Thursday, April 26, 2018

2017 bar exams top ten placers

See -  https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/04/26/1809661/university-st-la-salle-graduate-tops-2017-bar-exam


"x x x.

Here are the top 10 of the 2017 bar exams:


Mark John Simondo, University of St. La Salle, 91.05%

Christianne Mae Balili, University of San Carlos, 90.8%

Camille Remoroza, Ateneo de Davao University, 90.7%

IvanneD'laureil Hisoler, University of San Carlos, 89.55%

Monica Anne Yap, San Beda College-Manila, 89.45%

Lorenzo Luigi Gayya, University of Santo Tomas, 89.1%

Rheland Servacio, University of San Carlos, 89%

Krizza Fe Alcantara-Bagni, St. Mary's University, 88.9% and 

AlgieKwillon Mariacos, San Beda College-Manila, 88.9%

Klinton Torralba, University of Santo Tomas, 88.65%

Emma Ruby Aguilar, University of Santo Tomas, 88.4%.

x x x."


Read more at https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/04/26/1809661/university-st-la-salle-graduate-tops-2017-bar-exam#AzDQdsMH1hdZ8yxW.99

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

Bill lowering corporate income taxes filed in House - House Bill No. 7458


See - Bill lowering corporate income taxes filed in House
"x x x.

Businesses will enjoy lower corporate income taxes next year but investors across a broad range of industries will lose their fiscal perks under the second installment of the Duterte administration's tax reform package filed by House leaders this week.

Tax evaders will also be punished with bigger fines and longer jail terms under the proposed "Corporate Income Tax and Incentives Reform Act," which will complement the "Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion Act" that took effect this year.

On Wednesday, House ways and means committee chair Dakila Cua, Deputy Speaker Raneo Abu, and Deputy Majority Leader Aurelio Gonzales Jr. filed the 65-page House Bill No. 7458 covering the second part of the tax reform program.

"Specifically, this bill proposes the lowering of corporate income taxes, reforming the corporate income tax system, broadening the tax base by modernizing investment tax incentives, removing excessive tax exemptions and privileges given to certain industries, and limiting the grant of tax incentives to strategic industries and lagging regions," they said in an explanatory note.

The lawmakers said the second tax package would supplement the TRAIN law, which lowered personal income tax for the middle class but imposed higher excise tax on fuels, cars, cosmetic procedures, and sweetened beverages.

One percent less

The central feature of the new tax bill is the provision reducing the corporate income tax rate by one percentage point every year beginning January 1, 2019 on the condition that it shall not go lower than 20 percent.

This applies to domestic and foreign corporations, which are both taxed at 30 percent of net income as of January 2009.

Economic managers earlier said the goal was to "gradually lower" the tax rate to 25 percent to put the Philippines on equal standing with its neighbors.

Standard corporate income taxes are at 20 percent in Thailand, 24 percent in Malaysia, and 25 percent in Vietnam.

To offset revenue losses from the reduced corporate taxes, the Cua-Abu-Gonzales bill introduces sweeping changes to the incentives system for many industries and sectors by repealing or amending sections of laws providing for tax perks.

Repeal

The bill repeals the Omnibus Investments Code of 1987 and introduces in an amendment a new set of chapters on tax incentives to the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997.

Some of the repealed sections would remove exemptions from the payment of taxes and customs duties of, among other industries and sectors, dairy production, fisheries, thrift banks, and organic agriculture.

The bill provides that tax exemptions and privileges shall only be given to certain strategic industries and lagging regions, under a "Strategic Investments Priority Plan" (SIPP) to be formulated by the Board of Investments in coordination with the Office of the President, Investment Promotion Agencies (IPAs), government agencies and the private sector.

The bill identifies the qualified activities for tax incentives, including inclusion in the Philippine Development Plan; performance in terms of export sales, actual job creation and investments in lagging regions, and in research and development; use of modern technology; and adoption of environmental protection systems.

Incentives

For a business to qualify for tax incentives, a "threshold amount" shall be set in terms of jobs created and investment poured into the project, subject to a periodic three-year evaluation, according to the bill.

The bill, however, grants the President the right to grant incentives to "highly desirable projects" outside the SIPP, provided that the benefits from the investment are so convincing as to outweigh the cost of the fiscal perks.

Such projects must meet other criteria such as a minimum investment of $500 million and minimum job generation of 1,500 within the first year.

Another provision in the bill would include telecommunication firms whose franchises are subject to taxes along with radio and broadcasting companies.

Penalties

The bill also amends the Tax Code to impose more stringent penalties for tax evasion.

The fine for any attempt to evade or defeat tax shall be punishable by fines of P300,000 to P1 million and imprisonment of six to 12 years. The current penalty involves a P30,000 to P100,000 fine and two to four years in jail.

Other tax-related offenses, including failure to file one's income tax return and falsifying entries, shall also be punishable by bigger fines under the bill.

Penalties are also multiplied for establishments that fail or refuse to issue receipts. They will be fined P100,000 to P500,000 and jailed for four to eight year under the bill./lb

x x x."

Does a treaty need publication in the Official Gazette to be effective in the PHL?

See - Lagman: Rome Statute overrules PH law

"x x x.

An opposition lawmaker said an international treaty takes precedence over Philippine laws as he branded as "grossly incorrect" the declaration of President Rodrigo Duterte's that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) was not effective because it was not published in the Official Gazette.

Duterte earlier said that the treaty, entered to by the Philippines on Aug. 23, 2011, was neither "effective nor enforceable" in the country because it was not published locally.

READ: Duterte does the inevitable, withdraws PH from ICC treaty

Albay 1st District Rep. Edcel Lagman, a member of the so-called "House Magnificent 7" opposition bloc, on Tuesday said this rule under Article 2 of the Civil Code, "does not cover international covenants to which the Philippines is a State Party."

Lagman issued a statement Tuesday titled "Effectivity Clause of Rome Statute Prevails Over the Civil Code."

Article 2 of the Civil Code states that "laws shall take effect after 15 days following the completion of their publication in the Official Gazette" or the alternative publication in a newspaper of general circulation under Executive Order No. 200 dated June 18, 1987, refers to the effectivity of laws or statutes enacted by the Congress.

For his part, Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque, an international law expert, said the Rome Statute was a "penal law" which the Supreme Court ruled needed publication in the Official Gazette.

He cited the SC 1985 decision in the case of Tañada vs Tuvera, where the High Court ruled that "publication in the Official Gazette is necessary in those cases where the legislation itself does not provide for its effectivity date."

In his statement, Lagman said, "International instruments like the Rome Statute have their own effectivity clauses which the ratifying country has prior knowledge of."

The lawmaker said under Article 126 of the Rome Statute in relation to Article 125, the ratification by the Philippines became effective or entered "into force on the 1st day of the month after the 60th day following the deposit" of such instrument of ratification with the Secretary-General of the United Nations (UN).

x x x."

DOJ Circular No. 41 unconstitutional; right to travel [Art. III, Sec. 6, 1987 Constitution].


See -

"x x x.

The Supreme Court (SC) en banc on Tuesday, April 17, declared unconstitutional the watchlist order of detained Senator Leila de Lima against former President Gloria Arrroyo in 2011.

"The Court voting unanimously declared Department of Justice (DOJ) Department Circular No. 41 as unconstitutional for being violative of the right to travel under Article III, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution," SC Spokesman Theodore Te said in a news conference on Tuesday at the SC branch in Baguio.
DOJ Circular No. 41 was De Lima's basis as then justice secretary to put Arroyo on a watchlist and bar her from leaving the airport in 2011. De Lima then clashed with the Supreme Court (SC) which issued a temporary restraining order (TRO)against the watchlist order at the time.

The watchlist order was due to a pending electoral sabotage case against Arroyo, which was eventually dismissed.

"The Court, in interpreting Article III, Section 6, determined that there was no legal basis for Department Circular No. 41 because of the absence of a law authorizing the Secretary of Justice to issue Hold Departure Orders (HDO), Watch List Orders (WLO), or Allow Departure Orders (ADO)," Te added.

Department Circular No. 41 was signed by De Lima's predecessor, acting justice secretary Alberto Agra. It empowered justice secretaries to issue HDOs and WLOs, which are typically issuances that only courts can do.

Individuals issued with HDOs and WLOs under the circular by the justice secretary had to secure an Allow Departure Order (ADO) to be able to leave the country.

Former justice secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II issued what is called Immigration Lookout Bulletin Order (ILBO) which alerts immigration authorities about the movement of certain personalities, but does not prevent them from leaving the country.

The SC resolved petitions from Arroyo, former first gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo anbd Ephraim Genuino. Mr Arroyo was also issued a WLO and Genuino was issued an HDO.

The voting was unanimous. Associate Justice Benjamin Caguioa inhibited "due to previous participation." Caguioaserved as Chief Presidential Legal Counsel to former president Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino.

Associate Justice Andres Reyes Jr penned the decision. Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio and Associate Justice Marvic Leonen will issue separate concurring opinions.

Asked if the SC decision could be used by Arroyo to pursue charges against De Lima, Te said he would not speculate. – Rappler.com

x x x."

Gambling justice: "The SC fined Pizarro for violating Presidential Decree No. 1869, which prohibits government officials from playing at casinos. The SC also said Pizarro violated Canons 2 and 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct on the integrity and propriety of judges and justices."


See - https://www.rappler.com/nation/200883-court-appeals-justice-normandie-pizarro-fined-gambling


"x x x.

MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court (SC) en banc found retired Court of Appeals (CA) Associate Justice Normandie Pizarro guilty of conduct unbecoming of a member of the judiciary over instances of gambling in a casino, and fined him P100,000.

The decision penned by SC Associate Justice Samuel Martires with concurrences from 11 justices is a disappointing end to Pizarro's career in the judiciary, which had been tainted by accusations of corruption.

In an anonymous letter, Pizarro was accused of being the "most corrupt justice in the Philippines." He allegedly "sold" cases to support his supposed gambling addiction.

It was also stated in the letter that Pizarro, "together with his mistress and her whole family, made several travels abroad to shop and to gamble in casinos."

The accusations of corruption and an illicit affair were dismissed due to insufficient evidence.

Controversial cases

Pizarro retired last February, a year ahead of his mandatory retirement. He left the CA with a controversial acquittal of former Palawan governor Joel Reyes in the Gerry Ortega murder case.

It was a decision called "preposterous and premature" by his co-justices, and one that "stinks," according to Solicitor General Jose Calida.

Pizarro was also the justice who penned the ruling which acquitted Janet Lim Napoles in her serious illegal detention case in May 2017.

He also penned the ruling that nullified a Hawaii court decision which had granted $2 billion worth of damages to Martial Law victims. In January this year, he affirmed that decision.

Pizarro told the SC en banc that it was unfair to accuse him of corruption when "all of the few administrative cases filed against him did not involve corruption; and that he was absolved in all."

'Indiscretion of a dying man'

The anonymous complainant showed photos of Pizarro sitting at a casino table.

Pizarro said he was only accompanying a friend, and they only played "in a parlor game fashion without big stakes." He also confessed to playing at the casino in 2009.

"He maintained, however, that such was an indiscretion committed by a dying man because, prior to this, he had learned that he had terminal cancer," said the SC in its decision.

The SC fined Pizarro for violating Presidential Decree No. 1869, which prohibits government officials from playing at casinos. The SC also said Pizarro violated Canons 2 and 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct on the integrity and propriety of judges and justices.

"Considering, however, that this is the respondent justice's first transgression, and further bearing in mind his immediate admission of his indiscretion as well as the number of years he has been in government service, the Court finds the imposition of a fine in the amount of P100,000.00 sufficient in this case," the SC said.

Martires had 11 concurrences. Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno is on leave, and Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin did not take part "due to close relations to Justice Pizarro."

Associate Justice Marvic Leonen dissented. Leonen would have wanted to dismiss Pizarro from service as well as forfeit his retirement and accrued leave benefits. – Rappler.com

x x x."

Foreign divorce secured by a Filipino against a foreign spouse is also considered valid in the Philippines, even if it is the Filipino spouse who files for divorce abroad.


See - https://www.rappler.com/nation/200950-supreme-court-landmark-ruling-divorce-foreign-marriages


"x x x.

BAGUIO, Philippines – The Supreme Court (SC) en banc issued a landmark ruling on Tuesday, April 24, recognizing divorce in marriages with foreigners.

Voting 10-3-1, the SC en banc ruled "that a foreign divorce secured by a Filipino against a foreign spouse is also considered valid in the Philippines, even if it is the Filipino spouse who files for divorce abroad."
The particular case was that of Marelyn Tanedo Manalo who was married to Japanese national Minoru Yoshino. Manalo filed for and was granted divorce in Japan in 2011.

Manalo went to court in Dagupan in the Philippines to have her divorce recognized here. The trial court in Dagupan denied her petition. She then went to the Court of Appeals (CA), where she scored a victory in 2014.

The CA ruled that Manalo should have the right to remarry. It applied the amended Article 26(2) of the Family Code. Former president Corazon Aquino issued an executive order that amended the provision so that it included this:

Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.

The Philippine government, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), went to the SC to try to reverse the CA's ruling. Manalo won at the SC level, hence this landmark ruling.

Landmark ruling

How does this change things?

With the amended Family Code, Filipinos who obtain divorce in the country of their foreign spouse get to remarry without fear of a bigamy suit. However, if the one who obtained the divorce was the Filipino spouse, the state still did not recognize it divorce because of the absence of absolute divorce in the country.

With this ruling, the state now recognizes the divorce obtained by the Filipino, and couples of the same circumstances of mixed-marriage will be considered not married to each other under Philippine law.

"The Court remanded the case to the trial court for further reception of evidence as to the relevant laws of Japan on divorce," SC Spokesman Theodore Te said.

Manalo can now go to the Dagupan Trial Court and present to them this SC ruling, before the divorce can be final.

It opens up a window for Filipinos married to foreigners to get divorce in a predominantly Catholic country that is still ambivalent towards divorce. (READ: 'Til divorce do us part?' PH struggles to marry religion and reality)

The Philippines and the Vatican are the only two countries that ban divorce. Under the Duterte administration, the divorce bill has gained traction.

The House-approved bill seeks to grant absolute divorce of marriages under "limited grounds and well-defined procedures."

This ruling comes after the SC set for oral arguments a petition seeking to legalize same-sex marriage. – Rappler.com.

x x x."

Monday, April 16, 2018

Burma: Methodical Massacre at Rohingya Village

The sacred employment contract in France | DW Documentary

Prison subculture in Russia | DW Documentary

Police under pressure - Fighting crime in Germany | DW Documentary

Last chance for drug addicts in the Philippines | DW Documentary

Last chance for drug addicts in the Philippines | DW Documentary

Child prostitution in the Philippines | DW Documentary

Crazy Politics: Populism and Paranoia in America

Upholding Human Rights in Times of Populist Nationalism

Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?

Types of Government, Explained

CMFR: Journalists in PH need to be bolder

Life After Parole

Wednesday, April 4, 2018

International Criminal Court [ICC]; Statement on The Philippines’ notice of withdrawal: State participation in Rome Statute system essential to international rule of law



See - https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=pr1371


"x x x.

Press Release : 20 March 2018

ICC Statement on The Philippines’ notice of withdrawal: State participation in Rome Statute system essential to international rule of law
ICC-CPI-20180320-PR1371

Yesterday evening, 19 March 2018, the International Criminal Court ("ICC" or "Court") was officially notified by the United Nations that the Republic of the Philippines had on 17 March 2018 deposited a written notification of withdrawal from the Rome Statute, the Court's founding treaty, with the United Nations Secretary-General as the depositary of the Statute. The Court regrets this development and encourages the Philippines to remain part of the ICC family.

Withdrawing from the Rome Statute is a sovereign decision, which is subject to the provisions of article 127 of that Statute. A withdrawal becomes effective one year after the deposit of notice of withdrawal to the United Nations Secretary-General. A withdrawal has no impact on on-going proceedings or any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective; nor on the status of any judge already serving at the Court.

As indicated recently in the ICC Pre-trial Chamber decision authorising the opening of an investigation in relation to the situation in Burundi, the ICC retains its jurisdiction over crimes committed during the time in which the State was party to the Statute and may exercise this jurisdiction over these crimes even after the withdrawal becomes effective.

The Court wishes to reaffirm that the participation of States in the Rome Statute and their continued support for the ICC in the discharge of its independent and impartial mandate is essential to global efforts to ensure accountability and strengthen the international rule of law.

The Rome Statute system, with the ICC at its centre, has judicially addressed and galvanised national and international efforts to address the most serious crimes under international law such as the use of child soldiers, sexual violence in conflict, torture, wilful killing and the destruction of cultural heritage.

The Court remains fully committed to its independent mandate to help end impunity in a complementary manner with States, and in so doing, contribute to the prevention of future atrocities. States' participation in the Rome Statute ought not only be maintained and reinforced, but enlarged.

Background information on the Preliminary Examination of the situation in the Philippines

The Republic of the Philippines ratified the Rome Statute on 30 August 2011 and the Statute entered into force from 1 November 2011.

The preliminary examination of the situation in the Philippines was announced by the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC on 8 February 2018. It will analyse crimes allegedly committed in this State Party since at least 1 July 2016, in the context of the "war on drugs" campaign launched by the Government of the Philippines. Specifically, it has been alleged that since 1 July 2016, thousands of persons have been killed for reasons related to their alleged involvement in illegal drug use or dealing. While some of such killings have reportedly occurred in the context of clashes between or within gangs, it is alleged that many of the reported incidents involved extra-judicial killings in the course of police anti-drug operations.

A preliminary examination is not an investigation. It is an initial step to determine whether there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation. Specifically, under article 53(1) of the Rome Statute, the Prosecutor, must consider issues of jurisdiction, admissibility and the interests of justice in making this determination.

Under the Rome Statute, national jurisdictions have the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute those responsible for international crimes.

In conformity with the complementarity principle, which is a cornerstone of the Rome Statute legal system, and within the framework of each preliminary examination, the Office of the Prosecutor will engage with the national authorities concerned with a view to discussing and assessing any relevant investigation and prosecution at the national level.

In the independent and impartial exercise of its mandate, the Office of the Prosecutor will also give consideration to all submissions and views conveyed to it during the course of each preliminary examination, strictly guided by the requirements of the Rome Statute.

Should, at the conclusion of the preliminary examination process, the Prosecutor decide to proceed with an investigation, authorisation from a Pre-Trial Chamber of the Court would be required. The Court's judges would then make an independent assessment as to whether the statutory criteria for the opening of an investigation are met.

Further information on this Preliminary examination is available, here.

For further information, please contact Fadi El Abdallah, Spokesperson and Head of Public Affairs Unit, International Criminal Court, by telephone at: +31 (0)70 515-9152 or +31 (0)6 46448938 or by e-mail at: fadi.el-abdallah@icc-cpi.int

x x x."

BIR Rev. Reg. 12-2018 - new estate tax, donor's tax [TRAIN]


See - https://news.mb.com.ph/2018/03/18/bir-issues-new-rules-on-estate-donors-tax/



"x x x.

Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 12-2018 signed by BIR Commissioner Caesar R. Dulay uniformly fixed the rates on both estate and donor’s taxes at six percent, scrapping the old graduated and higher tax schedules.

The allowable deductions from the gross estate of the deceased are standard deduction of P5 million for resident and P500,000 for non-resident, plus claims against the unpaid debt and mortgages.

The tax exemption for the estate of family home has also been hiked from P1 million to P10 million.

Unlike before, the heirs are allowed to withdraw the bank deposits of the deceased, but subject to six percent final withholding tax

The tax rate applies to the estate of the deceased who died after the effectivity of the TRAIN law on January 1, 2018.

Section 11 of the RR No. 12-2018 stated that the “donor’s tax for each calendar year shall be six percent on the basic of the total gifts with the first P250,000 exempt from the tax.”

x x x."

Post Conviction : Evidence Location, Retention, and Preservation

Post Conviction : Lessons Learned

Post Conviction: DNA Exoneration

Crime Labs and the Courts

Post Conviction: Case Indentification

“Equal Protection” Origins and Legacies of the Fourteenth Amendment

"America's Unwritten Constitution" - Akhil Amar

Secrets of the Legal Industry Part 1 of 3

Empirical Legal Studies

Can International Law Change the World?

Lawyers as Leaders: Stephen B. Bright

Inventing the Public Defender

The Constitution and the World | Is Sovereignty Outmoded?

10 Things Body Language Says About You

BBC Documentary - The Money Trap - How Banks Control the World

The Law by Frédéric Bastiat - Full Audiobook

Why We're Losing Liberty

Why the Innocent Plead Guilty

How do we Right and Wrong?

Building peace, empowering communities through livelihoods in Mindanao, ...

China's pollution dilemma - Inside Story

Why The Rich Like High Taxes

Justice and Private Property

Islamist insurgency in the Philippines

'Those Who Wish to Practise Law Should Not Study Law at University'?

Know Your Audience: Legal Writing

Is new law against fake news necessary?

Presidential Pardon Power

Cities, States and The Trump Administration

What is absolute immunity?

The myth of independence: How Congress governs the Federal Reserve

War On Drugs: 3 Absurd Reasons for Banning Drugs

International Law Counter-Terrorism and the Concept of Prevention

International Humanitarian Law in Air and Missile Warfare

Science, Pseudo-science, and Statistics in the Criminal Courts

Conducting Effective Negotiations

Kiribati: a drowning paradise in the South Pacific | DW Documentary

CBC News Special: The fight for the Philippines

Monday, April 2, 2018

The Refugee Crisis and What Can Be Done About It

What is behind the rise in global rights violations? | Inside Story

Arming teachers would ""turn our schools into prisons"" "

Gun Nation

America's Mass Shooting Problem

Russiagate Has Become a Conspiracy Trap

Shooting survivor confronts NRA spokesperson Dana Loesch

Russian Troll Farm’s Inflammatory Posts and US elections

Amy Chua: Political Tribes: Group Instinct and the Fate of Nations

Peter Thiel: What is Multiculturalism Really About?

Hawaii lawmakers approve bill legalizing medically assisted death


See - Hawaii lawmakers approve bill legalizing medically assisted death
"x x x.

Hawaii lawmakers approve bill legalizing medically assisted death
Friday 30 March 2018 at 5:08 PM ETby Christopher Hsu

[JURIST] The Hawaii Senate on Thursday gave final approval to a bill [text] that would legalize medically assisted death for terminally ill patients.

The bill applies to patients with less than six months to live. It would allow patients to obtain a medical prescription to assist their passing. Only residents of Hawaii would be eligible.

The bill would require that two medical care providers agree on the patient's terminal medical condition. The two healthcare providers would be charged with assessing the patient's mental soundness and capacity to make such a decision. If two doctors agree on the patient's medical condition, a mental health professional will be required to make sure the patient is not suffering from any mental conditions or states of mind, such as depression, that might affect the patient's ability to make an informed decision.

The bill also prescribes criminal penalties for anyone who interferes, tampers with or coerces a patient to seek this procedure. No medical provider nor healthcare facility will be held criminally liable for participating in such processes. Medical care providers are also given the option to refuse to participate. In such situations, the patient would have to be transferred to another medical care provider.

The bill passed the state's House of Representatives on March 6. The bill has now been sent to the governor's desk, where it currently awaits signature. Currently, five states (Oregon, Washington, California, Vermont and Colorado) and Washington, DC, have laws permitting medically assisted death.

x x x."

House: 150 ‘judges-at-large’ to fill shortage of judges


See - House: 150 ‘judges-at-large’ to fill shortage of judges

"x x x.

The House of Representatives has approved on second reading a bill creating positions for 150 Judges-at-Large who can be sent to fill in for judges in congested regional or municipal trial courts.

House Bill 7309 refers to Judges-at-Large as those who do not have permanent salas and can be detailed by the Supreme Court (SC) as acting or assisting judges to any regional, city or municipal trial court in the Philippines, as public interest may require.

The measure proposes the creation of 100 Judges-at-Large positions for the Regional Trial Courts and 50 more for the Municipal Trial Courts.


The bill seeks to amend Sections 14, 15, 25, 26, 41 and 42 of Batas Pambansa Bilang 129, otherwise known as “The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980” to implement the creation of Judges-at-Large positions.

The Regional Trial Judges-at-Large shall have no permanent salas and can be detailed by the Supreme Court as Acting or Assisting Judges to any Regional trial Court in the Philippines, as public interest may require.

No person shall be appointed Regional Trial Judge or Regional Trial Judge-at-Large unless that person is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, at least 35 years of age, and for at least 10 years has been engaged in the practice of law in the country, or has held a public office in the Philippines requiring admission to the practice of law as an indispensable requisite.

x x x."