Humanizing the judge

Gregorio Miguel Pallugna .

AS the Supreme Court celebrated its 117th Anniversary on the eve of the country’s 120th Independence birthday last week, the Philippine judiciary welcomed a new era. No, this is not going to be a celebratory piece on the controversial removal of former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, or a political article praising the present administration. This is but an observation of a significant change in the image of our magistrates which has come a long way since the inception of the Supreme Court in the beginning of the 20th Century. A change which, to the writer, proves a radical improvement in the lives of our judges and justices because, as the word implies, – and many of us may have forgotten- judges and justices are very much alive and breathing. Just like us, humans.

Much talk has been made about the “distasteful” public exchanges between certain members of the Supreme Court leading towards the removal of Sereno. This is owing to the fact that, as history has taught us, magistrates are not supposed to have personal opinions and should not be talking directly to the public. They should be “coldly neutral and beyond reproach.” And since humans like us who can move our lips and make distinctive sounds are bound to make a lot of mistakes, they are expected to avoid such ungodly behavior. Lest, they demote themselves from being the gods that they ought to be, to being mere mortals just like us. Because judges and justices are like endangered species which are rarely seen mingling with humans, the image they portray to the public is that they are nothing less than emissaries of the gods, sent down to coldheartedly decide on our fates. To most of us, these judges do not seem to know how to laugh, or smile or even breathe. They are but mere machines, and once they act like ordinary human beings, they become an embarrassment to the heavens. This is so true that the justices of the Supreme Court are even called the “Gods of Padre Faura,” giving reference to the street in Malate where the Supreme Court is located.

The high social standard set on judges is not without basis though. Since judges are supposed to rule on particular issues brought before their courts, they are expected to avoid being swayed by public opinion and personal biases. This is difficult to do when one is so entrenched in society. But it is certainly not impossible. What is lost in the equation is the fact that judges are not unlike us. Before they took their oaths as purveyors of justice, they were very much like all of us. They sing, dance, get drunk, make public tirades, and have fun! In short, they have lives. And we cannot expect them to stop living simply because they swore to an oath which tasks them to do the difficult job of determining what is just and legal. Being a judge is a vocation, not a spiritual ascension. Now, because of this apparent disconnect between the reality of judges and the image we have of them, many judges are either forced to live life in constant hiding or be criticized as unbecoming, biased and shameful. Either way, judges are at the losing end. This is why the new era of our judiciary is welcome news for all of us.

Society is starting to open up to the idea that magistrates are not robots who cannot have friends, own personal opinions, or live a life. Just recently, I had the happy opportunity of spending time with a very good friend and mentor over some whiskey and some exotic food he prepared – wild boar, python, and goat meat. In the company of several other good friends, there was a lot of singing, laughing and loud banter. My friend also happens to be a judge. Of course, the idea alone of this happening will raise eyebrows especially so that I am a lawyer who has pending cases before his court. But that is exactly the wrong image that we have been taught to have of magistrates because it presupposes that judges are incapable of being impartial unless they seclude themselves from the public and live as hermits. Instead of living up to this impossible image and facing the hardship of secluding themselves, judges should surmount the challenge of being neutral despite of relations outside the courtroom. I am sure the latter would be much easier for them to overcome. And I can proudly say that during the whole time of merry-making, not one word was uttered about any of the cases I have before his court. Judges can have friends and do their jobs faithfully at the same time.

Just last week, as I have mentioned earlier, the Supreme Court celebrated its 117th Anniversary, and in celebration of this event another judge who happens to be an impressive tenor held a concert for the benefit of an indigenous tribe in the province of Bukidnon. Some have reservations as to these kinds of activities because of the idea that lawyers and individuals will only buy tickets to get a good impression from the judge before whom they may have pending cases. Again, this is another classic example of the archaic image that we have of our magistrates which prevents judges from living an enjoyable and meaningful life – An image that we must seek to change, and which we are starting to change with the influx of modern-minded and independent members of the judiciary.

I may win or lose in my cases before the courts of my friend judges, but this should not prevent me from enjoying the company or talent of these courageous individuals. The judiciary has indeed come a long way in improving the image of our magistrates and in improving the quality of life of judges and justices. Admittedly, there is still a long way to go. But, with the conscious effort of justices, judges, lawyers and private individuals there may just be hope in realizing the noble dream of humanizing the judge.

(The author is a lawyer based in Cagayan de Oro.)