Lady Justice is blindfolded.

A court of law commences a trial of a dispute with no prior

knowledge of it and complete impartiality, hence the blindfold over Lady Justice’s eyes. This is
designed to symbolize that justice should be rendered “without passion or prejudice” to ensure a
result that is fair.
The scales in Lady Justice’s hands are the scales of justice. Each party during a trial presents its
evidence to the court (placing it on the scales of justice). The scales then slowly begin to tip one
way or the other. At the end of the trial, the winner is the party that has tipped the scale in their
favor.
The sword which Lady Justice carries is designed to advance the concept that justice can be
swift and final, swords being historic symbols of authority and power. The sword is also
designed to show that the justice system has the power to enforce the laws created by parliament
on behalf of society and that all citizens (and government officials) are bound by the law in the
same way.

CANON 3 IMPARTIALITY- Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial

office. It applies not only to the decision itself but also to the process by which the decision to
make.

Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial office. It applies not only to
the decision itself but also to the process by which the decision is made.

Impartiality; Concept. - Impartiality is a state of mind of the judge where there is no

consciousness or sense of favor for, bias, or prejudice against any party in a case. Impartiality is
firm neutrality. It is a mental condo ton of disinterestedness in the midst of a duty to decide
Issues without fear or favor. When a judge is impartial, he decides without regard to the
personalities involved; he treats parties equally and fairly; here solves the cases based on the
weight of the evidence presented and admitted and applies the law applicable to the facts
established, and not by influence or lack of influence of the parties involved.

Litigant Entitled To Full Neutrality, party Litigant is entitled to no less than the cold
neutrality of an impartial judge. Hearing is useless if there is no impartiality. Decision-making
becomes despotic when the law is no longer followed.

Section 1
Judges shall perform their judicial duties without favor, bias, or prejudice.

No Favor, Bias Or Prejudice. -In the performance of his duties, the judge must do so without
being swayed by the scent of favor, smell of bias or prejudice towards anyone. Just like the lady
who symbolizes the statuette of Justice who is blindfolded, the judge does not look at the persons
of the parties but only at the weight of evidence on the scale and the applicable law: he must
evince the cold neutrality of a disinterested magistrate with a duty to uphold the law without fear
or favor, malice or prejudice.

Notaru Dignum-

What is Notatu Dignum.

Datuin, Jr. vs. Soriano 391 SCRA 2

Held: Notatu dignum is the presumption of regularity in the performance of a judge's functions,
hence, bias, prejudice, and even undue interest can. not be presumed, especially weighed against
a judge's sacred obligation under oath of office to administer justice without respect to any
person and do equal rights to the poor and the rich. It is settled that in administrative proceedings
the complainant has the burden of proving, in general by substantial evidence, the allegations in
the complaint. This complaint failed to so discharge.

Impartiality Is Not Enough In Dispensation Of Justice. -The noble office of a judge is to

render justice, not only impartially but expeditiously as well, for delay In the disposition of cases
erodes the faith and confidence of our people in me judiciary, lowers its standards and brings it
into disrepute.

Section 2
Judges shall ensure that his or her conduct, both in and out of court, maintains and enhances the
confidence of the public, the legal profession and litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of
the judiciary.

Confidence Of The Community, Lawyers And Litigants In The Impartiality Of The Judge
Must Be Maintained And Strengthened. To maintain and enhance the impartiality of the judge
which gives him the credibility and moral ascendancy to dispense justice fairly to the people, he
must always act both in his public and private life with dignity, honesty, competence and
independence.

He must relentlessly maintain his good moral character just like the requirement for all the
members of the Bar. When his character dissipates, the judicial institute is adversely affected.
A spotless dispensation of justice requires not only that the decision rendered be intrinsically fair
but that the judge rendering it must at all times maintain the appearance of fairness and
impartiality (Ribaya vs. Binamira- Parcia, 456 SCRA 107).

The judge must avoid even the slightest infraction of the law.

A Judge Pays A High Price For The Honor Bestowed Upon Him. -One who occupies an
exalted position in the administration of justice must pay a high price for the honor bestowed
upon him, for his private as well as his official conduct must at all times be free from the
appearance of impropriety).

Moral Integrity; An Indispensable Virtue For All Justices And Judges. People who run the
judiciary. particularly. justices and judges, must not only be proficient in both the substantive and
procedural aspects of the law. but more importantly, they must possess the highest integrity,
probity, and unquestionable moral up uprightness. both in their public and private lives.

A judge should not only possess proficiency in law but should likewise possess moral integrity
for the people to look up to him as a virtuous and upright man.

A Judge Must Be Like Caesar's Wife.-Because appearance is as important as reality in the

performance of judicial functions, like Caesar's wife. a judge must not only be pure but beyond
suspicion.

A judge had the duty not only to render a just and impartial decision, but also to render it in
such a manner as to be free from any suspicion as to its fairness and impartiality, and also as to
the judge's integrity.

Stability Of Courts Rests Upon The Approval Of The People. As such, it is peculiarly
essential that the system for establishing and dispensing justice be developed to a high point of
efficiency and so maintained that the public shall have absolute confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of its administration. The future of the Republic to a great extent depends upon our
maintenance of justice pure and unsullied.

There Will Be No Peace In The Community Without An Impartial Judiciary. The chief
function of a Judge is the administration of justice whether he is a trial or appellate judge, his
chef duty is to see that Justice is done in the cases that come before him. There can be nothing as
a peaceful society in the absence of an impartial judiciary to settle controversies on the basis of
what is just and right and to direct the power of the state in the enforcement of the law.
Behavior Should Inspire Confidence In The Judge's Impartiality. It must be obvious,
therefore, that while judges should possess proficiency in law in order that they can competently
construe and enforce the law, it is more important that they should act and behave in such a
manner that the parties before them should have confidence in their impartiality.

Judicial Partiality Is A Ground For Disciplinary Action.

A Judge Should Inhibit Himself In A Case When. ever Necessary To Maintain The People's
Faith In His Impartiality- Where a judge is not legally disqualified from sitting in litigation,
but the suggestion is made of record that he might be induced to act in favor of one party or with
bias or prejudice against a litigant arising out of circumstances reasonably capable of inciting
such a state of mind, he should conduct a careful self-examination. He should exercise his
discretion in a way that the people's faith in the courts of justice is not impaired. On the result of
his decision to sit or not to sit may depend to a great extent the all-important confidence in the
impartiality of the judiciary.

The suspicion of the appearance of bias or prejudice on the part of the judge can be as damaging
as the actual bias or prejudice, to the public confidence and administration of justice Undue
interference of a judge in the presentation d evidence may be perceived as favoring a party, if the
interference is aimed at building the case of such party or. " may be perceived as bias or
prejudice against a party if the aim is to weaken the case of such party

Section 3
Judges shall, so far as is reasonable, so conduct themselves as to minimize the occasions on
which it will be necessary for them to be disqualified from hearing or deciding cases.co
Judge Should Avoid Activities Or Occasions Which Will Increase Possibility Of Being
Disqualified From Hearing Or Deciding Cases.-When a judge involves himself in various
extra-curricular activities like the ordinary affairs in civic, religious, cultural, sports, business,
and similar associations, he exposes himself to multifarious personal attachments in or outside
the community. When cases arise involving colleagues and friends in these associations, his
impartiality to decide the cases become vulnerable to assailment. The opposite parties, if they are
not comfortable with the situation, will impetuously seek his disqualification of Inhibition, This
will adversely affect the otherwise smooth and credible dispensation of Justice in the community.

Section 4
Judges shall not knowingly, while a proceeding is before, or could come before, them make
any comment that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome of such proceeding
or impair the manifest fairness of the process. Nor shall judges make any comment in
public or otherwise that might affect the fair trial of any person or issue.
Public Comment Or Statement By Judges Which Might Affect Fair Trial Of Cases Must Be
Avoided. A judge must hear both sides before he should even attempt to make any conclusion on
the Issues of a case-which conclusion could be the basis of his written judgment. It is dangerous
for a judge to make comments, especially publicly, of pending cases before his court, or even
impending cases such as those publicly known and anticipated to be in court, having been the
subject of wide publicity, or sensationalized in the media.

The danger is rooted in the fact that judges are among the quotable public officials by reason of
their exalted positions. And the media, many times, misquote people, wittingly or unwittingly.

If a judge Is interviewed for instance over the radio or television, he could possibly slip in his
opinion, and it is awkward for him to backtrack later from this opinion. What's more, two or
more judges give different or conflicting opinions on a similar issue. the situation will not create
a good image for them.

What is worse, in great probability, the Judge may express a prejudgment of the case and that
makes it difficult for him to change his opinion in the decision without impairing his credibility.
An impaired credibility can not project any image of Impartiality. And prejudgment is a ground
for the inhibition of the judge in the case. Thus. in exposing himself to an attack of inhibition, he
merely serves to delay the administration of justice. The judge is in no-win situation.

Judges Must Avoid Publicity For Personal Vanity Or Self-Glorification.-If lawyers are
prohibited from making public statements in the media regarding a pending case to arouse public
opinion for or against a party (Rule 13.02. CPR) and from using or permitting the use of any
undignified or sell-laudatory statement regarding their qualifications or legal services (Rule 3.01.
CPRJ, with more reasons, should judges be prohibited from seeking publicity for vanity or
self-glorification. Judges are not actors or actresses or politicians, who thrive on publicity. They
are also prohibited from making public comments on any pending or impending case (Rule 3.07,
CJC). Such state-Thents will violate the principle of the sub-judice. Further, if such comments
are allowed, the judge may unwittingly vocalize a pre-Judgment of the case which may lay a
strong basis for his disqualification. Above all, the publicity will undermine the dignity and
Impartiality of the judge. A Judge must not be moved by a desire to cater to public opinion to the
detriment of the administration of Justice.
Section 5
Judges shall disqualify themselves from participating in any proceedings in which they are
unable to decide the matter impartially or in which it may appear to a reasonable observer that
they are unable to decide the matter impartially. Such proceedings include, but are not limited to,
instances where
a. The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of
disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings;
b. The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a material witness in the matter in
controversy;
c. The judge, or a member of his or her family, has an economic interest in the outcome of
the matter in controversy;
d. The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or
matter in controversy, or a former associate of the judge served as counsel during their
association, or the judge or lawyer was a material witness therein;
e. The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of review;
f. The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within the sixth civil
degree or to counsel within the fourth civil degree; or
g. The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a financial interest, as heir, legatee,
creditor, fiduciary, or otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the
proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of
the proceedings;

Distinction Disqualification and inhibition Under Section 1 of Rule 137 it provides the
meaning of Disqualification it enumerates the grounds under which any judge or Judicial officer
is disqualified from acting as such. And the explicit enumeration of the specific grounds therein
does not exclude others. Tinder this paragraph, disqualification is mandatory. Sometimes. It is
referred to as compulsory inhibition.

The Intendment of Section 1. Rule 137 is incontestable that a judge, sitting in a case, must at
all times be wholly free and disinterested. impartial and independent. Elementary due process
requires a hearing before an Impartial and disinterested tribunal. A judge has both the duty of
rendering a just decision and the duty of doing it in a manner completely free from suspicion as
to its fairness and his integrity. To effect this intendment fully. Section 1 enumerates the grounds
for the disqualification of a judge.

The second paragraph of Section 1, Rule 137 is the rule on inhibition. It does not explicitly
enumerate the specific grounds for inhibition but merely provides a broad policy-oriented ground
for the disqualification of judges such as for just or valid reasons other than those mentioned in
the first paragraph. the inhibition is discretionary." But it must be based on just and valid reasons
It is referred to as voluntary inhibition.

The first paragraph expressly specifies the grounds for disqualification and gives the judicial
officer no discretion to try or sit in a case. the second paragraph thereof leaves the matter of
inhibition to the sound discretion of the Judge. In fine, the criterion for inhibition, contemplated
in the second paragraph, is a matter of conscience of the trial judge.

Rationale Behind The Rule On Disqualification. the underlying principle of the rule on the
disqualification of judges is that no judge should preside in a case in which he is not wholly free
or disinterested. Impartial, and independent. Next in importance to the duty of rendering a
righteous judgment is that of doing it in such a manner as will beget no suspicion of the fairness
and integrity of the judge, and general, litigants are entitled to have a hearing and determination
by an impartial tribunal, free from bias. prejudice and interest. The court should scrupulously
protect the rights of litigants in this regard.

Rule On Disqualification Of Judges Is Different From Rule on Suspension Or

Dismissal.-Disqualification of Judges is governed by Rule 137. Revised Rules of Court. while
the rule on their suspension or dismissal is governed by Rule 140 of the same Rules. The grounds
for the latter are (a) serious misconduct and (o) inefficiency under the law Under Rule 140 of the
Rules as amended the grounds are classified and enumerated.

Grounds For Disqualification Of Judges.-If any of the grounds enumerated in Section 5 of

Canon 3 is obtaining. the judge should not take part in proceedings where his impartiality might
be reasonably questioned. In other words. he should voluntarily declare his disqualification

Exception To Rule Of Mandatory Disqualification. Disqualification of a judge is mandatory if

any of the listed grounds exist. Silence or the parties will not constitute a waiver of the mandated
disqualification. If there is a remittal of disqualification agreed upon b all the parties done in
writing. This remittal of disqualification found in Rule 3.13 of the Code of Judicial Conduct is
now Section 6 of Canon 3 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct

Discussions Of The Grounds For Disqualification Of Judges Under The New Code.-
(a) The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal knowledge of
disputed

evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings.-This Around has two (2) parts: (1) actual bias or
prejudice: and (2) personal knowledge of facts
(1) Judge Has Actual Bias Or Prejudice Against A Party.-Where the judge is nourishing a
real or actuat blas or prejudice against a party in a case pending in his court. he must disqualify
himself, because it is very dim. malt for him to play fair with somebody he hates in his heart. His
sense of justice may be distorled if only to give vent to his hatred or dislike to the concerned
party. In order for the Supreme Court to sustain a charge of partiality and prejudice brought
against a judge. there must be convincing proof to show that he or she is indeed biased and
partial.

Bias And Prejudice Are Not Presumed. -The party who claims their presence must prove them
with substantial evidence.

Bias And Prejudice Must Stem From extra Judicial Sources and not from The assailed
order or Decision itself.

Judge's Decision To Inhibit Himself Is Not Conclusive; Mandamus Will Lie To Determine
His Competency.

Time When Petition For Disqualification Should Be Filed. -A petition to disquallly a judge
must be fled before the rendition of Judgment by the judge It must first be presented to him for
his determination. It cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.

Ultimate Test If Judge Denies Petition For Disqualification; Remedy Of Prejudiced Party.-
The ultimate test is whether or not the complainant was deprived of a fair and impartial trial. The
remedy of the prejudiced party is to seek a new trial.

Mere Filing Of Administrative Case Against A Judge, Not A Ground For

Disqualification.-Mere filing of an administrative case against a judge by one of the parties
before him is not grounds for disqualifying him from hearing a case.

Membership in a college fraternity or in an alumni association or civic group like Rotary is

not a ground for inhibition. Such members are even expected to maintain the highest standards
of probity. Thus, a complainant cannot ask that a judge inhibit himself because he and the
respondent are members of Sigma Rho. Being neighbors is not also a grounds for
disqualification

Legal Reason For Disqualification Or Inhibition Must Be Stated In The Order.-If the judge
disqualifies or inhibits himself, he must state the legal reason therefor. This is important because.
if a party wishes to question the Order, the appellate court can take cognizance thereof and can
review the soundness or unsoundness of the reason for disqualification or inhibition.
Judge To Whom Case Was Transferred Cannot Review The Order Of
Self-Disqualification.-If a judge disqualifies himself, the order of self-disqualification cannot be
reviewed or annulled by the judge to whom the case was transferred.

Other Grounds For Disqualification Not Enumerated In The Rule. Rule 3.12 is not
limitative. There can be other grounds for disqualification although not men. toned therein. Thus,
a judge who had prejudged the case pending in his court may be disqualified from hearing the
case. Or. the judge can invoke the second paragraph of Rule 137 for his voluntary inhibition
based on other lust and valid grounds.

The issue of voluntary inhibition is primarily a matter of conscience and sound discretion. A
judge shall not inhibit himself for frivolous reasons or alibis. Otherwise, cases will be delayed.
Worse, there may be a possibility that no judge will remain in the area who can try and decide
the cases involved. Judges have the duty to sit and decide cases (See Art. 9, New Civil Code).
Inhibition should be resorted to sparingly and only on valid and just grounds.

However, the appellate court can review the order if elevated to it.

Denial Of A Motion For Disqualification Of Judge; Its Consequences In Criminal Cases

Judge may decide to deny a motion for his disqualification and decide on his own competency.
And the Rules of Court provide that xxx no appeal or stay shall be allowed from, or by reason of,
his decision in favor of his own competency, until after final judgment in the case"

This Rule applies only in civil cases but not in criminal cases where disqualification is
sought by the prosecution or offended party.

Section 6
A judge disqualified as stated above may, instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose
on the records the basis of disqualification. If, based on such disclosure, the parties and lawyers
independently of the judge's participation, all agree in writing that the reason for the inhibition is
immaterial or unsubstantial, the judge may then participate in the proceeding. The agreement,
signed by all parties and lawyers, shall be incorporated in the record of the proceedings.
Disclosure On The Record Of The Reason Or Basis Of Disqualification Of The Judge.-if
the judge is disqualified under any of the instances mentioned in Section 5 (letters (a) to (g]
Canon 3, instead of immediately withdrawing from the case, he may disclose on the record the
basis of his disqualification for the information parties.
If the parties and their lawyers shall agree in writing that the judge's reason for disqualification is
immaterial or insubstantial and they offer no objection to the continuation of the proceedings
under the judge. the participants in the proceedings.

Opinion Expressed Before Hearing The Evidence Must Be Avoided. Comments indicating
that the judge formed an opinion as to the outcome of a case before hearing evidence and
argument are improper. in the Philippines, this is pre-judgment and a ground for disqualification

At The Very First Sign Of Lack Of Faith And Trust To His Actions, Judge Must Inhibit
Himself.-

Effect Of Inhibition.-After the judge had inhibited himself from a case. he loses jurisdiction
over the said case. Need. lees to stress. this principle applies to disqualification.

Procedure In Inhibiting A Judge From The Case.-The procedure laid down in Section 2. Rule
137 of the Rules of Court (adopted in Rule 3.12 of the Old Code) may be used in using a Motion
For Inhibition of the judge. The only difference is that if the ground is mentioned in Section 1,
Rule 137 (or a ground similar to any of those listed! now under Section S, Canon 3 (Impartiality)
of the New Code, the motion is one of disqualification. If the ground is established, it is
mandatory for the judge to disqualify himself. if the ground Is not included in Section 5, Canon
3 (New Code). generally, it is one for inhibition and is discretionary on the part of the judge to
retire from the case.

Some Confusion About Disqualification Of Judges Must Be Addressed. -Many good lawyers
get confused on the rules of disqualification and inhibition of judges. And they cannot be
blamed, for indeed, there is overlapping in the provisions of the rules which must be
straightened. In certain decisions, the word - inhibition - is applied to both situations of
compulsory and voluntary "disqualification".

Canon 4: Impropriety- Propriety and the appearance of propriety are essential to the
performance of all the activities of a judge.

Propriety; Concept. This is conformity to prevailing customs and usages. In brief, it is

appropriate. It is required in all the activities of a judge. The propriety must be open and manifest
to a reasonable observer.

Section 1
Judges shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
Judge Should Be Free From Any Appearance of Impropriety Both In His Public And
Private Life. Judges' official conduct should be free from any appearance. ance of impropriety:
and his personal behavior, not only in the bench and in the performance of his official duties, but
also in his everyday life should be beyond reproach Being the visible representation of law and
justice, judges should always conduct themselves within the confines of proper judicial
deportment and behave in a manner short of reproach.

Impropriety, Not Necessarily Illegal.-An impropriety is not necessarily an illegal act such as
trying a case in improper attire; singing loudly and shamelessly out of tune in a formal affair;
getting drunk at a party: relieving himself in public view: being untidy in appearance; being a
clownish: getting involved in petty quarrels or scandals and the like.

Section 2
As a subject of constant public scrutiny, judges must accept personal restrictions that might be
viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. In
particular, judges conduct themselves in a way that is consistent with the dignity of the judicial
office.

Acts Of Judges Must Conform With The Dignity Of The Judicial Office, As judges are
occupying exalted positions. they must exercise some restraints freely and willingly to prevent
unnecessary criticisms or condemnations. They are often the subjects of constant public scrutiny,
especially by active members of the media who love to publish the negative sides of life. The bad
news about judges involving immoralities, bribery charges, or corruption is welcome news to the
media. Avoidance of improprieties. which require some personal sacrifices, is an essentiality for
Judges because in the ultimate end. if their dispensation of Justice is perceived as fair and
acceptable, they contribute a lot to the maintenance of peace and order in the community. Courts
are created precisely for that noble end and for this reason only the qualified must sit as judges
for they will hold the seals in passing judgment to their peers who should be convinced of the
fairness of their decisions.

There is no dignity If there is no decency. Judges must be perceived as decent intellectuals. So,
they must not be seen hanging around beer gardens. bawdy houses. gambling dens, drug dens,
casinos, cockfight areas, nude colonies, strip-tease joints and similar others. These places are
demeaning and repulsive to the dignity of a judge.

The judge must always be beyond reproach in all his activities.

Section 3
Judges shall, in their personal relations with individual members of the legal profession
who practice regularly in their court, avoid situations which might reasonably give rise to
the suspicion or appearance of favoritism or partiality.

Personal Relations Of Judges With Members Of The Bar.-In view of the delicate nature of
their positions. judges must avoid familiarity with members of the Bar. Familiarity may not only
breed contempt, but may also compromise the judge's impartiality when due to his close
friendship with some lawyers, he may not be able to resist or deny their requests for judicial
favor for fear of losing their friendship.

The right attitude will be "to keep an arms-length distance, which means staying "not close
and not far". In this case, suspicion or appearance of favoritism or partiality may not hatch so
easily in the minds of the suspicious and distrustful. It is wrong for the judge to clandestinely and
secretly maintain a deep-seated friendship with a practitioner who appears before him, without
inhibiting himself from the former's casc/s. His impartiality will be sham.

Section 4
Judges shall not participate in the determination of a case in which any member of their family
represents a litigant or is associated in any manner with the case.

When Judge's Relative Is Associated In Any Manner With The Case. Even if the relative is
not a representative of a litigant, the Judge must still disqualify himself if a relative is associated
in any manner with the case - such as when the relative is the owner of the land where a building
is standing and parties to the case are fighting for the ownership or possession o the building
standing on the land.

Section 5
Judges shall not allow the use of their residence by a member of the legal profession to
receive clients of the latter or of other members of the legal profession.
It Is Improper For A Judge To Allow A Practitioner To Receive His Clients In His (Judge)
Residence.-Such a scenario will create the wrong impression that the judge and the lawyer are
partners in the "practice of law", or that they are intimate with one another which perceived
intimacy will adversely affect the presumed impartiality of the judge should the lawyer have a
case before him.

Section 6
Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and
assembly, but in exercising such rights, they shall always conduct themselves in such a manner
as to preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the
judiciary.
Judges Do Not Lose Their Rights As Citizens When They Don Their Judicial Robes. -When
a lawyer is appointed as a judge, he does not lose any of his fundamental rights and freedoms
guaranteed under the Constitution. However, in the exercise thereof there are restrictions that
they must uphold and respect.

For they are not allowed to stage a strike to paralyze in stand in administration of justice. They
cannot speak in political rallies or in election campaigns. They must remain hon partisan.
Otherwise, they destroy their Impartially as well as the judicial machinery itself. A judge should
avold making portical speeches, contributions to party funds. the public endorsement of
candidates for political office, or participating in party conventions.

Section 7

Judges shall inform themselves about their personal fiduciary financial interests and shall make
reasonable efforts to be informed about the financial interests of members of their family.

This section Does Not Prohibit Judges From Having Financial Dealings Or Personal
Fiduciary Interests.-The Section simply directs judges to keep them. selves informed of their
personal fiduciary and financial interests, as well as the financial interests of the members of
their family. When judges are well-informed of their financial standing. they can better make
adjustments on their family expenses if things are not going well. The rule is to situate the judges
from the temptations of corruption. By knowing the financial standing of the lamily. judges will
not be taken by surprise when financial crisis emerges. Section. However, the purpose is not
related to the judicial duties of the judge, there is no violation. So, If the judge uses the
miormation in a linancial dealing unrelated to judicial functions, does not violate the provision.
Whereas, before there would be a violation.

Section 8

Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance their private interests, or
those of a member of their family or of anyone else, nor shall they convey or permit others to
convey the impression that anyone is in a special position improperly to influence them in the
performance of judicial duties.
Section 9 as last updated by OCA Cir. 103-06 (2006)
Confidential information acquired by judges in their judicial capacity shall not be used or
disclosed for any other purpose NOT related to their judicial duties.
A Judge Is Prohibited From Using Or Disclosing Confidential Information Acquired In His
Judicial Capacity. The prohibition to use or disclose confidential information acquired by the
judge in his judicial capacity is not absolute. If the purpose of the use or disclosure is related to
their judicial duties, there is a violation of the section. However, if the purpose is not related to
the judicial duties of the judge, there is no violation. So, if the judge uses the information in a
financial dealing unrelated to judicial functions, he does not violate the provision. Whereas,
before there would be a violation.

Section 10
Subject to the proper performance of judicial duties, judges may:
a. Write, lecture, teach and participate in activities concerning the law, the legal system, the
administration of justice or related matters;
b. Appear at a public hearing before an official body concerned with matters relating to the
law, the legal system, the administration of justice or related matters;
c. Engage in other activities if such activities do not detract from the dignity of the judicial
office or otherwise interfere with the performance of judicial duties.
Section 11
Judges shall not practice law whilst the holder of judicial office.

Municipal Judges May Not Engage In Notarial Work Except As Notaries Ex Officio:
Conditions.

RTC Judges Have No Authority To Notarize Documents-RTC judges and justices have no
authority to notarize documents anywhere and under all circumstances.

Judges May Engage In Another Profession, Unless Prohibited By The Constitution, By

Law Or Same Will Affect His Judicial Duties.-What is basically prohibited of Judges is to
practice law. Judges, however, may engage ir other lawful professions other than the practice of
law as long as they are not prohibited by the Constitution or by law. An example is being a
professor o law or giving medical prescriptions if he is also a doctor. Judges nonetheless must
refrain From engaging in such other professions if such engagement will affect or conflict with
their judicial functions.
Section 12
Judges may form or join associations of judges or participate in other organizations representing
the interests of judges.
Judges Associations Or Organizations,- Judges, are not prohibited from forming new
associations on organizations or judges or joining those already organized and existing.
Generally, such associations are devoted to the improvement of the administration of Justice and
to continuing legal education or training purposes for judges They may also participate in the
affairs of other legal organizations where the interests of judges are also represented like the
Vanguard of the Philippine Constitution. Philippine Association of Law Professors . the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines - where all judges being lawyers are members thereof by
mandate of the law.

Section 13
Judges and members of their families shall neither ask for, nor accept, any gift, bequest, loan or
favor in relation to anything done or to be done or omitted to be done by him or her in
connection with the performance of judicial duties.

Meaning Of Gift.-It refers to a thing or a right to dispose of gratuitously, or any act of liberality,
in favor of another who accepts it, and shall include a simulated sale or an ostensibly onerous
disposition thereof. it shall not include an unsolicited gift of nominal or insignificant value not
given in anticipation of, or in exchange for a favor from a public official or employee.

Acceptance Of Gifts, Bequests, Loans Or Favors From Anyone Is Prohibited; Exception.

-There are many laws that prohibit a fudge or any public officer for that matter, from accepting
gifts, bequests or favors, or loans from anyone, except accepted by law.

Bribery, Indirect And Direct.-Acceptance of gifts by reason of the office of the judge is
indirect bribery and when he agrees to perform an act constituting a crime in connection with the
performance of his official duties in consideration of any offer, promise gift, or present recelved
by such officer, he is guilty of direct bribery.

Anti-Graft And Corrupt Practices.- Under R.A. No. 3019. the judge is liable criminally for
directly or indirectly accepting gifts. Exception: unsolicited gifts or presents of small value
ollered or given as a mere ordinary loken of gratitude or tendshlp according to local custom or
usage.

A judge Should Avoid Taking Or Receiving Loans From Litigants. It is serious misconduct
for a judge to receive money from a litigant in the form of loans That he never intended to pay
back even if the judge Intends to pay. it is an act of impropriety to take a loan from a
party-litigant.

No Solicitation Of Funds by Public Officials.- Judges and other public officials are prohibited
from collecting directly or indirectly anything of monetary value from any person in the course
of their official duties.

Section 14
Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff or others subject to their influence, direction or
authority, to ask for, or accept, any gift, bequest, loan or favor in relation to anything done or to
be done or omitted to be done in connection with their duties or functions.
Section 14
Judges shall not knowingly permit court staff or others subject to their influence, direction or
authority, to ask for, or accept, any gift, bequest, loan or favor in relation to anything done or to
be done or omitted to be done in connection with their duties or functions.
Section 15
Subject to law and to any legal requirements of public disclosure, judges may receive a token
gift, award or benefit as appropriate to the occasion on which it is made provided that such gift,
award or benefit might not reasonably be perceived as intended to influence the judge in the
performance of judicial duties or otherwise give rise to an appearance of partiality.

Occasions When Judges May Receive Token Gifts, Awards, Or Benefits. -To avoid any
misinterpretation, the Section describes the gift as a token gift to indicate that It is just a
symbolic gesture. It is not something of value given as compensation or bribe.

precaution Must Be Exercised By The Judges When Receiving a Gift, Etc.-If the token gift,
award or benefit may be perceived as designed or intended to influence the judges in the
performance of their judicial duties or would generate an appearance of partiality. then they must
refuse the same in a subtle or courteous way. or may return It, If it was not received by him
personally.