JEFFREY EGAMEN DY

JURIS DOCTOR, Polytechnic University of the Philippines

May 30, 2018

“DIGITALIZED COURTS”

The Implementation of Electronic Court (E-Court) and Automated Systems in the Philippines as
being Supported by United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and American
Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative (ABA ROLI)

ABSTRACT

This paper intends to discuss the nature and effects of the implementation of electronic court and
automated systems in the Philippine sphere. It will answer the following questions:

1. Can this reduce docket congestion and court delays?

2. Can this strengthen the rule of law and streamline of the local judicial process?
3. Can this really helps the court employees in the discharge of their daily duties and
responsibilities?
4. Can this really helps parties to the case with regard to the filing of their pleadings and other
processes and papers in courts?

This paper will also discuss the origin of this program and its effectivity in the country. Its effects
in the Philippine Judicial System especially in the disposition of cases filed in court. It will also give insights
of the programs being developed by the Supreme Court for the enhancement of works in the judiciary.

1. Introduction

The judicial power iS vested in “one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established
by law.” This judicial power is exercised through the judiciary’s primary role of adjudication, which
includes the “duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally
demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government 1.

Article VIII, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution mandates that the Supreme Court shall have
administrative supervision over all courts and the personnel thereof. In 2013, the Supreme Court registered
a 50% case disposal percentage as to Administrative and Bar Matters, with a total Case Output of 2,133
(1,993 by minute resolution and 140 by ponencia) as against a total Case Input of 4,232 (2,285 pending
cases as of December 31, 2012; 1,881 new cases; and 66 reinstated cases). There are only 2,099 pending
cases by the end of 2013.

Because of the clogging dockets in Philippine Courts especially in lower courts, the then Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court Maria Lourdes Sereno had adopted and started the e-court program and
automated systems in Quezon City courts in 2013. She promised for faster justice with e-courts. She
envisions a future where courts are fully digitalized and can dispense justice in a shorter amount of time.
During the 68th Management Association of the Philippines (MAP) meeting on January 25, 2017, she said
that Philippine courts will have a more digitalized system to ensure faster case resolutions. The e-court
program files cases in an information system that highlights the oldest and those requiring the most urgent
action. It notifies judges of deadlines, and provides them templates of resolutions, decisions and orders so
they can be issued more quickly. Sereno said that currently there 197 e-courts in 8 cities nationwide and

1
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pio/annualreports/2013%20ANNUAL%20REPORT%20I.pdf
expectedly there will be 297 e-courts spread across 10 cities by the end of 2017 using funds from the USAID
and the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative (ABA ROLI). According to her, the European
Union has also pledged its support to take the e-court program to the National Capital Region (NCR),
Region III and Region IV-A possibly by 2018. She likewise said that these courts are able to adopt the
Automated Hearing System, a game-changing initiative previously deemed impossible in the Philippines.
Every activity in the hearing is captured in real time, enabling the court to serve the counsel the written
copy of the order of the judge in as little time as 15 minutes after the order is given in open court which
previously unimaginable court experience.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and American Bar Association
Rule of Law Initiative (ABA ROLI) support this program of the Chief Justice.

2. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and American Association
Rule of Law Initiative (ABA ROLI)

The USAID is an independent agency of the United States federal government that is primarily
responsible for administering civilian foreign aid and development assistance. While, ABA ROLI is focused
on improving court efficiency, increasing business sector confidence, combating corruption, advancing
human rights, and expanding access to justice in the Philippines. By continuously working with a broad
coalition of local partners, trial and appellate courts, the Supreme Court, the Philippine Judicial Academy,
the Department of Justice, the Public Attorney’s Office, universities, law schools, and a spectrum of civil
society representative. ABA ROLI is building local capacity to champion and uphold the rule of law. ABA
ROLI is a non-profit organization that implements legal reform programs in roughly 50 countries around
the world. ABA ROLI has nearly 500 professionals staff working abroad and in its Washington, D.C. office.
ABA ROLI’s host country partners include judges, lawyers, bar associations, law schools, court
administrators, legislatures, ministries of justice and a wide array of civil society organizations, including
human rights groups2.

2.1 Judicial Reform

As part of its judicial reform programs, ABA ROLI promotes greater independence, accountability
and transparency in judicial systems; assists in drafting and implementing codes of judicial ethics; promotes
judicial education and training; and helps to enhance court administration and efficiency.

When it first began providing technical legal assistance in Central and Eastern Europe about 25
years ago, the judiciaries of many nations in the region were in desperate need of reform. As ABA ROLI
expanded its rule of law programming to other regions, it became apparent that similar obstacles existed in
judicial systems throughout the world. And while many judiciaries have made significant progress,
challenges remain.

Insufficient judicial education and professional training, as well as a lack of emphasis on judicial
ethics, hamper the effectiveness of judiciaries and of individual judges in many countries throughout the
world. Overwhelming caseloads—coupled with inadequate resource allocation and a lack of modern case-
management systems—can result in procedural delays that undermine the administration of justice.

Courts are often plagued with corruption, undermining often-fragile public trust in the fairness and
efficiency of the judicial system. Moreover, insufficient professional guarantees and ill-defined judicial
powers leave many judges and magistrates demoralized and marginalized in their own courtrooms and thus
unable, or unwilling, to promote the rule of law.

2
https://www.devex.com/jobs/aba-roli-country-director-philippines-staff-520530
 ABA ROLI believes that an independent, accountable, well-functioning judiciary is a central pillar
of the rule of law. With this in mind, we offer expert assistance in and provide resources for:

 conducting assessments of judicial reform efforts,

 facilitating dialogue on judicial reform and independence,
 promoting education and training for judges and court personnel,
 improving judicial ethics and accountability, and
 strengthening court administration, efficiency and transparency.

ABA ROLI’s criminal justice programs provide technical assistance to governments, civil society
organizations and justice sector professionals, including prosecutors, police, defense counsel, magistrates
and judges.

Its programs improve criminal justice systems by helping justice sector professionals and
institutions increase capacity and enhance skills. A well-functioning criminal justice system protects and
promotes individual rights. Its contributions toward criminal procedure code reform have resulted in
investigations and trials that are increasingly free from bias and that contain enhanced rights protections for
the accused and victims alike at all stages of criminal investigations and proceedings. In some countries,
especially those transitioning toward a more adversarial system, ABA ROLI provides trial advocacy
training for criminal justice actors, helping them communicate and advocate more effectively. These
trainings also emphasize compliance with international and regional standards and best practices.

Its role in establishing and supporting public defender and legal aid centers helps to create improved
and sustainable access to justice in many countries. Programs that help delineate and strengthen the
respective roles of judges, prosecutors and defense counsel promote fairness and a better balance of power
between the state and the accused. Targeted, substantive trainings on a wide range of issues, including
organized crime, money laundering, terrorism financing, domestic violence and gender-based violence,
further professionalize and empower criminal justice actors and help keep communities safe.

2.2 The Partnership for Growth (PFG) Agreement

In 2012, the Philippine and U.S. governments entered into the Partnership for Growth (PFG)
Agreement to address the most serious constraints to economic growth and development in the country. In
the Executive Summary on the Final Report3 on the said agreement, it provides that:
The Partnership for Growth (PFG) aims to achieve accelerated, sustained, and broad-based
economic growth in partner countries, including El Salvador and the Philippines, through bilateral
agreements between the United States Government (USG) and the partnering countries’ national
governments. Using principles set forth in President Barack Obama’s September 2010 Presidential Policy
Directive on Global Development, PFG requires rigorous, joint analyses of countries’ individual
constraints to growth to develop joint action plans to address the most pressing of these constraints and to
establish high-level mutual accountability for the goals and activities selected to alleviate them. The
countries of El Salvador, the Philippines, Tanzania, and Ghana were selected as the first group of countries
in which the United States (U.S.) and partner governments would attempt to structure new PFG initiatives,
with selection based, in part, on each country’s record of accomplishment in implementing ongoing
Millennium Challenge Compacts (MCC). In November 2011, USG and the Government of the Philippines
(GPH) signed a Joint Country Action Plan (JCAP) for a 5-year period for implementing two primary
constraints, each with three subconstraints, to Philippine economic growth. Each constraint was
accompanied by a set of goals, policies, and actions to relieve them. The agreed-upon actions are designed
to lead to goal and policy achievement, which, in turn, will mitigate the effects of currently binding

3
https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/244182.pdf
 constraints and, therefore, accelerate and sustain the Philippines’ rate of broad-based, inclusive economic
growth.

The Partnership for Growth (PFG) agreement represents a partnership between the Philippines and
the United States to promote broad-based and inclusive growth. The U.S. Government is working with the
Government of the Philippines, the private sector and civil society organization to help put the Philippines
on an accelerated growth trajectory that benefits the majority of its population. The main objective of the
PFG is progress toward a more transparent, predictable, and consistent legal and regulatory regime and
strengthening the rule of law, an ABA ROLI continues to strive to meet. USAID and Philippines started
with the project called Judicial Strengthening to Improve Court Effectiveness (JUSTICE), a bilateral
initiative. JUSTICE Project is a five-year project started in 2012 focusing on strengthening the rule of law
and streamlining the local judicial process. JUSTICE supports reforming court procedures to improve
judicial efficiency, decongest court dockets and reduce court delay. This project aims to remove improper
filing practices, instate case timeliness and strengthen contract enforceability in order to achieve judicial
accountability and efficiency.

The project aligns with the goal and PFG intervention themes of good governance anchored on rule
of law and regulatory quality. Reformed judicial processes will reduce business costs and facilitate efficient
and reliable adjudication, helping the Philippines further develop.

The project carefully introduced three interventions all intended to enhance court efficiency:

1. Installation of e-Court system, a computerized case tracking and management tool;

2. Massive case decongestion effort that systematically identifies long-standing cases for resolution;
and
3. Streaming of trial rules to reduce opportunities for delay. This three-pronged strategy is fully
implemented in Quezon City, the largest and most congested court district in the county.

In three years’ time from its launch, JUSTICE is producing notable results in Quezon City. Initial
assessments show that the median case processing times of trials across all types of courts were reduced by
60 percent to 78 percent. In the area of docket decongestion, over 31, 000 cases were inventoried and 30
percent is now in the process of rolling out these interventions in eight additional growth hubs of the
country.

3. Docket Congestions and Court Delays

It is discussed in the Term Paper entitled Unclogging the Court Dockets4 that Court dockets are
heavily and unjustifiably congested as a result of the indiscriminate filing and delayed processing of cases
in the courts of justice. Hundreds of thousands of cases remain pending for further action or resolution. The
cases pending in all levels of the judicial system keep piling up at an alarming rate. The average judicial
disposal of cases annually is only 85.83%. The situation is believed to become worst and the backlog will
continue to grow rather than diminish unless judges are enabled to dispose of more cases through a
systematic and sustained judicial reform program. The slow or delayed processing of earlier cases affects
the progress of other following cases. As a consequence, some cases have incredibly taken as long as a
generation to resolve. Judges need time to study, analyze and research to come up with persuasive decisions
that may somehow even convince the losing party to accept the adverse decision and forego an appeal
thereby lightening the docket of the appellate court. Court docket congestion deprives the courts of the
essential element of time. The quality of justice is, therefore, adversely affected.

4
Paper presented in the Symposium on Economic Policy Agenda for the Estrada Administration, June 1, 1999 at
INNOTECH, Commonwealth Avenue, Diliman, Quezon City.
 To the business sector, such delays in processing of cases would increase their business cost due to
high litigation expenses. It is, therefore, imperative that alternative measures of unclogging court dockets
should be explored to help minimize litigation expenses of the business sector.

With the implementation of E-Court System and Automated Hearing, courts have become more
aware of the aging of cases. Pleadings and motions that have to be acted upon are now resolved on time
because of the notification that will pop up in the monitor of the Branch Clerk of Court and the Judge that
the same are due for resolution. Cases that are submitted for decision are likewise decided on time because
of the E-Court System. With the help of automated hearing, orders are now released in open court and
received by the parties present in the hearing. To date, high litigation expenses is minimized because of the
speedy disposition of the cases.

4. Strengthening the rule of law and local judicial process

The project carefully introduced three interventions all intended to enhance court efficiency: 1)
installation of e-Court system, a computerized case tracking and management tool; 2) massive case
decongestion effort that systematically identifies long-standing cases for resolution; and 3) streamlining of
trial rules to reduce opportunities for delay. This three-pronged strategy is fully implemented in Quezon
City, the largest and most congested court district in the country. It is reported that three years from its
launch, it produced a notable results in Quezon City. Assessment shows that the median case processing
times of trials across all types of courts were reduced by 60 percent to 78 percent. In the area of docket
decongestion, over 31,000 cases were inventoried and 30 percent of these were disposed by June 2015.

The project is in the process of rolling out these interventions in eight additional growth hubs of
the country. This year E-Courts will reach 94 more courts in Tacloban City, Davao City, Cebu City, and
Makati City. Tacloban was the city ravaged by typhoon Yolanda, international code name Hainan, which
destroyed court facilities and wiped out almost all their records. By implementing E-Courts in Tacloban,
we are, in a sense, building back better. Out of the rubble, we are building a modern court system for the
people of Tacloban. Davao and Cebu Cities are main commercial hubs in Central and Southern Philippines,
while Makati hosts the country’s main financial district. In implementing E-Courts, the Judiciary is
prioritizing not only the courts with the highest caseloads, but also courts which handle many commercial
cases. We want to improve the investment climate in these key economic corridors by ensuring speedy
dispute resolution using modern tools like E-Courts. In 2016, E-Courts will be further rolled out to the 120
courts of the capital city of Manila, Pasig City and Mandaluyong City. By the end of 2016, E-Courts will
be in 287 trial courts handling about 30% of the total caseload of the Philippine court system. But the
Judiciary will move beyond these 287 identified courts. Court modernization must be complete and its
benefits must reach all litigants, even outside the centers of population and commerce. Starting 2015, the
Judiciary, with appropriations coming from the national government, is implementing its Enterprise
Information Systems Plan (EISP), which is the Judiciary’s 5-year ICT master plan. As part of EISP, the
Judiciary is building two major data centers and around a dozen regional data centers and establishing
network and connectivity in major locations, including all the courts where E-Courts is targeted to be
implemented. This will be the backbone of our ICT infrastructure, which will allow us to extend E-Courts
beyond the 287 courts already targeted. The opening of bids for the two major data centers is scheduled on
16 June 2015. The bidding for connectivity and network security is expected to start in June 2015.

4.1 Implementation of the Enterprise Information Systems Plan5

The EISP, approved in 2009, identifies over 20 software application systems to speed-up the
adjudication of cases, increase personnel productivity, and improve court management. The EISP was

5
http://www.competitive.org.ph/doingbusiness/reference/downloads/Summit/forupload/RDEC/EC_REFERENCE6_
Key_Updates.pdf
reviewed and updated in 2013-2014 in order to ensure the readiness of the Judiciary to implement the EISP
and identify project implementation gaps and risks that need to be addressed before embarking on big ticket
ICT projects. The updated EISP was approved by the Supreme Court on 21 October 20146. The Supreme
Court issued A.M. No. 14-09-06-SC which provides:
Whereas, in a resolution dated 23 June 2009, the Court approved the Enterprise Information
Systems Plan (EISP), “which provides the Judiciary with the functional, technical and structural
specifications for selected systems, which should be developed for the Judiciary’s ICT Capability.

Whereas, the work plan and the P2.9 billion budget of the 2009 EISP is based, on the following
assumptions, among others:

(i) the plan’s scope only considers its “implementation to the Supreme Court and Appellate Courts
(Court of Appeals-Manila, Cebu and Cagayan de Oro, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals), plus
three Lower Courts as pilot sites”;
(ii) “the EISP estimation excludes the implementation services and hardware (servers and workstations)
for the roll-out sites [i.e. the trial courts outside the 3 pilot sites]”; and
(iii) that the needed data centers are ready for use.

Whereas, due to these assumptions, the 2009 EISP does not include a budget for a judiciary-wide
technical infrastructure (including a modern data center and disaster recovery site), nationwide
connectivity and network security, which, however, are pre-requisites to the nationwide implementation of
the EISP and on-going ICT projects like the E-Courts.

About P1.44 billion has been made available in 2015 to jumpstart the implementation of the EISP.
Aside from the ICT infrastructure mentioned in the preceding section, a number of EISP software
components have been identified for prioritization in 2015 because they are complementary to the E-Courts.
For instance, the digitization of court records and the Document, Records and Archive Management System
will pave the way for eFiling and the electronic storage and access of court documents, which will not only
speed up court processes by allowing quick access to specific pleadings and documentary evidence, but
also secure court records against disasters like Hainan, which destroyed almost all the court records in
Tacloban City. The Lawyer Information System will also be integrated into the E-Courts system, giving
information to both courts and the public on lawyers authorized to practice law, thus eradicating fake
practitioners from the system. This will also facilitate the security aspect of the eFiling System and regularly
update the courts and litigants alike of a lawyer's current status whether suspended, disbarred, or in good
standing. Also included in the 2015 priority list is the Legal Resource Management System, which will
facilitate knowledge transfer and make legal materials (laws, regulations case, law) accessible to judges,
court researchers and other court personnel. Bidding for these projects is expected to start in the 3rd quarter
of 2015. At present, there is already an eLibrary7 which all judges, court lawyers and legal researchers can
access and use for research and decision writing. This web-based legal resource database has been in place
since 2004. The eLibrary contains the decisions of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals (up to 2009, but
subject to updating), Court of Tax Appeals (up to 2009, but subject to updating), Supreme Court issuances,
executive issuances, laws and regulations, treaties and other legal references. The eLibrary will be
integrated into the Legal Resource Management System. Other application systems, including an upgraded
financial system that is part of the integrated Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System are included in
the priority list for 2016. An updated financial system will pave the way for electronic payment of court
fees, which will cut red tape and protect the integrity of public funds by removing human intervention in
the assessment and payment of court fees. The Judiciary expects that the national government will provide

6
AM NO. 14-09-06-SC
7
http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/
an additional P1.455 billion in the 2016 General Appropriations Act to support the sustained
implementation of the EISP.

It transforms the way the courts do their tasks by facilitating better workflows. It also impacts how
the public interacts with the court system by increasing transparency and access to information. Below are
some of the major impacts of the E-Courts:

a. Speeds up decision-making through automated monitoring of cases. Every hearing, a judge and
her staff need to know the incidents that have transpired in the cases that are in the court
calendar. Going through the pages of case files just to find out what has happened to a case eats
up hours, if not days, which could have been utilized for research and decision-writing. By
freeing more time for research and decision writing, the E-Courts is expected to drive-up
productivity and case disposition output;
b. Cuts case backlogs. The E-Courts provides judges with a dashboard that tracks the status of a
case on the judge’s docket and provides information like the aging of cases, deadlines, and case
incidents that require court action. The information gives the judges a more precise picture of
the status of their dockets – they can prioritize cases that have been delayed and issue needed
orders/action on or before deadlines;
c. Increases public access to information. The public can find out the status of cases through
computers in public kiosks that are found at the entrance lobby of court houses. People who
are not IT literate can go to the Office of the Clerk of Court and get assistance to access the
information on the status of their cases within a few minutes;
d. Bolsters transparency and serves as anti-corruption tool. The raffling of cases is now done
electronically. The electronic raffle is done immediately upon filing, which the litigants and
lawyers can observe from computer monitors at the Office of the Clerk of Court. Removing
human intervention in the raffle of cases removes the possibility of underhanded schemes,
which compromise the raffle;
e. Saves more time for making decisions. Every semester, courts conduct a two-week manual
inventory of cases in order to generate reports on caseloads. Hearings are suspended during
these inventory periods. As soon as all case information is encoded in the E-Courts system,
courts will do away with such manual inventories as reports can be automatically generated
and electronically submitted. That means an additional one month every year for decision-
making;
f. Adopts templates and forms for greater access and efficiency. Following the innovation of the
Small Claims Courts Project, E-Courts will use templates of both court-bound and court-issued
forms. These templates are ready for uploading on the E-Courts system for ready access and
use by litigants and lawyers, as well as by the judges and court personnel. The use of templates
and ready forms will drastically reduce the time consumed by the courts to act on interlocutory
and final case incidents. It will also be an access to justice tool for litigants unassisted by
counsels; and,
g. Adopts the Automated Hearing System. The Automated Hearing System transforms the entire
courtroom into an automated trial forum. This means that during trial, every activity is captured
electronically, right there and then, including orders issued by the judge, minutes of the hearing
conducted, judges' notes on testimony taken, markings of evidence, issuance of writs and other
court processes. Piloted in Branch 85 in February 2014, all 58 Quezon City trial courts, both
first level and second level courts, have been equipped with the infrastructure and the skills to
conduct Automated Hearings. The system does away with the delay in the preparation of open
court orders, which the parties now will be able to get prior to leaving the courtroom, the
inevitable postponements due to our present reliance on the snail mail system, and most
importantly, it frees up valuable time on the part of the judge and the court staff as they now
 no longer have to do these court orders after the hearing and can already devote themselves to
the more important task of adjudication.

5. Employees’ duties and responsibilities

CANON IV of Administrative Matter No. 03-06-13-SC or the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel
provides, to wit:
PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES

SECTION 1. Court personnel shall at all times perform official duties properly and with diligence. They
shall commit themselves exclusively to the business and responsibilities of their office during working hours.

SECTION 2. Court personnel shall carry out their responsibilities as public servants in as courteous a manner
as possible.

SECTION 3. Court personnel shall not alter, falsify, destroy or mutilate any record within their control. This
provision does not prohibit amendment, correction or expungement of records or documents pursuant to a
court order.

SECTION 4. In performing official duties, court personnel shall not discriminate nor, manifest, by word or
conduct, bias or prejudice based on race, religion, national or ethnic origin, gender or political affiliation.

SECTION 5. Court personnel shall not recommend private attorneys to litigants, prospective litigants, or
anyone dealing with the Judiciary.

SECTION 6. Court personnel shall expeditiously enforce rules and implement orders of the court within the
limits of their authority.

SECTION 7. Court personnel shall not be required to perform any work or duty outside the scope of their
assigned job description.

The dispensation of justice is the basic duty and responsibility of the judiciary as enshrined in the
Constitution. The Constitution declares that a public office is a public trust, and all public officers and
employees must at all time be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, loyalty and
efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives. In performing their duties and
responsibilities, court personnel serve as sentinels of justice and any act of impropriety on their part
immeasurably affects the honor and dignity of the Judiciary and the people’s confidence in it.

E-Court and automated hearing may be an additional burden to the employees of courts but it
appears based on the reports that these programs helped them in the speedy disposition of cases. An example
of the positive result of automated hearing is that, orders are now issued in open court and clerks need not
send them through registered mail to the parties which is a good indication that their work load is being
lessen.

6. Filing of pleadings and papers by the parties and e-court’s main function to courts

E-filings making courts accessible. An e-mail account has been set up by the Supreme Court to
accommodate the first-ever electronic filing (e-filing) and paperless system in the country's judiciary, in
time for the implementation of the Efficient Use of Paper Rule. The Supreme Court requires parties to
submit, aside from the printed copies of their pleadings, including annexes, digital copies either through e-
mail or by compact discs, with the annexes in PDF format. For the e-filing system, the high court has
designated the e-mail address efile@sc.judiciary.gov.ph to which parties can send soft copies of their
pleadings8.

The public can access e-Courts through the Public Kiosk Inquiry System, a computer mounted on
a booth. As of publishing time, Ting said that only Quezon City and Angeles City have functioning public
information kiosks, both located at the lobby of their respective Halls of Justice.

The user can look for cases by entering the case number, case title, or name into the search bar and
clicking "Find." The results will show the case number, case title, status of the case, branch handling the
case, and the dates of the next hearing. The public does not need to physically visit the individual branches
to request for or follow up the status of their cases, except in certain instances, such as family cases or those
involving minors, which are considered confidential9.

Hearings are scheduled in E-Court by encoding it into the system as Incoming Document needing
a court action and by making entries through case incidents tab. The eCalendar function of E-Court allows
a user to set a limit as to the number of hearings the trial court will schedule each day and can record in the
calendar the Holidays and no-hearing days or recess period. The hearing schedule can then be generated
automatically after the above information have been input into the system. The judge can track the status
of the case in the Case Incidents feature of E-Court. The Case incidents feature provides for a timeline of
the events that occur in a case during a particular stage. Tasks to be performed by the Court or orders to be
complied with by a party will appear on the Judge’s dashboard. The dashboard reminds them that there is
a task or order which due date is approaching or is overdue. In the evidence, calendar and case incidents
features, the judge can view what transpired in the case, which can assist the judge in writing the judgment.
Templates of orders/judgments are also available for the use of judges. In the Outgoing Document module
of E-Court there are templates that the Judge can use to write a draft and release court orders. The templates
of court orders are uploaded in the E-Courts and can easily be replicated and issued while hearings are on-
going under the Automated Hearing System. The Court Decision function provides information of the
decision, resolution and order rendered by the Judge. It is a transparency tool as well as a safeguard against
corruption as once an order or decision is made, it is uploaded and “published” such that alterations, save
those upon parties’ motion or as allowed by the Rules of Court, may no longer be made, and any such
alterations is automatically and electronically traced to the author. The issuance of orders in open court
during the day of the hearing itself is facilitated by the E-Courts through the templates of court orders,
which are uploaded into the system. The automated hearings cut 2-4 weeks of waiting time, which is usually
the amount of time it takes before the orders of the courts reach the parties through official mail. Since the
orders are issued during the day of the hearing itself, the parties and their counsels are immediately notified
of the courts’ orders. Thus, the period within which to comply with the court orders begins on the date of
the orders’ issuance instead of the date of receipt by official mail under the old practice. The parties and
their counsels can observe the electronic raffle of the cases through a computer monitor within minutes
from completing the filing of the cases and payment of court fees. The absence of human intervention
ensures that the assignment of cases is not manipulated to favor particular parties10.

It is evident now that E-court plays an important role in the Philippine legal system because it
provides easy access to the case filed in court. Without this, the parties are still burdened to go to court to
follow up their cases.

7. Conclusion

8
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/scitech/technology/288497/sc-sets-up-e-mail-for-new-paperless-filing-
system/story/
9
http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2017/03/30/200-ecourts-transparency.html
10
Updated on Judicial Sector Reforms that Impact on Enforcement of Contracts, May 1, 2015
 Supreme Court has been set up along the American model. With the USAID and ABA ROLI, courts
in the Philippines are now becoming digitalized and electronically operated. There are comments regarding
the implementation of E-Court and Automated Hearing. Some of the court employees, especially those who
work for lower courts more than 20 years, thought that this cannot help them because they are not used to
it and in fact they don’t have knowledge about the running of the application. On the other hand, those
employees who work for less than 20 years said that this program can help them very much because of its
paper less feature.

Through the help of trainings conducted by the USAID and ABA ROLI, court employees are now
getting familiarized with the functions of this program.

Another good thing with this program is that employees of the courts are being guided on what
action should be done because of the E-Court dashboard for the Judge and Branch Clerk of Court. The
Judge and BCC can now track the status through the dashboard which provides information like the aging
of cases, deadlines, and case incidents that require court action.

E-court also increases the public access to information. The public can now find out the status of
cases through computers in public kiosks that are found at the entrance lobby of court houses. People who
are not information technology literate can go to the Office of the Clerk of Court and get assistance to access
the information on the status of their cases within a few minutes. The raffling of cases is now done
electronically. The electronic raffle is done immediately upon filing, which the litigants and lawyers can
observe from computer monitors at the Office of the Clerk of Court. As soon as all case information is
encoded in the E-Courts system, courts will do away with such manual inventories as reports can be
automatically generated and electronically submitted. That means an additional one month every year for
decision-making. The Automated Hearing System indeed transforms the entire courtroom into an
automated trial forum. This means that during trial, every activity is captured electronically, right there and
then, including orders issued by the judge, minutes of the hearing conducted, judges' notes on testimony
taken, markings of evidence, issuance of writs and other court processes. Piloted in Branch 85 in February
2014, all 58 Quezon City trial courts, both first level and second level courts, have been equipped with the
infrastructure and the skills to conduct Automated Hearings. The system does away with the delay in the
preparation of open court orders, which the parties now will be able to get prior to leaving the courtroom,
the inevitable postponements due to our present reliance on the snail mail system, and most importantly, it
frees up valuable time on the part of the judge and the court staff as they now no longer have to do these
court orders after the hearing and can already devote themselves to the more important task of adjudication.

Considering that this program enhances the judicial system in the Philippines based on the reports
provided by the Supreme Court, clogging dockets are now minimized and cases are monitored and resolved
on time.

One of the positive comments made by the family of the detainee was mentioned during the
interview of the then Chief Justice Sereno, she said that the leader of the 15-member High Court shared the
story of a long-time detainee "released right then and there" after the order of release was "immediately
encoded and printed and served on him and his counsel." "It was so unprecedented that the accused and his
family were in tears, having actually witnessed justice real time”.

Thus, considering all the foregoing, E-Court and Automated Hearing as adopted in foreign
countries have a good effect in the Philippine Judicial System.