This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
JD-I CANON 1
A JUDGE SHOULD UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY
RULE 1.01 - A judge should be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. This rule highlights the institutional independence of the Judiciary. It requires that Judges reject pressure from any source by maintaining independence in the pursuit of their duties. It also requires Judges to rule fairly regardless of public opinion. Ramirez v. Corpuz-Macandog: A judge acted improperly when she rendered rulings based on directives she received from a government official. In her defense, the respondent judge claimed that at that time, the country was then under a revolutionary government, and to promote peace she made certain rulings acting on the pressure of the government official.
RULE 1.02 - A judge should administer justice impartially and without delay. In every case, Judges shall endeavor diligently to ascertain the facts and the applicable law unswayed by partisan interests, public opinion or fear of criticism. A Judge must also deal efficiently with administrative responsibilities. Fernandez v. Hamoy: Members of the judiciary have the sworn duty to administer justice without undue delay. A judge who failed to do so has to suffer the consequences of his omission. Any delay in the disposition of cases undermines the people’s faith in the judiciary. The office of a judge exists for one solemn end – to promote the ends of justice by administering it speedily and impartially. The judge as the person presiding over that court is the visible representation of the law and justice. These are selfevident dogmas which do not even have to be emphasized but which we always advert to when some members of the judiciary commit legal missteps or stray from the axioms of judicial ethics. More importantly, failure to resolve cases submitted for decision within the period fixed by law constitutes a serious violation of the constitutional right of the parties to a speedy disposition of their cases.
RULE 1.03. - A judge should be vigilant against any attempt to subvert the independence of the judiciary and should forthwith resist any pressure from whatever source intended to influence the performance of official functions. Judges should avoid even the slightest infraction of the law. They must be models of uprightness, fairness and honesty. They should not relax in his study of the law and court decisions. Also, Judges should not be swayed by public clamor or considerations of personal popularity. They must decide motions without delay and should also appear impartial.
the trial court should not have been influenced by this irrelevant consideration.A judge should so behave at all times as to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. remembering instead that its only guide was the mandate of the law. Judges are not actors or actresses or politicians. It is also required for compliance with the duty to respect not just the individual independence of fellow Judges but also the independence of the judiciary as a whole.03 . his disqualification is mandatory. Dabalos: The Supreme Court imposed disciplinary action against a judge who issued a warrant of arrest and fixed the bail of the accused without first conducting a hearing. Nevertheless. such that being limited by the exacting standards of their profession cannot debase the same by acting as if ordinary merchants hawking their wares. This provision is intended to ensure that judges are spared from potential influence of family members by disqualifying them even before any opportunity for impropriety presents itself. RULE 2. The High Court ruled that the pressure of a rally demanding the issuance of a warrant of arrest against the accused is not a sufficient excuse for the unjustified haste in respondent judge's act of fixing a bail without a hearing.01 . nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. This rule affirms that a Judge’s restraint from exerting influence over other judicial or quasi-judicial bodies is required for more than just propriety.02 . The highest degree of honor is required of Judges. or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment. social. . CANON 2 A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES RULE 2. The judge acted under the pressure of a rally staged by the complainant and sympathizers.Libarios v. Judalena: It should be noted that when a judge is related to one of the parties within the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity. The prestige of judicial office shall not be used or lent to advance the private interests of others. Hurtado v.A judge should not seek publicity for personal vainglory. The petitioner as portrayed by the media is not exactly a popular person. Court of Appeals: It appears that the trial court has been moved by a desire to cater to public opinion to the detriment of the impartial administration of justice. who thrive by publicity Go v.A judge shall not allow family. RULE 2.
. it violated the Code of Judicial Ethics because it conveyed or permitted others to convey the impression that the friend had special influence with him.A judge shall be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence.While Judges may continue to value these relationships. trying to sell to others whatever perceived influence or closeness to a Judge they may claim to have. and the application of the facts to the law pertaining to the case. CANON 3 A JUDGE SHOULD PERFORM OFFICIAL DUTIES HONESTLY. Judges must always guard against the probability that these people can be potential influence peddlers. In the performance of their judicial duties. whether successful or not. for even the least perversion of the process of lawful disposition of traffic offenses befouls the justice system. is serious misconduct. Navarro v. Although the judge’s interference brought the judge no personal gain. slap their personnel in public. Tormis: When judges of the same court fight with each other. columns or TV or radio commentaries on cases pending before them. they must be aware that relatives.01 .A judge should refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending before another court or administrative agency. the image of the judiciary is impaired. In re Kelly: The Judge reprimanded for holding ex parte communications with a fellow district court Judge in an attempt to influence the outcome of a traffic court proceeding for the benefit of a close associate. The court said that a ticket fix may not be cloaked as a favor or a break. Judges must ignore public opinion. When sitting as arbiters in court. In re Cornelius: A judge intervened in an employment dispute brought by the judge’s friend. to influence the decision-making process of another judge. the weighing of the testimonies and demeanor of witnesses. Judges are the dominant figure in the judicial process and the authority that determines which conduct or evidence may or may not be allowed. friends and associates may try to influence them in the performance of their judicial duties. RULE 2. AND WITH IMPARTIALITY AND DILIGENCE ADJUDICATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES RULE 3. or commit acts of sexual harassment. specifically disregarding editorials. The judge is responsible for the interpretation of laws.04 . they take their personal value systems into the courtroom. Any attempt. especially one who is of lower rank and over which he exercises supervisory authority.
Ysasi v. without a hearing. and others appearing before the court. Libarios v. Judges also should not interrupt proceedings before another Judge.RULE 3. the propriety of these queries is determined by whether the defendant was prejudiced by such questioning. RULE 3.A judge should be patient. A Judge should not examine or crossexamine a witness if the questioning reveals information that destroys the theory of one party.In every case. public opinion or fear of criticism. or participating in party conventions. and while not required to surrender his rights or opinions as a citizen. especially the inexperienced. instead of the courts for the litigants. They should not be quick to interrupt a presentation by counsel. As arbiters of the law. recognizing that time of litigants. Dodds v. the judge exceeds his proper role and casts disrepute on the judicial office. court staff.04 . and spectators alike. and courteous to lawyers. prevent unnecessary waste of time and dillydallying of counsel. or to clear up obscurities. Dabalos: Respondent judge should not have allowed himself to be swayed into issuing an order fixing bail for the temporary release of the accused charged with murder. . Fernandez: Judges should not be quick to interrupt a presentation by counsel. attentive. Judges should avoid a controversial tone. Judges should act with decorum toward jurors. and instead show restraint. witnesses and counsel is of value. studious. Comm’n on Judicial Performance: When a judge. a judge shall endeavor diligently to ascertain the facts and the applicable law unswayed by partisan interests. While entitled to entertain his personal view on political questions. the public endorsement of candidates for political office. parties. and instead show restraint. A Judge should avoid making political speeches. witnesses. it is inevitable that suspicion of being warped by political bias will attach to a Judge who becomes the active promoter of the interests of one political party against another. repeatedly interrupts a litigant and yells angrily without adequate provocation. clothed with the prestige and authority of his judicial office. there is undue interference where the Judge’s participation in the conduct of the trial tends to build or bolster a case for one of the parties.02 . In addressing litigants. RULE 3. patient and punctual in the discharge of their judicial duties. Also. contributions to party funds. Judges should be conscientious. which is contrary to established principles of law. witnesses and counsel. to litigants. While Judges may properly intervene in a trial to promote expeditious proceedings.A judge shall maintain order and proper decorum in the court.03 . courteous. A judge should avoid unconsciously falling into the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for the courts.
for the administration of justice is akin to a religious crusade. For this reason. properly intervene in the presentation of evidence during the trial.A judge should abstain from making public comments on any pending or impending case and should require similar restraint on the part of court personnel. Not only is there danger of being misquoted. interest or power and to be equipped with a moral fiber strong enough to resist the temptations lurking in her office. Dimatulac et al. Villon. Hon. prevent waste of time or clear up some obscurity. family members. He must view himself as a priest. respondent has dismally failed to exhibit these qualities required of those holding such office.: A judge should always be imbued with a high sense of duty and responsibility in the discharge of his obligation to promptly and properly administer justice. friends and associates.RULE 3.06 . An independent judiciary has been described as “one free of inappropriate outside influences. civil society. Regrettably. and therefore should refrain from making any comment on a pending case. to be unafraid to displease any person. There can be no surer guarantee of judicial independence than the character of those appointed to the Bench. By her appointment to the office. RULE 3.While a judge may. colleagues on the bench. Judges should embrace their independence and guard it against threats of erosion. Judges are the visible representation of the law and more importantly of justice. the public has laid on respondent their confidence that she is mentally and morally fit to pass upon the merits of their varied contentions. . but also of compromising the rights of the litigants in the case. Common sources of pressure upon a judge include political patrons. RULE 3. media. to promote justice.07 . Antonia Corpuz-Macandog: Even accepting for the nonce that there was this supposed pressure from a source twice removed from the national official mentioned earlier.05 . loose statements or gratuitous utterances that suggest they are prejudging a case. Judges should avoid side remarks.” Judges frequently experience pressures in the exercise of their judicial functions. Judges should be aware that the media might consider them a good and credible source of opinion or ideas. criminals and criminal syndicates.A judge shall dispose of the court's business promptly and decide cases within the required periods. Liwayway Samson v. militant groups. her confessed act of succumbing to this pressure on the telephone is a patent betrayal of the public trust reposed on respondent as an arbiter of the law and a revelation of her weak moral character. and rebel groups. v. et al. hasty conclusions. they expect her to be fearless in her pursuit to render justice. it should always be borne in mind that undue interference may prevent the proper presentation of the cause or the ascertainment of truth.
and require at all times the observance of high standards of public service and fidelity.10 . Belligerent behavior has no place in government service. All personnel involved in the dispensation of justice should conduct themselves with a high degree of responsibility. His constant scrutiny of the behavior of his employees would deter any abuse on the part of the latter in the exercise of their duties. By promoting public opinion for or against one party. RULE 3.A judge should organize and supervise the court personnel to ensure the prompt and efficient dispatch of business. Mataga v. The conduct and behavior of court personnel must always be beyond reproach and therefore they should refrain from the use of language that it is abusive. As an administrator. maintain professional competence in court management. offensive. and facilitate the performance of the administrative functions or other judges and court personnel. He should realize that big fires start small. RULE 3. scandalous. the media attempts to improperly influences the outcome of judicial decisions. This rule is on the case of the Judge's own conduct.09 .08 . the media is one of the more prevalent forces that exert pressure on the judiciary.A judge should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against lawyers or court personnel for unprofessional conduct of which the judge may have become aware. Buenaventura v. The respondent judge should constantly keep a watchful eye on the conduct of his employees. specifically disregarding editorials. In the performance of their judicial duties. menacing or otherwise . the competence of court personnel must also affirm the integrity of the judiciary.In re Kinsey: In the Philippines. where personnel should act with self-restraint and civility at all times. Benedicto: Oftentimes…leniency provides the court employees the opportunity to commit minor transgressions of the laws and slight breaches of official duty ultimately leading to vicious delinquencies. Judges should not be lenient in the administrative supervision of employees. the Judge must ensure that all court personnel perform efficiently and promptly in the administration of justice. Rosete: All personnel involved in the dispensation of justice should conduct themselves with a high degree of responsibility. columns or TV or radio commentaries on cases pending before them. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES RULE 3.A judge should diligently discharge administrative responsibilities. The judiciary would certainly inspire public confidence if all courts headed by the judges and justices were conducted with integrity. judges must ignore public opinion.
or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding. legatee. whether true or only perceived is likely to reflect adversely on the administration of justice. the judge shall indicate the legal reason for inhibition. or the judge or lawyer was a material witness therein. Where the payment of compensation is allowed. as heir. fiduciary.improper. While seemingly innocuous. administrators and others strictly on the basis of merit and qualifications. trustees.12 . In every instance. administrator. These cases include among others. Lacurom v. Magbanua: Judges and clerks of court must therefore take proper action against the misdeeds of employees. or otherwise.A judge should appoint commissioners. guardians. it cannot be allowed to frustrate or prejudice the administration of justice. RULE 3. whereby the judge who requested the accommodation is later asked to return the favor. the same criteria should be observed in recommending appointment of court personnel. (d) the judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within the sixth degree or to counsel within the fourth degree. trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in controversy.A judge should take no part in a proceeding where the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned. the circle of mutual accommodation will continue to widen. Unless otherwise allowed by law. or a former associate of the judge served as counsel during their association. Any misbehavior. (e) the judge knows the judge's spouse or child has a financial interest. (c) the judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of review. involving increasingly larger segments of the judiciary. creditor. avoiding nepotism and favoritism. receivers. While the traditional value of pakikisama often fosters harmony and good relationships in the workplace. The men and women who work in the judiciary must always act with propriety as the image of the court is reflected in the conduct of its personnel.11 . Once a judge engages in this kind of favoritism. it should be reasonable and commensurate with the fair value of services rendered. (b) the judge served as executor. DISQUALIFICATION RULE 3. in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding. guardian. This is especially true in the Philippines where utang-na-loob is a sacrosanct cultural value. proceedings where: (a) the judge has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding. this kind of unethical conduct frequently gives rise to a quid-pro-quo situation. .
instead of withdrawing from the proceeding. . A judge has both the duty of rendering a just decision and the duty of doing it in a manner completely free from suspicion as to its fairness and as to his integrity. The judge should disclose on the record the basis for his disqualification. signed by all parties and lawyers. In Villaluz v. in several cases. admonished judges for participating in proceedings in which one of the parties or counsel is a relative within the sixth or fourth civil degrees. disinterested.12 may. shall be incorporated in the record of the proceeding. The Supreme Court has. Similarly. all agree in writing that the reason for the inhibition is immaterial or insubstantial. However. some magistrates state only "personal reasons" as the ground for inhibiting themselves.The rule on compulsory disqualification of a judge to hear a case where. usually for fear of incurring the judge’s ire. A judge must disclose on the record the basis of the disqualification and ask parties and lawyers to consider. The purpose is to preserve the people's faith and confidence in the courts' justice.” the underlying reason behind disqualification under Rule 3. the judge may participate. The parties affected often would often not question such disqualification. In Hurtado v. The agreement. The High Court held that the judge should have inhibited himself. in the absence of written consent of all parties concerned. as in the instant case. such vague reasoning is not acceptable. respectively. the respondent judge is related to either party within the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity rests on the salutary principle that no judge should preside in a case in which he is not wholly free. out of the presence of the judge. in Perez v. the judge may then participate in the proceeding. prohibits him and strikes at his authority to hear and decide it. The law conclusively presumes that a judge cannot objectively or impartially sit in such a case and. a judge improperly presided over the preliminary investigation of a criminal complaint wherein the complaining witness was his nephew. If. as it would effectively place voluntary disqualification at the whim of the judge. Judalena. because while conducting preliminary investigation may not be construed strictly as "sitting in a case. Mijares. bases on such disclosure.13 . a preliminary injunction issued by a judge in favor of his sister before inhibiting himself was found reprehensible. a judge was fined for presiding over a petition for correction of a birth record where the petitioner was the judge’s daughter. If all parties and the judge agree that the judge should participate. REMITTAL OF DISQUALIFICATION RULE 3. the parties and lawyers may all agree that the judge should not be disqualified.A judge disqualified by the terms of rule 3. whether to waive disqualification. for that reason. This kind of latitude is not the intended effect of the rule.12 of the Code of Judicial Conduct and Section 1 of Rule 137 are the same. As long as the disqualification is not based upon personal bias or prejudice. and must incorporate the agreement into the record of the proceeding. Suller. Perhaps prompted by a cultural sense of delicadeza. the parties and lawyers independently of judge's participation. disclose on the record the basis of disqualification. impartial and independent.
01 . teach and speak on non-legal subjects. c. serve on any organization devoted to the improvement of the law. to the extent that the following activities do not impair the performance of judicial duties or case doubt on the judge’s impartiality: a. or non-legal advisor of a non-profit or non-political educational. CANON 5 A JUDGE SHOULD REGULATE EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF CONFLICT WITH JUDICIAL DUTIES ADVOCATIONAL. (b) engage in the arts. . religious. trustee. appear at a public hearing before a legislative or executive body on matters concerning the law. such as when caseload is too heavy. the Philippine Judicial Academy suggests that a judge or court should avoid acrimonious debate with reporters and the public. sports.A judge may. speak. (d) serve as an officer. the legal system or the administration of justice and otherwise consult with them on matters concerning the administration of justice. fraternal.01 . If a judge has time to spare. and other special recreational activities. the best attitude to take is to participate in activities which are closely related to the performance of his duties and which do not consume much of his time and energy. charitable. However. This rule allows the judge to participate in legal academia and public discourse on legal matters with the proviso that there shall be no interference in the performance of the judge’s primary functions with respect to his or her jurisdiction. (c) participate in civic and charitable activities. director. the legal system or the administration of justice. THE LEGAL SYSTEM AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. or civic organization. WITH DUE REGARD TO OFFICIAL DUTIES.CANON 4 A JUDGE MAY. prudence dictates that he must concentrate on his judicial duties. for a knee jerk reaction from the court or judge may only provoke negative follow-up reports and articles. The decision to engage in these activities depends upon the sound judgment of the judge. teach or participate in activities concerning the law. in dealing with the media. lecture. Rule 4. b. If the Judge does not have enough time to spare.A judge may engage in the following activities provided that they do not interfere with the performance of judicial duties or detract from the dignity of the court: (a) write. write. the legal system and the administration of justice. CIVIC AND CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES RULE 5. ENGAGE IN ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE THE LAW.
A judge shall refrain from financial and business dealing that tend to reflect adversely on the court's impartiality. Art 216. ruling that allowing the judge’s membership would be a violation of the constitutional provision on the discharge by members of the judiciary of administrative functions in quasi-judicial or administrative agencies. In Re: Designation of Judge Rodolfo U.05 . The Manzano decision did include the qualification that the constitutional prohibition should not be construed as a directive to avoid all involvement with organizations concerned with judicial interests. or a fine ranging from P200 to P1000. shall be imposed upon any appointive public officer who. they must learn how to manage their time in such manner that their judicial responsibilities do not falter and suffer. shall directly or indirectly become interested in any transaction of exchange or speculation within the territory subject to his jurisdiction. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from P200 to P1000 or both.02 . RULE 5. or both.A judge or any immediate member of the family shall not accept a gift. A judge should so manage investments and other financial interests as to minimize the number of cases giving grounds for disqualifications. Art 215. manager or advisor. Possession of prohibited interest by a public officer. Judges are expected to exercise judicial power but along with this rule is the explicit limitation that the judge may only engage in these activities to the extent that they do not impair the performance of judicial duties or cast doubt on the judge’s impartiality. a judge may hold and manage investments but should not serve as officer. RULE 5. FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES RULE 5. or employee of any business except as director of a family business of the judge. factor or loan from any one except as may be allowed by law.No information acquired in a judicial capacity shall be sued or disclosed by a judge in any financial dealing or for any other purpose not related to judicial activities. The Court denied his request.If they opt to engage in such activities. an administrative body.Subject to the provisions of the proceeding rule. during his incumbency. The penalty of arresto mayorin its medium period to prision correccional in its minimum period. Prohibited Transaction. bequest. shall . director. interfere with the proper performance of judicial activities or increase involvement with lawyers or persons likely to come before the court.03 . a judge sought the Court’s permission to accept membership in the Ilocos Norte Provincial Committee on Justice. RULE 5.04 .: Manzano.
or person of a member of the immediate family. Judge Barot: The Code of Judicial Conduct lays down the guidelines with respect to fiduciary activities that judges may engage in. or if the estate. If the Judge decides to accept the appointment. FIDUCIARY ACTIVITIES RULE 5. Ramos v. trustee. except for the estate. trust. complex estate which is likely to consume much time.06 . he must be sure that it will not interfere with the proper performance of his judicial duties. PRACTICE OF LAW AND OTHER PROFESSION . guardian. and then only if such service will not interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties. Sec 3. or (b) act as such contrary to rules 5. The intent of the rule is to limit a judge's involvement in the affairs and interests of private individuals to minimize the risk of conflict with his judicial duties and to allow him to devote his undivided attention to the performance of his official functions.05. a judge shall not: (a) serve in proceedings that might come before the court of said judge.06.02 to 5. The Code does not qualify the prohibition. trusts. As a family. or contract or transaction in connection with which here intervenes or takes part in his official capacity or in which he is prohibited by the Constitution or by any law from having any interest. If it is a large. or ward becomes involved in adversary proceedings in the court on which he serves or one under its appellate jurisdiction.be imposed upon a public officer who directly and indirectly. the following shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful:(h) Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary interest in any business. While acting as a fiduciary a judge is subject to the same restrictions on financial activities that apply to him in his personal capacity. administrator. General Rule: Avoid taking or receiving loans from litigants. the judge would be well advised to refuse appointment. Corrupt practices of public officers.A judge should not serve as the executor. "Member of immediate family" shall be limited to the spouse and relatives within the second degree of consanguinity. Exception: Unsolicited gifts or presents of small value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of gratitude or friendship according to local custom or usage. The Judge should not serve if it is likely that as a fiduciary he will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before him. or other fiduciary. and therein made very specific. In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law. The thin line between what is allowed and what is not allowed is set forth in Rule 5. shall become interested in any contract or business which it is his official duty to intervene.
As public officials. . The due process requirement of “the cold neutrality of an impartial judge” is denied the accused when the court assumes the dual role of magistrate and advocate by asking many questions of an accused. but also from acting more subtly in a way more befitting an advocate than a judge. liabilities. duties and functions of the office of an attorney with the powers. For example. Unless prohibited by the Constitution or law. Tagabucha: The Supreme Court held that a judge who acted as counsel for both parties. This prohibition is based on the inherent incompatibility of the rights. the Judges should not accept any appointment or designation to any agency performing administrative functions. Likewise. RA 3019 stresses the need for public officials to declare under oath their assets and liabilities and the public’s right to know of these assets. Section 12. MANZANO AS MEMBER OF THE ILOCOS NORTE PROVINCIAL COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE: Their integrity and performance in the adjudication of cases contribute to the solidity of such structure. with opposing interests in a parcel of land within his jurisdiction. Candia v. Philippine courts not only prohibit judges from overtly representing clients as counsel of record.RULE 5. they are trustees of an orderly society. RULE 5. acted in pursuit of his own interests and must be dismissed. IN RE: DESIGNATION OF JUDGE RODOLFO U.09 . Even as nonmembers of Provincial/City Committees on Justice. but only when such assistance may be reasonably incidental to the fulfillment of their judicial duties. a judge may engage in the practice of any other profession provided that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with judicial functions. duties and functions of a judge. Full disclosure of the Judges’ Statement of Assets Liabilities and Networth is stated under Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act and Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees.A judge shall not accept appointment or designation to any agency performing quasijudicial or administrative functions. net worth and financial and business interests including those of their spouses and of unmarried children under 18 years of age living in their households. Article VIII of the Constitution states that the Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts established by law shall not be designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions. RTC judges should render assistance to said Committees to help promote the laudable purposes for which they exist.07 .A judge shall not engage in the private practice of law.A judge shall make full financial disclosure as required by law. a judge may not meet with a complainant to give him advice.08 . FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE RULE 5.
contribute to party funds. . Arroyo is. But to avoid suspicion of political partisanship. The subsequent decision of the Court in Estrada v. the public endorsement of candidates for political office. Sandiganbayan: Attorney Alan F. Petitioner contends that the justices have thereby prejudged a case that would assail the legality of the act taken by President Arroyo. according to him. it is inevitable that suspicion of being warped by political bias will attach to a judge who becomes the active promoter of the interests of one political party against another.A judge is entitled to entertain personal views on political questions.POLITICAL ACTIVITIES RULE 5. a patent mockery of justice and due process. and while not required to surrender his rights or opinions as a citizen. publicly endorse candidates for political office or participate in other partisan political activities. petitioner states. or participating in party conventions. Estrada v. asserts that the inhibition of the members of the Supreme Court from hearing the petition is called for under Rule 5.10 . While entitled to entertain his personal view on political questions. contributions to party funds. the justices have violated by attending the ‘EDSA 2 Rally’ and by authorizing the assumption of Vice-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to the Presidency in violation of the 1987 Constitution. a judge shall not make political speeches. A Judge should avoid making political speeches. Paguia. speaking for petitioner.10 of the Code of Judicial Conduct prohibiting justices or judges from participating in any partisan political activity which proscription.