Date post: | 27-May-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | janette-toral |
View: | 1,388 times |
Download: | 3 times |
The Sub Judice Rule
Emerson S. Bañez
Code
Computer Code
Legal Code
Sub Judice – under judgment
Sub Judice – under judgment; under/before a judge or court;
under judicial consideration
[R]estricts comments and disclosures pertaining to judicial proceedings to avoid prejudging the issue, influencing the court, or obstructing the administration of justice.
Romero v. Estrada G.R. No. 174105, April 2, 2009
A violation of the sub judice rule may render one liable for indirect contempt under Sec. 3(d), Rule 71 of the Rules of
Romero v. Estrada G.R. No. 174105, April 2, 2009
IF legal matter/controversy
under jurisdiction of the court
NO COMMENT
NO PUBLICATION
the sub judice rule is not sufficiently certain to allow them to always know in a particular set
of circumstances whether it might be breached.
Australian Law Reform Commission Reference on Contempt of Court, Tribunals and Commissions, Research Paper No 4 - Prejudicial Publicity and the Courts, at 69.
Functional
What is it for?
Why is this function here?
CONTEMPTCONTEMPT
SUB JUDICESUB JUDICE
2 Functions
First: “[T]o be shielded against the influence of newspaper
comments…”
In Re: Jurado 243 SCRA 299, 337-338 (1995)
Administration of Justice
Due Process
Second: “[T]o vindicate the courts from any act or conduct calculated to bring them into disfavor or to destroy public
confidence in them”
In Re: Jurado 243 SCRA 299, 337-338 (1995)
Honor, Dignity
Administration of Justice (?)
Separation of Powers
No Army
No Power of the Purse
Honor, Dignity
“proceed to the disposition of its business in an orderly
manner, free from outside interference obstructive of its
functions and tending to embarrass the administration of
justice.”
Nestle Philippines v. Sanchez 154 SCRA 542 (1987)
Security Feature
Process Protection
Boundary Protection
Elements
Publication
Relating to Present Proceedings
Tendency to influence
Tendency to bring disrepute (?)
Issues
Anti-Pattern
Negative Solution
Worked, but…
Example: Y2K
Copied
Juries
Ordinary, Untrained
But that doesn’t apply to us
Lower Courts
Facts, Evidence
Not Appellate Courts
Cases in the SC are necessarily public in character
Old Code
Before Constitutional Principles
Free Speech
Petition
Incompatible (?)
Old Judge-Made Rule Procedural in Character
Or a guarantee of substantive rights in the fundamental law
Easy
Restriction Speech
Unmanageable