Sometimes, when teachers in school postulate that there are three independent branches of Government: Executive, Legislative and the Judiciary - some students think that's baloney.

Let's not even talk of the Lower House's canine devotion to the Palace - but how puny the Justice System is in this country is and how that explains the dismal record of dispensing justice here.

Structurally, the dice is loaded against the Judiciary. To start with. Consider that in a typical national budget allocation, the Judiciary, a supposed co-equal branch of government only receives less than 1% of the entire pie. The Executive gets 68%, Automatic Debt Appropriation 28%, Legislative Pork 3% and less than 1 percent each for the Judiciary and the Constitutional Commission.

The Constitutional Commissions, supposed to be creations of the Constitution -cannot be removed by any executive and legislative act. These include the Ombudsman, the Commission on Audit, the Commission on Human Rights, Comelec and the Civil Service Commission. Their heads are, of course, appointed by the president.

The recent perception of the record of Ombudsman chief Merceditas Gutierrez, classmate of the First Gentleman, does not inspire confidence of its independent judgment, to cite an example.

In the past, when the salaries and allowances of judges were disgustingly low, stories about "fixcals" and "cashunduan" littered the history books of the country's judiciary.

Many of them, likewise, were political appointees - that power in fact considered as a premium factor that made politicians extremely powerful and public office such a desirable, lucrative profession.

Right there, the economic impoverishment and the political apron strings created a judicial abomination that court decisions became predictable in this country where "who one knows" not "what one knows" became an overriding criterion in settling court cases.

Four years ago, Senator Francis Pangilinan filed a bill that generally upgraded the salaries and allowances of the judges in the country - precisely to shield them from the temptation of gold.

A Regional Trial Court judge in the 22 courts in Cebu, for instance, gets a basic salary of P25,000 and an assortment of allowances of about P50,000 from the Supreme Court and the Judiciary or a total of P75,000 per month.

The good intentions of the Local Government Code permitted city and provincial LGUs to give allowances to the judges. In the case of Cebu - P11,000 total from both the city and provincial governments - to help them resist the temptation to become partial for monetary considerations.

Except that this creates moments of conflicts on interest.

A Boholano Presiding Judge of Cebu Regional Trial Court No. 58 Gabriel Ingles, brought this to the fore when he wrote both Cebu Governor Gwendolyn Garcia and Acting City Mayor Michael Rama expressing his desire to indefinitely refuse to accept the P6,000 monthly provincial allowance and P5,000 monthly city allowance.

This was apparently in protest over the withholding of the provincial monthly LGU allowance to Judge Bienvenido Saniel perceived to be due to his unfavorable ruling on the petition of the provincial Government with respect to who should get more board representation in a Cebu Waterworks system.

The city had earlier appointed more board seats to the city in the waterworks system arguing that this is equitable since the city pays for 60% of the water revenues. The Provincial Government wanted Judge Saniel to issue a "petition for declaratory relief" which he refused because it was not the proper way to resolve the issue since a "violation" has already been committed by the city government.

Judge Saniel's allowance - allegedly from provincial government instructions was then withheld.

Judge Ingles, who teaches law at the University of San Carlos and writes a legal column in a regional newspaper, explained his move to rid his function of possible conflicts of interest whenever cases affecting the provincial and city governments would ensue.

Judge Ingles said "the courts must not just be impartial but be perceived as impartial, which is almost as important as the first."

Whatever the judges concerned decides - the public will always trace the bias towards the monetary consideration extended by either parties.

Another judge Meinrado Paredes also gave up his provincial government allowance - likewise in protest over Saniel's case - but kept his city allowance since Judge Paredes presides over a special Drug Court which will unlikely have conflicted cases involving the city Government.

Judge Ingles has a sterling record of work ethics and judicial integrity in Cebu and was once considered as a candidate for Comelec Commissioner. He had long dismissed the possibility because the Boholano judge, a product of the College of the Holy Spirit and an SVD ex-seminarian, said he had no "political backers."

Judges Ingles and Paredes stand today, therefore, as two beacons of hope that the future is not all that dim for the justice system in this country.

Judge Ingles also told the Chronicle that he deplores the accepted mode of LGUs funding the travel and hotel expenses of judges whenever they go on conferences in Manila and elsewhere - claiming the same uneasy situation of a benefactor-beneficiary relationship would befall on one who often sits in judgment over legal cases.

In the local scene, all 30 municipals circuit judges and now seven Regional Trial Court judges, inhibited themselves from handling the controversial case filed by city residents and establishments against the City Mayor et al. for the exorbitant rise in realty taxes without public consultation. The judges claim they are all tax paying residents who will benefit from either ruling on the case, thus their inhibition.

That seemed like an ethically-driven move.

But because of the Ingles Factor, taxpayers are now asking how much are the city, municipal or provincial governments giving as allowances to our judges? Or are they not giving any at all?

The integrity and independence of our Judiciary is an important cog in the preservation of true democracy in this country.

This important criterion becomes more pronounced today as we enter 2009 when seven or even eight Supreme Court justices will be retired - their replacements in the hands of President GMA.

How will the shift in ideological mix affect landmark cases expected to be tackled next year?

Indeed, how independent are our courts - national and local? Juan de la Cruz is asking.

* * * * *
For Comments: email to bingo_dejaresco@boholchronicle.com Or editor@boholchronicle.com