CANON 5:

EQUALITY
BRIEF HISTORY AND BACKGROUND
OF THE NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL
CONDUCT FOR THE PHILIPPINE
JUDICIARY
(THE BANGALORE DRAFT)

Isasama ko pa ba ito??
• Equality had been exercised in all nations by
mere conduct which was socially acceptable
to all people.
• “If we look to the laws, they afford equal
justice to all in their private differences; if no
social standing, advancement in public life
falls to reputation for capacity, class
considerations not being allowed to interfere
with merit; nor again does poverty bar the
way." (Pericles, 431 BC)
• “EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW”
 EQUALITY AS TO JUDGES
• In rendering decisions, there should be no bias
that may cause injury or prejudice to the ones
being affected.
• A judge should be familiar with the
international and regional instruments that
prohibit discrimination against vulnerable
groups in the community.
• Article 14, Paragraph 1, of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
– “All persons are equal before the courts”,

• Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the International

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
– …Recognizes the right of every individual to a fair
trial without any distinction whatsoever as regards
race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or
other convictions, national or social origin, means,
status or other circumstances.
 CANON 5, EQUALITY

ENSURING EQUALITY OF TREATMENT TO ALL

BEFORE THE COURTS IS ESSENTIAL TO THE
DUE PERFORMANCE OF THE JUDICIAL
OFFICE.
 CANON 5
• New Canon. Not found in the previous two
Philippine Codes of Judicial Conduct
• It expands the measures to promote equality
required by international human rights
agreements
• The drafters of the New Code of Judicial Conduct
were well aware of the basic principles found in
many U.N. documents and thus included
principles of equality and non-discrimination as a
reaffirmation of equality in the enjoyment of
human rights and fundamental freedoms.
• As the guardians of justice, courts must
adhere to the principle of equality. People
expect the courts to be unaffected by
differences in social status, degree of
education, and even physical abilities
• Canon 5 Preamble: “ensuring equality of
treatment to all before the courts is essential
to the due performance of the judicial office.”
 SECTION 1
Judges shall be aware of and understand
diversity in society and differences arising
from various sources, including, but not
limited to, race, color, sex, religion, national
origin, caste, disability, age, marital status,
sexual orientation, social and economic
status, and other like causes.
• Judges should be mindful of the various
international instruments and treaties ratified by
the Philippines.
• Everyone must be treated equally under the law
regardless their race, gender, national origin,
color, ethnicity without privilege, discrimination
or biases.
• Judges should not yield to first impression, reach
hasty conclusions or prejudge matters.
• They have a duty to ensure
that the minority status of the accused plays no
part in their decisions.
• Judges may not use derogatory or condescending
language in their judgment when dealing with a
rape complaint.
• Due process cannot be satisfied in the absence of
objectivity on the part of a judge sufficient to
reassure litigants that the judicial system is fair
and just.
• Judges should attempt by appropriate means to
remain informed about changing attitudes and
values and to take advantage of suitable
educational opportunities that will assist them to
be and appear to be impartial.
• Castillo v. Judge Juan, 62 SCRA 124
 SECTION 2

Judges shall not, in the performance of

judicial duties, by words or conduct,
manifest bias or prejudice towards any
person or group on irrelevant grounds.
• Judges must accord themselves at all times in
such a manner that their conduct can withstand
the highest level of public scrutiny. They should
strive to ensure that his or her conduct is such
that any reasonable observer would have
justifiable confidence in his or her impartiality.
• Candia v. Tagabucha, A.M. No. 528-MJ,
September 12, 1977
• Judges should avoid comments, expressions,
gestures or behaviours that may reasonably be
interpreted as showing insensitivity or disrespect.
• A judge’s critical comments about ethnic
origins, including the judge’s own, are also
undignified and discourteous.
• A judge should be particularly careful to
ensure that his or her remarks do not have a
racist overtone and that they do not, even
unintentionally, offend minority groups in the
community.
• Moreover, Judges should also avoid using
racially derogatory language to refer to
someone that is not in the courtroom.
• A judge must not make improper and insulting remarks
about litigants, advocates, parties and witnesses.
• Judges should not advise an accused of the best course
of action at arraignment
• A judge should hold office at the regular place of
business of the court and not at his residence.
• "the judge is the visible representation of the law and,
more importantly, of justice. From him, the people
draw their will and awareness to obey the law. They
see in him as intermediary of justice between two
conflicting interest. Thus, for the judge to return that
regard, he must be the first to abide by the law and
weave an example for the others to follow. He should
be studiously careful to avoid even the slightest
infraction of the law.”
 SECTION 3
Judges shall carry out judicial duties with
appropriate consideration for all persons,
such as the parties, witnesses, lawyers, court
staff and judicial colleagues, without
differentiation on any irrelevant ground,
immaterial to the proper performance of
such duties.
Judge’s Personal conduct
• Judges should be conscientious, studious,
courteous, patient and punctual in the discharge
of their judicial duties, recognizing that time of
litigants, witnesses and counsel is of value.
• Judges should act with decorum toward jurors,
parties, court staff, and spectators alike.
• Judges should act with decorum toward jurors,
parties, court staff, and spectators alike.
Judge’s conduct towards parties and
witnesses
• A judge should not examine or cross examine
a witness if the questioning reveals
information that destroys the theory of one
party.
• Judges should not make insensitive and
sarcastic comments in rape cases or use vulgar
language in solemnizing marriages—even off
the record.
Judge’s conduct towards lawyers,
court staff and judicial colleagues
• Unequal and disparate treatment in the
courthouse, whether intentional or perceived,
is unacceptable and can negatively impact the
professional lives of attorneys and employees,
the assessment of claims of litigants, and the
respect and credibility of the justice system.
• Judges must also be concerned with the
public’s impression of the judiciary.
• Judges, being dispensers of justice should not
act in a way that would cast suspicion in order
to preserve faith in the administration of
justice.
• A humane court is essential for due process.
 SECTION 4
Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff
or others subject to his or her influence,
direction or control to differentiate between
persons concerned, in a matter before the
judge, on any irrelevant ground.
 DUTIES OF JUDGES
1. To ensure that the Court personnel under their
supervision do not discriminate by dispensing special
favors or disclosing confidential information to any
unauthorized person, regardless of whether such
information came from authorized or unauthorized
sources
2. To organize their Courts to ensure the prompt and
convenient dispatch of business and should not
tolerate misconduct by clerks, sherrifs and other
assistants who are sometimes prone to expect favors
or special treatment due to their professional
relationship with the judge.
 SECTION 5
Judges shall require lawyers in proceedings
before the court to refrain from manifesting,
by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based
on irrelevant grounds, except such as are
legally relevant to an issue in proceedings
and may be the subject of legitimate
advocacy.
• Rule 3.03, Canon 3 of the 1989 Code of
Judicial Conduct
– Judges should conduct proceedings in court with
dignity and in a manner that reflects the
importance and seriousness of proceedings.
• Since judges set the tone and environment of
the court proceedings, they should censure
lawyers who use sexist language or
inappropriate behavior in court
 Rights and Obligations of Witnesses
(Rule 132, section 3 of the Revised Rules of Court)

1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper or

insulting questions and from a harsh or
insulting demeanor.
2. Not to be detained longer than the interests
of justice require.
3. Not to be examined except as to matters
pertinent to the issues before the court.
4. Not to give an answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an offense unless
otherwise provided by law.
5. Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade the witness’ reputation, but a
witness must answer the fact of any previous
final conviction for a criminal offense
 CRITICISM FOR THE CANON
1. Our constitution does not announce that
equality is to prevail completely in principle.

2. One should for once consider whether

equality and/or equal rights
 CONCLUSION
Judges are important public officials whose authority
reaches every corner of society. Judges resolve disputes
between people, and interpret and apply the law by which we
live. Through that process, they define our rights and
responsibilities, determine the distribution of vast amounts of
public and private resources, and direct the actions of officials
in other branches of government. In deciding cases and in
their everyday dealings, Judges must put in mind the 6 Canons
of the New Code of Judicial Conduct especially to CANON 5
(Equality) as a new Canon of the said Code which was based
on the international human rights agreement; and that the
law’s strong societal commitment places concern for equality
at the core of justice according to law.
 Equality before the law is a basic right in the constitutions of
democratic countries, and its content appears in all conventions on
human rights. It is the legal as well as moral appeal of everyone who
opposes discrimination. Basic rights are the supreme goods. They
formulate the basic consensus of the citizens on which the community
is built.
Judges should be aware of the Article 7 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which states that “all are equal
before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal
protection of the law.” It declares that all are equal before the courts
as far as treatment is concerned. This means that Judges consequently
are required to make themselves aware of the different facets of
society. Race, religion, marital status, sexual orientation and so on shall
be taken into consideration. Consequently, a judge can't say or do
anything that shows bias to any person or group on irrelevant grounds
while in the performance of his official duties. A judge will therefore
discharge his duties while giving appropriate consideration to all
people he encounters when doing his job.
 The judge should always do her or his best
to strike the right balance in the exercise of
equality. The fact that, when reconsidered later
with the benefit of hindsight and the
opportunity for further reflection, the situation
might have been handled differently is not, of
itself, any indication that the judge failed to deal
with inappropriate conduct during the
proceeding.
 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Equality should be applied in general or as a
whole, not only to those protected under the
Constitution which pertains to political views.
2. Judges should have a high degree of
professional awareness. They should ensure
that they maintain a high degree of
professional competence through basic and
further training, providing them with the
appropriate qualifications.
3. Judges should not be isolated from the society
in which they live, since the judicial system can
only function properly if judges are in touch with
reality. Moreover, as citizens, judges enjoy the
fundamental rights and freedoms protected
(freedom of opinion, religious freedom, etc).
They should therefore remain generally free to
engage in the extra-professional activities of
their choice.
4. Judges should discharge their duties without any
favouritism, display of prejudice or bias. They
should not reach their decisions by taking into
consideration anything which falls outside the
application of the rules of law.
5. In view of the exercise of equality, right to a fair trial
and legitimate public expectations, judges should
show restraint in the exercise of public political
activity.
6. Judges who are not exercising equality in rendering
decisions, upon clear and convincing proof, should
not only be suspended or dismissed, but should be
disbarred and be taken out in the Roll of Attorneys.
7. There should be additional Canons in the New Code
of Judicial Conduct to further strengthen the role of
Judges worldwide.
8. Judges should treat his personnel in Court as a man
who performs with the highest degree of
responsibility and not to treat him as a “puppet” for
his advantage.