Attorney Joaquin DLG Torres, left, and his client, Shayne B. Villanueva, are interviewed by reporters following the court’s not-guilty verdict.
THE CNMI Judiciary has raised “serious concerns” about the proposed budget cuts, specifically Section 703(e) of the fiscal year 2025 government appropriation bill.
The provision would prohibit the expenditure of any funds, including those obtained from outside sources, for costs related to judges or justices pro tempore.
In a letter dated Sept. 17, 2024, to Senate President Edith Deleon Guerrero and House Speaker Edmund Villagomez, Chief Justice Alexandro Castro and Presiding Judge Roberto C. Naraja said Section 703(e) “directly contradicts Article IV, Section 9 of the Commonwealth Constitution, which grants the Chief Justice the authority to designate, as needed, active or former justices or judges from the Commonwealth or certain other jurisdictions to serve as pro tempore justices or judges.”
“This provision is essential to ensuring the continued and efficient operation of the courts, particularly when regular judges are unavailable or have conflicts of interest,” the judiciary officials said.
“By eliminating funding for judges and justices, Section 703(e) effectively prevents the Judiciary from exercising this constitutional authority. Without the ability to pay or cover expenses for judges pro tempore, the courts will be unable to address case backlogs or handle matters in which regular judges are disqualified. This will severely impede the administration of justice and deny timely resolution of cases to the people of the Commonwealth,” they added.
They said the “prohibition in Section 703(e) undermines a critical judicial function and violates the constitutional mandate that empowers the Chief Justice to appoint judges and justices pro tempore. It places the Judiciary in a position where it cannot fulfill its duty to provide justice in a timely and efficient manner.”
Castro and Naraja urged the Legislature to reconsider section 703(e) and “uphold the constitutional framework and maintain the effective functioning of our courts.”
They noted that the Senate Committee on Fiscal Affairs has amended this section to allow expenditures relative to any cases being conducted remotely by electronic means.
“Even with this exception, Section 703(e) threatens the impartiality and efficiency of cases before the courts of the Commonwealth,” the Judiciary officials said.
They also expressed concern over the remittance of $641,011 from the available funds of the Justice Center Fund to the Second Senatorial District and the Department of Public Safety as proposed by the FY 2025 budget bill.
They said the Judiciary has established treatment courts such as the Drug Court and the Mental Health Court Docket and is exploring the creation of a Veterans Court.
“The evolving needs of these treatment courts demand more space, which the Justice Center Fund can support. Importantly, the funds in this revolving account are not limited to Saipan and the judicial branch; they will also be used to construct a new courthouse on the island of Tinian, as well as make improvements to the Rota Centron Hustisia, and to support the construction of the new facilities for the Executive Branch’s Office of the Attorney General and the Office of the Public Defender. If these funds are remitted and depleted, it is unclear when, if ever, these important initiatives can move forward,” the Judiciary officials said.
Castro and Naraja said the Senate Committee on Fiscal Affairs has removed the proposed remittance from the FY 2025 budget bill.
“The judiciary respectfully asks that the removal of this language be maintained in the Fiscal Year 2025 budget,” they added.
In his initial and revised FY 2025 budget submissions on April 1 and July 1, Gov. Arnold I. Palacios proposed $5,397,173 for the Judiciary. In FY 2024, the Judiciary’s budget amounted to $6,492,148. For FY 2025, the Judiciary requested $14.8 million.
