QUEZON CITY, Philippines — The Sandiganbayan Third Division has rejected claims that reading the formal charge against former House Speaker and incumbent Leyte 1st District Representative Martin Romualdez during his arraignment constituted “overkill,” stating the procedure safeguards a defendant’s constitutional rights.
In an order dated Friday, September 25, the anti-graft court addressed remarks made publicly by defense counsel Atty. Jose Roy III regarding the reading of the Information.
“The court therefore clarifies that the reading of an Information in open court is not intended to embarrass, tire, or punish an accused. It is a regular part of the judicial process and, more importantly, a safeguard of the accused’s constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him,” the Third Division stated.
The court clarified that while legal rules permit waiving the reading under specific circumstances—such as cases with multiple Informations that differ only in dates and monetary amounts—Romualdez’s case involves a single Information, making the formal reading necessary.
Highlighting that judicial proceedings are public matters, the tribunal emphasized the necessity of open court sessions.
“Openness promotes accountability, protects the rights of the accused, and allows the public to see that cases are resolved according to law and established procedure,” the order noted.
Addressing the conduct of the legal counsel, the court instructed all parties to adhere to proper judicial remedies rather than making public criticisms, reminding attorneys that “their language must observe propriety, restraint, and respect.”
“While counsel are expected to advocate zealously for their clients, such advocacy must always be exercised within the bounds of professional courtesy and respect for the court,” the order stated.
The tribunal further cautioned defense lawyers against making statements to news outlets that could undermine ongoing proceedings or breach the sub judice rule.
“Counsel must be careful with the language they use, especially when being interviewed by the media. While counsel are understandably advocating for the cause of your clients, their language must still reflect temperance, respect, and fidelity to the orderly administration of justice,” the court added.
“Any comments that would constitute a violation of the subjudice rule or improper conduct tending to degrade the proceedings herein must be avoided.”
The order was issued by Third Division Chairperson Associate Justice Karl Miranda, alongside Associate Justices Fritz Bryn Anthony delos Santos and Michael Frederick Musngi.