SUBJUDICE RULE

DEFINITION
• Sub – Judice Rule under the latin maxim “under judgement,”
• “restriction of comments and disclosures pertaining to judicial proceedings to
avoid prejudging the issue, influencing the court, or obstructing the
administration of justice.” (Romero, et al. v. Estrada, et al., G.R. No. 174105, 2
April 2009)
• not a cessation or prohibition of comments and issuance of statements
• statement of facts and opinions which may interfere with a fair trial in court by
creating hostile attitudes in the public during pending proceedings
LANDMARK CASE

• The first importance of the need for Sub – Judice rule was rendered by the United States
Supreme Court in the landmark case of Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333
• In this case, the Sub – Judice Rule was established and adopted by the Philippine Courts as
contained in the concept of Rule 13.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
 “A LAWYER SHALL NOT MAKE PUBLIC
STATEMENTS IN THE MEDIA REGARDING A
PENDING CASE TENDING TO AROUSE PUBLIC
OPINION FOR OR AGAINST A PARTY”.

CANON 13 (RULE 13.02 )

CANON 13 (RULE 13.02)

• subject to limitations on what he/ she can say regarding litigation

• only to the extent that it does not embarrass the prosecution and create
undue influence over the decision of the case
• duty of a lawyer to respect the courts where SC proceedings must be
conducted in decency and in decorum for the proper administration of justice
until their final adjudication
• Collaboration between counsel and the press as to information affecting the
fairness of a criminal trial is not only subject to regulation, but is highly
censurable, and worthy of disciplinary measures (Sheppard v. Maxwell)
 PURPOSE OF
SUBJUDICE RULE
• To restrict comments and disclosures pertaining to pending judicial
proceedings
– To avoid prejudging the issue
– To avoid influencing the court
– To avoid obstructing the administration of justice

Justice Brion:
“… without the sub judice rule and the contempt power, the courts will be
powerless to protect their integrity and independence that are essential in the
orderly and effective dispensation and administration of justice.”
RULES OF COURT

Section 3, Rule 71 of the Rules of Court: “Indirect contempt to be

punished after charge and hearing. xxx a person guilty of any of the
following acts may be punished for indirect contempt: xxx (d) Any
improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or
degrade the administration of justice.”
CONSTITUTION
Section 4, Article III of the 1987 Constitution as a defense: “No law shall be passed
abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the
people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

• Freedom of speech within the Constitution is NOT ABSOLUTE:

– While the sub judice rule may be considered as a limitation of the right to
free speech, it is essential to safeguard the proper administration of justice
and the right of an accused to a fair trial.

• The Constitution simply gives the citizens the right to speech, not the right to
unrestricted publicized speech.
REVISED PENAL CODE

Article 14, RPC:

“The following are aggravating circumstances…
2.That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public
authorities…”
THE PROCESS OF
SUBJUDICE RULE
“ J U D I C I A L R I G H T TO K N OW AC T ”
PROCEEDINGS
PROCEEDINGS
• According to Atty. Manuel Laserda,
“Contempt of court is a defiance of the authority, justice or dignity of the court; such
conduct as tends to bring the authority and administration of the law into disrespect or
to interfere with or prejudice parties-litigant or their witnesses during litigation.”

How does subjudice come about?

A petition or a formal charge should be filed and sent to a respondent
Respondent should be required to say whether he is guilty or not, then will be
given the privilege to state why one should or should not be charged with
contempt

In Rule 71 of the Rules of Court and Rule 13.02 states that a lawyer shall not
make public statements in media regarding ap ending case that may arouse public
opinion for or against the party
According to Rule 13.02

A lawyers must know the following:

How to distinguish a decent comment and fair criticisms from
what is not
In case of contempt, they may be subjected to disciplinary actions
It is also their duty to know what contempt is and what involves
such
Judges are not sacrosanct
PROCEEDINGS
PROCEEDINGS
APPLICATIONS OF
SUBJUDICE RULE
THE SUB JUDICE RULE APPLIES TO
THE FOLLOWING:

(1) Participants in the Pending Case

(2) Public
(1) PARTICIPANTS IN THE PENDING
CASE
 Members of the Bar and
Bench

 Litigants

 Witnesses
Image Source: http://verafiles.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/The-clerk-of-court-
reads-charges-against-Espinosa.jpg
(2) PUBLIC

PUBLIC IN GENERAL MEDIA

LIMITATION

LIMITATION:

The Sub Judice Rule is Limited to Publicized Speech Only.

 PUBLICIZED SPEECH
SCOPE: Those which are aired or
printed in several media forms such as:
 IT EXCLUDES DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN AND
A M O N G O R D I N A RY C I T I Z E N S , W H E T H E R I N
P U B L I C O R P R I V AT E .

R AT I O N A L E : T H E 1 9 8 7 C O N S T I T U T I O N
V E S T E D T H E R I G H T TO S P E E C H , BU T N OT T H E
R I G H T TO U N R E S T R I C T E D P U B L I C I Z E D
SPEECH.
E X C E P TI O N T O T H E L I M I TATI O N:

FAIR AND TRUE REPORT WITHOUT

COMMENT AND MADE IN GOOD
FAITH
 “This, of course, is not meant to stifle all forms of criticism against
the court.xxx The criticism must, however, be fair, made in good
faith, and “not spill over the walls of decency and propriety.” And to
enhance the open court principle and allow the people to make fair
and reasoned criticism of the courts, the sub judice rule excludes
from its coverage fair and accurate reports (without
comment) of what have actually taken place in open court.”
(Lejano v. People, 2010)- Supplemental Opinion of Justice Brion
 VIOL ATIONS OF
SUBJUDICE RULE
VIOLATIONS
 obtaining or publishing details of jury deliberations;
 publishing information obtained from confidential court documents;
 anticipating the course of a trial or predicting the outcome on television;
 publishing details of a defendant's lifestyle, if relevant to the charge;
 revealing the identity of child defendants, witnesses or victims or victims of sexual offenses;
 reporting on the defendant's previous convictions;
ISSUES
NO TRIAL BY JURY IN THE
PHILIPPINES
• Senate Bill 1357- The Judicial Right to Know
– Aimed at eliminating the Sub-Judice Rule in the country
– The prohibition of the media and the press from reporting,
commenting, or publishing events surrounding the trial
– Restriction on the constitutional guarantees of free press
• Became and EXCUSE by the courts to lessen media
exposure to cases
NO TRIAL BY JURY IN THE
PHILIPPINES
• Due Process vs. Free Speech / Freedom of the Press
– Media as “watchdog”
– Public right to scrutinize
– JUDGE: Trier of Fact AND Decider of the Law
EXCLUSIVE MEDIA SCRUTINY

• Whether or not exposing a pending case to extensive

media scrutiny violates the sub judice rule?
– Importance: to preserve the impartiality of the justice system
– Vizconde case:
• Both parties used media as their impetus for their arguments
• Opinions prescribed by the public
COMPARISONS
• Atty. Harry Roque: US Courts adapt to the environment and the
need of the status quo; Philippine courts impose a rule the freezes
(so to speak) information
• Marcos regime
– Benefited much from this rule
– Blanketed the court of unfair decisions
• Sub-judice rule as being ex-communicated
– A thing of the past