A SUPREME COURT associate justice has cited the need for structural reforms to encourage the public to rely on the judiciary, saying public perception has become an impediment that prods some Filipinos to tap informal channels like Sen. Raffy Tulfo’s show to resolve disputes.
Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh said platforms like “Raffy Tulfo in Action” are often preferred over a court system perceived as stagnant, expensive, and congested.
“In fact, informal legal services or legal advisory platforms like Tulfo are a favorite because of their immediate action. Right? When you go there and file a complaint with Tulfo, so many people end up afraid when they’re told, ‘I’m going to report you to Tulfo.’ You’re really afraid; there’s some kind of chilling effect there because the action is immediate,” the magistrate said during the 7th Narvasa Lecture Series held at UST on Feb. 2.
Justice Singh explained that such a course of action does not provide a legal remedy or security and leaves the accused helpless, as the show’s host acts as both judge and executioner in resolving the matters raised. However, Filipinos depend on this more than on the court’s due process, as it provides an immediate response to their problems.
A Justice Reform Initiative survey conducted by Price Waterhouse revealed that 75 percent of respondents cited the lengthy and burdensome process of filing cases as their primary reason for avoiding courts, while 69 percent are deterred by litigation costs, largely from lawyers’ fees.
The Supreme Court associate justice pointed to public perception as the root cause of the judiciary’s problems, saying it should be prioritized alongside other concerns, such as structural barriers and weak enforcement of ethical standards.
The Philippines scored 32 out of 100 and ranked 120th among 182 countries globally in the Corruption Index for 2025, a development that highlighted the fact that corruption in the public sector remains a key concern.
“So the perception of corruption—not the actual corruption, but the perception of it—on the indices has economic consequences, grave economic consequences… The economic difficulties, we look at it separately from corruption, but corruption is a contributor to the economic failures,” Singh said.
The National Economic and Development Authority uses international scales as basis for budget allocation, with perception of corruption directly impacting budget allocation. Singh said the judiciary used to receive less than one percent of the national budget, resulting in deficient resources for court infrastructure and impeding the delivery of legal services.
Addressing judicial corruption
Singh acknowledged the existence of internal corruption within the legal sector but expressed belief that the majority of judges and justices are honest civil servants.
In the face of weak enforcement of moral standards, Singh called the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, “a toothless tiger,” as it cannot be used to sanction violators.
“And I will be the first to admit, the Supreme Court has contributed to this [weak enforcement of the law] … So this has really emboldened a lot of people to abuse their position—public officials, I mean—knowing that sanctions were unlikely or would come too late, with retirement always seen as a convenient pathway out,” Singh said.
According to her, the mandate for judicial integrity in the 1987 Constitution is “not merely a legal or political document, but a moral one as well.”
Singh highlighted that the principle of “public office is a public trust” necessitates that the Supreme Court maintain sole administrative supervision over all courts to safeguard independence. However this does not equate to total immunity, she added.
“In criminal [cases], the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman exists; they can be charged. That’s something that causes confusion for a lot of our students… they think they are completely immune. They are not. It is only the administrative side that is solely reposed in the Supreme Court,” Singh said.
The Supreme Court Committee on Ethics and Accountability, Singh pointed out, addresses corruption within the highest levels of the judiciary because Justices are impeachable officers and are generally beyond the reach of standard disciplinary systems.
In line with the system of checks and balances, the Judicial and Bar Council aims to avoid an arbitrary use of executive power to avoid political interference in appointing judicial officers. Members of the council vet candidates for the president to ensure that merit and integrity dictate who completes the Bench.
Structural reforms, improving public’s access to justice
To combat judicial corruption, eroded public trust, structural barriers to court access, and weak enforcement of ethical standards that continue to impede judicial integrity and access to justice, the Supreme Court launched a five-year plan that started in 2022 under the “Strategic Plan for Judicial Innovations” through a people-centered approach.
One of the projects laid out in the plan is the development of Justice Zones under the Justice Sector Coordinating Council, which creates designated localities where the entirety of the judicial sector of the government commits to coordinate and jointly administer “real-time justice” that will be delivered according to the people’s need, not the administration’s capability to handle cases.
The UST Faculty of Civil Law and UST Legal Aid Clinic with the help of students and volunteer lawyers have pledged to assist in the decongestion program of the Justice Zones, as paralegal assistance can aid the release of persons deprived of liberty.
“The vision of a judiciary that truly carries the Filipino people over the troubled waters of corruption and delivers them safely to the shore of equal justice is still a work in progress. But with steady ethical leadership, unwavering commitment, and the collective efforts of all stakeholders, that vision is increasingly within reach,” Singh said.
The lecture was organized as part of the 7th Chief Justice Andres Narvasa Lecture Series, a partnership between the UST Law Review, the UST Faculty of Civil Law, the UST Graduate School of Law, and the UST Law Journal, held at the Buenaventura Garcia Paredes, O.P. Building.
The event carried the theme of “The Supreme Court’s Role in Combating Corruption and Bridging Access to Justice.” It was held to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the UST Law Review, which seeks to be a critical forum for examining the judiciary’s role in society. F
