Article 10p. 10

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS CODES, CANONS AND RULES

WHEREAS, the Bangalore Draft, as amended, is intended

to be the Universal Declaration of Judicial Standards

applicable in all judiciaries;

WHEREAS,

the

Bangalore

Draft

is

founded upon a

universal recognition that a competent, independent and

impartial judiciary is essential if the courts are to fulfill

their role in upholding constitutionalism and the rule of

law; that public confidence in the judicial system and in

the moral authority and integrity of the judiciary is of

utmost importance in a modem democratic society; and,

that

it

is

essential

that

judges,

individually

and

collectively, respect and honor judicial office as a public

trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in

the judicial system;

WHEREAS, the adoption of the universal declaration of

standards for ethical conduct of judges embodied in the

Bangalore Draft as revised at the Round Table Conference

of Chief Justices at The Hague is imperative not only to

update and correlate the Code of Judicial Conduct and

the Canons of Judicial Ethics adopted for the Philippines,

but also to stress the Philippines' solidarity with the

universal clamor for a universal code of judicial ethics.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Court hereby adopts this New

Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary .

CANON 1 Independence

Judicial independence is a prerequisite to the rule of law

and a fundamental guarantee of a fair trial. A judge shall

therefore uphold and exemplify judicial independence in

both its individual and institutional aspects.

SECTION 1. Judges shall exercise the judicial function

independently on the basis of their assessment of the

facts

and

in

accordance

with

a

conscientious

understanding

of

the

law,

free

of

any

extraneous

influence, inducement, pressure, threat or interference,

direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.

SECTION 2. In performing judicial duties, Judges shall be

independent

from

judicial

colleagues

in

respect

of

decisions

which

the

judge

is

obliged

to

make

independently.

SECTION 3. Judges shall refrain from influencing in any

manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending

before another court or administrative agency.

SECTION 4. Judges shall not allow family, social, or other

relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment.

The prestige of judicial office shall not be used or lent to

advance the private interests of others, nor convey or

permit others to convey the impression that they are in a

special position to influence the judge.

SECTION

5.

Judges

shall

not

only

be

free

from

inappropriate connections with, and influence by, the

executive and legislative branches of government, but

must also appear to be free therefrom to a reasonable

observer.

SECTION 6. Judges shall be independent in relation to

society in general and in relation to the particular parties

to a dispute which he or she has to adjudicate.

SECTION

7.

Judges

shall

encourage

and

uphold

safeguards for the discharge of judicial duties in order to

maintain and enhance the institutional and operational

independence of the judiciary.

SECTION

8.

Judges

shall exhibit and promote high

standards of judicial conduct in order to reinforce public

confidence in the judiciary which is fundamental to the

maintenance of judicial independence.

CANON 2 Integrity

Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge of

the judicial office but also to the personal demeanor of

judges.

SECTION 1. Judges shall ensure that not only is their

conduct above reproach, but that it is perceived to be so

in the view of a reasonable observer.

SECTION 2. The behavior and conduct of judges must

reaffirm the people's faith in the integrity of the judiciary.

Justice musty not merely be done but must also be seen

to be done.

SECTION 3. Judges should take or initiate appropriate

disciplinary measures against lawyers or court personnel

for unprofessional conduct of which the judge may have

become aware.

CANON 3 Impartiality

Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the

judicial office. It applies not only to the decision itself but

also to the process by which the decision to made.

SECTION 1. Judges shall perform their judicial duties

without favor, bias or prejudice.

SECTION 2. Judges shall ensure that his or her conduct,

both in and out of court, maintains and enhances the

confidence

of

the

public,

the

legal

profession

and

litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of the

judiciary.

SECTION 3. Judges shall, so far as is reasonable, so

conduct themselves as to minimize the occasions on

which it will be necessary for them to be disqualified

from hearing or deciding cases.

SECTION

4.

Judges

shall

not

knowingly,

while

a

proceeding is before, or could come before, them make

any comment that might reasonably be expected to

affect the outcome of such proceeding or impair the

manifest fairness of the process. Nor shall judges make

any comment in public or otherwise that might affect the

fair trial of any person or issue.

SECTION

5.

Judges shall disqualify themselves from

participating in any proceedings in which they are unable

to decide the matter impartially or in which it may appear

to a reasonable observer that they are unable to decide

the matter impartially. Such proceedings include, but are

not limited to, instances where

(a) The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a

party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts

concerning the proceedings;

(b) The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a

material witness in the matter in controversy;

(c) The judge, or a member of his or her family, has an

economic interest in the outcome of the matter in

controversy;

(d) The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian,

trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in controversy, or a

former associate of the judge served as counsel during

their association, or the judge or lawyer was a material

witness therein;

(e) The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of

review;

(f) The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a

party litigant within the sixth civil degree or to counsel

within the fourth civil degree; or

(g) The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a

financial interest, as heir, legatee, creditor, fiduciary, or

otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or in a

party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could

be

substantially

affected

by

the

outcome

of

the

proceedings;

SECTION 6. A judge disqualified as stated above may,

instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose on

the records the basis of disqualification. If, based on such

disclosure, the parties and lawyers independently of the

judge's participation, all agree in writing that the reason

for the inhibition is immaterial or unsubstantial, the judge

may then participate in the proceeding. The agreement,

© Compiled By RGL

10 of 41