After months of on-and-off protests, Philippine judges have finally secured a budget increase. The Aquino administration has pledged another 107 pesos for salaries. However, notably the administration is also requesting the Supreme Court to allow an audit of the Supreme Court’s Special Allowance for the Judiciary funds. Perhaps not coincidentally, a similar issue (auditing special funds) led to the impeachment attempt against former Chief Justice Hilario Davide in 2003. Davide resisted Congress’ demands for an audit of the Court’s special funds, citing judicial independence. While the Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the impeachment attempt as unconstitutional (it was the second drawn up that year), the whole affair does suggest the sensitivity of the issue. The PhilStar article doesn’t record the Supreme Court’s response to Aquino’s request, but I suspect it won’t turn over its books quietly.
Pay raise for Philippine justices
Comments Off on Pay raise for Philippine justices
Filed under Philippines, Supreme Court
Revenge of the Lawyers
During the Arroyo administration, progressive lawyers were some of the Philippine president’s harshest critics. Now, with the impeachment against Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, an Arroyo ally, approaching, lawyers are volunteering in droves to assist the House of Representatives legal team. I’d noted earlier that progressive lawyers are increasingly unlikely to view the Supreme Court as an ally. It seems they might be drifting back towards the elected branches of government to pursue their goals. This makes me wonder however whether the Supreme Court will have enough stakeholders to maintain its independence. If not lawyers, who has a stake in the court?
Comments Off on Revenge of the Lawyers
Filed under Philippines
Asia Foundation Thailand survey
The Asia Foundation has released a new survey of Thai attitudes towards politics and political institutions. Fortunately, it includes several questions about the Thai judicial system. Overall, the judiciary is still the most respected political institution (aside from the monarchy of course), with 59% of respondents claiming that it has “high integrity.” Perhaps more surprisingly given the public controversy, 63% of Thais regard the courts as generally unbiased or neutral. However, when respondents were separated into Yellow and Red shirts, the former had much more positive attitudes towards the courts than the latter. I highly suggesting skimming the pages related to courts and the justice system (pp. 69, 73, and 93).
Comments Off on Asia Foundation Thailand survey
Filed under Thailand
Oops – don’t throw that evidence out quite yet
A few weeks ago I reported the judge in the Anwar trial threw out a key piece of DNA evidence because the government had obtained it illegally without Anwar’s consent. It turns out I spoke too soon. According to Asia Sentinel, the judge has reversed his order and allowed the evidence in. Given turnarounds like that, it’s hard not to sympathize with the pessimistic views of many Malaysian lawyers about their country’s courts…
Comments Off on Oops – don’t throw that evidence out quite yet
Filed under Anwar Ibrahim, evidence, Malaysia
Access that court
In a speech before the International Association of Court and Administrator 2011 seminar, Indonesian President Yudhoyono pledged to improve access to justice for the poor. Here is an except from The Jakarta Globe:
“We have to widen access by making court cases free, granting consultation and legal aid and providing mobile trials,” he said.
In the next two years, the government plans to increase the number of free litigation cases from 4,000 a year to 11,000. It also plans to provide legal aid for more than 11,500 cases while establishing mobile courts in 233 spots around the country.
“For that reason, strengthening civil society is an important factor in allowing the people to have effective access to justice,” he said. “The government has prepared a strategy for national access to justice in the 2010 presidential decree about Justice Development.”
While I didn’t hear the full speech, from what I’ve seen the absence of any mention of corruption is striking – certainly an elephant in the room! From what I’ve heard from rule of law reformers in Indonesia, the problem isn’t access so much as lack of faith in the courts. Potential litigants simply don’t believe they will get a fair hearing, or moreover that the benefits of litigation are worth the costs. Apathy is the general feeling. In fact, USAID recently solicited proposals to stimulate demand-side rule of law reforms in Indonesia, namely getting more Indonesian stakeholders to care about the courts. Hopefully Yudhoyono’s plan to reduce barriers to litigation will help somewhat in this effort.
Comments Off on Access that court
Filed under access to justice, indonesia
Dominic J. Nardi, Jr. 
You must be logged in to post a comment.