When the bench spoke Filipino
The Velarde and Macasaet decision stands as a timely reminder that the law, at its core, must speak in a language the people can understand.
Text size
The Velarde and Macasaet decision stands as a timely reminder that the law, at its core, must speak in a language the people can understand.
Every August, the country celebrates Buwan ng Wika, a month set aside to honor the Filipino language and its enduring place in Philippine life, culture and national identity. This year, however, the celebration carries even greater significance for the legal profession. For the first time in its history, the Supreme Court has issued a full decision written entirely in Filipino.
The decision was penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh in the case of Mel V. Velarde at Angeline L. Macasaet laban sa Kagalang-Galang na Hukuman ng Pag-aapela sa Buwis, Ikatlong Dibisyon, Kawanihan ng Rentas Internas, at Kagawaran ng Katarungan (Mel V. Velarde and Angeline L. Macasaet v. Honorable Court of Tax Appeals, Third Division, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and Department of Justice).
This is a milestone that goes far beyond linguistic novelty. More than a symbolic gesture, it is a powerful affirmation of the Court’s continuing commitment to make justice more accessible, more understandable and, ultimately, more meaningful to the Filipino people.
Judicial decisions do not speak only to lawyers, judges and law students. They affect litigants seeking relief, communities whose interests are at stake, public institutions charged with implementing the law and ordinary citizens whose rights and obligations are defined by what our courts decide.
By writing in Filipino — one of the country’s official languages and the language most widely understood by the public — the Supreme Court sought to narrow the distance between judicial doctrine and the people it is meant to serve. It allows litigants and citizens alike to engage with the Court’s reasoning directly, without the additional barrier of translation or unnecessarily dense legal language.
Equally significant is the fact that the decision demonstrates that writing in Filipino does not diminish legal precision. The Court’s reasoning, doctrinal pronouncements, citations and dispositive portion remain faithful to the exacting standards of judicial writing.
Technical legal concepts that require precision, such as certiorari and moot and academic, were appropriately retained, consistent with established legal usage. The language may have changed, but the rigor of legal analysis certainly did not.
As to the merits, the case involved a Petition for Certiorari filed by Mel V. Velarde and Angeline L. Macasaet challenging proceedings before the Court of Tax Appeals in a criminal prosecution for tax evasion arising from the alleged undervaluation of a property transaction.
While the petition remained pending before the Supreme Court, the CTA granted the petitioners’ motion for reconsideration of the denial of their demurrer to evidence, dismissed the criminal case, and that dismissal eventually became final and executory. With no actual controversy left to resolve, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for being moot and academic.
Yet the lasting significance of the case lies not so much in the application of the mootness doctrine as in the manner by which the Court communicated its ruling. The decision reminds us that access to justice means more than opening courtroom doors. It also means ensuring that the people understand the law, appreciate the reasoning behind judicial decisions and recognize how those decisions affect their daily lives.
As we commemorate Buwan ng Wika this August, the Velarde and Macasaet decision stands as a timely reminder that the law, at its core, must speak in a language the people can understand. The use of Filipino as a language of justice is more than symbolic.
It strengthens public trust in our institutions, promotes inclusivity in the administration of justice and gives fuller meaning to the Constitution’s enduring promise that justice must be accessible to all — not only to those fluent in legal English, but to every Filipino whom the law is ultimately meant to serve.
