SC approves IP training for court personnel

The Supreme Court (SC) has approved the proposal of the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to give specialized training on IP to court personnel through the judiciary's Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA).

In an en banc resolution, the High Court approved the recommendation of its Office of the Court Administrator for the IPO and PHILJA to initiate the training not only to regional trial court judges but also to clerks of court, legal researchers, stenographers, and sheriffs.

The justices directed PHILJA to coordinate with the IPO on the course and submit a final proposal within one month after the issuance of the resolution, which reached the SC's information office on December 14. A draft of the course is now with PHILJA, which is reviewing it for its implementation, possibly early this year.

IPO Director General Adrian S. Cristobal Jr. said,"We are grateful to the Supreme Court for acting positively on our request. The IPO and PHILJA could now start working for the official initiation of the project, which will enhance the competency and even the specialization of the members of the court on IP. We are glad that the short-term goal of fully acquainting and building up the capabilities of judges and other court personnel will finally inch to a start."

However, in the said resolution, the SC decided to "defer the creation of Special Intellectual Property Courts" in the country due to a "low number" of IP cases. Cristobal disclosed that the court's pronouncement was a positive development for the IPO as the magistrates did not completely turn down the proposal but only held it temporarily. The creation or designation of such courts is one of the components in the ongoing efforts to reform and strengthen the country's IP system.

The IPO's proposal for IP courts has been supported and endorsed by different business organizations in the country, including the American Chamber of Commerce, Joint Foreign Chamber of Commerce, and the Federation of Filipino Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Should the SC decide to designate or create IP courts, Cristobal imparted that it could look up to the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court of Thailand as a model.

"Before Thailand came up with its IP court, it had the same problem with the Philippines when it comes to the low volume of cases, and this is the reason why it integrated international trade issues with its special IP court," Cristobal said. In fact, the IPO sent noted court personnel to Bangkok for a study visit to the Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court and the Thai Supreme Court and likewise went to the EU-ASEAN Symposium on IP Enforcement by Specialized Courts, Challenges and Recent Developments in Intellectual Property Rights that was also held also in the country.

Given IP's multi-faceted and fast-developing nature, the training program, which is a product of a collaborative effort between the SC, PHILJA and IPO, has been warmly received by all sectors.

The program has already identified the judges and staff of three courts in Manila, Makati and Quezon Cities as the initial batch of participants. It will also develop a "bench book" for judges on IPR cases, manuals for clerks of court and sheriffs and a dictionary of terminology for stenographers.

The IPO-funded course will have several modules, and these include: an overview of the IP system, the laws affecting IPR; international treaties and conventions on IP, remedies for violations of IPR and jurisdiction, the international law aspect of IPR and best practices on IP in other countries.

The IPO is also developing similar training programs for prosecutors under the Department of Justice (DOJ) and courses for elementary and high school students and public safety students for the Department of Education (DedEd) and the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) respectively, in order to achieve a holistic approach to addressing the IP problem.