Philippines Country Profile

Judicial System

Individual Corruption

Both Global Integrity 2008 and Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009 report that citizens perceive the judiciary to be corrupt. This is further supported by the US Department of State 2009, according to which, the judiciary in the Philippines suffers from corruption and inefficiency. According to Global Integrity 2008, corruption often starts with lawyers, rather than judges and magistrates, and several lawyers (at least 94 lawyers between 1947 and 2007) have been disbarred by the Supreme Court due to corruption.

Judges have been known to take bribes in order to grant bail to litigants, even in cases where the law prohibits granting bail. This fact is further supported by the US Department of State 2009, reporting that some wealthy or influential offenders received impunity due to personal connections and bribery. Citizens may also encounter other procedural irregularities in the courts which can give rise to corrupt behaviour, such as lack of legal and procedural knowledge, resulting in false charges.

Business Corruption

According to the Transparency International Bribe Payers Index 2008, companies' confidence in the judicial system is low in the Philippines because of allegations of graft and corruption, as well as incompetence within the judiciary. Companies should note that numerous irregularities occur in judicial procedures. For example, there are cases in which the public prosecutors were absent in criminal cases. There is also an insufficient supply of judicially competent personnel, which causes postponements and prolonged delays. Some trials can drag on for years. Some companies prefer to avoid the courts altogether due to low confidence levels in the judicial system.

Political Corruption

According to US Department of State 2009, the judicial system in the Philippines is constitutionally independent from both the legislative and the executive branches. However, Global Integrity 2008 states that the process of choosing nominees for national-level judges are reportedly being influenced by the executive. Furthermore, the judiciary is perceived to be corrupt and understaffed. One prominent example is the 'Alabang Boys' drug scandal in 2008, which involved PHP 50 million in bribes allegedly paid to prosecutors and officials in the Department of Justice, in return for the release of 3 drug suspects. Former President Arroyo ordered an investigation of this case, while the suspects remain in custody, according to The Manila Times.

According to the law, members of the judiciary have to submit a Statement of Assets and Liability and Networth (SALN). However, Newsbreak Online reveals that the SALNs of judges are kept secret and beyond public scrutiny. The lack of transparency adds to public perception of the judiciary as tainted. The official argument for the secrecy is that granting public access to the SALNs would, allegedly, endanger the judges, diminish their independence and expose them to negative consequences such as kidnapping, extortion or blackmail.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- It takes 37 procedures and 842 days at a cost of 26% of the claim to enforce a commercial contract through the courts.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the judiciary's level of independence from influences of members of government, citizens, or companies a score of 3.1 on a 7-point scale (1 'heavily influenced' and 7 'entirely independent').

- Business executives give the efficiency of the legal framework for private companies to settle disputes and to challenge the legality of government actions and/or regulations a score of 2.7 and 2.8 respectively on a 7-point scale (1 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'highly efficient').

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2009:
- Nearly 48% of the companies surveyed believe that the court system is fair, impartial and uncorrupted.

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2009:
- 27% of households surveyed consider the judiciary to be 'extremely corrupt'.

- 8% of households who had contact with the judiciary in 2008 report to have paid a bribe.

- Citizens give the judiciary a score of 3.4 on a 5-point scale (1 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

Freedom House: Freedom in the World - Philippines 2009:
- Cases in the Sandiganbayan anti-corruption court takes 6-7 years to resolve.

Transparency International: Bribe Payers Index 2008:
- Business executives give the judiciary a score of 3.5 on a 5-point scale (1 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

Social Weather Stations: Surveys of Enterprises on Corruption 2008:
- Business executives give the Supreme Court's sincerity in fighting corruption a net score of +37 (above +50 'very good' and below -50 'very bad').