---

> Expensive Justice

One of the hallmarks of a truly democratic and just society is easy access to government instrumentalities mandated to ensure that everyone is given his due at the least expense. With the issuance of Department Circular No. 42 dated September 14, 2004 regarding “ collection of legal fees by the national prosecution service ,this time-honored precept may already be a thing of the past.

Issued by Justice Secretary Raul M. Gonzales pursuant to the provisions of RA No. 9279 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations , the circular imposes charges on different services of the prosecutorial arm of the government for at least 37 types of services it may render.

In cases of Estafa/Violation of Trust Receipt Law/Business Scam and Financial Fraud , the fees charges depend on the amount of damage ranging from P150 to P 1,000 , plus P10 for every 1,000 in excess of P 500,000.

For seeking redress of having been a victim of libel, one must pay P 1,000 before the complaint is entertained by the public prosecutor. A complaint for oral defamation to merit consideration, requires a fee of P 200.
 
Hereunder are the other fees for specific criminal complaints :
Reckless Imprudence P 200
Malicious Mischief/All Other cases
With Damages 200
Qualified Theft 200
Carnapping 500.00 for trucks, cars & motorcycles ; 1,000 for buses
Violation of BP 22 50% of fees for estafa; if filed with estafa, no charge Violation of R.A. 7832(Electric
Pilferage) 2,000
Violation of SSS/PAG-IBIG
LAWS 5% of collectible amount
Illegal Recruitment 100
Viol. Of RA 8041 (Water
Pilferage) 1,000
Intellectual Property Law 5,000
Viol. Of Subdivision/Condomi-
nium Law 300
Viol. Of PD 1083
(Code of Muslim Personal Laws) 500

As if to discourage appeals and petitions for review of its own rulings, the prosecutorial agency imposes fees ranging from Ph500.00 to Ph1000.00.

The most scandalous is the imposition of fees on motions/pleadings etc. for consideration or comment of the prosecutors. A motion to reduce bail bond which logically is a product of want of money, is charged P100.00. P200.00 is collected for a motion for the release of a motor vehicle—whether the owner or driver is at fault or not. And, to top it all, a motion for the release of cash bond is charged Ph100.00. Why should one be taxed for withdrawing his own money? In all probability, the movant won an acquittal that is why he is claiming back his money—which during the pendency of the case against him was deposited with the court and whatever interest it may have earned does not accrue to him!

Another—because a litigant seeks to make a prosecutor inhibit from handling his case, he is made to shell out P200.00. Is this fair, or is this one way of getting back at the movant?

For a while , this column found it difficult to understand why direct filing with the Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts of cases cognizable by the Regional Trial Courts was put to a halt. Now, the cat is out of the bag and it is named DOJ Department Order No. 42, series of 2004.