I. Background
President Benigno S. Aquino
III’s Social Contract with the Filipino people envisions a country
characterized by inclusive rapid economic growth anchored on good governance
with strict adherence to the rule of law. This Social Contract has been
translated into efficient, effective and responsive actions which are now
embodied in the Philippine Development Plan (2011-2016).
In pursuing the gains of
the Social Contract, the President issued Executive Order No. 43 laying down
the priority areas for development. One of these is the attainment of “a just,
comprehensive, and lasting peace within the bounds of our law.” Consonant with the principles of efficiency,
effectiveness, and focus, EO 43 has organized thematically the Cabinet into
clusters in achieving the objectives of each priority area. One such cluster is the Security, Justice and Peace (the
“Security Cluster”) headed by the Executive Secretary.
“The Security Cluster shall
ensure preservation of national sovereignty and the rule of law; and focus on
the protection and promotion of human rights and the pursuit of a just,
comprehensive, and lasting peace. In particular,
the Security Cluster shall pursue the following goals:
a)
Protecting our national
territory and boundaries;
b)
Attaining a just and
lasting peace;
c)
Ensuring the welfare of the
Overseas Filipino Workers (OFW);
d)
Strengthening the rule of
law;
e)
Institutionalizing an
efficient and impartial justice system that delivers equal justice to the rich
and poor; and
f) Advancing
and protecting human rights.”
The Philippine Development
Forum (PDF) was organized to serve “as the primary mechanism of government to
facilitate substantive policy dialogue among stakeholders on the country’s
development agenda.” Consequently,
several working and sub-working groups were identified for each cluster under
EO 43 to identify reform measures and create a development policy agenda in
line with the President’s Social Contract. The Rule of Law Working group was first
convened on April 27, 2011, after having been elevated from a Sub-Working Group
within the Working Group of Good Governance and Anti-Corruption.
The USAID and the Philippine
Department of Justice serve as co-convenors of the Rule of Law Working Group.
This group functions as the primary platform for coordination among government
stakeholders in the justice sector and development partners, and has, since its
establishment, met five times. It acts
as a bridge between the judiciary and executive branches of government in
pursuing reform initiatives on common policy issues that crosscuts between the
two and among other justice sector agencies in the executive department.
For the membership and
meetings of the Working Group, please see Annex “A”.
II. Major
Policy Issues and Progress
The main problem of the Philippine
justice system is its slow, tedious and ineffective processes including
investigation and resolution of complaints/cases, rehabilitation of offenders
and dispute resolution.
Investigation/case disposition rates have been persistently low. Weak case build up, lack of physical evidence
and inadequate witness participation have resulted in low resolution and
conviction rates for most cases and impunity for many human rights
violations. Failure to locate and arrest
the accused has resulted in high case archival.
Offender rehabilitation programs have failed to address the increasingly
high re-offender rates. Besides criminal
cases, civil proceedings in court linger tor years due to case congestion. Procedural delays and technicalities have
made justice a costly and unwieldy service and rendered the justice system
vulnerable to politicization, influence and corruption. All these factors have obstructed effective
delivery of justice for criminal acts, equal access to justice, public trust
and confidence in the justice system. Ultimately these problems undermine the
rule of law and good governance.
Weaknesses in the legal-institutional
framework and resources are seen as root causes of such complex problems. Procedures have become very complicated
resulting in excessive red tape and delays.
The justice system has become highly fragmented from decades of
traditional institutional turfing, weak coordination and functional
compartmentalization among agencies.
Existing laws and government structures/mechanisms are no longer
responsive to transnational and technology-based crimes such as human
trafficking, terrorism, money laundering, drug trafficking, smuggling and
cybercrime. These emphasize the need to
integrate, rationalize and modernize systems and procedures, as well as
strengthen coordination and cooperation among government agencies and
stakeholders.
Resource constraints in terms of
funding, personnel, equipment and facilities remain a critical factor. Resource-demand gap has increased through the
years caused by marginal increases or stagnation in resource levels in the face
of fast growing population, globalization and technological advances, and
rapidly increasing complexity and sophistication of crimes. Police to population ratio stands at one (1)
to 690, far from the ideal one (1) to 500.
Law enforcement agencies have very limited physical/scientific
investigation capability in terms of facilities, equipment, technology and
competency. Vacancy rates among
prosecutors and judges remained at around 25% through the years. National penitentiaries are severely congested
at more than double their optimal capacity.
Other resource issues include personnel competency, integrity and
productivity, lack of justice sector-wide perspective in financing and support,
and inadequate resource management capability among justice agencies.
Despite such pervasive issues and
constraints, the justice sector plays a vital role in the good governance and
economic development agenda of the Administration in its pursuit of intensified
efforts against corruption and tax violations.
Broad-based and inclusive eocnomic growth will depend on the efforts of
the government to strengthen the country’s legal/ regulatory framework on
competition, and improve contractual enforcement and protection of property
rights, both critical factors for economic justice and investor confidence.
In response to these policy issues, the
priority policy areas of the Rule of Law Working Group are aligned with the key
result areas (KRAs) set out in the Justice Sector Coordinating Council (JSCC)
work plan[1].
- Good governance in the
justice sector;
- Detection, prevention
and reduction of crime;
- Speedy resolution of
investigations, complaints and cases;
- Restorative justice;
and,
- Greater, equal and
inclusive access to justice.
The members are addressing these KRAs by
various reform projects as discussed during the Rule of Law Working Group
meetings. The main progress made include
the following:
- Good governance in the
justice sector: Integrity development efforts including
the establishment of agency-specific codes of conduct and
establishment/enhancement of accountability mechanisms; various automation
projects including the National Justice Information System, biometric
criminal records and border management systems, police databases, and case
management systems; extensive program/project development efforts;
enhancing efficiency and accountability through performance management and
disciplinary mechanisms; various capacity development programs/projects;
and strengthened sector coordination and stakeholder collaboration through
the Justice Sector Coordinating Council, PDF working group and other fora.
- Detection, prevention
and reduction of crime:
Updating and codification of criminal laws; enhancing methods and
procedures in criminal intelligence, investigation, case build up and
prosecution; strengthening physical, scientific and electronic evidence
gathering; establishment of regional crime laboratories; strengthening
border management capability through immigration enforcement; improving
capacity among law enforcers in terms of equipment, facilities and
competency; and strengthening/review of the juvenile justice system.
- Speedy resolution of
investigations, complaints and cases:
Case/backlog decongestion through improved operating procedures and
performance management efforts in the Judiciary; procedural reforms
including the new Judicial Affidavit Rule; strengthening small claims
courts; enhanced procedures and reglementary periods in preliminary
investigation and review in the DOJ; and improving capacity of the courts
and prosecutors in terms of equipment, facilities and skills.
- Corrections and restorative
justice:
Various correctional reforms; improvements in the jail and prison systems
including additional funding, personnel, facilities and equipment; jail
and prison decongestion program and activities; enhancing the parole and
probation systems; and strengthening/mainstreaming restorative justice in
the corrections system.
- Greater, equal and
inclusive access to justice: Termination of collecting legal fees in the
National Prosecution Service; intensified measures against human trafficking,
extralegal killings, crimes against women/children and other human rights
violations; strengthening alternative dispute resolution mechanisms; and
enhancing the government’s legal framework for economic justice.
III. Challenges
Identified
The justice sector faces various
challenges in carrying out the various reform efforts. The change in leadership
at the highest levels made coordination more challenging for a period of
time. Nevertheless, with the appointment
of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes C.A. Sereno, leadership is now in place and she
is identifying and prioritizing her reform agenda for the judiciary. Coordination is also being established with
the new DILG leadership following the unfortunate and untimely death of DILG Secretary
Jessie Robredo.
Other challenges include the lack of
personnel and/or capability in certain agencies, resource constraints and heavy
workload resulting to delays and sustainability problems, limited
program/project scope, time, personnel and funding, procedural and procurement
delays, policy and geographical constraints, shifting priorities and management
approaches, lack of political will, adherence to old/traditional practices and
resistance to change, lack of capital/operating funds to sustain the work when
external funding/support ends, collaboration issues with and among
stakeholders, and inadequate monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
IV. Policy
Recommendations
In line with the priorities
set out by the President’s Social Contract and the PDP, the Working Group submits
the following policy recommendations:
1.
Address
procedural delays, congestion, constraints and cost in the justice system
particularly on investigation, court adjudication and corrections through vital
reforms in the legal-policy framework including laws, systems and procedures;
2.
Improve
justice sector capability and access to justice by mitigating resource gaps,
optimizing resource management, addressing inefficiencies and corruption,
building core competencies, maximizing information technology, mainstreaming
restorative justice, strengthening alternative dispute resolution, and
institutionalizing collaboration with partners/stakeholders; and
3.
Strengthen
economic justice including the legal framework on competition, contract
enforcement and property rights.
For the priority action areas,
programs and projects, please refer to Annex “B”.
x x x."
[1] The JSCC work plan is
subject final review for approval by the lead institutions of the justice
sector.
