Supreme Court Leaves Lasting Impression on UN Special Rapporteur Irene Khan, Highlights Commitment to Human Rights and Judicial Reform
Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo, Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, and the other Associate Justices discuss several topics about the Philippine Judiciary with United Nations Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Irene Khan during the latter’s courtesy visit on the Court on January 24, 2024. (Courtesy of the Supreme Court Public Information Office)
The Supreme Court of the Philippines, led by Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo, made a positive impression on Ms. Irene Khan, the United Nations Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression during the latter’s courtesy visit on the Court on January 24, 2024.
Joining Chief Justice Gesmundo in welcoming Ms. Khan were Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen and Associate Justices Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, Japar B. Dimaampao, Jose Midas P. Marquez, and Maria Filomena D. Singh.
Ms. Khan expressed her gratitude to the Supreme Court Justices for their time in what she described as “an inspirational meeting.” In her opening statement, she underscored that human rights cannot exist without the rule of law and highlighted the Judiciary’s role in setting the tone and in its implementation.
During the visit, the Justices discussed several matters which included the Supreme Court’s Strategic Plan for Judicial Innovations 2022-2027 (SPJI), the Court’s blueprint of action for judicial reform. The SPJI outlines the Court’s system wide judicial reforms currently being implemented which aims to address institutional challenges using four guiding principles—Timely and Fair Justice, Transparent and Accountable Justice, Equal and Inclusive Justice, and Technologically Adaptive Management—and aimed at three critical outcomes – Efficiency, Innovation and Justice.
Chief Justice Gesmundo assured the UNSR that the Philippine Judiciary is highly cognizant of the universal principles of freedom of speech and expression as enshrined in the Philippine Constitution and international laws, and that the courts always seek to actively endeavor in striking a balance between such freedoms and the right of the state to protect itself.
Senior Associate Justice Leonen then cited examples of recent Supreme Court Decisions that tackled the freedom of speech and expression.
He mentioned the recently decided case of St. Anthony v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 258805), where the Court En Banc held that the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) cannot remove or destroy privately-owned campaign materials displayed on private property. The Senior Associate Justice likewise cited ABS-CBN v. Ampatuan (G.R. No. 227004), where the Court protected the right of the media to report on cases pending in courts. He also took note of a case where the Court, voting unanimously, resolved to disbar a lawyer for a viral video clip where he repeatedly cursed and uttered profane remarks against a journalist.
On the issue of Anti-Terrorism, Ms. Khan was provided a copy of The Supreme Court’s Rules on the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 and Related Laws, which according to the Chief Justice, was promulgated by the Court “to ensure that our judges will handle properly and effectively, protecting the rights of people vis-à-vis prosecution against anti-terrorism.” The Senior Associate Justice also discussed the case of Calleja v. Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 252578), where the Court declared unconstitutional certain provisions of Republic Act No. 11479, or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. The Senior Associate Justice shared: “Actually, it said we can only rule upon on its face with respect to certain provisions that clearly violate freedom of expression. And therefore, we went on to strike down certain conditions which were vague in terms of the definition of the Anti-Terror Law. But I think you may have noticed that we did not rule on certain aspects of the Anti-Terror Law simply because we wanted to make sure that the balance between expression opinion as well as security can come out in an actual case.”
Senior Associate Justice Leonen added: “we fully appreciate that the special rapporteur understands that there is always a balance between expression and the security. We have also in some of our cases already acknowledge that there may be differences in the regulation of hate speech and also performative speech from declaratory speech. But of course, we are waiting for the proper case to flesh this out some more, and we are just hoping that the pleadings would be up to our standard so that we can continue to explore this.”
On Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) suits, the Chief Justice said that SLAPP suits are acknowledged by the courts and even incorporated in the rules of procedure, such as in the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases.
On the protection of members of the judiciary against frivolous complaints, Senior Associate Justice Leonen cited the case of Tallado v. Racoma (A.M. NO. RTJ-22-022) to demonstrate the conviction of the Court: “There, we said [that in the] administrative cases against the judge, we will look at all the administrative cases you filed against all the judges and that will weigh in very heavily on the merits for whether the court will entertain your charge against our judge. And our feedback is that [this] was appreciated by our judges because they often get litigants that are representing powerful individuals that actually threaten our judges and the judges are forced to inhibit. But we said continue with what you’re doing. The Supreme Court will protect you. That was unanimous.”
On the matter of strengthening the Shari’ah justice system, Justice Dimaampao discussed how the Supreme Court of the Philippines recognizes “that Shari’ah justice system has been an indispensable component of the country’s national legal framework,” adding that “it coexists alongside Constitution, traditional tribal laws and other relevant laws in this regard.” He took special note of the first ever National Shari’ah Summit held on March 5-6, 2023 at Cagayan de Oro City.
Justice Lazaro highlighted the steady increase in the number of female judges in all trial court levels. She shared that as of December 31, 2023, of the 2,119 total number of judges, 1,172 are female while the remaining 947 are male.
Justice Lazaro also disclosed that gender balance, on the other hand, is more mixed for collegiate courts, adding that as of December 31, 2023, two of the 15 Members of the Supreme Court are female. She also shared that in the Court of Appeals, 31 of 68 Justices are female; in the Sandiganbayan, 9 of the 21 Justices are female; and in the Court of Tax Appeals, 7 of 9 Justices are female. Justice Lazaro also mentioned the Court’s issuance of the Guidelines on the Use of Gender-Fair Language in the Judiciary and Gender-Fair Courtroom Etiquette.
For her part, Justice Singh shared that the Court has embarked on a study on gender representation and mobility to trace the career path of female judges. She likewise related that the Court conducted a study on legal feminism, which involved the review of decisions for the past 15 years. The study demonstrated that it is important to use gender-fair language in court decisions as gender sensitivity is already a step towards inclusivity. In addition, she emphasized the importance of drafting decisions under the lens of legal feminism.
On the issue of human rights, the Chief Justice also shared with Ms. Khan that the Philippine Judiciary issued in 2022 the Rule on Facilitated Naturalization of Refugees and Stateless Persons, which governs the procedure for the filing of petitions for naturalization by refugees and stateless persons recognized by the Philippine Government. The Philippine Judiciary is the first in the world to issue such a procedural rule. Further, he reiterated the Court’s commitment to ensure the protection of its judges, and cited the proposed creation of the Office of the Judiciary Marshals (OJM).
Justice Marquez seconded that the Court is now in the process of organizing the OJM, adding that the Court is currently accepting applications for the position of Chief Marshal. According to Justice Marquez, the passage of the Judiciary Marshals Act was meant to address attacks on and other crimes against judiciary members and other court personnel.
Ms. Khan was accompanied by Mr. Thibaut Guillet, Human Rights Officer, Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, United Nations. Also present were Presidential Task Force on Media Security (PTFoMS), Chief of Staff Atty. Hue Jyro Go, and Head Executive Assistant Kristine Venet Andal, also of PTFoMS.
Ms. Khan holds the distinction of being the first woman to hold the position of Special Rapporteur for freedom of freedom of opinion and expression (FOE). As an advocate, Ms. Khan focuses on human rights, gender equality, media freedom, and a gender perspective on FOE.
Through dialogues with Philippine government offices, Ms. Khan aims to assess the state of rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the country. She is expected, at the end of her visit to the country, to come up with a final report which will be considered during the 59th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in June 2025. (Courtesy of the Supreme Court Public Information Office)
United Nations Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Irene Khan and Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo in a discussion during the latter’s courtesy visit on the Court on January 24, 2024. (Courtesy of the Supreme Court Public Information Office)
Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo assures United Nations Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Irene Khan that the Philippine Judiciary “ “guided by the basic principles that these freedoms (referring to speech and expression) are measured in a calibrated way that we try to balance the right of people to express their opinion…freedom of the press… with the right of the state to preserve itself” during the latter’s courtesy visit on the Court on January 24, 2024. (Courtesy of the Supreme Court Public Information Office)
Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo (fifth from left) poses for posterity with United Nations Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Irene Khan (next to Chief Justice Gesmundo) during the latter’s courtesy visit on the Court on January 24, 2024. Also in photo are (from right) Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, Justice Jose Midas P. Marquez, Justice Japar B. Dimaampao, Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, and Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen. With them are (from left) Presidential Task Force on Media Security (PTFoMS) Head Executive Assistant Kristine Venet Andal; PTFoMs Chief of Staff Atty. Hue Jyro Go; Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, Human Rights Officer Mr. Thibaut Guillet, and PTFoMs Executive Director Undersecretary Paul M. Gutierrez. (Courtesy of the Supreme Court Public Information Office)