Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines
|This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of
An Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines is one of 15 members of the Philippine Supreme Court, the highest court in the Philippines. The Chief Justice presides over the High Court, but carries only 1 of the 15 votes in the court. Traditionally, the Chief Justice is deemed as primus inter pares ("first among equals") among the Justices.
Until 1973, only men were appointed as Associate Justices to the Court. Cecilia Muñoz-Palma, an appointee of President Ferdinand Marcos, was the first woman to sit on the Court. Since then, 13 other women have been appointed as Associate Justices of the Supreme Court.
Constitutional requirements and limitations
Under the 1987 Constitution, the minimum requirements for appointment to the Supreme Court are natural born citizenship; 40 years of age; and 15 years or more as a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines. (sec. 7(1), Article VIII) The members of the Court are appointed by the President from a list of at least 3 nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council. (sec. 9, Article VIII) The appointment is not subject to confirmation by Congress.
Members of the Court are mandated to retire upon reaching the age of 70. (sec. 11, Article VIII) They may also be removed from office through impeachment, which is accomplished through a resolution of impeachment affirmed by a 1/3 vote of all members of the House of Representatives and conviction by 2/3 vote of all members of the Senate.
Since 1901, there has always been only one Chief Justice. In contrast, the number of Associate Justices has wildly varied. From the original number of six (1901–1916), this was increased to eight (1916–1935), then to ten (1935–1940). During the years 1940-1945, the membership varied from five to seven. After liberation in 1945, the number was reset to ten, and the current number of fourteen was first set in place with the enactment of the 1973 Constitution. During the first few months of the Aquino administration, ten Associate Justices sat on the Court, but the appointment of Carolina Griño-Aquino in February 1988 finally restored the number of Associate Justices at fourteen.
The cases decided by the Supreme Court involve several classes of disputes. Most prominently, the Court is called upon to exercise the power of judicial review of presidential or legislative actions. More often, the Court also undertakes appellate review of decisions of the trial courts and the Court of Appeals in civil and criminal cases. The Court is also tasked with deciding administrative cases involving members and employees of the judiciary and of lawyers belonging to the Philippine Bar. The decisions of the Court become part of the law of the land.
Each Justice carries one vote on the Court which they exercise whether when sitting in Division, or in the full complement of 15 (or "en banc"). Since the 1970s, the Supreme Court has sat in three divisions, with five Justices as members of each division. As most Supreme Court cases are decided by the division rather than the en banc, a vote of three Justices sitting in a division is usually sufficient to decide the case. However, the Constitution prescribes instances whereby a case must be decided en banc, such as in declaring a law as unconstitutional or when a judicial precedent is overturned. Each vote can be crucial, as recently shown in the 2006 People's Initiative case (Lambino v. COMELEC), which was decided en banc by an 8-7 vote.
As a case is decided, one justice in the majority is assigned to write the majority opinion for the Court. Even as these decisions speak in behalf of the Court, the writer of the opinion (known as the "ponente") is strongly identified with the decision, and the body of opinions of each Justice enhances his/her reputation. Many important opinions are analyzed in law schools and are well-remembered long after the Justice had left the Court. For example, several of the opinions of Associate Justice José P. Laurel were crucial in the development of Philippine jurisprudence and are widely read and quoted nearly 70 years after they had been written.
Any other Justice, whether they be in the majority or in the minority, is entitled to write a separate opinion in a case to clarify his/her views, or even to challenge the points raised in the majority opinion. In the 1973 case of Javellana v. Executive Secretary, concerning the ratification of the 1973 Constitution, each Justice chose to write a separate opinion, while more recently, the 2005 decision on the Expanded VAT Law (Abakada v. Executive Secretary) saw 11 separate opinions. The separate opinions of a Justice in the majority is usually known as a "concurring opinion", while one penned by a Justice in the minority is known as a "dissenting opinion". A Justice who only partially agrees with the majority opinion while disagreeing with portions thereof may even write a "concurring and dissenting opinion".
While these separate opinions do not receive as much public attention as majority opinions, they are usually studied in the legal academe and by other judges. On several occasions, views expressed in a dissenting or concurring opinion were adopted by the Supreme Court in later years. Justice Gregorio Perfecto, whose staunch libertarian views were out of sync with the Cold War era, wrote over 140 dissenting opinions in just 4 years. Years after his death, some of his views in dissent, such as in Moncado v. People's Court (1948) were adopted by a more liberal Supreme Court.
The rule of seniority
The Associate Justices of the Court are usually ordered according to the date of their appointment. There are no official ramifications as to this ranking, although the order determines the seating arrangement on the bench and is duly considered in all matters of protocol. Within the discretion of the Court, the ranking may also factor into the composition of the divisions of the Court.
In 1986, the order of seniority in the Court was modified upon the assumption to the presidency of Corazon C. Aquino. President Aquino had sought to reorganize the Court by obtaining the resignation of most of the Associate Justices who had been appointed by Ferdinand Marcos, and filling those vacancies with her own choices. Eventually, Aquino chose to re-appoint three Marcos-appointed Justices: Amuerfina Melencio-Herrera, Hugo Gutierrez, Jr. and Nestor Alampay, but did so only after appointing several new Justices to the Court. The previous service of these three were not considered for the purposes of determining seniority. This point would cause a minor controversy in 1992. During that time, it was advocated in some sectors that Herrera, as the longest serving incumbent Associate Justice, was more qualified to succeed the resigned Chief Justice Marcelo Fernan than Andres Narvasa, who was considered as the Senior Associate Justice despite having been appointed to the Court 7 years after Melencio-Herrera. President Aquino eventually appointed Narvasa over Herrera.
The incumbent Justice with the earliest date of appointment is deemed as the Senior Associate Justice. While the Senior Associate Justice has no constitutional or statutory duties, he or she usually acts as Acting Chief Justice during the absence of the Chief Justice. The Senior Associate Justice is also usually designated as the chairperson of the second division of the Court.
Becoming Chief Justice
Only two persons appointed as Chief Justice had not previously served as Associate Justices. These were Cayetano Arellano, the first Chief Justice, and José Yulo, the former Speaker of the House of Representatives who was appointed as Chief Justice during the Japanese period. All other Chief Justices, except for Victorino Mapa, were incumbent Associate Justices at the time of their appointment as Chief Justice. Mapa had served as Associate Justice from 1901 to 1913, when he was appointed as Secretary of Justice. Mapa would be appointed as Chief Justice in 1920.
Another tradition, though less stringently observed, was that the most senior Associate Justice would be appointed as Chief Justice upon a permanent vacancy to that post. Deviations from this tradition, especially in recent years, have caused some controversy. Senior Associate Justice Claudio Teehankee, who had emerged as a fervent critic of Ferdinand Marcos, was twice bypassed for Chief Justice by Marcos. More recently, in 2005, the appointment of Artemio Panganiban as Chief Justice over Senior Associate Justice Reynato Puno was also the subject of some controversy. Puno was eventually appointed as Chief Justice in 2006. Another contender for Chief Justice in 2006 was Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago. Had Santiago been appointed Chief Justice, she would have been the first person since José Yulo in 1942 to have been appointed Chief without serving as Associate Justice. When Justice Renato Corona assumed as Chief Justice on May 17, 2010, the most senior Associate Justice was Antonio Carpio, who was appointed to the Court in October 2010, 6 months before Corona's own appointment.
Notable Associate Justices
- To date, one Associate Justice, José P. Laurel, would later serve as President of the Philippines. Laurel also ran for the presidency in 1949 but was defeated by Elpidio Quirino. Another Associate Justice, Claro M. Recto, would be a candidate for President, but he and former Chief Justice José Yulo lost to Carlos P. Garcia in the 1957 presidential election.
- The fourteen women appointed as Associate Justices of the Court: Cecilia Muñoz-Palma (1973); Ameurfina Melencio-Herrera (1979); Irene Cortes (1986); Carolina Griño-Aquino (1987); Flerida Ruth Romero (1991); Minerva Gonzaga-Reyes (1998); Consuelo Ynares-Santiago (1999); Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez (2000); Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez (2002); Conchita Carpio-Morales (2002); Minita Chico-Nazario (2003); Teresita Leonardo-de Castro (2007); Maria Lourdes Sereno (2010); and Estela Perlas-Bernabe (2011).
- Abdulwahid Bidin was the first Muslim named an Associate Justice. He was appointed by President Corazón Aquino in 1987. The vast majority of Filipinos appointed to the Court were Catholic. Three of the more prominent non-Catholics in the Supreme Court were Chief Justices José Abad Santos and Reynato Puno, both Methodists; and incumbent Chief Justice María Lourdes Sereno, who is a non-denominational Christian.
- There has been one husband and wife pair who have both served on the Court: Chief Justice Ramón Aquino and Associate Justice Carolina Griño-Aquino. Griño-Aquino was appointed to the Court only after her husband had retired. There have been four father-son pairs who have served in the Court: Associate Justices Florentino Torres (1901–1920) and Luis P. Torres (1949–1950); Chief Justice Ricardo Paras (1941–1961) and Associate Justice Edgardo Paras (1987–1992); Associate Justices Sabino Padilla (1946–1948, 1950–1961) and Teodoro Padilla (1987–1997); and Associate Justices Felicisimo Feria (1945–1953) and Jose Feria (1986–1987). Other prominent interrelated Justices were Chief Justice José Abad Santos and Associate Justice Vicente Abad Santos (uncle-nephew), and Associate Justice Manuel Briones and Chief Justice Marcelo Fernan (uncle-nephew).
- At age 35, American George A. Malcolm was the youngest person ever appointed Associate Justice, in 1915. Given the present age limit in the Constitution, however, it is unlikely that this record will ever be broken. The youngest Filipinos named Associate Justices were Claro M. Recto (45 years, 4 months, 25 days old) and Ramón Avanceña (45 years, 5 months, 18 days old).
- The oldest person named Associate Justice was José C. Campos, Jr. (69 years, 4 months and 23 days old), serving under President Fidel Ramos in 1993. However, José López Vito was 69 years, 364 days old when he temporarily sat in Court to fill a vacancy during the Japanese occupation. The oldest Justice to ever sit in Court upon retirement or death was Florentino Torres, who was 75 when he resigned in 1920; this was prior to the specification of any age limit.
- The longest-serving Associate Justice was American E. Finley Johnson, who served in that position for 29 years, 5 months and 27 days, from 1903 to 1933. The longest serving Filipino Associate Justice was Florentino Torres, who served for 18 years, 10 months, and 3 days, from 1901 to 1920. Justices Ramón Avanceña and César Bengzon would serve longer in the Court than Torres, but their tenure as Associate Justice was terminated by their respective promotions to Chief Justice.
- The Associate Justice serving the shortest period was Ramón Diokno, a former Senator who died 2 months and 11 days after his appointment in 1954.
- The longest-lived Associate Justice was most likely Delfin Jaranilla, who died on 4 June 1980, aged 96 years, 5 months and 11 days. He outlived Associate Justice (later Chief Justice) César Bengzon, who died on 3 September 1992 aged 96 years, 3 months and 5 days. The Supreme Court website identifies Justice Guillermo Pablo as having died at the age of 106 , however this is likely erroneous. Other Associate Justices who lived to be nonagenarians include Ricardo Paras, J. B. L. Reyes, Querube Makalintal, Cecilia Muñoz-Palma, Conrado Vasquez, José P. Bengzon, Pastor Endencia, and the still-living Lorenzo Relova.
- The youngest Associate Justice to die was American Fletcher Ladd, who died shortly after resigning in 1903 aged 40 years and 356 days; Ladd had served in the Court for less than two years. The youngest Filipino Justice to die was José Abad Santos, who was executed by the Imperial Japanese Army at age 56 years, 2 months, and 16 days. Gregorio Perfecto meanwhile died in office aged 57 years, 8 months, 20 days.
- The most recent Associate Justice to die in office was Leo Medialdea in 1992. Other Associate Justices who died during their terms were Fernando Jugo, Ramón Diokno, Gregorio Perfecto, Ignacio Villamor, Carlos Imperial and Charles Johns.
- The only Associate Justice who resigned before the age of compulsory retirement due to health reasons was Austria-Martinez. Note that Florentino Feliciano retired at 67 to accept appointment to the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization. On September, 2008, Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, citing health reasons, filed a letter to the Supreme Court of the Philippines thru Reynato Puno, tendering her resignation effective April 30, 2009, or 15 months before her compulsory retirement on December 19, 2010. In the October 1 Judicial and Bar Council's en banc deliberations, Reynato Puno ruled: "The court merely noted it. We don’t have to approve it... it is her right." During the JBC hearing, a JBC member said "Austria-Martinez had wanted to retire earlier because of health reasons. We were told she had health problems even when she was in the CA." Retired Chief Justice of the Philippines Artemio Panganiban stated: "I am saddened that Justice Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez has opted to retire early from the Supreme Court due to 'health reasons.' She is not bedridden. Neither is she physically or mentally incapacitated, but she has chosen to retire on April 30, 2009 because she felt she could no longer cope with the heavy caseload." The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines provides that: "Section 11, Article VIII. The Members of the Supreme Court xxx shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of seventy years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office."
- Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Judicial and Bar Council
- Constitution of the Philippines
- The Supreme Court E-library
- Sevilla, Victor J. (1985). Justices of the Supreme Court of the Philippines Vol. I. Quezon City, Philippines: New Day Publishers. ISBN 971-10-0134-9.
- Sevilla, Victor J. (1985). Justices of the Supreme Court of the Philippines Vol. II. Quezon City, Philippines: New Day Publishers. ISBN 971-10-0137-3.
- Sevilla, Victor J. (1985). Justices of the Supreme Court of the Philippines Vol. III. Quezon City, Philippines: New Day Publishers. ISBN 971-10-0139-X.