PHILIPPINE COURT SYSTEM

Review Courts
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Trial Courts
Regional Trial Court
Provincial Regional Trial Court
Metro Manila Regional Trial Court
Metropolitan Trial Court
Municipal Trial Court
Municipal Circuit Trial Court
Special Courts
Court of Tax Appeals
Sandiganbayan

INTRODUCTION
Judicial power rests with the Supreme Court and the lower courts, as established by law (Art. VIII, sec. 1
of the 1987 Constitution). Its duty is to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally
demandable and enforceable (Art. VIII Sec. 1 (2)).
The judiciary enjoys fiscal autonomy. Its appropriation may not be reduced by the Legislature below the
appropriated amount the previous year (Art. VIII, Sec. 3).

RULES AND PROCEDURES

The Rules of Court of the Philippines, as amended and the rules and regulations issued by the Supreme
Court, define the rules and procedures of the judiciary. These rules and regulations are in the form of
administrative matters, administrative orders, circulars, memorandum circulars, memorandum orders, and
OCA circulars. The Supreme Court disseminates these rules and regulations to all courts, publishes
important ones in newspapers of general circulation, prints them in book or pamphlet form, and uploads
them to the Supreme Court website and the Supreme Court E-Library website.
On June 21, 1988, the Supreme Court promulgated the Code of Professional Responsibility for the legal
profession. The draft was prepared by the Committee on Responsibility, Discipline and Disbarment of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
APPOINTMENTS TO THE JUDICIARY
By virtue of Article VIII, Section 8, appointments to the judiciary are made by the President of the
Philippines based on a list submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council which is under the supervision of the
Supreme Court. Its principal function is to screen prospective appointees to any judicial post. It is
composed of the chief justice as ex-officio chairman, the Secretary of Justice and representatives of
Congress as ex-officio members, and a representative of the Integrated Bar, a professor of law, a retired
member of the Supreme Court and a representative of the private sector as members.

PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY

The Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) is the training school for justices, judge, court personnel,
lawyers and aspirants to judicial posts. It was originally created by the Supreme Court on March 16,
1996 by virtue of Administrative Order No. 35-96, and was institutionalized on February 26, 1998 by virtue
of Republic Act No. 8557. No appointee to the bench may commence the discharge his adjudicative
function without completing the prescribed court training in the academy. Its organizational structure and
administrative setup are provided for by the Supreme Court in its en banc resolution (Revised A.M. No.
01-1-04-sc-PHILJA).
PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER
The Philippine Mediation Center was organized pursuant to the en banc Supreme Court Resolution A.M.
No. 01-10-5-SC-PHILJA, dated October 16, 2001, and in line with the objectives of the Action Program for
Judicial Reforms (APJR) to decongest court dockets, among others, the court prescribed guidelines in
institutionalizing and implementing the mediation program in the Philippines. The same resolution
designated the Philippine Judicial Academy as the component unit of the Supreme Court for CourtAnnexed Mediation and other Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms, and established the
Philippine Mediation Center (PMC).
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Office was organized to implement the rules on Mandatory
Continuing Legal Education for members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (B.M. No. 850
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)). It holds office in the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
main office.
KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
Presidential Decree No. 1508, or the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, took effect on December 11, 1978,
and established a system of amicably settling disputes at the barangay level. This decree and the Local
Government Code provided rules and procedures, Title I, Chapter 7, Sections 339-422. This system of
amicable settlement of dispute aims to promote the speedy administration of justice by easing the
congestion of court dockets. The court does not take cognizance of cases filed if they are not filed first
with the Katarungang Pambarangay.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) SYSTEM
Republic Act No. 9285 institutionalized the use of an alternative dispute resolution system, which serves
to promote the speedy and impartial administration of justice and unclog the court dockets. This act shall
be without prejudice to the adoption of the Supreme Court of any ADR system such as mediation,
conciliation, arbitration or any combination thereof.
THE SUPREME COURT
HISTORY OF THE SUPREME COURT
Royal audencia
The royal audencia was established on May 5, 1583, composed of a president, four oidores (justices) and
a fiscal. The audencia exercised both administrative and judicial functions. Its functions and structure
were modified in 1815 when a chief justice replaced its president and the number of justices was
increased. It came to be known as the Audencia Territorial de Manila with two branches, civil and
criminal. A royal decree issued on July 24, 1861 converted it to a purely judicial body with its decisions
appealable to the Court of Spain in Madrid. A territorial audencia in Cebu, and audencia for criminal cases
in Vigan were organized on February 26, 1898.
Philippine Revolution and First Republic
In the three phases of the revolution: 1896-1897; 1898; 1899-1901, the exigencies of war prevented the
thorough organization of the administration of justice. Katipunan councils, then the provisional
governments of Tejeros, Biak-na-Bato, and the Revolutionary Republic proclaimed in Kawit, essentially
had General Emilio Aguinaldo exercising decree-making powers instituting ad hoc courts and reviewing
any appeals concerning their decisions.
In 1899, when the Malolos Constitution was ratified, it provided for a Supreme Court of Justice. President
Aguinaldo proposed the appointment of Apolinario Mabini as Chief Justice, but the appointment and the
convening of the Supreme Court of Justice never materialized because of the Philippine-American War.

American military rule

During the Philippine-American War, General Wesley Merrit suspended the audencias when a military
government was established after Manila fell to American forces in August, 1898. Major General Elwell S.
Otis re-established the Audencia on May 29, 1899 by virtue of General Order No. 20, which provided for
six Filipino members of the audencia.
Establishment of the Supreme Court
With the establishment of civil government, Act No. 136 of the Philippine Commission abolished the
audencia and established the present Supreme Court on June 11, 1901, with Cayetano Arellano as the
first chief justice together with associate justicesthe majority of whom were Americans.
Commonwealth: Filipinization of the Supreme Court
With the ratification of the 1935 Constitution, the membership was increased to 11 with two divisions of
five members each. The Supreme Court was Filipinized upon the inauguration of the Commonwealth of
the Philippines on November 15, 1935. The composition of the court was reduced by virtue of
Commonwealth Act No. 3. It provided for a Supreme Court, headed by a chief justice with six associate
justices.
World War II and the Third Republic
During World War II, the National Assembly passed legislation granting emergency powers to President
Manuel L. Quezon; Chief Justice Jose Abad Santos was made concurrent Secretary of Justice and acting
President of the Philippines in unoccupied areas. After his capture and execution at the hands of the
Japanese, the Commonwealth government-in-exile had no system of courts.
Meanwhile, the Japanese organized the Philippine Executive Commission in occupied areas on January
8, 1942, which gave way to the Second Republic in October 14, 1943. By the end of World War II, the
regular function of the courts had been restored, beginning with the appointment of a new Supreme Court
on June 6, 1945. On September 17, 1945, the laws of the Second Republic were declared null and void; a
Supreme Court decision on Co Kim Cham v. Eusebio Valdez Tan Keh and Arsenio P. Dizon recognized
this.
Martial law
The Supreme Court was retained during the martial law years under rules similar to the 1935 Constitution,
but with the exception few key factors, e.g.:
1. The 1973 Constitution further increased the membership of the Supreme Court to 15, with two
divisions;
2. The process by which a chief justice and associate justices are appointed was changed under to
grant the president (Ferdinand Marcos during this time) the sole authority to appoint members of
the Supreme Court. There were five chief justices that were appointed under this provision.
PRESENT-DAY SUPREME COURT
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:
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;
All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any
penalty imposed in relation thereto;
All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue;
All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher;
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.
1. 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. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive
procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts 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.
2. Appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law (Sec.
5 , id.).
The Supreme Court has adopted and promulgated the Rules of Court for the protection and enforcement
of constitutional rights, pleadings and practice and procedure in all courts, and the admission in the
practice of law. Amendments are promulgated through the Committee on Revision of Rules. The Court
also issues administrative rules and regulations in the form of court issuances posted on the Supreme
Court E-Library website.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
THE INCUMBENT
Ma. Lourdes P. A. Sereno
Tenure as Chief Justice: August 24, 2012 present
Appointed by: Benigno S. Aquino III
Age at Appointment: 52
Read her biography from on website of the Supreme Court
Full roster of chief justices
The position of chief justice was created in 1901 by virtue of the establishment of the Philippine Supreme
Court. At the time, the chief justice was appointed by the President of the United States: the court was
composed mainly of American citizens with a Filipino chief justice.
The incumbent Chief Justice, Ma. Lourdes P.A. Sereno, appointed by President Benigno S. Aquino III,
took her oath of office on August 25, 2012. She is the first woman to hold the position.
There were six chief justices appointed by the President of the United States. In 1935, upon the
inauguration of the Commonwealth of the Philippines, the power to appoint the chief justice was
transferred to the President of the Philippines. According to the 1935 Constitution, the President of the
Philippines shall make appointments with concurrence of the National Assembly. There have been six
Chief Justices who were appointed under the 1935 Constitution. The only chief justice that was not
appointed by a president was Chief Justice Jose Yulo, who was in office during the Japanese occupation,
from 1942 until the liberation of the Philippines in 1945. During this time, the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court was appointed by the Philippine Executive Committee headed by Jorge B. Vargas.
The 1943 Constitution provided for the members of the Supreme Court and the chief justice to be
appointed by the president with the concurrence of his cabinet. Upon the declaration of martial law and

the subsequent establishment of the 1973 Constitution, the process of selection of the Chief Justice of the
Philippines was changed. The power of Congress to veto an appointment by the president to the office of
the chief justice was removed. According to the 1973 Constitution, The Members of the Supreme Court
and judges of inferior courts shall be appointed by the President. There were five chief justices that were
appointed under this provision.
After the revolution of 1986, a new constitution was enacted and a new process of selecting a chief
magistrate was created. Former chief justice and 1986 Constitutional Commission delegate Roberto V.
Concepcion introduced the concept of the Judicial and Bar Council. The aim of the Council is to depoliticize the judiciary by lessening the appointing power of the president. To read more about the
appointment of chief justices, members of the judiciary, and the Office of the Ombudsman, please click
here.
To date, there have been nine chief justices appointed under the conditions of the 1986 Constitution.
CHIEF JUSTICES LISTED ACCORDING TO APPOINTING PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES
Of the 15 Presidents of the Philippines, only eight have been able to appoint an individual to the highest
judicial post in the land. The following is the list of presidents who appointed chief Jjstices and their
appointees.
1. Manuel L. Quezon
o Jose Abad Santos
2. Sergio Osmea
o Manuel V. Moran
3. Elpidio Quirino
o Ricardo M. Paras
4. Carlos P. Garcia
o Cesar Bengzon
5. Ferdinand E. Marcos
o Roberto V. Concepcion
o Querube Makalintal
o Fred Ruiz Castro
o Enrique M. Fernando
o Felix V. Makasiar
o Ramon C. Aquino
6. Corazon C. Aquino
o Claudio Teehankee
o Pedro L. Yap
o Marcelo B. Fernan
o Andres R. Narvasa
7. Joseph Ejercito Estrada
o Hilario G. Davide
8. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
o Artemio Panganiban
o Reynato Puno
o Renato C. Corona
9. Benigno S. Aquino III
o Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno
Notable chief justices
Of the list of chief justices, there are a few individuals that stand out for having gone above and beyond
their duty and tenure as chief justice.
1. Cayetano Arellano: Cayetano Arellano was the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He was
appointed in 1901 when the Supreme Court was created through Act No. 136, along with three
American justices and one Filipino justice.
2. Ramon Avancea: Appointed in 1925 by U.S. President Calvin Coolidge, he is known for
ushering in an all-Filipino Supreme Court in 1935. Upon the establishment of the Philippine

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Commonwealth in 1935, American justices were no longer allowed to sit in the Philippine
Supreme Courtthus, new justices were appointed, all of whom were of Filipino citizenship.
Jose Abad Santos: As a wartime chief justice, Abad Santos took on two different roles; he was
the chief justice and concurrently the Secretary of Justice. When President Quezon left the
Philippines to evade capture by the Japanese, Abad Santos chose to stay in the country as a
caretaker of the government. On May 2, 1942, the Japanese military caught Abad Santos in Cebu
and invited him to become one of the members of their puppet government. Abad Santos refused
to collaborate. He died at the hands of the Japanese on May 2, 1942. His last words to his son
were, Do not cry, Pepito, show to these people that you are brave. It is an honor to die for ones
country. Not everybody has that chance.
Manuel V. Moran: Appointed in 1945 by President Sergio Osmea, Manuel V. Moran would
serve as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for six years. Upon his retirement in 1951, Moran
was appointed as Philippine Ambassador to Spain and concurrently to the Holy See. During
President Quirinos administration, Moran was once again offered a position in the Supreme
Court in 1953, at the twilight of Quirinos presidency. Moran, however, refused the midnight
appointment.
Roberto V. Concepcion: He went into early retirement for refusing to grant absolute power to
Ferdinand Marcos, the president who appointed him. In the resolution ofJavellana v. Executive
Secretary, Concepcion argued against the validity of the 1973 Constitution and its questionable
aspects. Accordingly, he dissented, along with Justices Teehankee, Zaldivar, and Fernando, from
implementing the 1973 Constitution. Due to the courts decision, Concepcion would enter early
retirement, 50 days before his originally scheduled retirement date.
Claudio Teehankee: Claudio Teehankee was known for his firm anti-martial law stance during his
tenure in the Supreme Court. Teehankee resisted multiple attempts by the Marcos administration
to garner absolute power by issuing questionable decrees. In 1973, he was part of the bloc that
dissented from the implementation of the 1973 Constitution. In 1980, he dissented from the
proposed judicial reorganization act of President Marcos. In 1986, after the EDSA Revolution, he
administered the Oath of Office of President Corazon C. Aquino in Club Filipino. He was
appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 1986 by President Corazon C. Aquino
Hilario G. Davide: Appointed by President Joseph Ejercito Estrada in 1998, Chief Justice Hilario
G. Davide was known as the presiding judge of the first impeachment proceedings in Asia. During
the impeachment of President Estrada, he conducted proceedings with impartiality. Following
EDSA II uprising, which deposed President Estrada, Davide swore in Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as
the 14th President of the Philippines.
Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno: Appointed by President Benigno S. Aquino III in 2012, Chief Justice
Sereno is the first woman appointed to the position.

Court of Appeals
The Court of Appeals is the second highest tribunal in the country, which was established on February 1,
1936 by virtue of Commonwealth Act No. 3. The current form of the Court of Appeals was constituted
through Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended by Executive Order No. 33, s. 1986, Republic Act No.
7902, and Republic Act No. 8246.
The jurisdiction 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 Court of Appeals 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 current presiding justice of the Court of Appeals is Andres Reyes Jr., who is set to retire on May 11,
2020.
Court of Tax Appeals
The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), which is of the same level as the Court of Appeals, was created by virtue
of Republic Act No. 1125, which was signed into law on June 16, 1954. Its present-day form was
constituted through RA 1125, as amended by Republic Act No. 9282 and Republic Act No. 9503.
The CTA exercises jurisdiction in the following:
1. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal, as herein provided:
1. Decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed
assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in
relation thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue or other
laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue;
2. Inaction by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in cases involving disputed
assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in
relations thereto, or other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue Code or
other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, where the National Internal
Revenue Code provides a specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall be
deemed a denial;
3. Decisions, orders or resolutions of the Regional Trial Courts in local tax cases originally
decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original or appellate jurisdiction;
4. Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases involving liability for customs duties,
fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or release of property affected, fines,
forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the
Customs Law or other laws administered by the Bureau of Customs;
5. Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction over cases involving the assessment and taxation of real property originally
decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals;
6. Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs cases elevated to him automatically for
review from decisions of the Commissioner of Customs which are adverse to the
Government under Section 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;
7. Decisions of the Secretary of Trade and Industry, in the case of non-agricultural product,
commodity or article, and the Secretary of Agriculture in the case of agricultural product,
commodity or article, involving dumping and countervailing duties under Section 301 and
302, respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code, and safeguard measures under
Republic Act No. 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to
impose said duties.
2. Jurisdiction over cases involving criminal offenses as herein provided:
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal offenses arising from violations of the
National Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs Code and other laws administered
by the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau of Customs: Provided, however, that
offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph where the principal amount of taxes and
fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than P1 million or where there is
no specified amount claimed shall be tried by the regular courts and the jurisdiction of the
CTA shall be appellate.
2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in criminal offenses:
1. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional Trial
Courts in tax cases originally decided by them, in their respective territorial
jurisdiction.
2. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders of the Regional
Trial Courts in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction over tax cases originally
decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts in their respective jurisdiction.
3. Jurisdiction over tax collection cases as herein provided:

1. Exclusive original jurisdiction in tax collection cases involving final and

executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties: Provided,
however, that collection cases where the principal amount of taxes and
fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is less than P1 million
shall be tried by the proper Municipal Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court
and Regional Trial Court.
2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in tax collection cases:
1. Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the
Regional Trial Courts in tax collection cases originally decided by
them, in their respective territorial jurisdiction.
2. Over petitions for review of the judgments, resolutions or orders
of the Regional Trial Courts in the Exercise of their appellate
jurisdiction over tax collection cases originally decided by the
Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts, in their respective jurisdiction.
The CTA is composed of one presiding justice and 8 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 Court of Appeals also apply to members of the
CTA.
The current presiding justice of the CTA is Roman del Rosario, who is set to retire on October 6, 2025.
Sandiganbayan
To attain the highest norms of official conduct among officials and employees in the government, the
creation of a special graft court to be known as the Sandiganbayan was provided for in Article XIII,
Section 5 of the 1973 Constitution. This court was formally established through Presidential Decree No.
1606, which was signed into law on December 10, 1978.
Through Article XI (Accountability of Public Officers), Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution, the
Sandiganbayan was carried over to the post-EDSA Revolution republic. The current form of the
Sandiganbayan was constituted through PD 1606, s. 1978, as amended by Republic Act No. 7975 and
Republic Act No. 8245.
The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over the following:
1. Violations of Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as amended, and
Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where one or more of the
accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government whether in a
permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense:
1. Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and higher,
otherwise classified as grade 27 and higher, of the Compensation and Position
Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
1. Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan
and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers and other provincial department
heads;
2. City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city
treasurers, assessors engineers and other city department heads;
3. Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher;
4. Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher
rank;
5. Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of
provincial director and those holding the rank of senior superintendent or higher;
6. City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and prosecutors
in the Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
7. Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or
-controlled corporations, state universities or educational institutions or
foundations;
2. Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as grade 27 and up under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;
3. Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the constitution;

4. Chairmen and members of constitutional commissions, without prejudice to the

provisions of the constitution; and
5. All other national and local officials classified as Grade 27 and higher under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.
2. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the
public officials and employees mentioned in subsection a of this section in relation to their office.
3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1,
2, 14 and 14-A, s. 1986.
In addition, the Sandiganbayan exercises exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions
or orders or regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their
appellate jurisdiction as herein provided.
The Sandiganbayan also has exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of the writs of
mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, injunctions, and other ancillary writs and processes in
aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature, including quo warranto, arising or that
may arise in cases filed or which may be filed under Executive Order Nos. 1,2,14 and 14-A issued in
1986.
In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the public
officers or employees, including those employed in govemment-owned or controlled corporations, they
shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts which shall exercise
exclusive jurisdiction over them.
The Sandiganbayan comprises of one presiding justice and 14 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 to become a member of the Sandiganbayan are as follows:
1. a natural-born citizen of the Philippines;
2. at least 40 years of age
3. has been a judge of a court for at least ten years, or been engaged in the practice of law in the
Philippines or has held office requiring admission to the bar as a prerequisite for at least ten
years.
The current presiding justice of the Sandiganbayan is Amparo Cabotaje-Tang, who is set to retire on
November 8, 2024.
ARTICLE VIII
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Section 1. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be
established by law.
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which
are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
Government.cralaw
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of the
various courts but may not deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Section
5 hereof.cralaw
No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of its
Members.cralaw
Section 3. The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Appropriations for the Judiciary may not be reduced
by the legislature below the amount appropriated for the previous year and, after approval, shall be
automatically and regularly released.cralaw
Section 4. (1) The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices.
It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in division of three, five, or seven Members. Any vacancy shall be
filled within ninety days from the occurrence thereof.cralaw

(2) All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, which
shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc, and all other cases which under the Rules of Court are
required to be heard en banc, including those involving the constitutionality, application, or operation of
presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and other regulations, shall be
decided with the concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on
the issues in the case and voted thereon.cralaw
(3) Cases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the concurrence of a majority of
the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, and
in no case without the concurrence of at least three of such Members. When the required number is not
obtained, the case shall be decided en banc: Provided, that no doctrine or principle of law laid down by
the court in a decision rendered en banc or in division may be modified or reversed except by the court
sitting en banc.
Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:chanrobles virtual law library
1) Exercise original 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 lower courts in:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(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.
(3) Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations as public interest may require. Such
temporary assignment 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.
(5) 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 under-privileged. 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.
(6) Appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law.
Section 6. The Supreme Court shall have administrative supervision over all courts and the personnel
thereof.
Section 7. (1) No person shall be appointed Member of the Supreme Court or any lower collegiate court
unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. A Member of the Supreme Court must be at least
forty years of age, and must have been for fifteen years or more, a judge of a lower court or engaged in
the practice of law in the Philippines.cralaw
(2) The Congress shall prescribe the qualifications of judges of lower courts, but no person may be
appointed judge thereof unless he is a citizen of the Philippines and a member of the Philippine
Bar.cralaw
(3) A Member of the Judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and
independence.cralaw
Section 8. (1) A Judicial and Bar Council is hereby created under the supervision of the Supreme Court
composed of the Chief Justice as ex officioChairman, the Secretary of Justice, and a representative of the
Congress as ex officio Members, a representative of the Integrated Bar, a professor of law, a retired
Member of the Supreme Court, and a representative of the private sector.cralaw
(2) The regular members of the Council shall be appointed by the President for a term of four years with
the consent of the Commission on Appointments. Of the Members first appointed, the representative of

the Integrated Bar shall serve for four years, the professor of law for three years, the retired Justice for
two years, and the representative of the private sector for one year.cralaw
(3) The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall be the Secretary ex officio of the Council and shall keep a
record of its proceedings.cralaw
(4) The regular Members of the Council shall receive such emoluments as may be determined by the
Supreme Court. The Supreme Court shall provide in its annual budget the appropriations for the
Council.cralaw
(5) The Council shall have the principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary. It may
exercise such other functions and duties as the Supreme Court may assign to it.cralaw
Section 9. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of the lower courts shall be appointed by the
President from a list of at least three nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council for every
vacancy. Such appointments need no confirmation.cralaw
For the lower courts, the President shall issue the appointments within ninety days from the submission of
the list.cralaw
Section 10. The salary of the Chief Justice and of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, and of
judges of lower courts, shall be fixed by law. During their continuance in office, their salary shall not be
decreased.cralaw
Section 11. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts shall hold office during good
behavior until they reach the age of seventy years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of
their office. The Supreme Courten banc shall have the power to discipline judges of lower courts, or order
their dismissal by a vote of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the
issues in the case and voted thereon.cralaw
Section 12. The Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts established by law shall not be
designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions.cralaw
Section 13. The conclusions of the Supreme Court in any case submitted to it for decision en banc or in
division shall be reached in consultation before the case is assigned to a Member for the writing of the
opinion of the Court. A certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice shall be issued and a copy
thereof attached to the record of the case and served upon the parties. Any Members who took no part, or
dissented, or abstained from a decision or resolution, must state the reason therefor. The same
requirements shall be observed by all lower collegiate courts.cralaw
Section 14. No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly
the facts and the law on which it is based.cralaw
No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due course
or denied without stating the legal basis therefor.cralaw
Section 15. (1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be decided or
resolved within twenty-four months from date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced
by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all other lower
courts.cralaw
(2) A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last
pleading, brief, or memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the court itself.cralaw
(3) Upon the expiration of the corresponding period, a certification to this effect signed by the Chief
Justice or the presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the
case or matter, and served upon the parties. The certification shall state why a decision or resolution has
not been rendered or issued within said period.cralaw
(4) Despite the expiration of the applicable mandatory period, the court, without prejudice to such
responsibility as may have been incurred in consequence thereof, shall decide or resolve the case or
matter submitted thereto for determination, without further delay.cralaw

Section 16. The Supreme Court shall, within thirty days from the opening of each regular session of the
Congress, submit to the President and the Congress an annual report on the operations and activities of
the Judiciary.

OBITER DICTUM
-

Judicial opinions on points of law which is not binding but may be regarded as persuasive in a future
decision.

Words of an opinion entirely unnecessary for the decision of the case. A remark made or opinion
expressed by a judge in a decision upon a cause, "by the way", that is, incidentally or collaterally, and not
directly upon the question before the court or upon a point not necessarily involved in the determination of
the cause, or introduced by way of illustration, or analogy or argument. Such are not binding as
precedent.
An obiter dictum (plural obiter dicta, often referred to simply as dicta), Latin for a statement "said by the
way", is a remark or observation made by ajudge that, although included in the body of the court's
opinion, does not form a necessary part of the court's decision. In a court opinion, obiter dictainclude, but
are not limited to, words "introduced by way of illustration, or analogy or argument." [1] Unlike the rationes
decidendi, obiter dicta are not the subject of the judicial decision, even if they happen to be correct
statements of law. Under the doctrine of stare decisis, statements constituting obiter dicta are therefore
not binding, although in some jurisdictions, such as England and Wales, they can be strongly persuasive.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION
- The final resolution of the case found at the end of the case beginning with the word WHEREFORE
SEPARATE OPINION

an opinion written separately by a judge who dissents or who concurs only in the result of the majority
opinion.
DISSENTING OPINION

an opinion disagreeing with the majority decision.

A dissenting opinion is an opinion of one or more judges expressing disagreement with the majority
opinion. By definition, a dissent is the minority of the court.
A dissenting opinion cannot create binding precedent because the holding in the opinion is not the
holding of the court in the case. Therefore the dissent's holding does not create case law. However,
dissenting opinions are sometimes cited as persuasive authority when arguing that the holding should be
limited or overturned. In some cases, a dissent in an earlier case is used to spurn a change in the law,
and a later case will write a majority opinion for the same rule of law cited by the dissent in the earlier
case.
JUDICIAL REVIEW

the courts authority to examine executive or legislative act and invalidate that act if it is contrary to
constitutional principles.
the doctrine under which legislative and executive actions are subject to review, and possible
invalidation, by the judiciary.
- A court's authority to examine an executive or legislative act and to invalidate that act if it is
contrary to constitutional principles.
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
JURISDICTION

the practical authority granted to a formally constituted legal body or to a political leader to deal with
and make pronouncements on legal matters and, by implication, to administer justice within a defined
area of responsibility.
Authority to hear and determine cause of action.
- The geographic area over which authority extends; legal authority; the authority to hear
and determine causes of action
LEADING CASE
An important judicial decision that is frequently regarded as having settled or determined the law upon all
points involved in such controversies and thereby serves as a guide for subsequent decisions.
STARE DECISIS

let the decision stand

The policy of courts to abide by or adhere to principles established by decisions in earlier cases.
The principle of stare decisis was not always applied with uniform strictness. the principle of stare
decisis has always been tempered with a conviction that prior decisions must comport with notions of
good reason or they can be overruled by the highest court in the jurisdiction.