Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court (Filipino: Kataas-taasang Hukuman; [2] colloquially referred to as the Korte Suprema (also used in formal writing), is the highest court in the Philippines. The Supreme Court was established by the Second Philippine Commission on June 11, 1901 through the enactment of its Act No. 136, [3] an Act which abolished the Real ...
3.19 Incumbent Supreme Court Justices During the Chief Justiceship of Artemio V. Panganiban, Jr. (2005–2006) 3.20 Incumbent Supreme Court Justices During the Chief Justiceship of Reynato S. Puno (2006–2010)
The judiciary of the Philippines consists of the Supreme Court, which is established in the Constitution, and three levels of lower courts, which are established through law by the Congress of the Philippines. The Supreme Court has expansive powers, able to overrule political and administrative decisions, and with the ability to craft rules and ...
The Philippine Supreme Court largely upheld on Thursday the legality of an anti-terrorism law that opponents fear could threaten democracy and muzzle dissent, but struck down a provision ...
The chief justice of the Philippines (Filipino: Punong Mahistrado ng Pilipinas) presides over the Supreme Court and is the highest judicial officer of the government of the Philippines. As of April 5, 2021, the position is currently held by Alexander Gesmundo , who was appointed by President Rodrigo Duterte following the early retirement of his ...
An associate justice of the Supreme Court (Filipino: Kasangguning Mahistrado ng Kataas-taasang Hukuman [1]) is one of fifteen members of the Supreme Court, the highest court in the Philippines. The chief justice presides over the high court, but carries only one of the 15 votes in the court.
The Office of the Court Administrator (Tagalog: Tanggapan ng Tagapangasiwa ng Hukuman, [1] abbreviated OCA) is a department of the Supreme Court of the Philippines tasked primarily with investigating judicial misconduct in the lower courts through audits and filing administrative cases against judges whom they find guilty of corrupt practices, gross negligence, and/or ignorance of the law ...
The Supreme Court held in de Castro v. JBC that the election-period prohibition against presidential appointments does not apply to appointments to the Supreme Court. "Had the framers intended to extend the prohibition contained in Section 15, Article VII to the appointment of Members of the Supreme Court, they could have explicitly done so." [10]