Curtailing subjectivism: A comparative study of the appointment processes of Supreme Court justices under the Philippine and United States of America systems
Date of Publication
2010
Document Type
Bachelor's Thesis
Degree Name
Bachelor of Science in Commerce Major in Legal Management
Subject Categories
Commercial Law
College
Ramon V. Del Rosario College of Business
Department/Unit
Commercial Law
Thesis Adviser
Crisostomo A. Uribe
Defense Panel Chair
Antonio A. Ligon
Defense Panel Member
Christopher E. Cruz
James Keith C. Heffron
Abstract/Summary
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines grants the President the sole power to appoint Justices of the Supreme Court with the aid of the Judicial and Bar Council which crafts the list of nominees credible to be one of the members of the highest court of the land. With the great power vested upon the President, politicians claim that the whole process is flawed and is highly politicized. This controversy has long been addressed by the framers of the 1987 Constitution when they created the JBC.
Since our laws are patterned with that of the U.S. Constitution, this study will identify and delve the key differences in the appointment process and distinguish our current systems advantages and disadvantages in comparison to the U.S. system. The aim is to develop a new system that curtails subjectivity, paving way for objectivity in the subjective process.
Abstract Format
html
Language
English
Format
Accession Number
TU19561
Shelf Location
Archives, The Learning Commons, 12F, Henry Sy Sr. Hall
Physical Description
82, [11] leaves
Recommended Citation
Tengco, S. R., & Villanueva, F. A. (2010). Curtailing subjectivism: A comparative study of the appointment processes of Supreme Court justices under the Philippine and United States of America systems. Retrieved from https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_bachelors/17760
