Search results
Dec 10, 2021 · The Philippines' Supreme Court largely upheld an anti-terrorism law this week that spawned rancorous challenges, in a ruling that could have far-reaching impacts in the Southeast Asian...
Dec 10, 2021 · The Philippine Supreme Court yesterday upheld the legality of most of an anti-terrorism law passed by President Rodrigo Duterte’s administration last year, which opponents claim – with some...
- Sebastian Strangio
- The Supreme Court Under Duterte
- Judicial Independence in The 1987 Philippine Constitution
- Judicial Independence in Practice
- Judicial Independence Reconsidered
- Conclusion
Since the beginning of his administration in 2016, Duterte has been able to remove a sitting chief justice and appoint three chief justices. His latest pick for chief justice, Diosdado Peralta, appointed in 2019, will not be his last. Chief Justice Peralta is set to compulsorily retire in March 2022, giving Duterte another chance to appoint a repla...
How did the Philippines get here? The 1987 Philippine Constitutionintroduced several guarantees for judicial independence. The framers sought to prevent regressions to authoritarian rule following the fall of former dictator Ferdinand Marcos. As such, the constitution is replete with safeguards to ensure the country’s continued democratic functioni...
In practice, however, constitutional safeguards, while necessary, are insufficient to guarantee judicial independence. After all, they can be open to different interpretations, they can be susceptible to abuse, or they can be simply ignored. Thus, constitutional safeguards must be complemented by unwritten democratic norms that act as “soft” safegu...
The Supreme Court, of course, cannot be expected to exercise judicial review and annul government policies just to prove its independence. To be sure, judicial review is unquestionably an exercise of judicial independence; after all, a less independent court is less likely to rule against ruling political elites. But the converse is not always true...
The Philippine Supreme Court has become less independent in practice since the time of former president Arroyo. There is then little surprise that the court is failing to protect democracy by continually siding with, and thereby emboldening, the current administration’s authoritarian tendencies. The result is democratic erosion. Indeed, Philippine ...
Feb 4, 2021 · On February 2, the Supreme Court in Manila held oral arguments on the whopping 37 petitions filed by various civil society groups against the controversial Anti-Terror Law.
- Michael Beltran
Dec 20, 2012 · In 2010, the Supreme Court (SC) of the Philippines concluded two controversial cases, People v. Lumanogi and Lejano v. Peopleii after over a decade of court proceedings.
- Abadilla 5
- AHRC-PAP-001-2012
- Philippines
- Paper
Supreme Court-initiated reforms in technology and case management practices improve court efficiency and reduce congestion and delays. These outcomes are priority areas for both the Supreme Court and the current Philippine administration, as highlighted in the Philippine Development Plan (2017–2022). Impact evaluation brief Governance
People also ask
Why is the Philippine Supreme Court failing to protect democracy?
Did the Philippines' Supreme Court uphold the anti-terrorism law?
Why is the Philippine Supreme Court important?
What is the judicial system in the Philippines?
Did Duterte reshaped the Philippine Supreme Court?
Which administration actions have been challenged unsuccessfully before the court?
This article investigates determinants of the Court’s behavior since the country’s return to democracy in 1987, with particular attention to “loyalty effects”—the likelihood that justices will vote for the government more often when the president who appointed them is in office.
