SC to judges holding convention: No gambling

STEER clear of the gaming tables.

The Supreme Court had this reminder for hundreds of judges attending a national convention in a popular entertainment complex in Pasay City, citing judicial guidelines and a presidential decree barring gambling among public officials.

In a circular, Court Administrator Jose Midas Marquez advised the magistrates participating in the Annual Convention and Seminar of the Philippine Judges Association to avoid the casino near the venue of their event.

The convention, which began Wednesday, ends today at the Marriott Hotel, “which is within the Newport City complex, which also houses a casino,” the Resorts World Manila.

“Considering that the annual convention will be held at the Marriott Hotel, all judges and court personnel are strictly reminded of the prohibition against being seen in casinos and gambling,” Marquez said in a circular issued this week.

Some 600 regional trial court judges are participating in the convention.

In the circular, Marquez cited Section 14 of Presidential Decree No. 1869, which “prohibits government officials from playing in casinos.”

 Stepping in

Supreme Court Circular No. 4, issued on Aug. 27, 1980, explicitly bans judges from playing or even stepping inside casinos: “…[J]udges of inferior courts and court personnel are enjoined from playing in or being present in gambling casinos.”

The circular is based on paragraph 3 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics, which says that “a judge’s official conduct should be free from the appearance of impropriety, and his personal behavior, not only on the bench and in the performance of his judicial duties, but also in his everyday life, should be beyond reproach.”

Marquez also cited the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Canon 4, Section 1, which requires that “judges shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all their activities.”

Although not explicitly cited in Marquez’s circular, violation of the judiciary’s ethical canons come with administrative penalties.

The judiciary has been actively pursuing a campaign to promote ethical service among officers of the court, imposing disciplinary measures against court personnel, lawyers, judges and justices found to have failed the judicial canons, including involvement in corruption, abusive practices and personal indiscretions. Tarra Quismundo