ALLOWING PARTIES WITHOUT LAWYERS TO GO TO PHILIPPINE MEDIATION

CENTER A GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW?

Four Judges and seventy court employees charged Judge A with multiple counts of Gross
Ignorance of the Law for referring the parties to Philippine Mediation Center without their
attorneys. Judge A grossly violated Sections 6 and 7 of Rule 116 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure.
Sec. 6. Duty of court to inform accused of his right to counsel. Before arraignment, the court
shall inform the accused of his right to counsel and ask him if he desires to have one. Unless the
accused is allowed to defend himself in person or has employed counsel of his choice, the court
must assign a counsel de officio to defend him.
Sec. 7. Appointment of counsel de officio. The court, considering the gravity of the offense and
the difficulty of the questions that may arise, shall appoint as counsel de officio such members of
the bar in good standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, can competently defend
the accused. But in localities where such members of the bar are not available, the court may
appoint any person, resident of the province and of good repute for probity and ability, to defend
the accused.

Is Judge A liable for multiple counts of Gross Ignorance of the Law? The answer is in the
negative.

On the issue of allowing parties to go to Philippine Mediation Center without their lawyers, the
same is allowed, it was stated in the Supreme Court circular that: After the last pleading has been
filed, the judge shall issue an order requiring the parties to forthwith appear before the concerned
Philippine Mediation Center (PMC) Unit staff to start the process for the settlement of their dispute
through mediation. On the same date, the court shall give to the PMC a copy of the Order for
mediation (A.M. No. 11-1-6-SC-PHILJA, January 11, 2011). Directive to parties/counsel to
immediately appear before the Philippine Mediation Center at the Court of Appeals Auditorium to
choose the Mediator and to set the time and date of the initial mediation conference (A.M. No. 022-
17-SC, April 16, 2002). The trial court, after determining the possibility of an amicable settlement or
of a submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution, shall issue an Order referring the case
to the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC) Unit for mediation and directing the parties to proceed
immediately to the PMC Unit. The Order shall be personally given to the parties during the pre-trial.
Copy of the Order together with a copy of the Complaint and Answer/s, shall be furnished the PMC
Unit within the same date (A.M. No. 01-10-5-SC-PHILJA, October 16, 2001).

The actual case is OCA IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ Judge Bibiano Colasito, Vice Executive
Judge Bonifacio Pascua, Judge Restituto Mangalindan Jr. , Judge Catherine Manodon, Miguel

1
Infante, Emma Annie Arafiles, Racquel Diano, Pedro Doctolero Jr., Lydia Casas, Auxencio
Clemente, Ma. Cecilia Gertrudes R. Salvador, Zenaida N. Geronimo, Virginia D. Galang, Elsa
Garnet, Amor Abad, Emelina J. San Miguel, Maxima C. Sayo, Romer H. Aviles, Froilan Robert L.
Tomas, Dennis M. Echegoyen, Norman Garcia, Noel Labid, Eleanor N. Bayog, Leilani A. Tejero
Lopez, Ana Maria V. Francisco, Soledad J. Bassig, Marissa Mashhoor Rastgooy, Marie Luz M.
Obida, Evelyn P. Depalobos, Joseph B. Pamatmat, Zenaida N. Geronimo, Benjie V. Ore,
Fortunato E. Diezmo, Nomer B. Villanueva, Edwina A. Jurok, Fatima V. Rojas, Eduardo E.
Ebreo, Ronalyn T. Almarvez, Ma. Victoria C. Ocampo, Elizabeth Lipura, Mary Ann J. Cayanan,
Manolo Manuel E. Garcia, Petronilo C. Primacio Jr., Edward Eric Santos, Armina B. Almonte,
Elizabeth G. Villanueva, Erwin Russ B. Ragasa, Bien T. Camba, Marlon M. Suligan, Chanda B.
Tolentino, Ferdinand R. Molina, Lanie F. Aguinaldo, Jasmine L. Lindain, Emilio P. Domine,
Arnold P. Obial, Ricardo E. Lampitoc, Jerome H. Aviles, Ana Lea M. Estacio, Cristina E.
Lampitoc, Melanie DC Begasa, Evangeline M. Ching, Karla Mae Pacunayen, Ronaldo S.
Quijano, Domingo H. Hocosol, Edwin P. Ubana, Marvin O. Balicuatro, Ma. Luz D. Dionisio,
Maribel A. Molina, Sevilla B. Del Castillo, Aida Josefina Ignacio, Benigno A. Marzan, Ignacio
Gonzales, Lawrence D. Perez, and Edmundo Vergara vs. Judge Eliza B. Yu
The Philippine Supreme Court sustained the legal arguments of Judge Eliza B. Yu.