Title: Understanding the Court Pillar of the Philippine Criminal Justice System

Objective:
By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:
1. Understand the role of the court pillar in the Philippine criminal justice system.
2. Identify the different levels of courts in the Philippines and their jurisdictions.
3. Explain the process of adjudication in the Philippine courts.

How the court pillar contributes to ensuring due process and dispensation of
justice:

1. Adjudication of Legal Disputes: Courts are responsible for adjudicating legal

disputes, including criminal cases. They provide a forum where conflicting parties can
present evidence, arguments, and defenses before an impartial judge. Through this
process, courts ensure that all parties have the opportunity to be heard and that
decisions are based on the rule of law and evidence presented.

2. Protection of Rights: The court pillar serves as a safeguard for individual rights and
liberties. It ensures that accused persons are afforded their constitutional rights, such as
the right to legal representation, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and
protection against self-incrimination. Courts also play a vital role in preventing abuses of
power by other branches of government and protecting citizens from unjust actions.

3. Impartial Adjudication: Courts are expected to be impartial and independent

arbiters of disputes. Judges are bound by law to apply legal principles fairly and without
bias, regardless of the status, wealth, or influence of the parties involved. This
impartiality is essential for upholding the rule of law and maintaining public trust and
confidence in the justice system.

4. Legal Interpretation and Precedent: The court pillar interprets and applies laws to
specific cases, setting legal precedents that guide future decisions. Through their
rulings, courts clarify the meaning and scope of laws, ensuring consistency and
predictability in the application of legal principles. This process contributes to the
development of a robust and equitable legal framework.

5. Checks and Balances: Courts serve as a check on the power of the executive and
legislative branches of government. They have the authority to review the
constitutionality of laws and executive actions, ensuring that they comply with the
principles of the constitution. This role helps maintain the balance of power and
prevents the concentration of authority in any single branch of government.

In summary, the court pillar is essential for ensuring due process and dispensation of
justice in the Philippine criminal justice system. By providing a fair and impartial forum
for resolving legal disputes, protecting individual rights, interpreting laws, and
maintaining checks and balances, courts uphold the rule of law and promote a just and
equitable society.
 STRUCTURE OF THE PHILIPPINE COURT

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF THE FOLLOWING COURTS IN THE

PHILIPPINES

a. Municipal Trial Court (MTC):

- Handles criminal cases involving violations of city or municipal ordinances.

- Also has jurisdiction over criminal cases where the penalty does not exceed
imprisonment for six years or a fine of ₱6,000, or both.
- Generally handles less serious offenses such as misdemeanors and minor
violations.

b. Regional Trial Court (RTC):

- Has jurisdiction over criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law exceeds
six years imprisonment or a fine of ₱6,000, or both.
- Handles more serious offenses including felonies and other major criminal
violations.
- Serves as the primary trial court for criminal cases of higher offenses within its
territorial jurisdiction.

c. Family Court:

- Has jurisdiction over criminal cases involving family relations, such as violence
against women and children, adultery, concubinage, and child abuse.
- Also handles criminal cases related to guardianship, adoption, support, and other
family matters.

d. Shari'a Court:

- Exercises jurisdiction over criminal cases involving violations of Muslim personal

laws, including offenses such as adultery, concubinage, and acts contrary to
Islamic law (Shari'a).
- Applies Islamic law principles and procedures in adjudicating criminal matters
involving Muslim parties.
e. Court of Appeals (CA):

- Acts as an appellate court for criminal cases decided by lower courts, including the
RTCs and MTCs.
- Reviews judgments, resolutions, or final orders of lower courts for errors of law or
jurisdiction.

f. Court of Tax Appeals (CTA):

- Handles criminal cases involving violations of tax laws, such as tax evasion,
fraudulent returns, and other tax-related offenses.
- Adjudicates criminal cases arising from disputes between taxpayers and tax
authorities.

g. Sandiganbayan:

- Has exclusive jurisdiction over criminal cases involving public officials and
employees accused of committing graft and corruption offenses, violations of anti-
graft laws, and other offenses related to public office.
- Also has jurisdiction over cases involving ill-gotten wealth acquired through
corruption.

h. Supreme Court:

- Acts as the highest court of appeal in the Philippines.

- May exercise jurisdiction over criminal cases involving questions of law or
constitutionality, as well as cases of national significance or those involving issues
of public interest.
- Has the authority to review decisions of lower courts and to issue rulings on
matters of law.

Adjudication Process in the Philippine Courts

A. Filing of the Complaint:

1. The prosecution, represented by the public prosecutor or fiscal, introduces the

complaint or information in court.

2. The complaint formally accuses the defendant of committing an offense and

outlines the specific charges against them. This initiates the legal proceedings against
the accused.

B. Arraignment:

1. During arraignment, the accused is formally informed of the charges against them.

2. The accused is asked to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. This plea determines the
subsequent course of the trial.

C. Trial:

1. The trial phase involves the presentation of evidence by both the prosecution and
defense.
 2. Witnesses are examined and cross-examined by both parties to establish facts and
challenge testimony.

3. Both sides may also present documentary evidence, expert witnesses, or other
forms of evidence to support their case.

D. Judgment:

1. After the presentation of evidence and arguments from both parties, the judge
evaluates the case.

2. Based on the evidence presented and legal arguments, the judge makes a decision
regarding the guilt or innocence of the accused.

3. The judge pronounces the judgment, which includes the verdict of guilt or
innocence and, if applicable, the sentence imposed.

E. Appeal:

1. If either party is dissatisfied with the judgment, they have the right to appeal to a
higher court.

2. Grounds for appeal typically include errors in law or procedure that may have
affected the outcome of the trial.

3. The appellate court reviews the lower court's decision and may affirm, reverse,
modify, or remand the case for further proceedings.

This process ensures that both the prosecution and defense have the opportunity to
present their case, that the accused is afforded their rights, and that judgments are
based on the rule of law and evidence presented. Appeals provide a mechanism for
correcting errors and ensuring that justice is served fairly and impartially.

Valid Exercise of Criminal Jurisdiction Requires Adherence to Certain Requisites

to Ensure that Justice is Served Fairly And Effectively.

1. Territorial Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction is generally based on the geographical location

where the crime was committed. Philippine courts have jurisdiction over offenses
committed within the territory of the Philippines. However, there are exceptions such as
crimes committed by Filipino citizens abroad that may still be prosecuted in Philippine
courts under certain circumstances.

Note:

a. For Complex Crimes, jurisdiction is lodged with the trial court having jurisdiction
to impose maximum and most serious penalty imposable

2. Subject Matter Jurisdiction: Courts must have the authority to hear and decide on
the particular type of criminal offense in question. Different courts have varying levels of
jurisdiction over criminal cases based on the severity of the offense. For example, lower
courts such as the Metropolitan Trial Courts handle less serious offenses, while
Regional Trial Courts have jurisdiction over more serious crimes.
Note:

a. 6 years below cases are cognizable by MTC

b. 6 years above cases are cognizable by RTC

3. Jurisdiction over the Person of the accused: Courts must have jurisdiction over
the person accused of committing the crime. This typically involves the accused being
physically present within the territorial jurisdiction of the court or voluntarily submitting to
the court's authority. In some cases, extraterritorial jurisdiction may apply, allowing
Philippine courts to exercise jurisdiction over individuals located outside the country
under certain circumstances.
Title: Understanding the Court Pillar of the Philippine Criminal Justice System -
Seatwork

Instructions:
- Read each question carefully.
- Provide your answers based on the lesson content.
- You may refer back to the lesson outline if needed.
- Write your answers in the space provided.

1. Explain the significance of the court pillar in ensuring due process and dispensation
of justice in the Philippine criminal justice system. (5 points)

2. Identify the different levels of courts in the Philippines and briefly describe their
jurisdictions. (10 points)

3. Describe the process of adjudication in the Philippine courts, including its key stages.
(10 points)

4. Reflect on the importance of fair and impartial adjudication in upholding the rule of
law and protecting individual rights. (5 points)