The Supreme Court (SC) has reaffirmed that all requests for the Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) of its justices must first be approved by the Court En Banc, citing privacy concerns and the need to follow established guidelines.

According to SC spokesperson Camille Ting, the High Court continues to adhere to the procedures set under Administrative Matter No. 09-8-6-SC, which requires members of the public to file written requests through the online SALN Request Form. These requests are then transmitted to the Office of the Clerk of Court and endorsed to the En Banc for action.

“You must go online and fill out the SALN request form and transmit it to the Clerk of Court. It will be the Supreme Court En Banc who will decide whether they will release the SALN or not, depending on the grounds and justification that you will be providing,” Ting explained.

When asked if the process was too tedious compared to that of the Office of the Ombudsman, Ting said the stricter review ensures a balance between transparency and privacy.

“Under the laws, there are some exceptions to the release of SALNs. We have to consider the privacy concerns of the people, which is why it has to be approved by the En Banc,” she said.

She added that the Court also determines which portions of the SALN documents should be redacted before release to “protect the privacy of the justices.”

Ting assured that the En Banc acts on requests “as soon as possible,” depending on whether they can be included in the Court’s agenda.

“It shouldn’t take long,” she said, though noting that no fixed period is prescribed under the current guidelines.

The spokesperson also confirmed that the 2012 resolution — which outlined the rules on public access to SALNs following multiple requests from journalists and civic groups — remains in effect.

“The 2012 resolution laid down the guidelines, and we also have rules for access to information which include timelines,” Ting said.

She added that the SC is currently reviewing and updating its policies on access to information to make the process more efficient.

“We are reviewing the process for the rule of access to information so we can update it, especially when it comes to the guidelines,” she said.

Earlier, the Supreme Court reiterated in a separate statement that while it recognizes the public’s constitutional right to access information, such access remains subject to reasonable conditions set by law and the Court’s own procedural safeguards.