Judge Malcolm Simmons and Independence of the Judiciary in the Philippines

In 2000, the Supreme Court initiated the execution of the Action Program for Judicial Reform ('APJR'), a multi-year plan (2000–2006) that recognized, organized, and actualized legal change.

Judge Malcolm Simmons clarified that the APJR got critical outer help for a wide scope of tasks that concentrated on improving legal proficiency, legal freedom, monetary independence and responsibility, and access to equity.

After the APJR finished in 2006, the execution of the changes started and kept concentrating on (I) putting forth defense goals progressively effective (the foundation of case the board data frameworks in the Supreme Court and redrafting courts and correction of the standards of methodology); (ii) improving court trustworthiness (the lead of an uprightness audit of court activities); and (iii) expanding access to equity (foundation of little cases courts and sending of versatile courts).

Judge Malcolm Simmons clarified that dynamic in the legal executive has been exceptionally brought together. The wasteful aspects and postpones innate right now brought together dynamic and asset allotment are regularly connected with poor framework and insufficient working frameworks. Choices that can be all the more successfully took care of in the districts, for example, work force and acquisition of provisions, need to go through the organization in the focal workplaces, causing bottlenecks and ridiculous postponements in the conveyance of administrations to court faculty in the areas. Because of this issue, the legal executive started decentralizing court organization in 2007 through a pilot Regional Court Administration Office ('RCAO') in legal district 7. Using RCAO as an instrument of decentralization, it is normal that court faculty in the locales will be given better administrations, which ought to thus bring about better organization of equity to court end-clients. At present, the Office of the Court Administrator is focused on gradual decentralization beginning with acquisition duties.

Judge Malcolm Simmons clarified that courts in the Philippines have a noteworthy overabundance of cases. By and large, the yearly caseload of lower courts from 2004 to 2009 was roughly 700,000 cases. Given the assets, including the quantity of judges, courts staff, accessibility of courts, and so on it is evaluated that it will take roughly twenty years to clear that overabundance while new cases keep on entering the framework. An overabundance decrease technique ought to be considered.

As a result of the build-up of cases pre-preliminary detainment regularly surpasses five years. Around 95% of those in confinement are anticipating preliminary. This circumstance can't be permitted to proceed. Just as a build-up decrease system courts should think about elective measures to detainment for those anticipating preliminary.

Judge Malcolm Simmons disclosed that so as to address a portion of these difficulties the Philippine Development Plan (PDP), 2011–2016 imagines changes to: (I) fortify the oversight bodies; (ii) cultivate powerful and quick goals of cases in courts and semi legal bodies; (iii) decrease the expense of prosecution; (iv) stay away from claims including Government contracts; (v) upgrade the respectability and skill of judges, judges, court faculty, and every single other official of the legal executive and semi legal bodies; (vi) increment assets for equity segment offices and semi legal bodies; (vii) improve access to equity of all divisions of society, especially helpless gatherings; (viii) advance the utilization of elective debate goals; and (ix) regulate existing equity area coordination instruments.

Judge Malcolm Simmons has been a legal mentor for over 15 years and has addressed the world over.

Judge Malcolm Simmons Explains Anonymity Orders Under the Pakistan Criminal Code, Islamabad June 2018

“Judge Malcolm Simmons is an accomplished speaker” -High Court Judge

Every defendant has a right to a fair trial. An important aspect of a fair trial is the right of the defendant to be confronted by, and to challenge, those who accuse him or her.

Judge Malcolm Simmons explained that an Anonymity Order is therefore a draconian step and should only be issued if there are grounds to believe that the court would not otherwise hear evidence that should be available to it in the interests of justice; that other measures falling short of anonymity would not be sufficient; and that the defendant will have a fair trial if the order is made.

Anonymous witness testimony is not necessarily incompatible with the defendants’ right to a fair trial - even when it is the sole or decisive evidence against the defendant.

Whether the measures used to allow a witness to give evidence anonymously in any particular case would make the trial unfair has to be evaluated with care on the facts of each case.

Judge Malcolm Simmons explained that the effect of a Witness Anonymity Order is to prevent the defendant from knowing the identity of a witness. Without this information the defendant’s ability to investigate and challenge the accuracy or credibility of the witness’s evidence may be limited.

Judge Malcolm Simmons explained that when considering whether to make a Witness Anonymity Order the court will consider to what extent the defendant needs to know the identity of the witness in order to challenge the witness’s evidence effectively. This question will often be central to the question of whether, having regard to all the circumstances, the Witness Anonymity Order sought would be consistent with a fair trial.

The interests of justice include the interests of the victim or victims, the interests of the witness or witnesses, the interests of the defendant and any co-defendants and the wider public interest.

Judge Malcolm Simmons has been a judicial trainer for over 15 years.  He has lectured around the world.

An extract from a seminar presented by Judge Malcolm Simmons.

Judge Malcolm Simmons Describes Successful Judgment Writing

A fruitful judgment will be one that is clear, well-contemplated, addresses the entirety of the issues in issue, convincing and blameless.

Judge Malcolm Simmons clarified that a judgment recounts to the story. It ought to be drawing in while concentrating just on important, permissible proof. The realities ought to be obviously settled in sequential request. Clarify unmistakably why you incline toward one rendition of occasions to another.

Allude to predictable – or conflicting – proof; proof that may be contemporaneous and innate probability.

Time-allowing, preceding preliminary, a judge ought to have perused the Indictment and composed reaction (assuming any) of the litigant, reminded him/herself of any concurred realities or confirmations and any shared belief. S/he ought to likewise set aside the effort to peruse observer explanations and other significant reports.

An order is helpful and structures the skeleton on which the tissue of an organized judgment can be based.

Judges who utilize an equation based way to deal with the structure of their decisions may have the greater part of what they will in the long run say arranged before shutting contentions are made.

All through the preliminary experienced judges will frequently increase significant entries in the proof and cross-reference matters to a different piece of paper on which they have started to define the structure of the judgment.

Making a judgment can be troublesome. Judge Malcolm Simmons disclosed that the way to composing an effective judgment is arrangement. There are various key focuses to manage as a primary concern.

The Judgment:

•    Should be ordered;

•    Focus on the main problems;

•    Address concurred realities right off the bat in the judgment;

•    Identify quickly the issues of law and additionally truth whereupon you are required to choose;

•    Ensure that you have abridged the standard entries of the ineffective party;

•    Deal with direct proof of the essential realities and state what surmisings can be drawn from his discoveries on the optional realities.

•    Give contemplated choices for your discoveries on those issues of law as well as certainty;

•    Deal with issues of law – typically in sequential request by reference to the realities for the situation. Allude to the specialists.

•    Summarise your decisions on every one of the issues that you have chosen;

•    Be as brief as could be allowed.

Judge Malcolm Simmons clarified that when practicing prudence ensure that you say as much and recognize all variables (both for and against) that you have considered in doing the adjusting exercise.

Judge Malcolm Simmons depicts Climate Change Litigation In The Southern Asia Region.

Judge Malcolm Simmons gave a remarkable introduction on environmental change case in Southern Asia. Several prominent judges and scholars from the region participated in the meeting.

Judge Malcolm Simmons introduced the vital polices for reacting to environmental change impacts throughout the following 10 years (2014–2024).

The arrangement characterizes five topical objectives and procedures that legislatures in the district have organized for execution to guarantee that security and adaptability are accomplished.
Judge Malcolm Simmons clarified that the five key arrangement objectives give a pathway to an incorporated methodology, for the whole district:

(I) guarantee and coordinate manageable financing in environmental change adjustment openings and low emanation improvement measures;
(ii) reinforce a low discharge advancement future and guarantee vitality security for the locale;
(iii) fortify adjustment activities and openings and assemble atmosphere versatile framework and networks to address present and future vulnerabilities;
(iv) instill national, territorial and global environmental change promotion job in driving the worldwide exchanges and mindfulness in cross-sectorial territories for
the most helpless and little island creating states; and
(v) encourage maintainable advancement while guaranteeing security, monetary manageability and power from the negative results of the evolving atmosphere.

Judge Malcolm Simmons has been a legal coach for more than 15 years and has addressed around the world. Judge Malcolm Simmons provides legal aid outsourcing services and reduces the cost and time spent on non-core processes.  He is  provides legal aid to poor people, who cannot hire a lawyer to fight the case. Judge Malcolm Simmons is a team of specialist lawyers and legal professionals who examine various areas in the UK within legal services. Judge Malcolm Simmons was a worker of the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office and filled in as a worldwide criminal judge from 2004 to 2017.He was a well-regarded judge who had an immaculate profession on the seat. From 2014 to 2017 he was President of EULEX Judges.

Judge Malcolm Simmons Explains the Basic Principles of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, Venice 2018

Judge Malcolm Simmons explained that while removing border controls in the EU has made it easier for EU citizens to travel around freely it has also made it easier for criminals to operate across borders.


Judge Malcolm Simmons explained that the rules on gathering evidence in criminal matters in the EU are based on ‘mutual assistance’ agreements. Specifically (1) the European Conveyance on Common Help with Criminal Issues (20 April 1959) and its extra conventions, in addition to two-sided understandings finished up under Article 26; (2) the Conveyance implementing the Schengen Agreement and its additional protocols and (3) the Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union (2000) and its protocol.

Since 22 May 2017, acquiring proof in the EU has been administered by the Mandate on the European Analytical Order.The new order depends on shared acknowledgment and replaces the relating measures in the above shows.
It applies between the EU countries bound by the Directive.

After the appropriation of the Mandate, the System Choice on the European Proof Warrant(2008) (which had a progressively restricted degree) was revoked by Guideline 2016/95 of 20 January 2016.

Conveyance on shared help with criminal issues of 2000

Judge Malcolm Simmons explained that the Convention is the most commonly used instrument for obtaining evidence.
It covers mutual assistance in areas such as:

•    taking statements from suspects and witnesses
•    the use of videoconferencing
•    using search and seizure to obtain evidence
•    telecommunications.

Its protocol contains rules on obtaining information on bank accounts and banking transactions.

Judge Malcolm Simmons explained that the requesting authority can contact the issuing authority directly.

Except if the executing authority has grounds to decline a solicitation, the solicitation ought to be executed at the earliest opportunity – and by the cutoff time given by the mentioning authority, if doable.

Judge Malcolm Simmons disclosed that to guarantee that the proof got is acceptable, the specialists of the executing nation must conform to any methods indicated by the experts in the mentioning nation – if they are not in opposition to basic standards of law in the executing nation.