Written by Daisy Brett-Holt | 02 August 2009

(Atty. Jimeno was a former president of Philippine Bar Association of the Philipppines [2004 to 2005], a co-chair of the Committee on Judicial Reforms of the Constitutional Consultative Commission and VP for Constitutional Reforms (PHILCONSA 2008-2010).

I am sorry about your irritation when hearing a "non-Filipino" speak with arrogance and condescension about our systems without laying down a clear basis.  I too would be, but only after an in-depth analysis and find out that there really was no clear basis for the non-Filipino’s comment.  You, yourself, mentioned that “we are critical of the people running our government”.  Don’t you believe in the saying _ “Where there is smoke, there is fire”?

More and more Filipinos and judges think that many of our Court of Appeals judges are corrupt.  So which higher court are the lowly Filipinos to turn to?

It is unfortunate that Atty Jimeno’s and daughter’s exposure to the jury system is the grandstanding of lawyers in Perry Mason’s TV series, Erin Brocowich, John Grisham’s novels and films and many others.  The Jimenos have to understand that the theatricals were meant to be otherwise no one would pay for the cinema tickets or eagerly watch the TV series!

In reality, courtroom dramas are rare.  They could also watch (if they wished to) the jury system at work in other countries like Britain, Canada, Australia, South Korea and many more.  For your information, America’s jury system was patterned about 100 years ago after the British system.  But now, the British has done away with the grand jury that is still used in America. 

Let me answer the issues the Jimenos have raised against the jury system.  On the issue of:

EXPENSE

Sequestration is done only when the lives of the jurors are at stake due to involvement of gangs and syndicates like the Mafia or high profile cases like the OJ Simpson case.

On the average, most cases only last for 3 days!  Compare this to the length of time a case is heard in the Philippine courts.  Hearings are postponed umpteen times to the woe of the poor defendant or appellant who pays their lawyer whether a case is heard or not.

The number of jurors does not have to be 12.   In South Korea, this number depends on the seriousness of the crime.  The number could be 9, 7 or 5.  The Filipinos do not have to re-invent the wheels.  We will pattern our own jury system from those that will suit our culture and national psyche.

SELECTION PROCESS

Jurors are selected from the electoral register.  The Prosecution Service of the country selects and vets the jurors based on some predetermined requirements.  Except for issues of health or mental disability, no one may refuse to serve a jury service.  The Jury System is part of the nation’s responsibility for the execution of the laws.  My English husband is 62 years old but was never asked to be a juror.  However, there are Filipinos in the UK who had already served and some had served twice!

In a grand jury the jurors have to gain the approval of the lawyers of the opposing parties.  Is this necessary?  Or is this another excuse for grandstanding?

COLLEGE EDUCATION AND KNOWLWEDGE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

The Filipinos have always spoken Taglish (Tagalog and English).  So why not do the same in the courts?  If we would insist that jurors speak perfect English, then many degree holders from Philippine Universities would be disqualified from serving!  Why don’t we go further and require jurors to have a Degree in Law?  This way the judge, the opposing lawyers and the jurors would understand each other except the defendant and/or appellant and the witnesses who are the ordinary citizens.

Criminal cases turn entirely on simple facts easily within the range of common sense.  On such ground judge and jury are equals.

In civil suits, the judge appears as a disinterested arbitrator between the litigants’ passions.  The jurors feel confidence in him and listen to him with respect, for here his intelligence completely dominates theirs.  It is he who unravels the arguments they find hard to understand and takes them by the hand to guide them through procedural intricacies; it is he who limits their task to the question of fact and tells them what answer to give on questions of law.

JUROR DISMISSAL

As your daughter has argued, “the jury system was NOT foolproof”, but NOTHING is foolproof no matter how we try.  We are but humans!  If a juror had erred or was bribed, why change the whole lot?  The important issue is that a juror who is not a professional juror could not easily hide his error in judgement, premeditated or not.  However, a single judge who knows his or her ways around the intricacies of the law could!

UNANIMITY OR MAJORITY RULE

In the UK, unanimous decision used to be the requirement for conviction, now the majority rule of 10 to 2 is enough.  The point here is, if the British could modify an unworkable rule or policy, why should not we?

JURORS’ PERSONAL BIASES AND BELIEFS

Everyone has personal biases and beliefs.  These are what make us different from each other and these personal opinions and prejudices are the bases of how we judge our peers.  We look at a crime or civil suits through our eyes; consequently we expect to be judged in the same manner.  Juries teach people equity in practice.  Each person, when judging a neighbour, thinks that they may be judged, especially in civil suits; only a few will ever face criminal trial, but anybody can be sued or have a lawsuit.

Juries teach each individual not to shrink responsibility for his own acts, and without that manly characteristic no political virtue is possible.  It makes men pay attention to things other than their own affairs and combat the individual selfishness which is like rust in society.

BRIBERY

Corruption is everywhere, even in countries with a jury system.  The difference is in countries with the jury system, the habits of judicial mind are instilled into every citizen, and those habits prepare people to be free.  They make all men feel that they have duties toward society and they take a share in its government.

In the Philippines, most of the judges who have served in a particular region or municipality for are period of time become the law unto themselves.  The people who know no better become subservient to them.  The rich and powerful political leaders exploit this situation by bribing the low-paid judge to swing their decisions in their favour or turn a blind eye to the plight of the poor.

A juror may be bribed but what good will it do?  His conscience will torture him for the rest of his life for bringing someone down for just a few pieces of silver!  They may lose nothing materially, but they will lose their souls forever.

DAMAGES AWARDS

America used to be the land of milk and honey.  People have become very materialistic and greedy and money has lost its value.  For this reason, damages awards have become exorbitant.  But this was not brought about by the Jury System.  The system became the casualty of the breakdown in the society’s moral values.

Do you think that in a country where money is very tight, exorbitant awards are likely?  Let us be realistic.  Besides, it is the judge who decides the amount of the awards and not the jurors.

As the Jimenos have said, “In most countries, people consider it their civic obligation to serve their jury duty.  They take pride in it, and try to carry out this duty as best as possible.  In the Philippines, however, the maturity of most people toward civic responsibility is still wanting in many ways.”

This is precisely the reason why the Philippines should have Trial by Jury! How can the Filipinos achieve political maturity when they were not given the tools to learn and develop it?  And if we do not do anything now, that is, install Trial by Jury, we will condemn the next generations of Filipinos to selfishness without regard to their civic responsibility towards their fellow Filipino and without love for their country.

And as to Atty Jimeno’s comment about the American fellow, I sense a defence mechanism against an American coloniser telling a colonised what to do.

If we keep on doing what we have always been doing, we will keep on getting what we have always got _ a corrupt government.  Is this what we want for the coming generations?

Finally, as Winston Churchill once said “ONLY AS LONG AS JURIES OF ORDINARY CITIZENS HAVE THE FINAL SAY, GOVERNMENT REMAINS THE SERVANT, NOT THE MASTER, OF THE PEOPLE”.  If we want a truly democratic country where the government is of the people, by the people and for the people, then we have to safeguard the sanctity of our vote, instil  in the minds of every citizen that trial by jury is a form of sovereignty of the people and fight for our right to a free press.