The Supreme Court's Justice on Wheels Project in Cebu

By Virgil Vallecera, Romeo Limatoc Jr., Dennis Libetario

ABSTRACT

Justice is a necessity of living. Without it, life is a misery. In the Philippines, people could hardly fell its existence, especially to those prisoners who served more than the maximum years intended for their particular cases. The Supreme Court then tried to solve this problem by implementing the so-called Justice on Wheels. Believing that this would solve congestion in the country's jailhouse and bring justice closer to the people, the Supreme Court is confident enough to spend for this. In Cebu Province alone, within one day, 71 cases were heard, justice was felt by those who are acquitted and to the complainants who are successful to make their suspects convicted. Justice on Wheels indeed has its goals slightly achieved.

In some points, Justice on Wheels did not serve well. It is impractical. It is an additional burden to the taxpayers, considering its cost of P8-11 million per bus. Our jails need not to have Justice on Wheels but a court, a usual court. In terms of comparative advantage, it is not that beneficial, considering that our courts could hear above or below 100 cases a week, and given the fact that in one day only 71 cases were heard, and that JOW does not have Judges on Wheels, which means our judges are going to leave their branches if there is a case subjected to their sala.

In solving congestion, we need not to have Justice on Wheels, but good governance and equal distribution of wealth. Another is to have at least one court in our jailhouse. We need not to spend too much because it would only cause another injustice to our people.

chapter 1

the problem and its scope

RATIONALE

Accessibility to justice by the poor and the disadvantaged remains a worldwide problem despite the diverse approaches and strategies formulated and employed to address it.

In the Philippine setting, this problem causes another problem, which is the congestion in our municipal and city jails. Some prisoners rot in jail for more than the maximum penalty for their cases. Some want to plead guilty, some want to be diverted or released on recognizance.

The Supreme Court takes a step to solve this. It is by implementing the “Justice on Wheels” project—a bus set up as a courtroom where prisoners’ cases are heard for speedy resolution.

The JOW project operated first in Luzon. As the Supreme Court saw its effectiveness, the mobile courtrooms were rolled out to Visayas and Mindanao. However, this study only gives focus to Cebu Province.

This research aims to know more about this P8,000,000.00 bus and how it would solve Cebu’s problem on jail congestion.

As what Regional Trial Court in Central Visayas (RTC-7) Executive Judge Fortunato de Gracia said, “The number of criminals is increasing, while the country still has limited number of judges and public lawyers.” This speaks of the problem of giving attention to all the cases. Judges and public lawyers cannot accommodate them all anymore.

OBJECTIVES

This study seeks to meet the following objectives:

1. To determine the effectiveness of Justice on Wheels in terms of speedy trial in Cebu;
2. To determine the impact of Justice on Wheels to Human Rights, especially the poor people in Cebu;
3. To evaluate the disadvantages and advantages of Justice on Wheels as it operates in Cebu; and
4. To determine what ways maybe taken to maintain or improve the Justice on Wheels project.

Theoretical background

“Justice delayed is justice denied.”

This time-honored tradition of speedy justice is indeed an old dictum. This principle is the basis for the right to a speedy trial and similar rights which are meant to expedite the legal system, because it is unfair for the injured party to have to sustain the injury with little hope for resolution. The phrase has become a rallying cry for legal reformers who view courts or governments as acting too slowly in resolving legal issues either because the existing system is too complex or overburdened, or because the issue or party in question lacks political favor.

The 1987 Philippine Constitution includes this principle of speedy justice in Article III Bill of Rights as a response to the common charge against the perennial delays in the administration of justice that in the past and even until now has beset our judicial system. Section 14 guarantees the right to speedy trial in criminal cases. Section 16 covers all phases of any case before judicial, quasi-judicial, and administrative bodies from its filing to its disposition.

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to…have a speedy, impartial, and public trial …” (Section 14, Article III, 1987 Philippine Constitution)

“All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.” (Section 16, Article III, 1987 Philippine Constitution)

One need not stress the fact that a long delay in the disposition of cases creates mistrust of the government itself and this may pave the way to one’s taking the law in his own hands to the great detriment of society (de Leon, 2005:117)

Accessibility to justice by the poor and disadvantaged remains a worldwide problem despite diverse approaches and strategies that have been formulated and employed to address it. (Azcuna, 2005)

In 1998, Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr. vowed in his “Davide Watch” to make an open access to justice by the poor a major thrust of the Court. Through his initiative, an Action Program for Judicial Reform was developed, and in the area of accessibility to justice, one of the recommendations proposed was the creation of special courts for the poor and disadvantaged. But it did not end there.

On an official visit to Guatemala in 2003, Chief Justice Davide was briefed how the Guatemalan government brings justice to the grassroots through the Mobile Court System. The principal purpose of the mobile court in Guatamela is to bring justice closer to the people or to provide people in remote areas adequate and inexpensive access to justice.

On his return to the Philippines, the Chief Justice and the World Bank arranged for and made possible two study and observation trips in January and May 2004 by officials of the Philippine Supreme Court to Guatemala, to look into the possibility of establishing a mobile court system in the Philippines as a means to bring justice closer to the poor, by providing a fast and free resolution of conflicts through conciliation, mediation or adjudication.

In May 2004, a concept paper on the feasibility of establishing mobile courts in the Philippines was prepared and submitted to the Court. The following month, the Court launched the Justice on Wheels Project, for this purpose created an ad hoc Committee, and assigned Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna as its Chairperson.

The following are the justifications of the Supreme Court in launching the Justice on Wheels Project:

“…WHEREAS, in view of the many vacancies in court in the Philippines, especially in municipal trial courts and municipal circuit trial courts, delays in the resolution of cases pending threat are inevitable. Delayed justice creates a negative impact on the justice system, undermines social, economic, and even political stability, and impedes national progress.

“WHEREAS, due to various constraints, foremost of which is the lack of interest on the part of lawyers to apply for appointment to vacant judicial posts in courts of the first level, it is not possible to fill up the vacancies within the near future;

“WHEREAS, the urgent need to dispose of the pending cases in vacant courts of the first level and to ensure efficient and effective administration of justice to the people in places within the jurisdiction of the vacant courts may be properly attended to through what maybe known as Justices on Wheels Project, akin to Guatemala’s mobile courts;…” (A.M. NO. 04-6-02-SC Resolution dated June 8, 2004)

The Court then directed the Committee headed by Justice Azcuna to prepare a design of the vehicle that shall serve as the Justice on Wheels, and to formulate rules governing the implementation of the Project. Later on August, the Court approved the proposed Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Justice on Wheels Project. The Committee then organized three technical working groups for the preparation of the design and purchase of the mobile court vehicle, the court jurisdictional structure, and the operational details, respectively.

On December 20, 2004, barely six months after the passing of the SC resolution, the Court decided to implement the Justice on Wheels Project: The first Mobile Court was rolled out.

The Justice on Wheels Project aims to literally bring the courts to the people via an air-conditioned bus that houses a small courtroom and offices of the first- or second-level court judge assigned via a rotation scheme, and are staffed by court personnel and a mediator. The Mobile Court (or Justice on Wheels) is custom-built to efficiently serve its functions. It is divided into two main sections: the front section serves as the courtroom, while the rear section serves as the mediation room. It is fully air-conditioned and equipped with amenities for the judge, the court personnel, the litigants, and their lawyers.

The mobile court is provided with the following personnel complement: a presiding judge, a clerk of court, a prosecutor, a public attorney, a court stenographer, a docket clerk, a process server, a driver, and a security guard.

The judges were assigned to the mobile court on a rotation basis. The judge on duty brings with him the branch clerk of court, stenographer, docket clerk, process server and the prosecutor and public attorney assigned to his sala. A mobile court calendar is prepared for each hearing day for each assigned presiding judge.

As part of the pilot implementation of the Justice on Wheels Project, the mobile court was initially assigned to hear cases involving juveniles in conflict with the law. The main purpose was to hear cases involving juveniles who wanted to plea guilty, or who wanted to be diverted or released on recognizance. More importantly, the mobile court prioritized the hearing of cases of those who have been in detention for more than the maximum penalty for their particular cases.

This strategy was intended to help decongest the various youth reception and detention centers within the Metro Manila area, which were holding up to five times their designed capacities. This was also aimed at decongesting the heavy caseloads of the designated Family Courts in Metro Manila.

In its 66 days of operation within the period December 20, 2004 to November 11, 2005, the Justice on Wheels was able to visit several youth reception centers, juvenile detention facilities and jails in eight (8) municipalities and cities in Metro Manila. Within the same period, the Justice on Wheels was able to hear a total of 1,126 cases and secure the release of 391 detainees, or around 35 percent of the total number of cases heard. (Azcuna, 2005)

A second mobile court was deployed in Bohol on October 13, 2006, while a third mobile court in Agusan del Sur in the CARAGA Region. (Supreme Court Annual Report, 2006)

In view of the unprecedented accomplishments and impact of the pilot implementation of the Justice on Wheels project, the Supreme Court has decided to procure two more buses to be used as mobile courts. These buses are deployed in the major island groups in the country, one each in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. They are considered as extensions of first level courts. By which, they travel from town to town, village to village, and hear cases within the jurisdiction of the first level court

The Committee of the project, now headed by Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, decided it was time to focus on court-annexed mediation. Hence, the JOW mobile court is now being used as a Mobile Philippine Mediation Center for court-annexed mediation or mediation for cases referred by courts. The project is dubbed as “Court-Annex Mediation on Wheels” (CAMOW), which was conceptualized with the cooperation of the Philippine Judicial Academy. The CAMOW is consistent with the Supreme Court’s initiative under the Judicial Reform Support Project (JRSP) to bring the courts closer to the poor and to provide a fast and free resolution of conflicts through conciliation, mediation, and adjudication.

Under the definition of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Law (ADR Law), court-annexed mediation is “any mediation process conducted under the auspices of the court, after such court has acquired jurisdiction of the dispute. It is mandatory, being part of pre-trial.” It is therefore a component of the Philippine court system.

Cases covered by court-annexed mediation are all civil cases, settlement of estates, and cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure, except those, which by law, may not be compromised; cases cognizable by the Lupong Tagapamayapa under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law; the civil aspect of quasi-offenses under Title 14 of the Revised Penal Code; the civil aspect of estafa and libel cases where damages are sought (Sec. 9, Rule 11, AM No. 04-2-04 SC effective 16 August 2004); the civil aspect of BP 22 cases; and “mediatable” cases under the Family Code, such as support, custody/habeas corpus in relation to custody, legal separation, property relations, separation of property, and guardianship.

Under the Supreme Court Judicial Reforms Program, cases filed in court that are classified as “mediatable” are referred to the Philippine Mediation Center, which are composed of trained mediators from the Philippine Judicial Academy. The mediators are given 30-60 days to facilitate resolution of regular cases and 120 days for
family cases. Should the parties refuse or fail to come to a settlement, the case goes back to the judge for a full-blown trial.

This is a very good program of the Supreme Court because most provinces, cities, and municipalities in the country lacked mediation centers and facilities. The Committee uses the following criteria in deploying the buses for court-annexed mediation: caseload base, presence of Supreme Court-accredited mediators, and the absence of mediation units in the area.

The JOW/CAMOW program strives to maintain the excellent record it achieved. The slogan of the Committee on Justice on Wheels this year 2008 is: “Our Courts Are Driven to Serve You Better.” Access to justice, especially for the poor and the marginalized, and decongestion of court dockets are the main goals. Thus, after serving Bulacan and Rizal, the first and third mobile courts were brought to other provinces, cities, or municipalities that are in need of assistance.

In the Visayas, the JOW bus was first deployed in Bohol to hear and mediate environmental cases. Supreme Court Assistant Court Administrator Nimfa Vilches says the Committee sees “the Visayan triangle is renowned the world-over for its rich marine life, which is why it has been suggested to station the said mobile court in Cebu City. We are hoping that the deployment of the third mobile court will serve as an effective deterrent for those who wish to exploit our natural resources in that island.”

ACA Vilches says while the CAMOW program is enjoying a successful run in its first quarter of operations, she believes that the Committee must set a boundary system for its future undertakings. She stresses, “We will function as long as we are needed; and while we are here to address the immediate needs of the people, we must be careful not to send a wrong signal to the judges. They must continue to hear and decide cases conscientiously and expeditiously and must not wait on the mediators to take over their cases. Our main task is to efficiently redirect the transfer of mediatable cases which have already been filed in court and clog the dockets.”

Considering the number of municipalities without regular courts and the number of detention facilities that are overcrowded, the Justice on Wheels has indeed demonstrated its usefulness in addressing, at least partly, these problems.

CHAPTER II

DATA AND RESULTS

This chapter dwells the presentation, analysis, and interpretation of gathered data. This research attended to qualitative approaches in research to effectively meet the objectives.

The primary sources of this section are the interviews with Regional Trial Court-7 Former Executive Judge Fortunato M. de Gracia; Municipal Trial Court in Cities Branch 4 Presiding Judge Rosabella M. Tormis; and Bagong Buhay Rehabilitation Center Jail Warden Efren Nemeño. Pertinent documents from the Office of MTCC Executive Judge Oscar D. Tormis are also presented here.

Secondary sources stipulated in this section are from the Supreme Court’s official website, http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph; and from news clippings of Sun.Star Cebu and Cebu Daily News.

JOW Project: The Cebu Leg

According to documents available at the Supreme Court’s official website, http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph, a record of 71 detention prisoners from two jailhouses in Cebu City were released on August 16, 2008, Saturday after hearings were conducted inside the Justice on Wheels (JOW) mobile court. Some 1,762 inmates suffering from various ailments were also given immediate medical attention.

The jails are Cebu Provincial Detention and Rehabilitation Center (CPDRC) with 1,604 inmates and the Cebu City Jail with more than 2,000 detainees.

Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno, who led Supreme Court officials in bringing the JOW mobile court in its first time in Cebu, said the JOW is intended to supplement the regular courts in Cebu.

Speedy and Fair Justice

"You have here a big bus but that [the JOW mobile court] is more than a bus. That bus was constructed as a complete courtroom that can try with speed and fairness cases involving especially the poor," Chief Justice Puno told Cebu court officials and employees, as well as members of the BJMP during a short program prior to the start of the mobile court hearings.

The JOW mobile court initially aimed to address the twin problems of clogged court dockets and jail congestion.

The Chief Justice further said, "When you consider the realities on ground, the poor and the marginalized oftentimes play in an uneven legal field. So the JOW program is predicated on that rationale: bringing social justice to the disadvantaged sectors of our society as a living reality."

Executive Judge Fortunato M. de Gracia Jr. of the Regional Trial Court Cebu; Executive Judge Oscar D. Andrino of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) Cebu; Presiding Judge Sylva A. Paderanga of RTC Branch 16, and Presiding Judge Rosabella M. Tormis, MTCC of Branch 4 presided over the JOW hearings.

Medical Attention

"This JOW has an important component. The medical services which are given to inmates in coordination with doctors and dentists of local government units, in our experience, show that because of the congestion problem, a lot of inmates suffer lots of diseases," the Chief Justice added.

"Even as we pay attention to their legal needs, we should not overlook their medical needs."

Mediation

Chief Justice Puno said the JOW mobile courts are also now being used to strengthen the mediation program of the court. Mediation is a mode of alternative dispute resolution wherein a neutral third party helps facilitate the resolution of cases of contending parties.

In September 2007, the JOW mobile court was brought to Taytay, Rizal to serve as a mediation court. At least 90 percent of the cases referred to mediation were resolved.

Puno said they would be bringing JOW mobile courts to Davao, Sarangani, and other parts of Mindanao.

Education Program

The Chief Justice said the JOW is also being used to strengthen the education program of the High Court.

"We will be bringing this JOW to our indigenous peoples, fishermen, farmers, and we will have experts, legal lecturers" who will educate them on their rights and privileges under our laws, rules and regulations and the manner on how these rights can be effectuated in our tribunals, he added.

The Cebu leg’s number of 71 released detainees adds to the 164 other inmates from three congested jailhouses in Metro Manila, and eight (8) minors from the Manila Youth Reception Center released on separate dates in July and August.

Speedy Disposition

Deputy Court Administrator Nimfa C. Vilches, for her part, said the JOW mobile court hearings give litigants an additional one hearing day of their cases, thereby contributing to speedy disposition of cases.

The jail decongestion activity in the Cebu jails was done in coordination with the Cebu provincial government led by Governor Gwendolyn F. Garcia and provincial consultant on security Byron Garcia.

The jail decongestion activity through the Supreme Court's JOW Project, in conjunction with the Court's Increasing Access to Justice by the Poor Program, is part of the Court's efforts to respond to the difficulty under the justice system that limits the poor from seeking redress from the courts. The program follows the successful holding of the Court's Forum on “Increasing Access to Justice: Bridging Gaps and Removing Roadblocks” last June 30 and July 1, 2008.

Litigation Cost of Travel

The JOW project, literally, orders judges, clerks, and prosecutors to pack into large buses and go to far-flung barangays all over the country to hear cases.

The High Tribunal is serious about the mobile court project and has created a committee to carry it out.

The committee is composed of Justice Adolfo Azcuna, Deputy Court Administrators Zenaida Elepaño, and Christopher Lock, lawyers Ismael Khan Jr. and Thelma Bahia, together with Evelyn Dumdum and Edilberto Davis.

Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna described the mobile court as “custom-built to efficiently serve its functions.”

“Litigants from distant provinces need not travel far to attend court hearings as there will soon be a fleet of mobile courts,” the SC public information office said.

“The many vacancies in courts nationwide have inevitably resulted in the delay of the resolution of cases,” the High Tribunal said.

Through the program, the SC said, people living far away will no longer have to travel to court and wait for the cases to be called because it is now the court that will go to them.

“The mobile court will move about in places where there are no judges to hear cases involving labor, domestic relations and others. It also conducts mediation, also known as alternative dispute resolution,” the SC said in its statement.

To note, the JOW mobile court visited Kalibo, Aklan to hear cases following the destruction of the Kalibo Hall of Justice in July.

“Delayed justice creates a negative impact on the justice system as it undermines social, economic, and even political stability and impedes national progress,” the SC said.

Asked for his opinion, a Regional Trial Court (RTC) judge who asked not to be named expressed fears that the project, because it breaks years of tradition, may devalue the court as an institution.

“The court is an institution. It cannot be reduced to a judge sitting on a table hearing a case. The court is more than that. The ceremony and the tradition have a purpose,” he said in a July 12, 2004 Sun.Star Cebu article titled “‘Justice on wheels’ rolls to save parties involved in litigation cost of travel.”

Born by virtue of Administrative Order 04-7-02, the Justice on Wheels Project was created to ensure “accessible and immediate justice to the people.”

With the mobile courts, not only will the problem of disposal of pending cases in vacant courts be addressed, it also “ensures efficient and effective administration of justice to the people in places within the jurisdiction of the vacant courts.”

Landmark Case

Among those released through the JOW project last August 16, 2008 were brothers Maximo and Corcodio Laputan, who were accused of raping and killing Maximo's daughter, Mylene, in Carcar City in 2005.

The real suspect, their nephew, Ronnie Tabora, implicated them to save himself.

Although the Laputan brothers were cleared of the rape with homicide case in 2006, they remained in jail because of another case for direct assault filed against them by a member of the Carcar City Police Station.

They were earlier convicted by the Municipal Trial Court of Carcar City and were sentenced up to four years in jail, which they appealed before the RTC.

Presiding Judge Slyvia Paderanga of RTC Branch 16, however, reversed their conviction last Saturday and ordered their release.

The Laputan brothers are only two among the 235 prisoners nationwide who benefited from the JOW program.

Easier Access

In a Sun.Star Cebu article “Special SC bus sets justice in motion for over 50 inmates" last August 17, 2008 RTC Judge Paderanga said the JOW mobile court gave the poor easier access to their cases.

As she wrapped up her hearings on the day the mobile courts came on August 16, she had a schedule of five (5) cases, but only two (2) were heard. Both cases were dismissed and the suspects released. Paderanga said she was in session for less than 30 minutes.

“The advantage is easier access to justice. The inmates just stay in jail and more cases can be heard. The judges also get a chance to directly interview the inmates,” Judge Paderanga said of the JOW program.

No major difference, however

Former Executive Judge Fortunato de Gracia of RTC-7 sees no difference with the mobile court. “We have courts everywhere, it is just the same with our courts, and the only difference is that it is on wheels.”

Just the same with ordinary courts, the mobile court hears all types of cases and the hearings last 30 minutes to one hour per case from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 nn and from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

“Even prior to the existence of the Justice on Wheels, access to justice was enhanced, at least this time in a new system,” he said.

Judges not to blame on congestion

Judge de Gracia said judges could not be blamed for the country’s packed prisons, however.

Many factors contribute to the congestion, among them poverty, which drives people to commit crimes just to survive, he said.

The number of criminals is increasing, De Gracia said, while the country still has a limited number of judges and public lawyers.

“Few judges, many criminals. That’s a lethal combination,” De Gracia said in an August 1, 2008 Cebu Daily News article titled “’Justice on Wheels’ to visit Cebu prisons.”

He said the RTC-7 in particular has many vacancies. But there are no takers because the job of a judge is complicated, De Gracia said.

“Judges sit in hot courtrooms, wearing black robes, solving problems that are not theirs,” he said. “Even now, two of our judges are in hospitals because of their work.”

The executive judge lashed out at criticisms that blame judges for delayed justice. “The judge is not the judicial system. It is also composed of the PAO (Public Attorney’s Office) lawyer, the prosecution, the defense counsel, and the witnesses. Everyone should be there and everyone should be ready. One little quirk and there is no trial, there is delay.”

According to Rosemarie Pe, statistician of RTC-7, the RTC in Cebu City has at least 6,517 pending criminal cases and 1,990 pending civil cases.

Much ado about nothing

Presiding Judge Rosabella M. Tormis of MTCC Branch 4 is pessimistic about the project. For her, the JOW project stalled the cases she could handle. “I handled four cases, and to think that in my branch, I could hear 100 cases a week.”

She said a day before August 16, 2008, the people involved in the four cases she handled were ready to be released, but the hearings were suspended for a day to pave the launching of the Cebu leg of the JOW project.

Financial loss; corruption

Judge Tormis is skeptic that the project would only take its toll from the people, that instead of giving due advantage, the people gained financial losses with the acquisition of the buses. “Considering the P8,000,000.00 cost per bus, excluding the expenses for its maintenance and transportation, who will pay for this? The payment would be another slice of the people’s taxes, the people’s money.”

More so, she suggested that the cost be allotted for the detainee’s daily food consumption for them to have a decent chance of living at least. “Gipanghatag pa lang na nila sa atong mga prisuhan ang kwarta para pagkaon sa atong mga piniriso. (They should’ve given the budget to our jailhouses for our detainees’ rations.)”

She said the courts are responsible to have access to justice. The problem is not about congested jailhouses and court dockets nor rising crime rates, but corruption. “Dili magsige og gasto, dili magsige og utang, dili magsige og pangurakot, mogamay ang crime. (If only they stop spending, asking money, corrupting a lot, only then will crime decline.)”

‘Judges on Wheels’

Borrowing Shakespeare’s line, Judge Tormis said the Justice on Wheels was merely a poor justification on the budget handed over by the World Bank; hence, “it was much ado about nothing.”

“It is not adoptable in Cebu. It is impractical. We are understaffed; unless the Supreme Court appoints ‘Judges on Wheels,’ then it would be better,” she said.

Bus only a symbol

At the Cebu City Jail, Supt. Efren Nemeño, the warden, said that with the JOW visit last August 16, jail decongestion, speedy disposition of cases, and inmates’ justice were served.

However, it would have been better if instead of a mobile court, a court in every prison be installed since a bus is only a symbol.

“The program was a noble undertaking considering that the problem of congestion is addressed, at least,” he said.

Supt. Nemeño said minor cases like theft of prisoners 70 years and older were prioritized in the mobile court.

CHAPTER III

ANALYSIS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter wraps up the important features of the Justice on Wheels Project. It also gives the analysis, conclusions, and recommendations of the researchers about the JOW project.

Analysis

Based on the data gathered and collated, the following are what the researchers have observed. The researchers used a structuralist perspective in analyzing the data. In such a way, the researchers preferred to look into some moral, social, and economic variables to come up with further recommendations about the research subject.

1. The JOW project, which started conducting hearings on July 9, 2004, aims to reduce the number of court cases in order to ease the congestion in crowded jails, by conducting hearings in buses. Buses have been converted into mobile courtrooms where judges hear cases.

2. While the program, which began four years ago, deserves appreciation as it publicly acknowledges that court delays not only adds to the congestion in detention centers, it also acknowledges the deprivation of detainees' rights to speedy disposition of their cases. This endemic problem of court delays likewise has long deprived an unthinkable number of detainees of their freedom, who have since forced to endure prolonged detention, even before being convicted.

3. The JOW program has, in fact, brought to light the sad realities in the administration of justice. While our court system makes every effort to become efficient—which is eventually helpful to detainees—the actions they have taken underlines the incapability of the judges and the regular courts to perform speedy hearing of cases. Had these regular courts been functioning effectively, there would have no need at all for mobile courts. This is because, that while most of the judiciary intend to carry out their duties effectively, they are confronted with practical problems; for instance, the lack of competent judges, legal aid lawyers and court staff; overloading of cases; lack of resources; among others.

According to a Press Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission tagged AHRC-STM-190-2008 last July 14, 2008, the program, which, since 2004, still has four mobile courtrooms throughout the country, is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done.

“Even if the JOW project may have been able to resolve cases and decongest the detention centers promptly, it can neither be an alternative nor replacement to what should have been an effective, competent, and independent judiciary. Therefore, increasing the capabilities and efficiency should likewise be addressed to solving the practical problem in the administration of justice. In doing so, not only is it the duty of the judiciary, but that of the Government that has the utmost obligation to ensure an effective administration of justice.” (Press Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission tagged AHRC-STM-190-2008 last July 14, 2008)

4. The violations of human rights of the poor and their difficulties in accessing the courts must be addressed. However, there are also economy-wide effects of macroeconomic policies that violate these rights. The following are among the most relevant that cut across all the basic sectors of Philippine society that comprises the majority of the population.

According to a Paper submitted by IBON Foundation to the Supreme Court Forum on “Increasing Access to Justice: Bridging Gaps, Removing Roadblocks” last June 30-July 1, 2008, the Philippines is facing worsening poverty despite supposedly rapid economic growth. There is an unambiguous worsening of poverty in the country.

“Family incomes are not even keeping up with inflation and the results of the latest Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) of 2006 shows real average family income dropping from P145,000 in 2000 to P125,000 (at constant 200 prices) in 2006. In particular, the poorest four-fifths of Filipino families – or some 13.9 million families – saw their real incomes fall between five and almost 13 percent.

“The FIES 2006 in particular found that poverty – using a low poverty threshold of P41.25 per day (or US$0.80 at then prevailing exchange rates) – worsened from 30.0% of the population in 2003 to 32.9% in 2006. This already means 27.6 million poor Filipinos in 2006 or a 3.8 million increase from 2003. The top 20% of families also account for over half (52.8%) of total income while the bottom 80% of families divide less than half (47.2%) between them.” (IBON Foundation Position Paper for the Supreme Court Forum on “Increasing Access to Justice: Bridging Gaps, Removing Roadblocks” last June 30-July 1, 2008)

The situation is becoming even worse today with high and rising inflation rates that reflect the punishing and rapid increases in the prices of food and oil products. The poor are thus being violated on an even wider scale.

5. The people, who have already lost faith in courts, are themselves unwilling or discouraged in seeking legal remedies, especially as some of the security forces and other persons are already taking the laws into their hands, thereby rendering the courts useless—for instance, extrajudicial executions of crime suspects. The delay in the prosecution of cases has, in fact, prevented victims or complainants of crimes to file case in court.

It is indeed disturbing that the failure of the state's justice institutions to function has been allowed to continue. Also, curing a deeply wounded system of justice requires not just treatment; but the finding of solutions to improve the system that caused the delays and people's loss of faith in the first place.

CONCLUSIONS

From the analysis of data, the researchers have come up with the following conclusions:

1. The Justice on Wheels Project was not effective in addressing jail congestion and overloaded court dockets. Though given the noble purpose of having speedy disposition of cases, it is sad to note that from the data gathered it slowed the whole process.

For instance, in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) Branch 4 alone, there are about 100 cases heard and resolved every week, which translates to a 20 caseloads a day. But when the JOW dropped by here in Cebu on August 16, 2008, there were only four (4) cases heard and resolved by the said branch in a day.

2. The project has been favorable to those poor Cebuanos who have been detained for quite a long time for minor crimes. It is specifically beneficial to those who have been released on August 16, 2008. However, given the 71 cases heard and resolved on the mobile court, there is no correlation or assurance that much of its function benefits the poor. There is still the need to mobilize a few buses to reach its full potential. But if that happens, it only adds fuel to the fire as the financial burden goes to the taxpayers.

The project still has a long way to address speedy and impartial justice. However, given the financial dilemma, the project is either way too shallow a solution to adopt. It only attends to short-term concerns of the poor.

3. Considering the data gathered and analyzed in this study, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

The program is barely scratching the surface of what needs to be done (Asian Human Rights Commission, 2008). A weak judicial institution prompted up by absolute poverty is where reforms should begin. The JOW project only undermines insufficient and inefficient administration of justice.

Indeed, true to the words of MTCC Judge Tormis, the whole JOW project is simply “much ado about nothing.”

4. Given its stint here in Cebu, the JOW project has very little room for improvement. The budget prioritized for the mobile courtrooms is better off to the improvement of the administration of justice, especially in terms of getting efficient and sufficient judicial work force.

Recommendations

With the apparent ineffectiveness of the JOW project, the researchers recommend the following:

1. The budget of the project should be diverted to solve the much important and apparent aspects of the bigger problem: The weak administration of justice. The Supreme Court and its judicial branches should have concerted effort not in purchasing millions worth of buses, but in staffing our courts with efficient and sufficient staff to man over the administration of justice.

2. Furthermore, a chunk of the budget should be allotted for the establishment of courts in prison. In such a way, there would be efficient and hassle-free access to justice especially to those detained in prisons or jailhouse. If the noble intention of the Supreme Court’s Increasing Access to Justice by the Poor program is zeroed in for the speedy and impartial hearings and resolution of cases, then having the courts come in to prisons or jailhouse is one of the best ways to do that.

REFERENCES

INTERVIEWS

Regional Trial Court-7 Former Executive Judge Fortunato M. de Gracia

Municipal Trial Court in Cities Branch 4 Presiding Judge Rosabella M. Tormis

Bagong Buhay Rehabilitation Center Jail Warden Efren Nemeño

DOCUMENTS

Status of Cases Calendared on August 16, 2008 at Cebu City Jail courtesy of the Office of MTCC Executive Judge Oscar D. Tormis

INTERNET

Supreme Court’s official website, http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph

NEWS CLIPPINGS

“‘Justice on wheels’ rolls to save parties involved in litigation cost of travel,” July 12, 2004, Sun.Star Cebu

“Special SC bus sets justice in motion for over 50 inmates," August 17, 2008, Sun.Star Cebu

“’Justice on Wheels’ to visit Cebu prisons,” August 1, 2008, Cebu Daily News

The Perceptions of College Students in Cebu City Toward Ready-Made Researches . B

On Civil Status. The civil status of the respondents was needed as this would reflect the financial backup or support in store while research making. The researchers opted to include this as they assumed that for a married respondent, he could gain financial support from his own; while for a single respondent, from his family or immediate relative. The civil status profile would also mirror the level of dependence toward research making or purchasing of ready-made researches.

Civil Status of Respondents per School

As shown, the 10 respondents each from CNU, SWU, UC, and UP were all single. While UV had one (1) married respondent while nine (9) were single.

Figure 10 also shows that none of the respondents per school was a widow or widower.

Table 3

Civil Status of Respondents

Civil Status	Total Frequency (F)	Percentage (%)
Single	49	98%
Married	1	2%
Widow/er	0	-
Total	50	100%

Table 3 shows that 49 respondents or 98% were single, and only one respondent covering the 2% was married.

However, no respondent was either a widow or widower, which suggested that almost all of the respondents were still not into a serious relationship; hence, a possibility that they were mostly independent, financially or otherwise, to their family or immediate relative.

On Educational Background. One of the essential financial determinants of this study, the educational background of the respondents would reflect their level of financial dependence. Not only that, this profile would also adhere to their academic level of perception toward research making and the possibility of purchasing ready-made researches.

Educational Background of Respondents per School

Figure 11 shows that nine (9) CNU respondents were full-time students while only one (1) was a scholar. Both SWU and UV sample respondents had nine (9) full-time students and one (1) working student, respectively. Eight (8) of the UC respondents were full-time students while two (2) were working scholars. Lastly, all of the UP respondents were full-time students. However, none of the respondents per school was a professional or a student who already had a business undertaking or had been employed.

Table 4

Educational Background of Respondents

Educational Background	Total Frequency (F)	Percentage (%)
Full-Time Student	45	90%
Working Student	4	8%
Scholar	1	2%
Professional	-	-
Total	50	100%

Table 4 shows that among the 50 respondents, 45 of which or 90% were full-time students, four (4) or 8% were working students, and only one (1) comprising 2% was a scholar. It also shows that no respondent was a professional.

The results suggested that an average of only one (1) out of nine (9) respondents was financially independent from his family or kin. It also suggested that almost all respondents were concentrated to their academic endeavors. hence, an assumption that the respondents would have enough time in doing research. However, majority of the respondents might be assumed financially dependent to their family or kin.

On School Respondents. This profile shows the schools involved in this study. When the study was conducted, a fair share of 10 enrolled students each from the five (5) school respondents was considered a cluster sample population. This profile would also reflect the difference in the level of perception of the respondents in relation to their school of origin.

Table 5

School Respondents

School	Total Frequency (F)	Percentage (%)
Cebu Normal University	10	20%
Southwestern University	10	20%
University of Cebu	10	20%
University of the Philippines	10	20%
University of the Visayas	10	20%
Total	50	100%

Table 5 shows the equal distribution of respondents among the five (5) schools in Cebu City, which were, Cebu Normal University, Southwestern University, University of Cebu, University of the Philippines, and University of the Visayas. Each school had 10 research students wrapping up the 50-respondent sample population.

On Year Level. One of the academic determinants in this study, the year level of the respondents was gathered in order to reflect the level of perception and academic application. In relation to their academic year level, students vary in their perception towards research making and, especially, towards the purchasing of ready-made researches. This would also prove the level of possibility of purchasing the said works, since as the year level increases, the academic standards and requirements also goes along, which presupposed the assumption that students would be overloaded with requirements and deadlines that they opted to choose a work that demanded lesser effort and burden.

Year Level of Respondents per School

Figure 12 shows that all CNU respondents were freshmen. Five (5) SWU respondents were freshmen, one (1) was sophomore, and four (4) were juniors. The UC cluster had a perfect split of five (5) respondents per 3^rd year level and 4^th year level. The UP sample population had one (1) 5^th year student, while nine (9) were senior students. Furthermore, the UV respondents were strong hold at the 4^th year level. Moerover, only CNU and UV had a bulk of 10 respondents in one year level while the SWU, UC, and UP respondents were spread out to the other year levels.

Table 6

Year Level of Respondents

Year Level	Total Frequency (F)	Percentage (%)
5th Year	1	2%
4th Year	24	48%
3rd Year	9	18%
2nd Year	1	2%
1st Year	15	30%
Total	50	100%

Table 6 shows that out of 50 respondents, 15 of which or 30% were in first year, one (1) or 2% was in second year, nine (9) or 18% were in third year, 24 or 48% were in fourth year, and one (1) or 2% was in fifth year.

It then suggested that the sample population had a majority of graduating students at 48%, which was expected since most of the school respondents offered research or thesis subjects only during the graduating 4^th year students. However, it was observed that a bulk of 30% were freshmen, which suggested that the research topic was encompassing even to the 1^st year level sample population. It was also a good thing that the freshmen had a say to the topic, as researching would also be part of their school requirements.

Relevance or Significance of Research Making to Students. This sub-section pertains to the individual perception of students to research making after having considered the basic profile of the respondents.

Significance of Research Making to Respondents per School

Figure 13 shows the perceptions of the respondents per school towards research making. From this, the researchers used the results as the benchmark of the significance or the impact of research making towards the respondents’ scale of interest.

As shown, most CNU respondents (5 respondents) saw research making an avenue of developing verbal skills; while the least of them (1 respondent each) thought of it as making life easier, making them socially and politically aware, broadening their knowledge on issues, discovering useful skill, and advancing their capabilities. The most of the SWU cluster (5 respondents each) saw research making an outlet of making them socio-politically aware and of widening their knowledge on issues; while the least of them (1 respondent each) saw research making improving their grammar skills and inter-personal skills. Furthermore, the most of the UC respondents (8 respondents) related researching as making them socio-politically aware of issues; while dramatically the least of them (3) related to it as making their life easier. Eight (8) of the UP respondents agreed that researching advanced their capabilities; while the least (1 respondent) made life easier. Notably, all of the UV respondents or 10 of them believed that researching developed their being resourceful; while the least of them (1 respondent each) believed that the impact of researching made life easier, made them more patient, and, dramatically, nothing at all.

Notably, three (3) respondents saw researching as having no significance or contribution to them. No school respondent, except for UV, all agreed in one option.

Table 7

Significance of Research Making to Respondents

Rank	Options	Total Frequency (F)
1	It will broaden my knowledge on certain issues	26
2	It will allow me to be more socially and politically concerned	25
3	It will develop my being resourceful	24
4	It will advance my capabilities as a student	23
5	It will improve my ability to discover useful things	22
6	It will improve my skill in grammar	17
6	It will make me more patient	17
6	It will enliven my interpersonal relationship	17
7	It will develop my verbal things	15
8	It will make my life easier	6
9	It can do nothing to me	3

Table 7 shows the relevance or significance of research making to the overall respondents in a way of determining what research making could do to them.

A simple majority or 26 respondents believed that research making broadened their knowledge in certain issues. This was followed by 25 respondents who believed that it allowed them to be more socially and politically concerned; 24 respondents who believed that it developed their being resourceful; 23 respondents, it advanced their capabilities as students; and 22 respondents, it improved their ability to discover useful things, which was fifth in rank.

Furthermore, 17 respondents believed research making improved their skills in grammar, made them more patient, and enlivened their interpersonal relationship; these were in the sixth rank. This was followed by 15 respondents who believed that it developed their verbal skills; six (6) respondents, it made their lives easier; and three (3) respondents, it could do nothing to them, which ranked the least.

Apparently, majority of the respondents believed that research making allowed them to broaden their knowledge on issues. Only few believed that research making could bring nothing to the respondents. It was also observed that the overall respondents had a common frequency in terms of the options: Research improved their grammar skills, made them more patient, and developed their interpersonal relationship and skills.

Overall, the respondents saw research making’s significance as information acquisition and awareness as well as skills enhancement. Further, few as it was, still it gave an impression that students also thought of researching as nothing at all, despite the good effects it had brought to certain facets of their student life.

Consideration of Research Making to Respondents per School

After having shown the significance of research making to the respondents, the researchers the came up with a follow-up question on how the respondents considered research as an academic undertaking in itself. Moreover, here were the results:

Figure 14 shows that seven (7) CNU respondents considered researching as a second priority; while only one (1) respondent each considered it as a first priority, least priority, just for the sake of compliance, and for the love to deal with it. Most of the SWU cluster (4 respondents) saw to consider it as a second priority; while the least consider it as a first priority, burden and waste of time, and love to deal with. The UC respondents considered it as again a second priority; while they saw it least as a last priority. The UP respondents also considered it as a second priority; while one (1) respondent each considered it a burden and waste of time, love to deal with, and notably, should not be part of the curriculum. The UV cluster considered it as both a second and least priority; while only one (1) respondent considered it as a waste of money.

Notably, only one (1) respondent each considered research making as a waste of money and that it should not be part of the curriculum. Most if not majority of the respondents per school considered it as a second priority next to their major subjects and extra-curricular activities.

As the researchers saw it, since research is indeed a non-major subject, the respondents could not be blamed for considering it as only a second priority.

Table 8

Respondents’ Consideration to Research Making

Rank	Options	Total Frequency (F)
1	I make it second priority to my major subjects	25
2	I make it my first priority	9
2	I consider it a least priority among my subjects and extra-curricular activities	9
3	I love to deal with it at all times	6
4	I don’t take it seriously, I just do it for the sake of passing	5
5	I think it is a burden and waste of time	2
6	I believe it’s just a waste of money	1
6	I don’t think it is necessary so I wish it’s not part of the curriculum	1
-	I always think of it as a lousy undertaking	0
-	I don’t care for it	0

Table 8 shows that 25 respondents made research making as their priority second next to their major subjects. Both second in rank were research making as first and least priority. Six (6) respondents loved to deal with it at all times, which ranked third. Five (5) respondents did not take it seriously and did it just for the sake of passing, which ranked fourth. Two (2) respondents thought of it as a burden and a waste of time, which ranked fifth. One respondent believed it was just a waste of money, which ranked sixth. Another one respondent did not think it was necessary, so he wished it was not part of curriculum. No respondent believed that it was a lousy undertaking or that they did not care for it.

Therefore, majority of the respondents prioritized research making after their major subjects. And that all respondents were not favorable of not caring about it.

Perceptions and Possibilities of Purchasing Ready-made Researches. This sub-section pertains to the perceptions and possibilities of students to purchase ready-made researches. This section does not speak of students who already purchased the researches, but on how students saw the idea of purchasing ready-made researches.

Possibility of Letting Others Do Research for Respondents per School

Figure 15 shows that a simple majority of CNU respondents would take the chance of letting others do research for them; while four (4) of them disagreed with the idea. Seven (7) SWU respondents chose to take the chance; while three (3) believed not to. The UC cluster, however, was perfectly sliced into two with one half or five (5) of them agreeing to take the chance to let others to research for them; while the other half disagreeing. The half of the UP respondents also wanted to take the chance; while three (3) of them would turn down any offer; and notably, two (2) of them were undecided on what to do. Lastly, majority or seven (7) of the UV respondents would not take the chance while three (3) would like to take it.

Standing at opposite poles, most or seven (7) of the CNU respondents would allow other person to do research for them, while each most or seven (7) of the UV respondents would turn the offer down. Notably, SWU, UC, and UP did not reach a simple majority on what to do when given the chance to let other do research for them.

Table 9

Possibility of Letting Others Do Research for the Respondents

Options	Total Frequency (F)	Rank
Yes	26	52%
No	22	44%
No Answer	2	4%
Total	50	100%

Table 9 shows the possibilities toward purchasing ready-made researchers. When asked, “If given the chance to let someone do research for you, would you take it?” 26 respondents answered Yes and 22 respondents answered No. There were 2 respondents, who were uncertain. Moreover, with the categorical information at hand, the researchers saw that this would reflect the possibility of indulging into the purchase of ready-made researches, given the perception per school respondents.

Perceptions of Respondents per School about Students who Purchase Ready-Made Researches

Figure 16 shows how the respondents per school perceived students who purchased or will purchase ready-made researches. The results would also adhere to the factors that lead potential buyers to purchase ready-made researches.

The CNU cluster saw that they were unconfident in research making; while one (1) respondent each perceived reasons of the potential buyers as not being taught well by teachers, not motivated by teachers, in order to do work on other requirements, and to lessen financial expenses. The SWU cluster also considered that potential buyers were not confident in researching, were taught by teachers with unpractical lessons, and to be relieved from the burden of researching. The majority or eight (8) of the UC respondents thought that potential buyers were just unconfident in doing research; while they saw that the least of potential buyer’s reasons would be to do other important requirements in school. Both the UP and UV clusters had five (5) respondents each who believed that potential buyers were both unconfident in researching and just wanted to be relieved of the burden of researching. The UP respondents saw that the least of the potentials buyer’s reason of purchasing ready-made researches was that the lessons in class were not practical and doable. For the UV respondents, the least would be: that teachers did not teach well, that lessons were not practical, that potential buyers just wanted to hasten the research task, and that they wanted to have good researches from good researchers.

Apparently, most of the respondents per school saw that potential buyers were just unconfident in research making so they opted to purchase ready-made ones.

Table 10

Perceptions of Respondents about Students who Purchase Ready-Made Researches

Rank	Options	Total Frequency (F)
1	They are not confident in making research	27
2	So they be relieved of the burden of researching	18
3	Their teachers don’t teach that well	9
4	Teachers don’t motivate them to do research	8
4	So they can work with other important requirements	8
4	To hasten the research task	8
4	To have a good research work since it is made by good researchers	8
5	Research lessons taught by teachers are not practical and doable for them	7
5	To have good grades	7
6	To lessen financial expenses	5

Table 10 shows the probable reasons or factors that provoked potential buyers to purchase ready-made researches.

Twenty-seven (27) respondents believed they were not confident of how to make research, which ranked first among the options. Eighteen (18) respondents reasoned out that they wanted to be relieved from the burden of researching that was why they would probably resort to letting someone do it for them. Ten (10) respondents believed that teachers did not teach that well, it ranked third. Eight (8) respondents each presumed that teachers did not motivate them to do research; that they wanted to work with other important requirements; that they wanted to hasten the research task; and that they preferred to have a good research work made by good researchers. Seven (7) respondents presumed that research lessons taught by teachers were not practicable and doable, which ranked fifth. Another seven (7) respondents reasoned out to have a good grade that was why they would probably let someone do the research for them if given a chance. Five (5) respondents wanted to lessen financial expenses, which ranked sixth.

Quite notably, financial reason was the least of the factors. This was probably because the respondents thought that ready-made researches were cheaper or affordable than doing research themselves, which was somehow or unlikely true as per the price of a ready-made research earlier presented in this chapter.

Moreover, it appeared that majority of the respondents thought that potential buyers were not confident of how to make research so they would let someone do research for them if given chance. As the researchers saw it, a low level of confidence meant that potential buyers were uneasy in applying research concepts taught in school, which then posed questions: Were the lessons of help to them? Or were the lessons well inculcated to them? These then brought the researchers to a point in question about the quality of educational instruction of the respective schools. More to the point, it was also observed that the second reason for potential buyers to purchase was that they wanted to be relieved of the burden of researching, which somehow supported the researchers’ claim that a question on quality educational instruction existed. Though the researchers still had to well establish such a theory, the quality of education would be something worth to venture, in relation to the factors that provoked potential buyers to purchase ready-made works.

Reasons Why Respondents per School Would Not Purchase Ready-made Researches

Figure 18 shows the justification of respondents per school on why they preferred not of purchase ready-made researches.

Seven (7) CNU respondents believed that they did not want ready-made researches because they wanted to have grades that deserved their efforts; while two (2) respondents each thought that they wanted to be proud that they painstakingly made their research, they wanted to measure their research capabilities, and they also wanted to apply their teachers’ lessons. The SWU cluster believed that they wanted to assure that they could answer questions about their research; while the least of them believed that that they wanted to be honest, to measure their limitations, and to apply what theirs teachers had taught. The UC respondents believed that they wanted to be proud of their research; while the least of them thought of the same with the least of the SWU cluster. The UP cluster did not want to purchase ready-made researches because they wanted to defend the research themselves; the least of them (3 respondents) would like to apply what their teachers had taught them. Lastly, seven (7) UV respondents wanted to test their research capabilities; four (4) respondents wanted to measure their limitations.

It was observed that the CNU, SWU, UC, UP, and UP respondents took up all the given options.

However, there was no common trend noticed among the school respondents’ answers. It suggested that each school indeed had a diversity of opinions set of factors that constitute their stand in doing research on their own.

Table 11

Reasons Why Respondents Would Not Purchase Ready-made Researches

Rank	Options	Total Frequency (F)
1	To assure that I can answer questions about the research	28
1	To be able to defend the research my way	28
1	To have grades deserving of my efforts	28
2	To be proud that I painstakingly made my research	25
3	To test my research capabilities	23
4	To be honest	15
5	To measure my research limitations	14
5	To apply what my teacher taught	14

Table 11 shows the perceptions and reasons of the overall respondents why they would not let someone do research for them if given chance.

All ranked in first, twenty-eight (28) respondents each thought that they wanted to assure that they could answer questions about the research; that they could defend the research their way; and that they could have good grades deserving of their efforts. Twenty-five (25) respondents wanted to prove that they painstakingly made their research, which ranked second. Twenty-three (23) respondents wanted to test their research capabilities; it ranked third. Fifteen (15) respondents wanted to be honest, which ranked fourth. While at the fifth and last place, fourteen (14) respondents wanted each to measure their research limitations and to apply what their teacher taught them.

Apparently, majority of the respondents thought that by doing the research themselves, they could defend the research, answer questions, and have deserving grades, which were all concepts underlying the final and most awaited stage of researching: The oral defense. The oral defense was perhaps the very reason why the respondents reasoned out in such a manner of coherence that was why they preferred to make and conduct the research themselves.

Apparently, the research oral defense is perhaps the most prepared if not rehearsed phase of the whole research process, since it is where the judgment of whether the research presented passed the standards for publication or not. Well, as to some it is whether the researcher would graduate or not.

However, the researchers believed that it was also because of the oral defense’s notorious image that a bigger chunk of the overall respondents would prefer to let others do research for them or to purchase ready-made researches rather than make their own (refer to Figure 15 and Table 9); hence, a reverse psychological effect.

Furthermore, given that the results of Tables 9, 10, and 11 were valid, one could not escape the fact that though with the notorious image of the oral defense, some potential buyers could still pass through such a phase since there is no authenticity test installed during the oral defense. The researchers saw that there was a need to establish such a test or a line of questioning that would prove the honesty and genuineness of the research defended and the researchers themselves.

CHAPTER III

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

After a thorough display of gathered data, this chapter deals with the implied findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the study.

FINDINGS

This section is divided into two: Findings of the discreet interviews and that of the survey questionnaires.

Discreet Interview Findings. The researchers had come up with the following findings:

1. The freelance researchers had businesses like internet, photocopy, and risograph centers to cover-up the business of ready-made researches.

2. The freelance researchers lived with their families or kin.

3. The freelance researchers had wide-range of stocked and customized researches and topics that vary in price.

4. The hot spots were located in front of or near academic institutions.

5. The freelance researchers had potential buyers from colleges and universities within Cebu City.

6. The hot spots were issued with Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) certificates.

Survey Questionnaire Findings. Upon the conduct of the study, the researchers tried to cover all the possible and necessary data to come up with the perceptions of college students in Cebu City toward purchasing ready-made researches. Thus, the research instrument was divided into three parts; namely, the profile of the respondents, the relevance or significance of research making to students, and the perceptions and possibilities toward purchasing ready-made researches.

The researchers found that majority of respondents belong to the age bracket of 15-19 years old. Respondents consisted mostly of male students. Majority of the respondents were singles. Most of them were full-time fourth year students.

When asked about the relevance or significance of research-making, majority of the respondents believed that research making broadened their knowledge on certain issues. However, most of them only considered research making as a second priority next to major subjects.

The researchers also found that if given the chance to let someone do research for them, majority of the respondents was favorable of taking the chance since they are not confident of how to make research. While minority of the respondents was not favorable to take the chance since they believed that by making their own research, they could defend it their way and answer questions during the oral defense.

Conclusions

Considering the results of the data gathered, the researchers concluded that the fraudulent business of ready-made researches does exist; much more, is rampant as the buyers come from various universities within Cebu City. What is more alarming is that freelance researchers are very much accessible in front of or near schools. One of the freelance researchers was a teacher.

Second, majority of the student respondents, wittingly or unwittingly, agreed to let someone do the research work for them as they are not confident that they can see things through if they do the research for themselves. Also, they want to be relieved of the burden of researching.

Third, as for the fraudulent research paper itself, it is sad to note that its contents and forms passed the scrutiny of research panelists while the authenticity and honesty of the research were unseen and undetected.

Fourth, it is sad to note that school, research, and government authorities have not seen this discreet transaction under their noses, of which they have not done any extensive or encompassing move against it.

RECOMMENDATIONS

From the data gathered and the inferences made, the following recommendations were born:

For the future researchers, research of this kind should widen its perspective in terms of (1) it should gather information from the research professionals and teachers and (2) it should also multiply the range of student respondents in order to have a reliable and valid result.

For the researchers, they should have a seminar on intellectual honesty and plagiarism every before scheduled research defense of students.

For the academic heads, research teachers and directors, they should include either in the course curriculum or subject syllabus a discussion on intellectual honesty and research ethics so that student researchers will be inculcated of the importance of being authentic in every paper requirement.

For the research panelists, they should not only be keen-eyed on the forms and contents of the research presented but also on the authenticity and honesty of both the research and the researcher.

For the Cebu City government and law enforcers, they should heighten their efforts in monitoring and implementing rules and policies on intellectual property and on plagiarism. Legislate ordinances that effectively man and, ultimately, punish key players in this underground and discreet business of purchasing ready-made researches.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“The Filipino Norms and Ethics,” Truth; pp. 39-41

“Ethics and Filipino,” National Book Store, Inc. and Ramon B. Agapay, 1991, Volume 14, p. 154

“Introduction to Intellectual Property,”Thomas G. Field Jr.

INTERNET

“MSN Encarta Encyclopedia-Dictionary,”

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/morality.html

“Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia,”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism

“Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary,”

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plagiarize

“The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines Main,”

http://ipophil.gov.ph/IPCode/IPCodeMain.htm

http://www.piercelaw.edu/tfield/tgf.htm