ENDEAVOR

Every week, a Dulugang Bayan (literally, Town Roundup) is held in a chosen barangay in Calamba City, Laguna. Sponsored by the local government unit (LGU), the assembly enables citizens to seek free legal assistance for addressing their grievances and for expediting processes that could lead to decongestion of court dockets, easing of crowding in the city jail, as well as strengthening the barangay justice system. This is an initiative of the Calamba City Justice Zone whose convenor is Executive Judge (EJ) Glenda R. Mendoza-Ramos.

This writer had an opportunity to witness the dynamics of the Justice Zone last month when he attended an assembly of civil society organizations in Calamba City. Judge Ramos is an enthusiastic Justice Zone advocate. Popularly called Judge Ganda by admiring Calambeños, EJ Glenda has introduced other innovative practices.

Kids’ Day Out was conceived to address the perennial problem of delayed litigation of cases in the Family Court due to unwillingness or unpreparedness of minors who are called on to serve as witnesses. Accompanied by their parents or guardians, they are taken on a tour of the courtroom and informal chats with court personalities they are likely to encounter such as the judge, prosecutor, defense lawyer, and the social worker. 

COLLAB Para sa mga Calambeño is a monthly convergence activity of three neighboring barangays which addresses legal issues, such as domestic violence and land disputes, as well as minor health issues of women and children, especially those from needy areas. Active supporters include the barangay chairmen, the city health officer and city-based doctors.

Last week, a National Justice Zone meeting was convened in Manila to share good practices and shape policy recommendations that would enhance the implementation of the overall strategy for improving the delivery of real-time justice. Five outcomes were analyzed and discussed: institutionalization of the justice zones, court decongestion, jail decongestion, strengthening of the barangay justice system, and rehabilitation and reintegration of persons deprived of liberty.

To the citizenry at large, the Justice System may appear to be a monolith that is all-powerful and beyond reach. It is composed of five pillars, namely, law enforcement, prosecution, judiciary, penology, and the community. The community is actually the customer, end -user, or beneficiary of the services rendered by the first four pillars. Citizen involvement and support are essential to their institutional effectiveness.

Law enforcement is carried out by the Philippine National Police (PNP). National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), and 34 other related agencies. 

Prosecution is handled by the DOJ through its prosecutors (or fiscals) at the town or city and provincial levels; the Office of the Ombudsman; and the Public Attorney’s Office.

Penology is handled by municipal, city, provincial jails for those accused of crimes or those convicted to serve sentences not more than three years; and by the Bureau of Corrections that operates the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa; the Correctional Institute for Women in Mandaluyong; and penal farms and prisons in Palawan; Mindoro Occidental; Davao del Norte; Zamboanga City and Abuyog, Leyte.

Pursuing Fair and Swift Administration of Justice was emphasized in the 2017-2022 Philippine Development Plan (PDP): “(T)here will be greater trust between the people and government. At the same time, key reforms in the justice system will be done to reduce delays and cost to those who seek justice at all levels (community/barangay, police, fiscal/prosecution, and the courts).”

This is reemphasized in the 2023-2028 Philippine Development Plan. To improve quality and efficiency in disposition of cases, the primary strategy is to “Establish and/or strengthen coordination mechanisms to improve sector efficiency and accountability.” The Justice Zone integrates the efforts of the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) in carrying out this strategy. To date, 11 Justice Zones have been established in Quezon City, Cebu, Angeles, Davao, Bacolod, Naga, Calamba, Balanga, Baguio, Zamboanga, and Tagaytay. According to the PDP, four new justice zones will be launched every year during the plan’s period.

The European Union, through its Governance in Justice (GOJUST) Programme, has extended a total grant of 19 million euros, or approximately ₱1.1 billion to support the government’s “efforts to improve access to justice for all Filipinos, and thus, contribute to inclusive and sustainable socio-economic development.”

Digital technology has been harnessed to enhance information sharing, analysis and reporting among the stakeholders through five information systems, namely: the E-Warrant System, E-Subpoena, the Crime Information Reporting and Analysis System (CIRAS), the National Police Clearance System, and the Case Information Database Management System (CIDMS). 

There was palpable enthusiasm among the participants in last week’s convenors’ meeting in Manila. Institutionalizing the Justice Zones elicited the most number of concerns and suggestions. Even as the newer zones are gathering momentum, the older ones are already experiencing greater cohesion and achieving synergies. Continuity of leadership was flagged, especially considering that executive judges have limited tenure and could be reassigned or promoted. Budget sufficiency was raised, but it was evident that this was not viewed as a serious constraint, as there is ample community support.

Strengthening the Barangay Justice System or Katarungang Pambarangay could be the proverbial game-changer. A stronger sense of bayanihan at the grassroots level could foster goodwill and trust that would facilitate the amicable and speedy resolution of conflicts that need not escalate into court cases. If their concerns are expeditiously addressed and resolved, citizens need not vent their sense of impatience or hopelessness in the social media, or with unscrupulous broadcast media purveyors.

The common sentiment, “justice delayed is justice denied” could be addressed most effectively through the concerted efforts of all stakeholders, especially those in government that serve as the pillars of the justice system.