The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) has backed the Supreme Court’s call for those alleging corruption in the judiciary to file formal complaints and present evidence, saying that accusations of wrongdoing must be substantiated because “it is easy to paint corruption” on the courts.
IBP national president Allan G. Panolong said the organization condemns corruption in all government institutions, particularly in the judiciary, but agreed with the SC that serious allegations should be pursued through the proper channels.
“We in the IBP condemn any form of corruption in any of our institutions, moreso in the judiciary,” Panolong said.
“We adopt, however, the statement released by the SC relative to that subject matter. It is easy to paint corruption against our courts, but it needs to be substantiated,” he added.
Panolong said anyone who believes a judge or justice has committed a corrupt act in connection with a pending case should lodge a formal complaint before the SC.
“The proper way is to make a formal complaint before the SC against the judge or justice who is allegedly involved in any corrupt act relative to a pending case before their sala so that appropriate investigation will be made and the judiciary official will be held accountable if found guilty,” he said.
The IBP statement came after the SC called on Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla or any concerned party to substantiate allegations of partiality, misconduct and corruption in the Court of Appeals.
The Court said it takes such allegations seriously but cannot act on broad accusations based solely on public statements.
It urged the Ombudsman or any concerned party to file the proper complaint and submit supporting evidence as it stressed that judges and justices must also be given an opportunity to respond.
The SC made the call after Remulla urged the judiciary to undergo “soul searching” over “a troubling trend of Ombudsman decisions being reversed by the CA.”
The SC, however, maintained that serious accusations against judges and courts must undergo proper investigation so facts can be fairly determined and disciplinary action taken when warranted.
It also stressed that fair criticism of the judiciary and its decisions remains protected by citing its recent unanimous ruling in in re Heydarian, Cendana, and Gadon.#