippine Court System – CACJ. (n.d.). https://cacj-ajp.org/philippines/judiciary/description-
of-courts/philippine-court-system
Respicio, H. (2024, October 15). Appointments to the Judiciary | JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.
RESPICIO & CO. https://www.respicio.ph/bar/2025/political-law-and-public-international-
law/judicial-department/appointmen
ts-to-the-judiciary