#Serving judicial papers in Philippines

[philippinesprocessservers]

Various Types of Legal Documents Served in the Philippines

When it comes to the legal system of the Philippines, the correct and rightful delivery of legal documents is what makes it possible for people to have a legal and just trial. These items are to inform people and bodies about their rights, obligations, and pending cases. Misdelivery or unsatisfactory service can cause delays, case dismissals, or other legal complications. Knowledge of the specific categories of legal documents that require formal service can enable individuals and establishments to manage the legal process responsibly and efficiently.

The Importance of Serving Legal Documents

In due course, Serving legal documents in philippines are officially served just to ensure the addition of the involved parties to a dispute. Contrary to belief, following the Rules of Court in the Philippines, this manner is indispensable to the guarantee of the right to due process. Observing legal procedures, whether in civil, criminal, or administrative cases, is one of the reasons why timely and accurate service of legal papers is a must.

Legal papers in the country consist of different categories, such as judicial, extrajudicial, and administrative papers. Further is a list of legal documents that are served most frequently, and at the same time, their importance is underlined.

1. Court-Issued Legal Documents

Certificates of the court are the origin of judicial papers. They are a vital part of legal action in lawsuits.

Summons

A summons issued by the court is a formal notice through which the defendant is informed about the beginning of the legal action against him. The detailed content is the case number, court name, and period for response.

Summons are the recipient’s duty to ensure the person will receive it personally.

If the defendant is nowhere to be found, the Court may authorize substituted service (delivery to a household or office member) or publication in newspapers.

The court can issue a default judgment if the defendant fails to obey a summons.

Subpoena

A subpoena is a legal instrument that authorizes a person to act as a witness in court and submit documentary evidence that is relevant to a claim before the court.

A subpoena ad testificandum is a command for the person to appear as a witness in court and give their testimony.

A subpoena duces tecum is a command for the submission of specific documents.

Disregarding: A subpoena may lead to contempt charges.

Court Orders

A court order is a directive issued by a judge, instructing specific actions to be taken by individuals, organizations, or government agencies.

Examples include injunctions, writs of execution, and restraining orders.

Non-compliance can lead to fines, sanctions, or legal consequences.

Judgments and Final Decisions

Once a case has been resolved, the court’s final judgment or decision must be served to the involved parties. This document explains the legal ruling and the obligations of each party.

Service is carried out via personal delivery, registered mail, or official court processes.

If a party refuses to receive the document, it may be left at their residence or office.

2. Non-Judicial Legal Documents

Extrajudicial documents do not originate from the court but still require proper service for legal validity.

Demand Letters

A demand letter serves as a formal request for an individual or entity to fulfill a legal obligation, such as debt repayment, contract fulfillment, or property return.

These letters often serve as a prerequisite before legal action is taken.

Service is done via personal delivery, registered mail, or legal representatives.

Termination Notices

Employers are required to provide a notice of termination to employees facing dismissal due to redundancy, misconduct, or other legal grounds.

Labor laws mandate a 30-day notice period before termination.

Service is conducted through personal delivery or official correspondence.

Extrajudicial Settlement Agreements

For estate settlements without court proceedings, an extrajudicial settlement agreement must be signed and served to all legal heirs.

This ensures transparency and legal acknowledgment of the property division.

Some cases require publication in a newspaper of general circulation.

3. Government and Administrative Legal Documents

Administrative and government-related legal documents are essential for regulatory compliance and enforcement of laws.

Show-Cause Orders

Government agencies issue show-cause orders requiring individuals or businesses to explain why they should not be held liable for alleged violations.

Law enforcement or regulatory bodies serve these orders personally or via registered mail.

Failure to respond can result in administrative penalties or legal action.

Violation Notices

Regulatory agencies issue notices of violation to businesses or individuals who fail to comply with laws, such as labor standards, tax regulations, or environmental policies.

The recipient is required to take corrective actions within a specified timeframe.

Notices are served through personal delivery, registered mail, or official postings.

Eviction Notices

Landlords or housing authorities issue eviction notices to tenants for non-payment of rent or breach of lease agreements.

Proper service of eviction notices is required before filing a legal eviction case.

If the tenant refuses service, the notice may be posted on the property or served through legal representatives.

Challenges in Serving Legal Documents in the Philippines

Several challenges arise when serving legal papers, potentially delaying legal proceedings:

Evasion of service: Some recipients intentionally avoid service to delay legal actions.

Inaccurate address information: Frequent relocations make it difficult to locate recipients.

Geographic limitations: Delivering documents in remote areas or provinces takes longer.

Bureaucratic delays: Certain government offices require extensive processing times before accepting service.

To overcome these issues, alternative service methods such as substituted service, service by publication, or electronic notifications may be authorized by the court.

Conclusion

The service of legal documents in the Philippines is an essential step in ensuring the smooth progress of legal proceedings. Judicial, non-judicial, and administrative documents must be properly served in accordance with legal requirements. Failure to comply with service procedures can lead to delays, penalties, or even case dismissals. By understanding the different types of legal documents and their proper methods of service, individuals and organizations can ensure compliance with Philippine laws and avoid unnecessary legal complications.

[phgq]

Duterte names Jhosep Lopez as Supreme Court justice

#PHnews: Duterte names Jhosep Lopez as Supreme Court justice

MANILA – President Rodrigo Duterte has named Court of Appeals (CA) Justice Jhosep Lopez as Supreme Court Associate Justice, completing the 15-seat roster of the high court.

Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque confirmed Lopez's appointment in a Palace press briefing.

“Kinukumpirma ko po na ang dating CA Justice Jhosep Lopez ay naitalaga na po bilang Associate Justice ng Korte Suprema (I confirm that former CA Justice Jhosep Lopez was appointed as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court),” he said.

He said the President signed Lopez’s appointment paper on Jan. 25.

“Inaasahan ng Pangulo na paiiralin ni Justice Lopez ang judicial independence at rule of law at ipagpapatuloy niya ang mga reporma sa ating court processes (The President hopes that Justice Lopez will enforce judicial independence and rule of law and will continue to reform our court processes),” he added.

Lopez will fill the spot vacated by Associate Justice Priscilla Baltazar Padilla, who retired last year at 62, eight years ahead of the mandatory retirement age for justices and judges.

He has repeatedly applied for an SC post. The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) has also included him in its shortlist of nominees several times.

Prior to his stint at the CA, Lopez was Manila’s chief prosecutor starting in February 2006.

He also served as councilor of Manila’s 3rd District from 1992 to 1998 and from 2001 to 2006.

Lopez graduated with a degree in Political Science from the University of the Philippines Diliman, graduating cum laude.

He went to law school in the same university in 1984.

While Lopez completes the 15-seat bench of the high court, there will be a new vacancy in the Supreme Court when Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta retires in March. (PNA)

***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "Duterte names Jhosep Lopez as Supreme Court justice." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1128545 (accessed January 26, 2021 at 10:16PM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "Duterte names Jhosep Lopez as Supreme Court justice." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1128545 (archived).

[pinoyscientists]

Meet Maria Corazon (Cora) De Ungria, molecular biologist and forensic geneticist

1) What do you do?

I am a molecular biologist who has chosen to focus on studying genetic variations across human populations. I apply this knowledge in forensics to assist criminal investigations, aid in the identification of disaster victims, and help resolve issues of parentage and kinship. 

In addition, I am interested in studying the genetic variations that exist across different Philippine populations, including indigenous people/indigenous cultural communities (IP/ICCs) in order to contribute to the discourse regarding our origin/s as a people, as well as the process of evolution of our DNA over time as a response to the rapid changes in our environment and way of living.

2) Where do you work?

I am the head of the DNA Analysis Laboratory, UP Diliman Natural Sciences Research Institute (www.dnaforensic.org). This laboratory continues to promote the development of forensic DNA technology in the country. 

I hold the rank of University Researcher V which means that I devote most of my time planning/conducting research and extension services for the community. 

Research projects include the generation of the database of the Filipino population across the regional centers and indigenous communities, validation of methodology for collection and analysis of forensic samples and involvement in actual forensic cases as requested by the university, government agencies and private clients. 

In addition, I have volunteered to work with UP Faculty in the College of Science towards the development of relevant forensic subjects to cater to the ever growing interest in different fields of forensic sciences, particularly forensic genetics.

3) Tell us about the photos.

[Left:] Here I am with a typical set-up for DNA extraction in a molecular biology laboratory. This process involves using chemical reagents to release the DNA contained in the cells obtained from single source samples, or as part of the repertoire of evidence that were submitted for analysis. The DNA product/s are subsequently used for downstream analysis such as DNA profiling and/or Massively Parallel Sequencing (MPS).

[Right:] This is a group photo with the participants and resource persons of the 4th Forensic Science Symposium held in Baguio City, Benguet this year. Talks on forensic DNA technology, wildlife forensics, sexual assault investigations, law enforcement, forensic pathology, and human rights investigations revolved around the central theme of how forensic science can strengthen the rule of law in the Philippines, which was consistent with the conference title - “Forensic Science at the Frontier of National Issues”. 

4) Tell us about your academic career path so far.

I was born into a middle class family living in Metro Manila. My father, Remigio De Ungria, was a chemical engineer who worked for Meralco, the nation's lead energy and power distribution company. My mother, Segundina Abogado, was a dentist who had given up her career to become a full-time housewife. Starting from a young age studying in the UP Integrated School, my parents repeatedly reminded me of the value of education that should be an integral part of the foundation of my future life. 

At the age of 11 years old, my application to study in the Philippine Science High School (PSHS) was accepted and I transferred to a new school, leaving my comfort zone in UPIS in order to start again. PSHS or “Pisay” students as we call ourselves then, were referred to as 'scholars of the state'. The diversity of students that the school took in every year represented a microcosm of Philippine society – a celebration of the country’s demographic diversity and limitless potential as embodied in its youthful population.

Upon graduation, I enrolled at the University of Philippines, where I expected to major in Zoology as a pathway to becoming a medical doctor. Studying zoology was then viewed as a prerequisite for applying to medical school. But after two years of study, I realized that my true ambition was to become a research scientist. Doctors, of course, belong to one of the world’s most noble professions. But I knew that laboratory research, not patient care, was my calling. I also believed that my chances to have a broader and more lasting impact on a society through my work would be enhanced if I pursued a career in research where I would be at the forefront of exciting discoveries that could potentially help improve the lives of the Filipino people. I was 17 at the time, and already the sight of children begging in the streets, the poor person without a home and helpless faces amidst the injustices brought about by the increasing gap between the learned rich and the uneducated poor was pushing me to find meaning in my life.

So I left the Philippines to study in Australia in 1988. I didn’t anticipate then that I would be gone from home for more than a decade – first to earn a Bachelor of Science degree in Biology with Honors from Macquarie University in 1993 and then to earn a doctorate degree in Microbiology from the University of New South Wales in 1999.

Upon completing my degree, I was tempted to remain abroad. However, I ultimately chose to return home. The reasons for this decision were simple and non-negotiable. I profoundly missed my parents whom I had visited only a couple of times since leaving for Australia because the cost of travel was high. I also felt a responsibility to give something back to my country. Taxpayers had covered large portions of my education since secondary school. Government funding that paid for my education for four years, monthly stipends and study fellowships – all gifts, in essence, given by strangers – had enabled me to obtain a very good education in the Philippines and abroad. My degrees would undoubtedly serve me well throughout my life as tickets to a rewarding career. I was thankful to be the recipient of such generosity, and I strongly believed that I had a duty to apply my knowledge and skills to address critical problems within my own country in the hope of improving the lives of all Filipinos.

I also believe that chance plays an important role in a person's life. A clear factor in a person's success is therefore one's ability to maximize the opportunities that chance brings in order to achieve one's dreams. Upon my return to the Philippines, I met Dr. Saturnina C. Halos, the founding head of the DNA Analysis Laboratory, who offered me her former position. Within a month, my appointment papers were ready and I assumed the role of the head of the DNA Analysis Laboratory on 19 February 1999, which would later pioneer the development of forensic DNA technology in the Philippines and would be one of the driving forces behind the drafting and subsequent promulgation of the Rule on DNA Evidence. This judicial rule now governs the presentation and use of DNA evidence in Philippine courts. And everything else is history.

5) Anything you’d like us to share.

In a plenary talk which I was asked to deliver recently on the challenges of doing forensic science in the Philippines today, I reported three major challenges which include the 1) lack of recognition on the vital role of forensic DNA science in disaster victim identification (DVI) and criminal investigations; 2) over reliance on testimonial evidence compounded by lapses in investigations in some cases; and 3) the eroding Rule of Law.

I ended on a reflective mode and stated a very important challenge in doing forensic science in the Philippines, which I would like to share here. It is the need for scientists of all agencies--universities, private agencies and law enforcement--to recognize and to value the social impact of our work. We need to remain apolitical and to stick to the core values of a true scientist--objectivity, ingenuity and excellence--leaving no stone unturned because we recognize that underneath the science that we do are the lives of real people, many of whom are desperately calling to us for help. 

Scientists need to share our knowledge and our passion to find order where there is none, to find creative solutions to seemingly hopeless situations, and to discover the common and shared humanity, across individual diversities manifested in different cultures, languages, spiritual beliefs and social status. Only in doing so can we say that we truly made use of science in order to serve the Filipino people.

[consti-blog]

How is the Philippines today?

Looking at our country, it is truly a synergy between a willful government and a vigilant Filipino people that can and have the right to maintain and enhance the situations in the country. The Filipinos have become to be known as a race that can endure almost everything that comes to them. We are a group of people that would smile despite of the challenges that Filipinos and the country experiences such as typhoons, floods, and other natural disaster. There is something that perhaps, Filipinos can be proud of.

On the other hand, the inability to qualify as a full democracy is lamentable in the perspective of the Philippines. The Philippines state has been characterized as being captured in competing and diverse social interests such as dominant socioeconomic classes, political clans, and powerful families. Politics involves the production, allocation and use of decision-making powers among large groups of individuals. It is not limited to beliefs, feelings, group-accepted practices, and languages shared by large groups of Filipinos as they produce, allocate and use political powers within, outside, and in interaction with the state. After more than 100 years, the Philippines is now used as a study model of a country that started with a surfeit of democracy to a country with democratic deficit. Unfortunately, our State has failed to discharge its duties to the Filipinos in order to establish a democratic society. It is difficult to disagree with this classification for indeed we will not be a flawed democracy if we have developed a State that is strong and capable of fulfilling the expectations of our people to what is right and just. A clean meaning no corruption government is a huge factor in order for the Philippines to be better to what it is today. The danger is that a State that continues to be weak, a State that severely defaults in serving the people may be brought down by anti-democratic forces. Hence, Filipinos and politicians must focus on solving the roots of the problems in the Philippines than making excuses and pointing out on who to blame.

As a Filipino, seeing the extra-judicial killings as very prevalent today, it is still frustrating to see the involvement of armed forces in those crimes and them not being taken to justice at all. The past administrations had their shares of good-in-paper human rights plans but had never been completely actualized and felt by the Filipino people. Politics in the Philippines has traditionally been dominated by clans and political bosses and patronage where it is characterized by law makers that make decisions based on incentives rather that beliefs and voters that make choices based on personality rather than reasoned policies. In addition, several prominent families play a disproportionate role in politics. Leaders usually win the elections through favors where voters expect money or jobs in return for their political support. In many cases politician’s performance was not based on programs or policies. Personalities are more important than parties in Philippine politics. These reasons could also be one of the main cause of why the Philippine economy could not develop well. The support of the military and the Catholic church are key to political survival and success in the Philippines. If I were to think about the situation of the Philippines and its government, one thing that comes into my mind, chaos. It is really not easy to change political leaders in the next elections if we are talking about leadership and power but what we can do now is to start the change within ourselves. Be a good example to other people by doing good in academics and following the rules and laws. Influence others to do good and stay truthful to the country.

Mendoza, Danica Bianca DC.

[chinapolicynews-blog]

Arbitration on the South China Sea – Implications for Maritime-Asia

  Littoral combat ship USS Fort conducting routine patrol in US Pacific Fleet

Source: US Pacific Fleet

ARBITRATION

ASEAN

PHILIPPINES

SOUTH CHINA

In 2016, a series of developments in maritime-Asia drew international attention to the territorial disputes in the South China Sea, none more so than the Philippines vs. China Arbitration over maritime rights and jurisdiction in the littoral seas. On July 12, 2016, a tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at Hague passed a landmark on the matter, ruling that Beijing’s claims of historic rights within the nine-dash line are without legal basis. It further concluded that Beijing’s activities within the Philippines’ two-hundred-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ), such as illegal fishing and environmentally damaging artificial island constructions, constituted and infringement of Manila’s sovereign rights. In many ways, China had only itself to blame for the debacle. Beijing’s first reaction to the Philippines’ legal appeal had been to ignore the matter altogether – as if not acknowledging the case would effectively delegitimise it. Given the high level of international interest in the affair, however, it was forced to make a course correction, issuing a position paper in December 2014 clarifying its official stance on the issue.[1] Unfortunately for Beijing, its contention that Manila had violated the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by filing a petition on a matter of ‘sovereignty’ and ‘territorial jurisdiction’ failed to convince judges at the PCA, who ruled comprehensively in favour of the Philippines.[2] Notwithstanding the maritime legalese surrounding the case, the technical nuances of the points raised reveal an underlying narrative. It is important to note that when Manila filed proceedings under Annex VII of the UNCLOS in July 2013, it was smart enough to invoke only those provisions that allow for compulsory arbitration. Fully aware that territorial disputes are beyond the remit of UNCLOS, the Philippines’ legal team dressed-up their case as one of historical rights and judicial clarifications on the applicability of UNCLOS provisions. This is significant because many of China’s operational moves in the region after the verdict reflect a sense of betrayal at being legally ambushed by a ‘lesser’, though legally stronger, opponent.[3] At the heart of the Philippines’ submission were questions about the legal validity of China’s nine-dash line’ in the South China Sea. Manila framed its petition to seek a clarification from the court whether state rights and obligations in the waters, seabed, and maritime features of the SCS could be demarcated by something as arbitrary as a hand-drawn line on a chart. Simply put, Manila asserted that China’s maritime map of the SCS was of dubious provenance, and claims arising from it were an outright violation of the law.

A Flawed Legal Strategy

China’s belatedly mounted legal defence was innately flawed. Beijing implausibly argued against the tribunal’s mandate to interpret the application of the UNCLOS; erroneously invoked Art 298, citing its voluntary opt-out of compulsory arbitration under the UNCLOS; and unconvincingly petitioned for the dismissal of the Philippines’ case, invoking the Declaration of the Conduct of Parties (DOC) in the South China Sea.[4] Nothing in the text of that agreement, the judges pointed out, imposed any obligation on a state to eschew legal remedies in pursuing a just redressal. Yet, until July 12, 2016 when the Tribunal passed its final judgment, few had believed that China would face such a humiliating loss. It came as a surprise that the tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines on almost every count, unanimously rejecting nearly all of China’s maritime claims in the region. The felicity with which the tribunal tackled legal technicalities deserves acknowledgment. The court rightly held that all the territories in the contested Spratly Islands are reefs or rocks, and not islands – an important distinction, as under UNCLOS, reefs cannot generate a claim to the surrounding waters or airspace, and rocks serve as the basis only for a maritime claim of 12 nautical miles. The judges’ classification of the features on the Spratlys as “less than Islands” negated the possibility of any being used to proffer claims of a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone. China’s real problem, it appears, is that the court’s ‘non-territorial’ judgment implicitly invalidates Beijing’s territorial claims in the South China Sea.[5] Before the verdict, Chinese leaders assumed that their South China Sea claims would eventually be recognised, because the features under Chinese control will, at some point in the future, be awarded the status of islands. Beijing believed that its “islands” in the Spratlys would legitimise its legal claim over territory enclosed within the nine-dash line, without having to resort to any form of overt aggression. The tribunal declaration, however, that the Spratly features are only reefs or rocks, deflated Chinese claims. China’s outposts in the Spratly group are now rendered isolated enclaves floating in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone—lying within 200 nautical miles of that country’s territory.  This is one reason why Beijing has moved to quickly accept the Philippines’ suggestion for a maritime sanctuary around the Scarborough shoal and jointly exploit South China Sea resources elsewhere.[6] If negating China’s historical claims was not enough, the court also found Beijing to be guilty of conducting illegal maritime activities inside the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone. Chinese vessels, the judges held, were not only fishing in unauthorised fashion, they were routinely engaged in dangerously manoeuvers by approaching Philippine boats too close, preventing them from fishing, and extracting oil within the zone. Turning its knife in an already aching wound, the tribunal then censured China for its construction of artificial islands in the region, which it determined had caused severe environmental damage and heightened geopolitical tensions.

China’s Operational Response

Despite the clarity brought by the verdict to many contentious issues, it did not plug all loopholes. Its biggest inadequacy is the lack of an honorable face-saver for Beijing.[7] China was perhaps aware that the court would pass an adverse ruling, but was still taken aback by the severity of the final verdict. Expectedly, it provoked an immediate response from the PLAN that moves to expand its operational presence in the South China Sea. Within days of the judgment, Beijing upped the tempo of its reclamation activities and began creating military infrastructure on islands under its control in the SCS. If the international community had any doubts, China made it clear that there is no provision in international law to enforce a UN court’s binding judgment. Since then, Chinese military and non-military vessels have regularly undertaken activities to strengthen their de facto control of the area. Far from being pushed into adopting a more conciliatory approach, Beijing has doubled down on a strategy of “passive assertiveness” – methodically expanding its regional military footprint while avoiding risky manoeuvres that could trigger an accidental clash. Besides stepping up its fortification of military outposts in the Spratly Islands in open defiance of the tribunal’s ruling, China has constructed reinforced aircraft hangars on Subi, Mischief and Fiery Cross Reefs. These new facilities have potential military usage and expand the PLA’s power projection capability in the South China Sea. In combination with the first, Beijing has moved to mobilise its massive coastguard fleet to mark its presence and intimidate non-Chinese fishermen in Southeast and East Asia, in the process substantially raising the risk of an inadvertent clash. The PLAN’s South China Sea patrols and exercises since the ruling have consolidated China’s wider strategic footprint without adopting unnecessarily provocative military postures. Rather than establishing an air defence identification zone – which would have been hard to enforce – Beijing initiated a new program of “air combat patrols”, flying nuclear-capable H-6K bombers and Su-30 fighters over disputed island features in an intimidating display of its airpower and resolve.[8] Worryingly, China’s joint maritime exercises with friendly navies incorporated “island-seizing drills” and anti-submarine warfare. Meanwhile, despite undertaking multiple FONOPS in the South China Sea since the verdict, the US seems to be at a loss of options in tackling China’s provocations. Despite warning from the Obama administration and President-elect Donald Trump, Beijing has refused to mend its ways. In December 2016, a Chinese boat confiscated a US underwater drone in the waters off the Philippines, challenging US operational primacy in the SCS.[9] The UUV was returned days later, but Beijing showed how it was taking unkindly to intrusive US maritime operations, as well as unconsidered remarks by Trump and his transition team. In effect, Beijing has managed to shift the burden of escalation onto the US and its allies, who must now decide how much provocation is enough to cross the threshold of tolerance. With the Chinese Supreme Court’s recognition of a “clear legal basis for China to safeguard maritime order, marine safety and interests and to “exercise integrated management over the country’s jurisdictional seas”, US analysts and policymakers know Beijing could soon come up with a domestic law to tighten its control over the South China Sea.[10] If China declares base lines around the Spratlys, it will set the proverbial cat out among the pigeons.

India’s South China Sea Interests

A passive bystander through much of the dispute’s recent history, India took a measured stand in the wake of the UN tribunal’s verdict. New Delhi issued a statement that urged all parties to show utmost respect for the UNCLOS, and the international legal order of the seas and oceans.[11] The statement indicated India’s recognition of the legitimacy of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), but more importantly, it illustrated New Delhi’s willingness to acknowledge the need for all affected parties to uphold the verdict. While New Delhi’s choice of words seemed motivated by the need to appear balanced, China insisted on interpreting India’s stand as being in support of its position. The Chinese media noted that New Delhi’s signing of the Russia-India-China joint statement was an affirmation of the need for all parties involved in the maritime disputes to settle matters through dialogue rather than seeking legal recourse. Not that Beijing has ever believed that India’s South China Sea stand matters. Days before the start of the G-20 meeting, Wang Yi, China’s Foreign Minister, held wide-ranging talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj.[12] The agenda included a number of contentious bilateral issues – China’s perceived opposition to India’s membership to the Nuclear Security Group (NSG), Beijing’s opposition to UN sanctions on Jaish-e-Mohammed Chief, Masood Azhar, and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor – but not the affairs of the South China Sea. That the visiting Chinese delegate had the South China Sea in mind all along was confirmed a day later, when the Chinese media hailed India for being “neutral on the South China Sea” – convinced that if the matter ever came up at the forthcoming G-20 summit, New Delhi would not take sides.[13] For its part, India realises that too much interest in the affairs of the SCS has the potential to impact bilateral ties. Indeed, a week prior to Wang’s visit to India, the Global Times, a Chinese tabloid widely seen as the government’s mouthpiece, had warned New Delhi that its seemingly inimical posture on the South China Sea could damage bilateral ties. “Instead of unnecessary entanglements with China over the South China Sea debate during Wang’s visit,” an editorial in the newspaper had declared, “India must create a good atmosphere for economic cooperation, including the reduction of tariffs…amid the ongoing free trade talks.”[14] Regardless of Beijing’s deeply held beliefs, however, developments in the South China Sea do affect Indian interests. To begin with, Indian trade and economic imperatives in the Pacific are more pronounced than ever. Under the ‘Act East’ policy, trade with ASEAN and the far-eastern Pacific is expanding significantly. Consequently, Asia’s Eastern commons are increasingly becoming a vital facilitator of India’s economic development. With growing dependence on the Malacca Strait for the flow of goods and services, economics is increasingly a factor in India’s Pacific policy. The territorial conflicts in the SCS threaten the future trajectory of India’s economic development, creating an unacceptable impediment for regional trade and commerce.[15] More importantly, India believes that the disputes in the Southeast Asian littorals are a litmus test for international maritime law. In the aftermath of the Hague Tribunal’s verdict on the South China Sea, New Delhi feels obligated to take a principled stand on the issue of freedom of navigation and commercial access as enshrined in the UNCLOS. Regardless of the guarantees being sought by Beijing from India about staying neutral on the SCS, New Delhi cannot be seen to be condoning an aggressive stand by China in the region. For all of China’s concessions on offer, New Delhi has reason to continue viewing PLAN manoeuvres in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) with suspicion. For one thing, Beijing still yet to explain its rapidly growing undersea presence in littoral South Asia. The flimsy pretext of anti-piracy operations to justify the deployment of Chinese submarines in the Indian Ocean makes many Indian maritime analysts believe that China is preparing for a larger strategic thrust in the Indian Ocean.[16]

Implications for South Asia

An aggressive Chinese maritime posture in the South China Sea Chinese also has implications for the wider Asian commons – in particular the South Asian littorals, where Indian observers fear an increase in power asymmetries. For many Indian analysts, there is a clear correlation between aggressive Chinese patrolling in the SCS and its growing deployments in the Indian Ocean Region. China’s aggressive response to the UN Arbitral Tribunal’s verdict is interpreted by many in India as a broader strategy to project power in maritime-Asia. What most worries Indian observers is the prospect of reclamation and militarisation of features under China’s possession. In particular, Indian analysts anticipate the deployment of Chinese missiles, fighters and surveillance equipment in its Spratly group of islands, allowing the PLAN effective control over the entire range of maritime operations in the SCS. As China’s maritime militias become more active in its near-seas, Indian watchers are anticipating an expansion of Chinese maritime activities in the IOR. Many fear a rise in non-grey hull activity in the Eastern Indian Ocean, where China’s distant water fishing fleet is already a significant presence. Beijing’s blueprint for maritime operations in the Indian Ocean might involve the construction of multiple logistical facilities close within India sphere of influence. China’s 10-year agreement with Djibouti in 2015 for the setting up of a naval replenishment facility in the northern Obock region is widely seen by Indian experts as proof of the PLA Navy’s strategic ambitions in the IOR.

The Way Forward

If regional watchers expect the tribunal’s verdict to bring a sense of closure in Southeast Asia, they could be disappointed. The judgment sets a significant legal precedent: the principles that guided the tribunal’s decision are now part of international law, and countries must embrace and reinforce them if they want others to uphold them in the future. But it does little to remedy China’s behaviour, or to prevent other regional countries from seeking legal recourse. Since July 12, 2016, US President Barack Obama has repeatedly asked China to abide by the arbitral award, even warning Beijing that a violation of international “norms” would entail “consequences”.[17] However, while Washington has been firm in pronouncements, it has failed to prompt a stronger operational response from regional states. The Philippines, in particular, seems oblivious that it was the prime mover of legal proceedings against China. Rather than hold China to account, President Rodrigo Duterte appears keen to play “political footsie” with Beijing.[18] In the circumstances, it appears only the US and, to a lesser degree, Japan, are willing to confront China in the South China Sea. America’s options are to either raise the frequency of its freedom of navigation or conduct more aggressive footing regional patrols. Despite a resumption of FONOPS, there is little consensus among American policymakers that assertive USN patrols in the South China Sea will change Chinese behaviour. Yet, if Beijing crosses the “red-line” by reclaiming Scarborough, it is likely the US Navy will offer strong pushback.[19] Washington will be keen to leverage diplomacy in preventing tensions from rising. But it knows Beijing is unlikely to offer any guarantees that it will scale back its aggression in the South China Sea. Even so, there are ways in which regional states could reinforce the recent ruling without militarily confronting China. The first is to encourage both China and the Philippines to abide by the UN court’s decision. Other claimants too must discuss ways in which the ruling affects their own position vis-à-vis the maritime disputes. All parties must desist from military activities and allow tensions to cool. In the meantime, it is better to keep talking – for the solution to the problems in the SCS might actually lie in accelerated dialogue. Southeast Asian states must encourage Chinese officials to negotiate with other claimants in the South China Sea, and also make progress on a binding code of conduct (CoC) with ASEAN. A clear set of guidelines for maritime behaviour in the South China Sea could prove invaluable. Not only would a CoC freeze the waterway’s political and territorial status quo, it would signal China’s willingness not to threaten the existing security order in the long term. Meanwhile, the US must make it clear to Beijing that the avenues for cooperation risk shut-down if China resorts to assertive moves, such as construction at Scarborough Shoal. For India, it is important to display solidarity with Southeast Asian states to press for a peaceful solution to the SCS disputes. New Delhi must encourage both China and ASEAN to undertake greater confidence-building measures and to reduce the risk of an accidental clash. It is in nobody’s interest to see great-power conflict over the South China Sea. New Delhi can assure China that it does have reasonable options available to it. With or without the UN court’s interventions, resolving the impasse in the South China Sea peacefully and legally would be in everyone’s interests. Against this larger backdrop, the following chapters of this primer attempt to evaluate the prospects for peace and stability in the South China Sea. The contributors argue that even though the vexed nature of the dispute has prevented all sides from reaching a working consensus, the search for diplomatic solutions hasn’t ended. Undoubtedly, as Jeff Smith points outs, the only way in which the seriously contested issue of freedom of navigation (FON) in the SCS can be resolved is through greater diplomatic dialogue between the US and China. Yet, as Teng Jianqun suggests, there are many ways of interpreting navigational freedoms – each one meant to serve specific political agendas, and shaped by a uniquely nationalist historical perspective. Meanwhile, the region’s middle powers remain concerned over the deteriorating security dynamic in the region. Richard Haydarian gives an excellent account of President Duturte’s refusal to side with the US, affecting his own unique ‘pivot’ towards China. The Philippines, he avers, is only following in the footsteps of other ASEAN countries that have all felt the need to adopt an ‘equi-balancing’ strategy towards the two great powers. Ristian Supriyanto points to the need for greater confidence building measures in the SCS. While the adoption of a naval Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES) as a crisis management mechanism counts as a positive move, he notes the absence of consensus in resolving the controversial uses of white-hull vessels and “maritime militias” in enforcing maritime claims. For Koh Swee Lean Collin, the balancing game in the SCS can have unintended consequences for all sides seeking to maximise gains. Closer diplomatic and economic links with China, he avers, doesn’t change the reality that regional states remain increasingly dependent on the US for their security. Ha Anh Tuan outlines Vietnam’s principal motivations in abstaining from public criticism of China. Making predictions about the SCS, he argues, is fraught with risk for Hanoi because future outcomes are likely to be dependent entirely on evolving variables. Finally, Satoru Nagao brings out Japan’s need for a special partnership with India in the regional maritime commons. As great-power politics becomes more intense in the South China Sea, he proposes a deeper India-Japan operational compact in the regional littorals. Clearly, the old certainties that brought prosperity and stability to the Western Pacific for over three decades are under threat. The US-led security system undergirding Asia’s maritime strategic order is being dismantled. More disturbingly, the institutional edifice on which political confidence in the system was built is being decisively undermined. It is therefore time to have a reasoned discussion of the consequences of continuing instability in the South China Sea. This essay originally appeared in Line in the waters.

[1]Position Paper of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of China July 12, 2014 http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1217147.shtml [2] Julian Ku, It is Beijing’s fault that China lost big in the South China Sea ruling, The Quartz, July 17, 2016 http://qz.com/733012/it-is-beijings-fault-that-china-lost-big-in-the-south-china-sea-ruling/ [3] Abhijit Singh, End of Maritime Innocence, The Asia Times Online, July 10, 2016,  http://www.atimes.com/article/end-of-maritime-innocence-the-china-vs-philippines-arbitration-saga// [4] Jay Batongbacal, Arbitration 101: Philippines v. China, Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, Jan 21, 2015 https://amti.csis.org/arbitration-101-philippines-v-china/ [5]Alex Linder, China swiftly rejects Hague Tribunal ruling against its South China Sea claims, The Shanghaiist, Jul 12, 2016 http://shanghaiist.com/2016/07/12/china_rejects_hague_ruling.php [6] Philippines to Declare Marine Sanctuary in South China Sea, The New York Times, November 21, 2016  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/world/asia/philippines-rodrigo-duterte-scarborough-shoal-china.html?_r=0 Joint exploration in South China Sea legal, The Business Standard, January 5, 2017, http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/joint-exploration-in-south-china-sea-legal-philippine-official-117010500978_1.html [7] Mira Rapp-Hooper, Parting the South China Sea, Foreign Affairs, Sept / Oct 2016 https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2016-07-22/parting-south-china-sea [8] Brian Kalman, Escalation, Naval Deployments and Geopolitical Conflict in the South China Sea, Global Research, August 16, 2016, http://www.globalresearch.ca/escalation-naval-deployments-and-geopolitical-conflict-in-the-south-china-sea/5541122 [9] Chinese warship seizes US underwater drone in international waters, The Guardian, December 16, 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/16/china-seizes-us-underwater-drone-south-china-sea [10] Amanda Macias, China’s top court issued an ‘ominous’ message about the South China Sea, The Business Insider, August 4, 2016 http://www.businessinsider.in/Chinas-top-court-issued-an-ominous-message-about-the-South-China-Sea/articleshow/53532697.cms [11] Jayanth Jacob, India for peaceful means to resolve South China Sea row, Hindustan Times, July 13, 2016  http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/south-china-sea-india-for-peaceful-means-to-resolve-row-pak-backs-beijing/story-eJ0MxK644YDSafF5C06COI.html [12] Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi meets Narendra Modi, The Hindu, August 13, 2016 http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/chinese-foreign-minister-wang-yi-meets-narendra-modi/article8984735.ece [13] Chinese media hails India for being ‘neutral’ over South China Sea, Daily News and Analysis, Aug 17, 2016 http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-chinese-media-hails-india-for-being-neutral-over-south-china-sea-says-ties-developing-smoothly-2245998 [14] Hu Weijia, India should focus on preserving good economic ties with China, rather than on the South China Sea, The Global Times, August 8, 2016 http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/999240.shtml [15] Abhijit Singh, Telling China like it is about the South China Sea, Observer Research Organisation Online, http://www.orfonline.org/expert-speaks/telling-china-like-it-is-about-the-south-china-sea/ [16] China Defends Its Submarines In Indian Ocean, NDTV, July 7, 2017 http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/china-defends-its-submarines-in-indian-ocean-says-they-are-legitimate-1429068 [17] Jason Miks, Obama: Consequences if China violates rules and norms, CNN, Sept 4, 2016 http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/04/us/obama-china-response-zakaria-interview-miks/ [18]Andrew Brown, Rodrigo Duterte Throws a Grenade in Washington’s China Strategy, Wall Street Journal, Sept 7, 2016   http://www.wsj.com/articles/duterte-throws-a-grenade-in-washingtons-china-strategy-1473239479; The Real Reasons Rodrigo Duterte Flip-Flopped On South China Sea, Forbes, January 4, 2017 Disputes http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2017/01/04/the-real-reasons-rodrigo-duterte-flip-flopped-on-south-china-sea-disputes/#2baf2b8b6361 [19] Report: China May Cross Obama’s ‘Red Line,’ Reclaim Scarborough Shoal, Sputnik News, August 15, 2016 https://sputniknews.com/asia/20160815/1044267318/china-red-line-scarborough-obama.html For more details visit our links below

THE PACIFIC, EAST AND SOUTHEAST ASIA

MARITIME POLICY

MARITIME SECURITY

MARITIME GOVERNANCE ARCHITECTURE

[philippinesprocessservers]

Serving judicial papers in Philippines

Serving judicial papers in Philippines is a critical aspect of the legal process. It involves delivering official documents like summons, complaints, and subpoenas to the concerned parties. The procedure must comply with Philippine laws to ensure the proper notification of individuals or organizations involved in legal matters. Timely and accurate serving judicial papers in Philippines helps uphold the integrity of the legal system, ensuring fairness and transparency in all legal proceedings. Professional servers are often employed to handle this task efficiently.

[phgq]

PRRD distributing pastillas 'symbolic' of anger vs. corruption

#PHnews: PRRD distributing pastillas 'symbolic' of anger vs. corruption

MANILA – President Rodrigo Duterte’s distributing pastillas with rolled up money to 40 suspended immigration officials is “symbolic” of his anger versus corruption, Malacañang said on Tuesday.

Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque made this remark after Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra bared that Duterte summoned erring immigration officials allegedly involved in the so-called “pastillas” bribery scheme and gave them a dressing down in Malacañang on Monday night.

He said Duterte reportedly asked them to eat the pastillas, "but did not insist out of deference to the Secretary of Justice who was also present".

“Nagbigay po ng pangaral ang Presidente na talagang dapat matigil ang korupsyon na ito at yung kaniyang pagbibigay naman ng pastillas, that’s also symbolic of his anger against corruption pero kagaya ng aking sinabi hindi naman po niya pinilit (The President gave a sermon that this corruption should really stop and his giving pastillas, that’s also symbolic of his anger against corruption but as I said he did not force them),” he said in a Palace press briefing.

Roque said none of the 40 suspended immigration officials dared to speak while they were being reprimanded by the President.

“I think the message has been received kasi (because) not a single person, out of the 40 individuals there, uttered a single word,” he added.

He said the giving out of pastillas was simply not “for show”, adding the President was really determined to spend the last two years of his term fighting corruption.

“The President is sending a message, ‘Itigil ang korupsyon. At nung ginawa po niya I think lahat po ng taong gobyerno narinig po ang mensahe (The President is sending a message ‘Stop corruption’. And when he did that, I think all the people in the government heard the message),” he said.

Asked how much amount was rolled in the pastillas, Roque said he never got to find out since none of the erring immigration officials opened them.

“Hindi na po nalaman kung magkano kasi wala naman dun sa kuwarentang nagbukas ng pastillas. Hinawakan lang nilang lahat (We never found out because none of the 40 officials opened the pastillas. They were just holding it),” he said.

He noted the President was “calm” while reprimanding the erring immigration officials since he just finished administering the oath of House Speaker Lord Allan Velasco.

Roque said that because of the separation of powers of the executive and judicial branch of government, the most that Duterte can impose by way of penalty is to remove them from service.

He also said that despite massive corruption within the bureau, BI Commissioner Jaime Morente still “serves at the pleasure of the President”.

“All presidential appointees serve at the pleasure of the President. Pag wala na pong tiwala, hindi na po sila maninilbihan (If he no longer trusts them, they will no longer serve),” he said.

The “pastillas” bribery scam refers to the operation at the airport wherein grease money was rolled up in paper, like the wrapper of milk candy.

Ombudsman Samuel Martires ordered the suspension of over 40 immigration officials following a BI report that there were discrepancies in their statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN), and their salaries.

The order imposed suspension on the 44 BI personnel, namely: Erwin Ortañez; Grifton Medina; Glenn Comia; Benlado Guevarra; Danieve Binsol; Deon Albao; Arlan Edward Mendoza; Anthony Lopez; Cecille Jonathan Orozco; Dennis Robles; Bradford Allen; Vincent Bryan Allas; Rodolfo Magbuhos Jr.; Er German Robin; Gabriel Estacio; Ralph Ryan Garcia; Phol Villanueva; Abdul Fahad Calaca; Danilo Deudor; Mark Macababad; Aurelio Lucero; George Bituin; Salahudin Hadjinoor; Cherry Pie Ricolcol; Chevy Chase Naniong; Carl Jordan Perez; Abdulhafez Hadji Basher; Jeffrey Dale Ignacio; Juan Carlo Gomez;

Clint John Simene; Jhayson Albelda; Asliyah Maruhom; Jan Christian De Villa; Jessica Anne Salvador; Jennifer Timbreza; Robern Michael Sarmiento; Maria Victoria Jogno; Catherine Mendoza; Lorenz Arlei Bontia; Paul Borja; Hamza Pacasum; Manuel Sarmiento; Fidel Mendoza; and Dimple Mahyumi Mallari. (PNA)

***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "PRRD distributing pastillas 'symbolic' of anger vs. corruption." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1121331 (accessed November 10, 2020 at 11:37PM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "PRRD distributing pastillas 'symbolic' of anger vs. corruption." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1121331 (archived).

[phgq]

Palace hopes Biden admin eases immigration policies for Pinoys

#PHnews: Palace hopes Biden admin eases immigration policies for Pinoys

MANILA – Malacañang on Monday expressed hope that the US government under President-elect Joe Biden will relax immigration policies that took the restrictive approach during the term of outgoing US President Donald Trump.

In a Palace press briefing, Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque was optimistic that the Democratic Biden presidency would deal fairly with undocumented Filipino workers in the US.

“Sana po matulungan yung mga Pilipino na naninirahan ngayon sa Estados Unidos na wala pa pong mga papel dahil ‘yan naman po yung isang major policy difference between a Republic and Democratic administration (I hope they help Filipinos living in the United States without papers because that’s one of the major policy differences between a Republic and Democratic administration),” he said.

Roque, however, said he does not expect any major changes in bilateral relations between the Philippines and US.

While Democrats like former US President Barack Obama have been critical of the administration’s anti-illegal drugs campaign, Roque said Duterte will avoid making judgements about Biden until he finally gets to work with him.

Biden served as Obama’s Vice President for two terms—2009-2017.

“Other than congratulating him, I think the President is keeping an open mind as he should. It will be a new start but we have no prejudgements as far as President-elect Biden is considered other than the position that we are able and willing to work with all leaders of the world,” he said.

Asked if Duterte had any intention to visit the US if invited by Biden, Roque said: “Let’s cross the bridge when we get there.”

“Pero wala po akong nakikitang dahilan para tanggihan po ‘yan (But I don’t see any reason to reject it),” he added.

Roque refused to comment on Biden’s win showing the fate of populist leaders like Trump.

“I think academics and political observers can answer that in treaties, but for me, what’s important is the vote happen considering that we have similar Constitutions that the voice of the majority of the people were heard and the next US president was given a popular mandate,” he said.

Meanwhile, Roque said he has no word on Duterte’s decision on the suspension of the abrogation of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) which is expected to end next month.

“I would defer on this matter to the [Department of Foreign Affairs]. All I can say on the part of the President is what he has already said previously that he’s abrogating it but the abrogation is suspended for six months, extendible for another six months,” he said.

The VFA, a military pact signed between the Philippines and the US in 1998, allows American troops who are participating in joint military exercises to visit Manila without passport and visa.

In February, Duterte scrapped the VFA over its alleged inequities in its treaty provisions and the US’s alleged assault on the country’s sovereignty and disrespect for its judicial system.

He later decided to suspend the planned revocation of the military pact with Washington DC last June. (PNA)

***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "Palace hopes Biden admin eases immigration policies for Pinoys." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1121212 (accessed November 10, 2020 at 12:05AM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "Palace hopes Biden admin eases immigration policies for Pinoys." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1121212 (archived).

[phgq]

CA justice promoted to SC

#PHnews: CA justice promoted to SC

MANILA – President Rodrigo Duterte has appointed Court of Appeals (CA) Justice Priscilla Baltazar-Padilla as the new Supreme Court (SC) associate justice, Malacañang announced on Thursday. “This is to announce that Court of Appeals Justice Priscilla J. Baltazar- Padilla has been appointed as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court,” Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque said in a press statement issued Thursday night. Roque did not elaborate on Baltazar-Padilla’s promotion to the high tribunal. Malacañang has yet to release the appointment paper of Baltazar-Padilla. Baltazar-Padilla completed the 15-member SC since she will fill the seat at the high tribunal vacated by Andres Reyes Jr. who retired on May 11. For the first time, the Judicial and Bar Council held on May 28 its online panel interview of the applicants to the post of SC associate justice vacated by Reyes due to the threat posed by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. She bested her six contenders who made it to the shortlist of candidates vying for a seat at SC. Court Administrator Jose Midas Marquez and CA justices Ricardo Rosario, Japar Dimaampao, Jhosep Lopez, Ramon Cruz, and Manuel Barrios failed to secure Duterte’s nod. The revised JBC rules that took effect on June 8 state that associate justice or presiding justice of an appellate court; court administrator; chairperson of a constitutional commission; solicitor general or department secretary applying for the position of SC associate justice or chief justice should have at least two and a half years left in service. Those who are not holding any of the said positions or are private practitioners should have at least five remaining years to serve. The revised JBC rules also note that applicants must get at least four votes from the council to be included in the shortlist. The number of nominees for every vacancy should be at least three and not more than seven unless there is a tie. Under the 1987 Constitution, Duterte has 90 days from May 11, 2020 to appoint the replacement of Reyes. (PNA)

***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "CA justice promoted to SC." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1109242 (accessed July 17, 2020 at 03:25PM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "CA justice promoted to SC." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1109242 (archived).

[phgq]

Ex-Chief Justice Bersamin named GSIS chair

#PHnews: Ex-Chief Justice Bersamin named GSIS chair

MANILA -- President Rodrigo Duterte has named retired chief justice Lucas Bersamin as the new chairperson of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS).

Duterte signed Bersamin’s appointment paper on February 6, according to a copy of the document released by Malacañang on Friday.

Bersamin replaced Ronald Macasaet, who served as officer-in-charge of GSIS.

Duterte also appointed Bersamin as a member of the GSIS board of trustees.

As GSIS board member, Bersamin will serve until June 30, 2020.

Bersamin joined the new presidential appointees that took oath before Duterte at Palace’s Rizal Hall on February 6, photos from Malacañang showed.

In November 2018, Duterte appointed Bersamin as the country's top magistrate. He retired from the judiciary in October last year.

A native of Abra, Bersamin finished his law degree at the University of the East in 1973 and placed ninth in the bar examinations in the same year.

He served as presiding judge of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 96 in 1986.

In 2003, Bersamin was appointed associated justice at the Court of Appeals and was promoted to the Supreme Court in 2009.

He bagged the Judicial Excellence Award for Best Decision both in Civil Law and Criminal Law. (PNA)

***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "Ex-Chief Justice Bersamin named GSIS chair." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1093829 (accessed February 14, 2020 at 07:31PM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "Ex-Chief Justice Bersamin named GSIS chair." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1093829 (archived).

[phgq]

DOLE, NLRC ink deal to put up satellite offices in Bicol

#PHnews: DOLE, NLRC ink deal to put up satellite offices in Bicol

LEGAZPI CITY -- The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) in Bicol and the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) on Tuesday, setting up NLRC satellite offices in DOLE field offices in Masbate City and Daet, an official said on Wednesday.

Johana Vi Gasga, DOLE public information officer, said under the agreement, the NLRC-Regional Arbitration Branch (RAB)-5 will receive complaints from the satellite offices through email and issue summons.

The summons shall state the date of mandatory conciliation and mediation conferences which shall be scheduled on three consecutive Thursdays, the first setting at least 15 days after the date of mailing of the summons.

DOLE-Bicol will then issue a referral for compulsory arbitration if the parties fail to reach a settlement during the Single Entry Approach (SEnA) proceedings.

The latter shall also act as complaint officer authorized to administer oaths, receive complaints and transmit duly accomplished complaint form through email to the NLRC-RAB 5.

The MOA was signed by DOLE-Bicol regional director Joel M. Gonzales and NLRC-RAB 5 executive labor arbiter Jose C. del Valle Jr.

Gonzales, at the signing ceremony, said the agreement is to bring closer to the clients the services that they deserve in the most economical, effective and efficient means.

“This shows the strongly-founded relationship of DOLE and NLRC in Bicol,” he said.

“With the provision of the NLRC satellite offices in Masbate and Camarines Norte, access to quasi-judicial courts and the expeditious among their basic rights are likewise guaranteed,” said lawyer Joan Noya-Nidua, DOLE Bicol Med-Arbiter, who witnessed the MOA signing.

Del Valle said the two agencies may now better serve all its clients in the provinces of Camarines Norte and Masbate.

“Because of this MOA, all our clients who are workers as well employers in the said provinces need not go to Naga City anymore and spend time and money just to file their complaint or papers with the NLRC Sub RAB Naga,” he said.

“We will be freeing these people particularly the workers from unnecessary expenses,” del Valle added.

DOLE is mandated to protect workers, promote their welfare and maintain industrial peace.

NLRC, on the other hand, is tasked to promote and maintain industrial peace by resolving, in the fairest, quickest, least expensive and most effective way possible, labor and management disputes involving both local and overseas workers through compulsory arbitration and alternative modes of dispute resolution. (PNA)

  ***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "DOLE, NLRC ink deal to put up satellite offices in Bicol." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1085849 (accessed November 14, 2019 at 05:19AM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "DOLE, NLRC ink deal to put up satellite offices in Bicol." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1085849 (archived).

[phgq]

Duterte to Peralta: Let ‘fairness, truth’ prevail in SC

#PHnews: Duterte to Peralta: Let ‘fairness, truth’ prevail in SC

MANILA — President Rodrigo Duterte advised newly-installed Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta to make sure that “fairness and truth” prevail in the Supreme Court (SC).

Duterte made the call when he administered the oath-taking of Peralta as Chief Justice at Malacañang Palace on Thursday, Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo said in a statement.

Panelo said the President wants Peralta to lead the fair implementation of the country’s laws.

“In the oath taking of [Chief Justice] Peralta this afternoon in Malacañang, [President Duterte] told him that all he asks is that the SC under his watch should be characterized with fairness and truth,” the Palace official said.

“[The President wants] that every citizen be treated equal before the law regardless of the status in life,” he added.

Peralta was sworn in as the country’s top magistrate a day after the President signed his appointment paper.

He took the place of former Chief Justice Lucas Bersamin who reached the mandatory retirement age of 70 on Oct. 18.

Peralta will serve as Chief Justice until March 27, 2022.

Peralta is the most senior magistrate among Senior Associate Justices Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Andres Reyes Jr., the two other candidates earlier endorsed by the Judicial and Bar Council to lead the Supreme Court.

Peralta was an associate justice of the Supreme Court before assuming the top post at the high tribunal.

As a Supreme Court associate justice, Peralta penned the November 2016 ruling that upheld the legality of the burial of former president Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani in Taguig City.

He was also one of the magistrates who voted in favor of the ouster of former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno in May 2018, as well as of the granting of retroactive application of Republic Act 10592 or the Expanded Good Conduct Time Allowance in June 2019. (PNA)

***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "Duterte to Peralta: Let ‘fairness, truth’ prevail in SC." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1084160 (accessed October 25, 2019 at 05:29AM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "Duterte to Peralta: Let ‘fairness, truth’ prevail in SC." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1084160 (archived).

[phgq]

SC will be ‘well-managed’ with CJ Peralta in control: Palace

#PHnews: SC will be ‘well-managed’ with CJ Peralta in control: Palace

MANILA -- Malacañang expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would continue to thrive under the leadership of newly-appointed Chief Justice Diosdado Peralta.

This after Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea confirmed that President Rodrigo Duterte has appointed Peralta, former Associate Justice, to lead the Supreme Court following the retirement of Lucas Bersamin.

Medialdea said the President signed Peralta’s appointment paper on October 23.

Presidential Spokesperson Salvador Panelo spoke highly of Peralta for serving the judiciary for more than three decades in various capacities.

Peralta served in the judiciary as a trial court judge, associate justice and presiding justice of the Sandiganbayan, and associate justice.

“We are certain that with Chief Justice Peralta at the helm of the Supreme Court, the Judiciary will continue to be well-managed as it thrives to uphold the principles of judicial excellence, integrity, and independence,” Panelo said in a statement.

Panelo also enumerated Peralta’s many accomplishments including landmark decisions such as the imposition of the death penalty on a policeman who used his service firearm to shoot an 11-year-old boy while flying his kite on a rooftop in People vs. Fallorina.

He said it was also Peralta who made the decision on the first conviction for plunder involving a cashier of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) in People vs. Manalili and the first and only conviction of Qualified Bribery under Article 211-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, involving a substantial number of police officers in the case of suspected foreign drug traffickers.

The Palace official said Peralta also convicted the most number of accused involved in big-time drug cases and other serious crimes.

For his contributions, the Supreme Court, during the Court’s Centennial Celebration, and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines conferred the Special Centennial Awards in the Field of Criminal Law to Peralta, Panelo said.

The newly-appointed Chief Justice was recognized for his “credible and no-nonsense management and expeditious disposal of heinous crimes and drug cases… [which have] visibly strengthened the Philippine Criminal Justice System and helped bolster and maintain respect, trust and confidence in our criminal courts."

Peralta bested Associate Justices Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Andres Reyes Jr., the two other magistrates who made it to the shortlist for the country's next Chief Justice endorsed by the Judicial and Bar Council.

Perlas-Bernabe was appointed to the Supreme Court by former President Benigno Aquino III in 2011, while Reyes got a seat at the high court in 2017.

Peralta will serve as Chief Justice until his mandatory retirement on March 27, 2022. (PNA)

***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "SC will be ‘well-managed’ with CJ Peralta in control: Palace." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1084040 (accessed October 24, 2019 at 03:41AM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "SC will be ‘well-managed’ with CJ Peralta in control: Palace." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1084040 (archived).

[phgq]

Diosdado Peralta is new Chief Justice

#PHnews: Diosdado Peralta is new Chief Justice

MANILA -- Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta is the successor of retired Chief Justice Lucas Bersamin, Malacañang announced on Wednesday.

In a text message, Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea confirmed that President Rodrigo Duterte has chosen Peralta to lead the Supreme Court following Bersamin’s retirement.

“Yes,” Medialdea said, when asked to confirm Peralta’s appointment as the country’s new top magistrate.

Bersamin reached the compulsory retirement age of 70 on October 18.

The 1987 Constitution mandates the President to appoint a new top magistrate within 90 days from vacancy.

Medialdea said the President signed Peralta’s appointment paper on October 23.

Malacañang has yet to release a copy of the appointment paper.

Peralta is the most senior in terms of experience in the high tribunal.

Prior to his stint at the Supreme Court in January 2009, Peralta served as presiding judge of the Sandiganbayan.

He was also a presiding judge of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 95, and a prosecutor in Laoag City and in Manila.

He bested Associate Justices Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Andres Reyes Jr., the two other magistrates who made it to the shortlist for the country's next Chief Justice endorsed by the Judicial and Bar Council.

Perlas-Bernabe was appointed to the Supreme Court by former president Benigno Aquino III in 2011, while Reyes got a seat at the high court in 2017. (PNA)

***

References:

* Philippine News Agency. "Diosdado Peralta is new Chief Justice." Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1083995 (accessed October 23, 2019 at 11:47PM UTC+14).

* Philippine News Agency. "Diosdado Peralta is new Chief Justice." Archive Today. https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1083995 (archived).