NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty.
Lood
JUDICIAL ETHICS
- The branch of moral science which treats of the
right and proper conduct and behavior to be
observed by all judges and magistrates in trying
and deciding controversies brought before
them for adjudication which conduct and
behavior must be demonstrative of
independence, integrity, impartiality, equality,
propriety, competence, and diligence.
- While all these virtues are important, the
freedom from improprieties must be observed
both in the public and private life of a judge –
being the visible representation of the law.
Importance of Judicial Ethics:
• Without it, no judicial system can work.
• Preventive of anarchy and tyranny for it is both
a legal and moral mechanism that keeps and
maintains the trust and confidence of the
people in the judicial system and ultimately
keeps the peace and order in the community.
• Necessary in the administration of justice to
keep judges and magistrates free,
independent, honest, diligent, and impartial.
• So that litigants can find or enjoy the cold
neutrality of independent, wholly-free,
disinterested, and impartial tribunals.
Requirements for SC and CA Justices:
• Natural-born citizen of the Phils.;
• At least 40 yrs of age;
• 15 years or more a judge of lower court or
engaged in the practice of law; and
• Must be a person of proven competence,
integrity, probity, and independence.
Requirements for RTC Judges:
• Natural-born citizen of the Phils.;
• At least 35 yrs of age;
• For at least 10 years, has been engaged in the
practice of law in the Philippines or has held a
public office in the Philippines, requiring
admission to the practice as an indispensable
requisite; and
• Must be a person of proven competence,
integrity, probity, and independence.
Requirements for MTC Judges
• Natural-born citizen of the Phils.;
• At least 30 yrs of age;
• For at least 5 years, has been engaged in the
practice of law in the Philippines or has held a
public office in the Philippines, requiring
admission to the practice as an indispensable
requisite; and
• Must be a person of proven competence,
integrity, probity, and independence.
NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT FOR THE
PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY (A.M. No. 03-05-01-SC, 1
June 2004)
• Inspired by the revised Bangalore Draft of the
Code of Judicial Conduct adopted by the
Judicial Group on Strengthening Judicial
Integrity in the Round Table Meeting of Chief
Justices, held at the Peace Palace, in the
Hague, on November 25-26, 2002.
Bangalore Draft is founded on the ff principles:
a. A competent, independent, and impartial
judiciary is essential if the courts are to fulfill
their role in upholding constitutionalism and the
rule of law;
b. 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;
c. It is essential that judges, individually and
collectively, respect and honor judicial office as
a public trust and strive to enhance and
maintain confidence in the judicial system.
Significance of the New Code:
• It updates and correlates the Code of Judicial
Conduct and the Canons of Judicial Ethics and
stresses the Philippines’ solidarity with the
universal clamor for a universal code of judicial
ethics.
Superseding effect of the New Code on the Canons
of Judicial Ethics and the Code of Judicial Conduct:
1 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
• Did not completely repeal the old Canons of Section 1. Judges shall exercise the judicial function
Judicial Ethics (Admin Order No. 162) and the independently on the basis of their assessment of the
Code of Judicial Conduct of 1989; facts and in accordance with a conscientious
• Only when the New Code has specific understanding of the law, free of any extraneous
provisions or concepts that covers those found influence, inducement, pressure, threat or interference,
in the old canons that the latter are considered direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.
superseded. (based on Rule 3.02 of the Old Code)
• In the absence of specific provisions or
deficiency in the New Code, the Canons of • Judge should not be swayed by the pressure of
Judicial Ethics and the Code of Judicial public opinion.
Conduct shall apply suppletorily. • Judge who gives in to pressure loses his
independence.
6 Canons of the New Code of Judicial • A judge is expected to be fearless in the pursuit
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary: of rendering justice, to be unafraid to displease
any person, interest or power and to be
• CANON 1 - INDEPENDENCE equipped with a moral fiber strong enough to
• CANON 2 - INTEGRITY resist temptations.
• CANON 3 - IMPARTIALITY • A judge should always apply the law in deciding
• CANON 4 - PROPRIETY cases before him. He may not substitute his
• CANON 5 - EQUALITY personal beliefs for what the law states and
• CANON 6 – COMPETENCE and DILIGENCE disregard the latter, even if he disagrees with a
particular law or doctrine enunciated by the SC.
Canon 1. Independence. Judicial • A judge is expected to decide cases only on the
independence is a prerequisite to the rule of law and a basis of applicable law on the matter, not on
fundamental guarantee of a fair trial. A judge shall any other extraneous factors, such as public
therefore uphold and exemplify judicial independence in opinion, personal convictions and partisan
both its individual and institutional aspects. (new interests.
provision)
Section 2. In performing judicial duties, Judges shall
Independence – freedom from influence, guidance or be independent from judicial colleagues in respect of
control of others. Judicial Independence decisions which the judge is obliged to make
independently. (partly based Canon 1 and Rule 1.03 of
Individual Judicial Institutional Judicial the Old Code)
Independence Independence
- As a person, the judge - As the court, no branch • Lawyers are expected to lawfully
must be free from the of the government or influence/convince judges by their pleadings
influences of other agencies thereof could and arguments. However, judges must not
persons like members of dictate upon it in the interfere or intervene in the works of their fellow
the family and friends. performance of its
judges.
judicial duties.
- No personal • Every judge must decide independently.
relationship shall - Must maintain and fight • In collegial courts, while there may be
influence him to do or not for the institutional and discussions and exchange of ideas among
to do what is requested operational justices, at the end of such discussion, the
of him whether right or independence of courts judge must decide on the basis of his own
wrong. from the influences or judgment.
pressures arising from
- Focuses on each other branches or Section 3. Judges shall refrain from influencing in
particular case and agencies of the any manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending
seeks to insure the government, whether before another court or administrative agency. (taken
judge’s ability to decide local or foreign. from Rule 2.04 of the Old Code)
cases with autonomy
within the constraints of - Focuses on the • A judge who tries to influence the outcome of
the law. independence of the litigation pending before another court subverts
judiciary as a branch of the independence of the judiciary and
govt and protects judges undermines the people’s faith in its integrity and
as a class. impartiality.
• Any attempt, whether successful or not, to
influence the decision-making process of
another judge, especially one who is of lower
2 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
rank and over which he exercises supervisory
authority, is serious misconduct.
Section 4. Judges shall 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.
(taken from Rule 2.03 of the Old Code; similar to Canon
12 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics)
• Judges should ensure that their family
members, friends, associates refrain from
creating the impression that they are in a
position to influence the judge.
• Judge shall not lend the prestige of his office to
others.
• Judges should remind themselves that they are
not in the business of giving out favors. They
are in the judiciary to dispense justice.
• Judges should make it clear that they will
neither be influence by anyone, nor would they
allow anyone to interfere in their work.
Section 5. Judges shall 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 therefrom to a reasonable
observer. (new section based on jurisprudence)
• Rationale: To protect the independence and
separation of the judiciary from the two other
branches of government.
Section 6. Judges shall 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. (new
section inspired by Canon 30 of the Code of Judicial
Ethics)
• Judges should refrain from all relations which
would arouse suspicion that such relations
warp or bias his judgment and prevent an
impartial attitude in the administration of judicial
duties.
• Judges should not fraternize with litigants and
their counsel; should make a conscious effort to
avoid them in order to avoid the perception that
their independence has been compromised.
• This does not mean that they should live in
seclusion. They may still commingle but with
limitations.
Section 7. Judges shall encourage and uphold
safeguards for the discharge of judicial duties in order
to maintain and enhance the institutional and
operational independence of the judiciary. (new
provision, based on jurisprudence)
Section 8. Judges shall 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. (partly taken
from Rule 2.01 of the Old Code)
• No sure guarantee of judicial independence
than the character of those appointed to the
Bench.
• Judge should always be imbued with a high
sense of duty and responsibility in the
discharge of his obligation to promptly and
properly administer justice. He must view
himself as a priest for the administration of
justice as akin to a religious crusade (Dimatulac
v. Villon, G.R. No. 127107, Oct. 12, 1998)
Who are good judges?
• Good judges are those who:
o Have mastery of the principles of law;
o Discharge their duties in accordance
with law;
o Are permitted to perform the duties of
the office undeterred by outside
influence; and
o Are independent and self-respecting
human units in a judicial system equal
and coordinate with the other two
departments of the government.
(Borromeo v. Mariano, G.R. No. 16808,
Jan. 3, 1921)
Canon 2. Integrity. Integrity is essential not
only to the proper discharge of the judicial office but also
to the personal demeanor of judges. (Based on Rule
1.01 of the Old Code)
• Integrity is a steadfast adherence to a strict
moral or ethical code. It is moral uprightness.
• Judges should endeavor to conduct
themselves strictly in accordance with the
mandate of the existing laws and Code of
Judicial Ethics.
• Be exemplars in their communities and the
living personification of justice and the Rule of
Law.
• Both in public and private life, the judge must
live honestly and uprightly, being the visible
representation of the law.
• Must not only be “good judges” but must appear
as “good persons”.
• Judges are presumed to be honest and men of
integrity, unless prove otherwise.
o The high qualification required of
lawyers to become judges explains the
good and favorable presumption.
o When a judge has integrity, it is
presumed that he has the virtues of
3 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
impartiality, propriety, equality, and
independence.
Section 1. 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. (new provision
inspired by Canon 31 of the Old Code)
• A judge’s official conduct and behavior should
be free from appearance of impropriety and
must be beyond reproach. Even his personal
behavior in everyday life should be beyond
reproach.
Section 2. 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. (based partly on Rule 2.01 of the Old Code)
• Appearance is as important as reality in the
performance of judicial functions.
• A judge must not only be pure but beyond
suspicion.
• Judge has a duty not only to render a just and
impartial decision, but also to render it in such
a manner as to be free from any suspicion as to
its fairness and impartiality, and also as to the
judge’s integrity.
• Judges must be proficient in both substantive
and procedural aspects of the law, and must
possess the highest integrity, probity, and
unquestionable moral uprightness, both in their
public and private lives.
Section 3. Judges should take or initiate appropriate
disciplinary measures against lawyers or court
personnel for unprofessional conduct of which the judge
may have become aware. (taken from Rule 3.10 of the
Old Code)
• Judges may discipline lawyers and court
personnel for unprofessional conduct.
• May summarily punish any person for direct
contempt for misbehavior committed in the
presence of or so near a court or a judge as to
obstruct or interrupt the proceedings before the
same. (Rule 71, ROC)
• May punish any person for indirect contempt
after appropriate charge and hearing who is
guilty of acts enumerated under Sec. 3, Rule
71, ROC.
Canon 3. Impartiality. 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. (based on Rule
2.01 and Canon 3 of the Old Code)
• Impartiality is a state of mind of the judge where
there is no consciousness or sense of favor for,
bias or prejudice against any party in a case.
• When a judge decides without regard to the
personalities involved; treats parties equally
and fairly; resolves cases based on the weight
of the evidence presented and admitted and
applies the law applicable to the facts
established and not by the influence or lack of
influence of the parties involved.
• Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge
of the judicial office. Applies not only to the
decision itself but also to the process by which
the decision is made.
Cold neutrality of an impartial judge
• A judge should not only render just, correct, and
impartial decision but should do so in a manner
free from suspicion as to his fairness,
impartiality and integrity. This is an
indispensable requisite of due process (Rallos
v. Gako, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1484, Mar. 17,
2000).
• NOTE: A judge has a duty of rendering a just
decision and the duty of doing it in a manner
completely free from suspicion as to his
fairness and as to his integrity.
Section 1. Judges shall perform their judicial duties
without favor, bias or prejudice. (based on
jurisprudence)
• Judge does not look at the persons of the
parties but only on the weight of evidence on
the scale and the applicable law; he must
evince the cold neutrality of a disinterested
magistrate with a duty to apply the law without
fear or favor, malice or prejudice to anyone.
• NOTE: Notatu dignum = presumption of
regularity in the performance of a judge’s
functions.
4 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
o Bias, prejudice, and undue interest
cannot be presumed.
• Burden of proof lies with the complainant to
show that there is bias sufficient to be a ground
for inhibition.
o NOTE: there is bias and prejudice
when the opinion is based upon an
extrajudicial source.
• Degree of proof required to prove bias and
prejudice on the part of the judge: clear and
convincing evidence.
compromising the rights of the litigants in the
case.
Section 4. Judges shall disqualify themselves from
participating in any proceedings in which they are
unable to decide the matter impartially or in which it may
appear to a reasonable observer that they are unable to
decide the matter impartially. Such proceedings
include, but are not limited to, instances where: (based
on Rule 3.12 of the Old Code)

Section 2. 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 litigants in the impartiality of the judge
and of the judiciary. (partly based on Canon 3 of the Old
Code)

• Judge must always act with dignity, honesty,

competence, and independence in his public
and private life.
• Proficiency in law and possession of moral
integrity is required of a judge for the people to
look up to him as a virtuous and upright man.

Section 3. 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. (based on Canon 5 and
Rule 5.02)
• Judges should avoid activities on occasions w/c
will increase possibility of being disqualified
from hearing or deciding cases.
Section 4. Judges shall not knowingly, while a
proceeding is before, or could come before, 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. (based on Rules 2.02
and 3.07 of the Old Code)
Section 6. A judge disqualified as stated above may,
instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose on
the records the basis of disqualification. If, based on
such disclosure, the parties and lawyers independently
of the judge's participation, all agree in writing that the
reason for the inhibition is immaterial or unsubstantial,
the judge may then participate in the proceeding. The
agreement, signed by all parties and lawyers, shall be
incorporated in the record of the proceedings. (based
on Rule 3.13 of the Old Code)
• This is called Remittal of Disqualification.

• A judge’s language, both written and spoken,

must be guarded and measured, lest the best
of intentions be misconstrued. (Fecundo v.
Berjamen, G.R. No. 88105, December 18,
1989)
• This section warns judges against making
tactless comments that would affect the
outcome of the proceedings before them or
may later decide but not yet before him; or
Section 1, Rule 137 of the ROC
impair the manifest fairness of the process.
• Judges should avoid side remarks, hasty
conclusions, loose statements or gratuitous
utterances that suggest they are prejudging a
case. There is a danger of being misquoted, of

5 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
Section 1. Judges shall avoid impropriety and the
appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
(based on Canon 3 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics)

• Judges are held by the public to a higher

standard of integrity and ethical conduct than
lawyers and other persons not invested with
public trust.
• Being the visible representation of law and
justice, judges should always conduct
themselves within the confines of proper judicial
deportment and behave in a manner short of
reproach.
• Prohibits not only actual impropriety but even
the mere appearance of impropriety.

Disqualification Inhibition
1. There are specific 1. There rule only
grounds enumerated provides broad basis for
under the rules of court inhibition.
for disqualification.
2. The matter is left to the
2. Judicial officer has no sound discretion of the
discretion to sit or try the judge.
case.
Procedure for disqualification/inhibition?

Section 2. As a subject of constant public scrutiny,

judges must accept personal restrictions that might be
viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and
should do so freely and willingly. In particular, judges
shall conduct themselves in a way that is consistent with
the dignity of the judicial office. (based on
jurisprudence)

• Certain restrictions regarding personal conduct

Time when Petition for DQ should be filed?
• Petition to dq a judge must be filed before
rendition of the judgment, and cannot be raised
on appeal. Otherwise, the parties are deemed
to have waived any objection regarding the
impartiality of the judge.
Canon 4. Propriety. Propriety and the
appearance of propriety are essential to the
performance of all the activities of a judge. (Based on
Canon 3 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics)
• Propriety means appropriateness.
• It must be open and manifest to a reasonable
observer.
• It is required in all the activities of a judge.
are imposed on members of the judiciary, this
is the price one has to pay for holding such a
distinguished position. These restrictions apply
in the public and private life of judges and
magistrates.
• The conduct of members of the judiciary must
be able to withstand the most searching public
scrutiny, for the ethical principles and sense of
propriety of a judge.
Section 3. Judges shall, in their personal relations
with individual members of the legal profession who
practice regularly in their court, avoid situations which
might reasonably give rise to the suspicion or
appearance of favoritism or partiality. (based on
jurisprudence)

• Bolsters the principle of cold neutrality of an

impartial judge. This section requires judges to
6 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
scrupulously guard against any act that may be
construed as an expression of bias in favor of a
litigant.
• NOTE: Public suspicion may be aroused if a
judge is frequently seen with a lawyer, thus
tending to erode the trust of litigants in the
impartiality of the judge. (Padilla v. Zantua, G.R.
No. 110990, Oct. 1994)
Section 4. Judges shall not participate in the
determination of a case in which any member of their
family represents a litigant or is associated in any
manner with the case. (partly based on Rule 3.12 of the
Old Code)
• Principle that no judge should preside in a case
in w/c the judge is not wholly free, disinterested,
impartial, and independent.
Section 5. Judges shall not allow the use of their
residence by a member of the legal profession to
receive clients of the latter or of other members of the
legal profession. (based on jurisprudence)
• Such a scenario will create the wrong
impression that the judge and the lawyer are
partners in “practice of law”.
• REASON: judges are required to always exhibit
cold neutrality of an impartial judge.
Section 6. Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled
to freedom of expression, belief, association and
assembly, but in exercising such rights, they shall
always conduct themselves in such a manner as to
preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the
impartiality and independence of the judiciary. (based
on Canon 27 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics, and
Jurisprudence)
• Judges in the exercise of their civil liberties,
should be circumspect and ever mindful of their
continuing commitment to uphold the judiciary,
and its values places upon them certain implied
restraints to their freedom.
Section 7. Judges shall inform themselves about
their personal fiduciary financial interests and shall
make reasonable efforts to be informed about the
financial interests of members of their family. (new
provision)
• Judge shall refrain from financial and business
dealings that tend to reflect adversely on the
court’s impartiality, interfere with the proper
performance of judicial activities, or increase
involvement with lawyers or persons likely to
come before the court.
Section 8. Judges shall not use or lend the prestige
of the judicial office to advance their private interests, or
those of a member of their family or of anyone else, nor
shall they convey or permit others to convey the
impression that anyone is in a special position
improperly to influence them in the performance of
judicial duties. (based on Rule 2.03 of the Old Code)
• Acts prohibited:
o Judge’s act of using judicial office to
advance private interests;
o Judge’s act of giving impression that he
can be influenced to use the judicial
office to advance the private interests
of others.
Section 9. Confidential information acquired by
judges in their judicial capacity shall not be used or
disclosed by for any other purpose related to their
judicial duties. (reversal of Rule 5.05 of the Old Code)
• Prohibition will discourage, if not stop the
judges from making business speculations in
some business ventures, the secrets of which
they learned by reason of their position as
judges.
Section 10. Subject to the proper performance of
judicial duties, judges may:
a. Write, lecture, teach and participate in activities
concerning the law, the legal system, the
administration of justice or related matters;
b. Appear at a public hearing before an official
body concerned with matters relating to the law,
the legal system, the administration of justice or
related matters;
c. Engage in other activities if such activities do
not detract from the dignity of the judicial office
or otherwise interfere with the performance of
judicial duties.
• This section’s tolerance of judicially-related
activities is limited by Sec. 12, Art. VIII of the
Constitution, which prohibits judges from being
“designated to any agency performing quasi-
judicial or administrative functions”.
• Allows judge to participate in legal academia
and public discourse on legal matters, provided
that there shall be no interference in the
performance of the judge’s primary functions.
• In dealing with media, the Phil Judicial
Academy suggests that a judge or court should
avoid acrimonious debate with reporters and
the public.
Section 11. Judges shall not practice law while the
holder of judicial office. (taken from the first part of Rule
5.07 of the Old Code)
• Prohibition is based on inherent incompatibility
of the rights, duties, and functions of the office
7 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
of an atty with the powers, duties, and functions
of a judge.
• NOTE: Sec. 35, Rule 138 ROC prohibits judges
from engaging in the practice of law or giving
professional advice to clients.
Section 12. Judges may form or join associations of
judges or participate in other organizations representing
the interests of judges. (based on Canon 4 of the Old
Code and Rule 4.01)
• Rule recognizes the difference between
membership in associations of judges and
membership in association of other legal
professionals.
• Judges-only organizations di not create an
appearance of impropriety.
Section 13. Judges and members of their families
shall neither ask for, nor accept, any gift, bequest, loan
or favor in relation to anything done or to be done or
omitted to be done by him or her in connection with the
performance of judicial duties. (based on Rule 5.04 of
the Old Code)
• GIFT
• LOAN
• FAVOR
Sec. 7(d) of RA 6713 provides that public officials and
employees shall not solicit or accept, directly or
indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan...
Laws which prohibit a judge or any public officer from
accepting gifts, bequests, or favors or loans from
anyone, except when provided by law:
1. Bribery, Indirect and Direct (Art. 210-211 RPC)
2. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019)
3. Void Donations (Art. 739 of NCC)
4. Loans prohibited under the Const (Art. XI, Sec.
16, 1987 Constitution)
Section 14. Judges shall not knowingly permit
court staff or others subject to their influence, direction
or authority, to ask for, or accept, any gift, bequest, loan
or favor in relation to anything done or to be done or
omitted to be done in connection with their duties or
functions. (partly based on Rule 5.04 of the Old Code)
• Judges are not allowed to do indirectly what
they are not allowed to do directly.
Section 15. Subject to law and to any legal
requirements of public disclosure, judges may receive a
token gift, award or benefit as appropriate to the
occasion on which it is made provided that such gift,
award or benefit might not reasonably be perceived as
intended to influence the judge in the performance of
judicial duties or otherwise give rise to an appearance
of partiality. (partly based on Rule 5.04 of the Old Code)
• The gift contemplated here is a token gift, a
symbolic gesture. It is not something of value
given as compensation or bribe.
Canon 5. Equality. Ensuring equality of
treatment to all before the courts is essential to the due
performance of the judicial office. (new Canon inspired
by the Canon 3 of the Old Code)
• Equality of Treatment – judge must treat all
litigants with equality regardless of their race,
nationality, sex or religion.
• Equal treatment to ALL who have legal
business to do with the court.
Section 1. Judges shall be aware of and understand
diversity in society and differences arising from various
sources, including, but not limited to, race, color, sex,
religion, national origin, caste, disability, age, marital
status, sexual orientation, social and economic status
and other like causes. (new provision)
• Not entertain bias and prejudice by reason of
the abovementioned causes.
• Judges must treat all fairly and equally despite
their striking diversities and differences in many
aspects of their life status and experience.
• Judges are expected to be aware of the
diversity in society. A judge should not yield to
first impression, reach hasty conclusions or
prejudge matters.
Section 2. Judges shall not, in the performance of
judicial duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or
prejudice towards any person or group on irrelevant
grounds. (partly based on Rule 3.07 of the Old Code,
Canon 3 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics, and
Jurisprudence)
• Magistrates of law must comport themselves at
all times in such manner that their conduct can
withstand the highest level of scrutiny.
• Cold neutrality of an impartial judge.
Section 3. Judges shall carry out judicial duties with
appropriate consideration for all persons, such as the
parties, witnesses, lawyers, court staff and judicial
colleagues, without differentiation on any irrelevant
ground, immaterial to the proper performance of such
duties. (partly based on Rule 3.04 of the Old Code)
• As arbiters of the law, judges should be
conscientious, studious, courteous, patient,
and punctual in the discharge of their judicial
duties, recognizing that time of litigants,
witnesses and counsel is of value.
8 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
• Respect should go both ways. If a judge
indulges in intemperate language, the lawyer
can return the attack on his person and
character through an administrative case
against the judge.
• Patience, attention, and courtesy
inexperienced lawyers is specially directed.
• Arrogance of judges must be repressed. No
official, no matter how high, is above the law.
Section 4. Judge shall not knowingly permit court
staff or others subject to his or her influence, direction
or control to differentiate between persons concerned,
in a matter before the judge, on any irrelevant ground.
(new provision)
• Duties of judges under this section:
o To ensure that court personnel under
their supervision do not discriminate.
o To organize their courts to ensure the
prompt and convenient dispatch of
business and should not tolerate
misconduct.
• All personnel involved in the dispensation of
justice should conduct themselves with a high
degree of responsibility.
Section 5. Judges shall require lawyers in
proceedings before the court to refrain from
manifesting, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice
based on irrelevant grounds, except such as are legally
relevant to an issue in proceedings and may be the
subject of legitimate advocacy. (based on Rule 3.10 of
the Old Code)
• Conduct proceedings in court with dignity and
in a manner that reflects the importance and
seriousness of proceedings. Judges should
maintain order and proper decorum in the court.
• Judges cannot malinger or refrain from their
duty to decide complicated or controversial
cases. Unless there are clear and valid grounds
for their dq or inhibition, they must not recuse
from such cases.
to
Duties of a judge:
1. A judge must perform his judicial duties
with regard to a case where he is not
disqualified to so and, may not divest
himself of such case if he is not so
disqualified; and
2. A judge shall not inhibit himself simply to
avoid sitting on difficult or controversial
cases.
Section 2. Judges shall devote their professional
activity to judicial duties, which include not only the
performance of judicial functions and responsibilities in
court and the making of decisions, but also other tasks
relevant to the judicial office or the court's operations. (a
new provision based on jurisprudence)
• Judge has other impt tasks like the
management and supervision of court
personnel and operations.
• Keeping of records of cases is under the
supervision of the judge. Loss of records may
be attributed to the negligence and lack of
managerial skill of the judge, may be held liable
administratively. May be excused in cases of
fortuitous events.
• As an administrative officer of the court, a judge
should organize and supervise the court
personnel to ensure prompt and efficient
dispatch of business and require at all times the
observance of high standards of public service
and fidelity.

Section 3. Judges shall take reasonable steps to

Canon 6. Competence and
Diligence. Competence and diligence are
prerequisites to the due performance of judicial office.
(based on Canon 3, Rule 3.01, and Rule 3.08 of the Old
Code)
• Membership in the bench requires amont other
stringent qualifications, proven competence,
integrity, probity, and independence.
• Competence and diligence to be able to cope
with the heavy and serious responsibilities and
duties attached to their offices.
Section 1. The judicial duties of a judge take
precedence over all other activities. (based on Canon 5
and Rule 5.02 of the Old Code)
• Primary duty of Judges – to hear and decide
cases brought to them for trial and adjudication.
maintain and enhance their knowledge, skills and
personal qualities necessary for the proper
performance of judicial duties, taking advantage for this
purpose of the training and other facilities which should
be made available, under judicial control, to judges.
(inspired by Canon 4 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics
and Canon 4 of the Old Code)
• A judge owes the public and the Court the duty
to be proficient in the law and is expected to
keep abreast of laws and prevailing
jurisprudence.
• Good faith, absence of malice, corrupt motives
or improper consideration are sufficient
defenses in which a judge charged with
ignorance of law can find refuge.
o RATIONALE: as a matter of policy, in
the absence of fraud, dishonesty, and
9 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
corruption, the acts of a judge in his they will run in conflict with the efficient
official capacity are not subject to discharge of judicial duties.
disciplinary action.
• Service in the judiciary means a continuous LIABILITY OF JUSTICES
study and research on the law from beginning
to end. AND JUDGES(Administrative,
Section 4. Judges shall keep themselves informed Civil, Criminal)
about relevant developments of international law,
including international conventions and other General Rule: A judge is not liable administratively,
instruments establishing human rights norms. (new civilly, or criminally when he acts within his legal
provision) powers and jurisdiction.

• Competence of Phil judges must not be
confined to domestic laws and jurisprudence.
Section 5. Judges shall perform all judicial duties,
including the delivery of reserved decisions, efficiently,
fairly and with reasonable promptness. (partly based on
Canon 6 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics, Rule 1.02 and
Rule 3.05 of the Old Code)
• Reason: To free the judge from apprehension
of personal consequences to himself and to
preserve the integrity and independence of the
judiciary
• Remedy of aggrieved party is not to file an
administrative complaint against the judge but
to elevate the error to a higher court for review
and correction.

• PURPOSE: To implement the provision of the Exception: Where an error is gross, deliberate and
Constitution which makes it the judge’s duty to malicious, or is incurred with evident bad faith, or
decide cases promptly, and to give parties to a when there is fraud, dishonesty, or corruption.
suit the enjoyment of their right to the speedy
XPN to the XPN: When the law or procedure is so
disposition of their cases.
elementary that not knowing or to act as if one does
• Judges must comply with the reglementary
not know the same, constitutes gross ignorance of
period within which to decide cases in order to
the law, even without the complainant having to
prevent delay in the administration of justice.
prove malice or bad faith.
• Justice delayed is often justice denied.
• Delay in the disposition of cases impairs the Administrative Charges and Sanctions are
faith and confidence of the people, specially the classified as:
low-income group, in the judiciary.
• If cases could not be resolved within the • Serious;
prescribed period, an application or request for • Less serious; and
extension of time is necessary. • Light charges (Sec. 7, Rule 140, ROC)
• Extension must first be approved by the SC.

Section 6. Judges shall maintain order and

decorum in all proceedings before the court and be
patient, dignified and courteous in relation to
litigants, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom
the judge deals in an official capacity. Judges shall
require similar conduct of legal representatives, court
staff and others subject to their influence, direction or
control. (based on Rules 3.03, 3.04, 3.08, 3.09 of the
Code of Judicial Conduct)

Section 7. Judges shall not engage in conduct

incompatible with the diligent discharge of judicial
duties. (new provision)

• This section is an all-encompassing rule which

will cover all forms of conduct of judges not
covered explicitly by the Old or New Code
which must be avoided.
• Although some acts to be avoided are not
illegal, they should still be avoided because
Sanctions for SERIOUS charges:
• Dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all or
part of the benefits as the Court may determine,
and disqualification from reinstatement or
appointment to any public office, including
10 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
GOCCs. Provided, however, that the forfeiture
shall in no case include accrued leave credits;
• Suspension from office without salary and other
benefits for more than 3 months but not
exceeding 6 months;
• A fine of more than Php20,000 but not
exceeding Php40,000. (Sec. 11, Rule 140,
ROC)
Sanctions for LESS SERIOUS charges:
• Suspension from office without salary and other
benefits for not less than 1 nor more than 3
months;
• A fine of more than Php10,000 but not
exceeding Php20,000. (Sec. 11 (B), Rule 140,
ROC)
Sanctions for LIGHT charges:
• A fine of not less than Php1,000 but not
exceeding Php20,000.
• Censure
• Reprimand
• Admonition with warning (Sec. 11 (C), Rule
140, ROC)
Grounds for administrative sanctions against
judges:
• Misconduct – any unlawful conduct on the part
of a person concerned in the administration of
justice prejudicial to the rights of parties or to
the right determination of the case.
• Serious Misconduct – implies malice or
wrongful intent, not a mere error of judgment.
• Inefficiency – implies negligence,
incompetence, ignorance and carelessness.
3 ways of instituting administrative charges against
judges
1. Motu Proprio by the SC
2. Upon verified complaint with affidavits of
persons having personal knowledge of the facts
alleged therein or by documents which may
substantiate said allegations;
3. Upon an anonymous complaint supported
by public records of indubitable integrity. (Sec.
1, Rule 140, ROC).
Administrative Procedure on Complaints against
Justices and Judges (Rule 140, ROC)
1. Institution of Complaint (Sec. 1)
2. Action on the Complaint (Sec. 2)
3. Designation of Investigator (Sec. 3)
4. Hearing (Sec. 4)
5. Report (Sec. 5)
6. Action by the SC (Sec. 6)
NOTE: Confidentiality of Proceedings (Sec.12)
until finality thereof – to protect the reputation of
judges/justices, for it is possible the charge or
charges may be unfounded and malicious.
• Retirement, resignation, or promotion of a
Judge does not necessarily render moot and
academic the case against him.
• Desistance on the part of the complainant does
not warrant dismissal of administrative
complaint.
• Death of respondent judge will not necessarily
render the administrative case moot and
academic.
Administrative cases against Justices, Judges may
be automatically treated as disbarment cases
- Serious admin cases are automatically
converted as disciplinary proceedings against
them as such officials and as member of the
Philippine Bar. (A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC Sept. 17,
2002)
- Samson v. Caballero A.M. No. RTJ-08-2138,
Aug. 2009.
The filing of an administrative complaint against a
judge is not an appropriate remedy where judicial
recourse is still available.
An inquiry into a judge’s civil, criminal, and/or
administrative liability may be made only after the
11 of 12
NJBF | BLE 19-20| Atty. Lood
available remedies have been exhausted and “The Supreme Court en banc shall have the
decided with finality. power to discipline judges of lower courts, or
order their dismissal by a vote of a majority of
Justices and Judges are also protected from the Members who actually took part in the
baseless and unfounded administrative complaints. deliberations on the issues in the case and
A.M. No. 03-10-01-SC voted thereon.”
CIVIL liabilities under the Civil Code Powers and Liabilities of Members of the SC
1. Art. 27 – Refusal or neglect w/o just cause by a a) SC has administrative supervision over all
public servant to perform his official duty courts and personnel thereof (Sec. 6, Art. 8
2. Art. 32 – directly or indirectly obstructing, Constitution)
defeating, violating or in any manner impeding b) Justices of the SC can only be removed by
or impairing civil liberties guaranteed by the impeachment – Impeachment proceedings
Constitution against justices of SC is sui generis in nature
Disabilities of Judges under the Civil Code and governed by the rules created by the
impeachment court. Congress shall promulgate
1. Article 1491 (5) – Justices, judges, prosecuting its rules on impeachment.
attorneys, clerks of court of superior and inferior
courts and other officers and employees
connected with the administration of justice
cannot acquire by purchase, even at a public or
judicial action, either in person or through the
mediation of another the property and rights in
litigation or levied upon an execution before the
court within whose jurisdiction or territory they
exercise the irrespective functions.
2. Article 739 – donation made to a judge, his wife,
descendants and ascendants by reason of his
office are void.

CRIMINAL liabilities under the RPC

1. Art. 204 – Knowingly rendering unjust judgment

2. Art. 205 – Judgment rendered through
negligence
3. Art. 206 – Knowingly rendering an unjust
interlocutory order
4. Art. 207 – Malicious delay in the administration
of justice.

Malfeasance under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt

Practices Act

• Section 3(e), RA 3019

Resolution of Admin Cases against Judges &

Justices

1) If the penalty imposed upon a judge is more

than 1 year suspension or a fine of more than
Php10,000.00 or both, the administrative case
shall be decided by the Supreme Court en
banc.
2) If the penalty does not exceed the period and
fine above-mentioned, the case will be decided
by the Division where it is assigned.
3) If the decision is one of dismissal of the judge,
that decision shall be en banc.

NOTE: Sec. 11, Art. VIII 1987 Const.

12 of 12