ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO.

35-2005

EXTENSIVE ORIENTATION PROGRAM ON THE NEW CODE

OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT FOR THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY
AND THE CODE OF CONDUCT FOR COURT PERSONNEL

WHEREAS, on 1 June 2004 the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary and the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel took effect;

WHEREAS, these Codes must govern the conduct of judges and court personnel,
respectively;

WHEREAS, it is thus necessary that an effective extensive orientation and immersion

program on these Codes be pursued and carried out through seminars-workshops.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA), the Office of the
Court Administrator (OCA), the Program Management Office (PMO), and Office of
Administrative Services (OAS) of the Supreme Court are hereby directed to work
together, coordinate, and prepare a consolidated seminar-workshop program to ensure
that before August 2006 all judges and court personnel shall have already attended a
seminar-workshop on the New Code of Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary and the
Code of Conduct for Court Personnel. To attain this objective

1. The PHILJA shall include orientation or immersion sessions on the Codes as a

special component of its regular Regional Judicial Career Enhancement
Program; and if this would prove to be less effective, it should conduct lectures
on the Codes by province or group of provinces.

2. The OAS of the Supreme Court, in coordination with the PMO, should
complete the orientation program on the Codes for the officials and personnel of
the Supreme Court, the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET), the OCA, the
Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), and the PHILJA.

3. The Presiding Justices of the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, and the
Court of Tax Appeals, through their respective Clerks of Court, shall coordinate
with the PHILJA, OAS, and the PMO of the Supreme Court for the conduct of
seminars-workshops on the Codes for their officials and personnel to be
completed before 31 December 2005.

4. For the conduct of these seminars-workshops, the PHILJA, the PMO, and the
OAS of the Supreme Court are enjoined to tap the expert lectures on the Codes,
such as Court of Appeals Justice Jose C. Sabio, retired Court of Appeals Justices
Hector Hofileña and Hilarion Aquino, Deputy Court Administrator Jose P.
Perez, and officials from the pool of lectures formed by the OAS headed by
Atty. Ma. Carina C. Cunanan.
The funding for the seminars-workshops on the Codes shall be charged against the P25
million appropriation granted by the Court to the PHILJA if sponsored by the latter; the
WB-JRSP loan and other grants received by the Court through the PMO for the purpose;
or against the respective regular appropriations for seminars and conferences of the
Supreme Court and the lower courts, the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, and the
Court of Tax Appeals, as the case may be.

For the effective implementation of this Administrative Circular, the abovementioned

offices shall submit a schedule of seminars-workshops for the period from August to
December 2005 and from January to July 2006.

This Administrative Circular shall take effect upon its issuance.

Issued this 26th day of July 2005.

(Sgd.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR.

Chief Justice

ABOVE ALL THINGS

By Ramon Jr. & Eloisa S. Mabutas
‘New Code of Judicial Conduct’

PUBLIC confidence in the judicial system and in the moral authority and integrity of the
judiciary is of utmost importance in a modern democratic society. Thus, it is essential that
judges, individually and collectively, respect and honor judicial office as public trust.
They must strive to enhance and maintain confidence in the judicial system.

Such is the basic anchorage of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
judiciary, which we are portraying for the information of, and observance by, all
concerned.

Canon 1, entitled “Independence,” states that “judicial independence is a prerequisite to

the rule of law and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial. A judge shall therefore uphold
and exemplify judicial independence in both its individual and institutional aspects.”

Section 1 thereof mandates that “judges shall exercise the judicial function independently
on the basis of their assessment of the facts and in accordance with a conscientious
understanding of the law, free of any extraneous influence, inducement, pressure, threat
or interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason. Thus, in performing
their judicial duties, judges shall:

• “be independent from judicial colleagues in respect of decisions which the judge is
obliged to make independently” (Sec. 2);
• “refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending
before another court or administrative agency” (Sec. 3);

• “not allow family, social, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or

judgment. The prestige of judicial office shall not be used or lent to advance the private
interests of others, nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a
special position to influence the judge (Sec. 4);

• “not only be free from inappropriate connections with, and influence by the executive
and legislative branches of government, but must also appear to be free there from to a
reasonable observer” (Sec. 5);

• “be independent in relation to society in general and in relation to the particular parties
to a dispute which he or she has to adjudicate.” (Sec. 6);

• “encourage and uphold safeguards for the discharge of judicial duties in order to
maintain and enhance the institutional and operational independence of the judiciary”
(Sec. 7); and

• “exhibit and promote high standards of judicial conduct in order to reinforce public
confidence in the judiciary which is fundamental to the maintenance of judicial
independence” (Sec. 8).

Canon 2 states that “integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge of the judicial
office but also to the personal demeanor of judges.” Thus, it mandates that:

• “Judges shall ensure that not only is their conduct above reproach but that it is
perceived to be so in the view of a reasonable observer” (Sec. 1);

• “The behavior and conduct of judges must reaffirm the people’s faith in the integrity of
the judiciary. Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be done” (Sec. 2).

• “Judges should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against lawyers or

court personnel for unprofessional conduct of which the judge may have become aware
(Sec. 3).

Canon 3 of the new code pertains to impartiality. It says, “Impartiality is essential to the
proper discharge of the judicial office. It applies not only to the decision itself but also to
the process by which the decision is made.”

Section 1 thereof mandates that “judges shall perform their judicial duties without favor,
bias or prejudice.”

Section 2 provides that “judges shall ensure that his or her conduct, both in and out of
court, maintains and enhances the confidence of the public, the legal profession and the
litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of the judiciary.”
Section 3 thereby directs that “judges shall, so far as is reasonable, so conduct themselves
as to minimize the occasions on which it will be necessary for them to be disqualified
from hearing or deciding cases.”

To further uphold impartiality, Section 4 of same cannon provides that “judges shall not
knowingly, while a proceeding is before, or could come be- fore, them make any
comment that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome of such proceeding or
impair the manifest fairness of the process. Nor shall judges make any comment in
public or otherwise that might affect the fair trial of any person or issue.”

En Banc

A.M. No. 03-05-01-SC

Re: New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary

Sirs and Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUNE 6 2006.

"A.M. No. 03-05-01-SC.- Re: New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary.- The Court Resolved, upon the recommendation of the Philippine Judicial
Academy, to REVISE the provision of Canon 4, Section 9 of the New Code of Judicial
Conduct, as distributed to judges and court personnel, so as to read as follows:

Confidential information acquired by judges in their judicial capacity shall not be used or
disclosed for any other purpose not related to their judicial duties.

The Clerk of Court is hereby directed to publish the above correction." Ynares-Santiago,
J., on leave.

Very truly yours,