RULES ON EVIDENCE

As amended by A.M. No. 19-08 15 SC (effective May 1, 2020)

EVIDENCE, DEFINED — Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in

a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact (Rule 128 Sec.1).

Evidence may also be defined as the mode and manner of proving competent facts in a judicial
proceeding.

MAIN SOURCE OF THE LAW ON EVIDENCE - Rules of Court Rules 128-134.

PROOF, DEFINED - The result or the effect of evidence.

FACTUM PROBANDUM - The ultimate fact or the fact sought to be established. It is the fact to
be proved.

FACTUM PROBANS - The evidentiary fact or the fact by which the factum probans is to be
established

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

1. OBJECT OR REAL OR AUTOPTIC EVIDENCE OR PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OR

TANGIBLE EVIDENCE - That which is directly addressed to the senses of the court and
consists of tangible things exhibited in court.1

Note: ALIBI, DEFINED - Known as the weakest defense in a criminal case. It is an averment
that the accused was at another place for such period of time that it was impossible for him to
have been at the place where the act was committed at the time of its commission.

Alibi may be given strength to acquit the accused if:

1. Where no positive or proper identification has been made by the witnesses of the
offender;

2. Where the prosecution’s evidence is weak and unsatisfactory.

2. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE - That which is submitted to the court through the testimony or
deposition of a witness. It is that which directly comes out of the

1
Our CDI subject commonly defines Physical Evidence as the articles and materials which are
found in connection with the investigation and which aid in establishing the identity of the
perpetrator of the crime or the circumstances under which it was committed. Under its umbrella
are: 1. Associative Evidence – These are evidence which links the suspect to the crime scene.
2. Tracing Evidence – Refers tothe articles which

assist the investigator in locating the suspect.

witness’s mouth, oral or written, such as depositions and affidavits.

3. RELEVANT EVIDENCE - Evidence having any value in reason as tending to prove any
matter provable in an action.

4. COMPETENT EVIDENCE - Evidence that is not excluded by the rules, statute or the
Constitution.

5. DIRECT EVIDENCE - That which proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any inference
or presumption.

6. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - The proof of fact or facts from which, taken either singly
or collectively, the existence of the particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary or
provable consequence.

7. CUMULATIVE EVIDENCE - Evidence of the same kind and to the same state of facts. It is
a testimony repetitive of testimony given earlier. It is additional evidence which

merely reinforces testimony previously given.

8. CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE - Additional evidence of a different character to the same

point.
 9. EXPERT EVIDENCE - The testimony of one possessing in regard to a particular subject or
department of human activity, knowledge not usually acquired by other persons.

10. PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE - That which standing alone, unexplained or uncontradicted, is
sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed. Primary evidence is that evidence which suffices
for the proof of a particular fact until contradicted or overcome by other evidence.

11. POSITIVE EVIDENCE - When a witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur.

12. NEGATIVE EVIDENCE - When a witness states he did not see or know of the occurrence
of a fact.

13. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE - It consists of writings or any material containing letters,

words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written expressions offered as proof of
their contents.

14. EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE - That evidence which will excuse a person from an alleged
fault or crime.

15. INCULPATORY EVIDENCE - Evidence which has the tendency to implicate or incriminate
a person.

16. SELF SERVING EVIDENCE – Self serving statements are those made by a party out of court
advocating his own interest; they do not include a party’s testimony as a witness in court

ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE — Evidence is admissible when:

1. It is relevant to the issue and

2. It is not excluded by the Constitution, the law or the rules of court (Rule 128. Sec.3).

Notes: Admissibility of evidence should not be equated with weight of evidence. The
admissibility of evidence depends on its relevance and competence, while the weight of
evidence pertains to evidence already admitted and its tendency to convince and persuade.

EXCLUSIONARY RULE (the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine) – A rule which states that
any evidence obtained in violation of the right against unreasonable searches and seizures
shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.

FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE – A term that describes illegally obtained evidence (not
admissible).

Under this rule, once the primary source (tree) is shown to be illegal, any secondary or
derivative evidence (fruit) derived from it is inadmissible.

KINDS OF ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

1. CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE - Evidence that will be admitted although

seemingly not admissible provided that its relevancy would be shown in a later stage of the
trial.

Example: A photocopy of a document may be allowed by the court to be presented in evidence

but subject to the condition that the one who introduced it will later present the original copy.

2. CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE - Evidence which will be admitted although

normally inadmissible because similar inadmissible evidence has been introduced by the other
party.

3. MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE - When the evidence not admissible for one
purpose but admissible for two or more purposes.

Example: The statement of person may be admitted either as a form of dying declaration of
parts of the res gestae.

JUDICIAL NOTICE, DEFINED - The cognizance of certain facts which judges

may properly take act on without proof because they already know them.

Judicial notice means that courts will admit without proof of facts those matters of public
concern which are known by all well informed persons. Its purposes are: to save time, labor and
expenses.

RULE 129
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN MANDATORY — A court shall take judicial notice, without the
introduction of evidence, of: 1. the existence and territorial extent of states, 2. their political
history, 3. forms of government and symbols of nationality, 4. the law of nations, 5. the
admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals, 6. the political constitution and
history of the Philippines, 7. the official acts of legislative, executive and judicial departments
of the National Government of the Philippines, the laws of nature, 7. the measure of time, and
8. the geographical divisions (Rule 129 Sec.1).

JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN DISCRETIONARY — A court may take judicial notice of matters
which are: 1.of public knowledge, or 2. are capable to unquestionable demonstration, or 3.
ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions (Rule 129.Sec.2).

JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN HEARING NECESSARY — DURING THE TRIAL: During the pre-
trial and the trial , the court may motu proprio or upon motion, shall hear the parties on the
propriety on taking judicial notice of any matter.

Before judgment or on appeal, the court may motu proprio or upon motion may take judicial
notice of any matter and shall hear the parties thereon if such mater is decisive of a material
issue in a case.

JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS — An admission, oral or written, made by the party in the course of
the proceedings in the same case, does not require proof. The admission may be contradicted
only by: 1. Showing that it was made through palpable mistake or 2.

That the imputed admission, was not, in fact made (Rule 129.Sec.4).

RULE 130

RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY

OBJECT AS EVIDENCE - Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the
court. When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or
viewed by the court (Rule 130 Sec.1).

OBJECT EVIDENCE, DEFINED – That tangible thing submitted to the court for inspection,
exhibition of other demonstration.

OTHER NAMES FOR OBJECT EVIDENCE - Real Evidence/Autoptic Evidence/Physical

Evidence.

CHAIN OF CUSTODY - The chain of custody rule requires that the admission of an exhibit be
preceded by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what the
proponent claims it to be. It would include testimony about every link in the chain, from the
moment the item was picked up to the time it is offered into evidence, in such a way that every
person who touched the exhibit would describe how and from whom it was received, where it
was and what happened to it while in the witness’ possession, the condition in which it was
received and the condition in which it was delivered to the next link in the chain. These
witnesses would then describe the precautions taken to ensure that there had been no change
in the condition of the item and no opportunity for someone not in the chain to have
possession of the same.

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE — Documents as evidence consist of writing, recordings,

photographs, or any material containing letters, words, sounds, numbers, figures, symbols or
their equivalent or other modes of written expression offered as proof of their contents.
Photographs include still pictures, drawings, stored images, x-ray films motion pictures or
videos (Rule 130. Sec.2).

BEST EVIDENCE RULE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE - When the subject of inquiry is the
contents of a document, writing, recording, photograph or other record no evidence shall be
admissible other than the original itself.2

EXCEPTIONS TO THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE

(a)When the original is lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on
the part of the offeror;

(b)When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the
evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice; or the original
cannot be obtained by local judicial processes or procedure;

(c)When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be
examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is
only the general result of the whole; and

(d)When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a
public office (Rule 130 Sec.3).

2
The Best Evidence Rule is said to be a misnomer because it appears to apply to all kinds of
evidence when in reality this law applies only to documentary evidence.

(e) When the original is not closely-related to a controlling issue.

Notes: The best evidence rule requires that when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence is admissible other than the original document. As such, mere
photocopies of documents are inadmissible. Courts however, are not precluded to accept in
evidence a mere photocopy of a document when no objection was raised when it was formally
offered.

OTHER NAMES FOR BEST EVIDENCE RULE - Primary Evidence/Original Document

Rule/Contents of Original Writing Rule.

BEST EVIDENCE - It is that which affords the greatest certainty of a fact in question.

The opposite of Best Evidence is Secondary Evidence which is defined as that evidence that is
inferior to the primary evidence.

The purpose of the rule requiring the production of the best evidence is to prevent fraud, to
ensure that the exact contents of writing are brought before the court, and lastly this rule
protects against misleading inferences resulting from the intentional or unintentional
introduction of selected portions of a larger set of writings.

Note: There is another ―Best Evidence Rule‖ found in Rule 4 of The Rules on Electronic
Documents (A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC) Section 1. It states:

Original of an electronic document. – An electronic document shall be regarded as the

equivalent of an original document under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a printout or output
readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the data accurately.

(Examples of electronic documents: emails, undeleted text messages, scanned documents).

OLD NEW
DEFINITION DEFINITION
OF OF
―ORIGINAL ―ORIGINAL

DOCUMENT‖ DOCUMENT‖

beginning May
1, 2020
a. The original of a. An ―original‖ of
the document is a document is the
one the contents document itself or
of which are the any counterpart
subject of inquiry. intended to have
the same effect by
a person executing
or issuing it. An
―original‖ of a
photograph
includes the
negative or any
print thereform. If
data is stored in a
computer or similar
device, any printout
or other output
readable by sight or
other means,
shown to reflect
the data
accurately, is an
―original‖.

b. When a b. A ―duplicate‖ is
document is in two a counterpart
or more copies produced by the
executed at or same impression
about the same as the original, or
time, with from the same
identical contents, matrix, or by
all such copies are means of
equally regarded photography,
as originals.
including

enlargements and
miniatures, or by
mechanical or
electronic re

recording, or by
chemical

reproductions, or by
other equivalent
techniques which
accurately
reproduce the
original.

c. When an entry c. A duplicate is

is repeated in the admissible to the
regular course of same extent as an
business, one original unless (1) a
being copied from genuine question is
another at or near raised as the
the time of the authenticity of the
transaction, all original, or (2) in the
the entries are circumstances, it is
likewise equally unjust or
regarded as inequitable to
originals. admit the duplicate
in lieu of the
 original.

DOCUMENT, DEFINED - A deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by which

something is proved, evidenced or set forth.

SECONDARY EVIDENCE, DEFINED - That which is admissible when the best evidence is
not available; or any evidence other than the original document itself; or one which is inferior
to the best evidence.

OTHER NAME FOR SECONDARY EVIDENCE – Substitutionary Evidence or Inferior

Evidence.

SECONDARY EVIDENCE

WHEN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT IS UNAVAILABLE — When the original document has been
lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror, upon proof of its execution or
existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on his part, may prove its
contents by:

1. A copy(any machine copy), or

2. By a recital of its contents in some authentic document, or

3. By the testimony of witnesses in the order stated (Rule 130.Sec.5).

WHEN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT IS IN ADVERSE PARTY'S CUSTODY OR CONTROL — If

the document is in the custody or under the control of adverse party, he must have reasonable
notice to produce it. If after such notice and after satisfactory proof of its existence, he fails to
produce the document, secondary evidence may be presented as in the case of its loss

(Rule 130 Sec.6).

SUMMARIES – When the contents of a document, records, photographs, or numerous

accounts are voluminous and cannot be examined in court without great lost of time and the
fact sought to be established is only the general result of the whole , the contents of such
document may be presented in the form of chart, summary or calculation (Rule 130 Sec. 7).
The originals shall be available for examination or copying, or both, by the adverse party at a
reasonable time and place. The court may order that they be produced in court.

EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE WHEN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT IS A PUBLIC RECORD – When

the original of a document is in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office,
its contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof

PARTY WHO CALLS FOR DOCUMENT NOT BOUND TO OFFER IT — A party who calls for
the production of a document and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence
(Rule 130.Sec.9).

PAROL EVIDENCE RULE - When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it
is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the parties
and their successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the
written agreement.

However, a party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of written
agreement if he puts in issue in his VERIFIED pleading:

(a)An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement; (b)The failure of the
written agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the parties thereto;

(c)The validity of the written agreement; or (d)The existence of other terms agreed to by the
parties or their successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement.

The term "agreement" includes wills (Rule 130 Sec.10).

PAROL EVIDENCE, DEFINED - Any evidence aliunde, whether oral or written, which is
intended or tends to vary or contradict a complete and enforceable agreement embodied in a
document. It is also defined as any outside or extrinsic evidence introduced to modify or
explain or add something to an agreement that was put in writing.

PAROL EVIDENCE RULE, EXPLAINED – This rule means that there can be no evidence of
the terms of the written agreement other than the terms of the written agreement. This rule
forbids any addition to or contradiction of the terms of a written instrument. Oral testimony
cannot prevail over a written agreement of the parties. The reason for this rule is the
presumption that when the parties have reduced their agreement to writing they have made
such writing the only repository and memorial of the truth, and whatever is not found in the
writing must be understood to have been waived or abandoned.

Note: The word parol came from the French word parole meaning word of mouth or oral
statement. The PAROL EVIDENCE RULE – forbids any addition to, or contradiction of, of the
terms of the written agreement by testimony or other evidence purporting to show that different
terms were agreed upon by the parties, varying the written contract. PAROL
EVIDENCE/ORAL EVIDENCE -

Means outside or extrinsic evidence which is introduced in court to modify, explain, add, or
subtract, some terms in the written agreement. It is introduced in court to modify, explain, add,
or subtract, some terms in the written agreement. The term ―parol‖ means something oral or
verbal. With respect to contracts, ―parol evidence‖ means extraneous evidence or evidence
aliunde.

PURPOSE OF THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE - The purpose of the parol evidence rule is to
give stability to written agreements and to remove the temptation and possibility of perjury,
which would be afforded if parol evidence were admissible.

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN BEST EVIDENCE RULE

FROM

PAROL EVIDENCE RULE

The parol evidence rule precludes or prohibits varying the terms of the written agreement,
while the best evidence rule prohibits the introduction of inferior evidence where better
evidence is available.

QUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESS

WITNESSES; THEIR QUALIFICATIONS — All persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can
make their known perception to others, may be witnesses.

Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime unless
otherwise provided by law, shall not be ground for disqualification (Rule 130 Sec.21).

WITNESS DEFINED - A person who makes a statement to a judicial tribunal on a question of

fact.

FUNCTION OF WITNESS - To give testimonial evidence in court.

TESTIMONY, DEFINED - A declaration made by a witness under oath or

affirmation.

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MENTAL INCAPACITY OR IMMATURITY — The

following persons cannot be witnesses:

(a)Those whose mental condition, at the time of their production for examination, is such that
they are incapable of intelligently making known their perception to others;

(b)Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable of perceiving the facts
respecting which they are examined and of relating them truthfully

(Rule 130.Sec. 21)

Note: Section 21 is now deleted from the New Rules on Evidence.

Notes: Deaf and mutes are competent witnesses when: they can understand the nature of an
oath, can comprehend facts they are going to testify on, and can communicate their ideas
through qualified interpreter.

A mental retardate or a feebleminded person is not, per se, disqualified from being a witness
so long as they can still give a fairly intelligent and reasonable narrative of the matter testified
to.

Mental illness and mental retardation should not be used interchangeably. It is mental illness
that may disqualify a person from being a witness in court.
TESTIMONY CONFINED TO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE – A witness can testify only to those
facts which he knows of his personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his own
perception (Rule 130. Sec. 22)

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE - During their marriage, the

husband or the wife cannot testify against the other without the consent of the affected spouse,
except:

1. In a civil case by one against the other, or

2. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct
descendants or ascendants (Rule 130 Sec 23).

Example: Jose killed Mario on Monday. The lone witness was Maria. On Tuesday Jose and
Maria got married. Question: Can Maria be compelled by the prosecution to testify against
Jose on Wednesday or any other day? Answer: No. Maria cannot testify against Jose without
the consent of Jose because of the disqualification by reason of marriage rule.

Another example: After 5 years of marriage Jose and Maria decided to separate from one
another without court order (separation de facto). Maria thereafter lived together with Juan her
real love. One day Jose killed Juan in the presence of Maria. Question: Can Maria testify
against Jose? Answer: No. Maria cannot testify against Jose without the consent of Jose
because of the disqualification by reason of marriage rule. Jose and Maria are still married in
the eyes of the law..

OTHER NAMES FOR DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE - Marital

Disqualification Rule/Spousal Disqualification Rule.

Note: This privilege can be lost by consent or failure to object

REQUISITES OF MARITAL OR SPOUSAL IMMUNITY RULE

1. There must be a valid marriage;

2. That marriage must be existing at the time of the offer of the testimony;

3. The spouse is a party to the transaction.

REASONS FOR THE MARITAL DISQUALIFICATION RULE

1. The policy of the law is to guard the confidence of private life even at the risk of occasional
failure of justice.

2. To preserve harmony between the husband and wife and family.

3. There is identity of interests between the husband and the wife.

4. If one were to testify for or against the other, there is consequent danger of perjury

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF DEATH OR INSANITY OF ADVERSE PARTY —

Parties or assignor of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted,
against an executor or administrator or other representative of a deceased person, or against a
person of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person
or against such person of unsound mind, cannot testify as to any matter of fact occurring
before the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind
(Rule 130 Sec. 23).

OTHER NAMES FOR DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF DEATH OR INSANITY OF

ADVERSE PARTY - Survivorship Disqualification Rule/Dead Man’s Statute.

DEAD MAN STATUTE, EXPLAINED - The Dead Man Statute is that law barring the testimony
of a person with an interest in an estate regarding any conversation with or any event taking
place in the presence of the decedent.

It is a law that prohibits a person from testifying against the interest of a person who is already
dead.

It provides that if one party to the alleged transaction is precluded from testifying by death,
insanity, or other mental disabilities, the surviving party is not entitled to the undue advantage
of giving his own uncontradicted and unexplained account of the transaction.

Note: This privilege may be waived by cross examining the witness

REQUISITES OF DEAD MAN’S STATUTE

 1. That the witness offered for examination is a party plaintiff, or the assignor of said party, or a
person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted;

2. The case is against the executor or administrator or other representative of a person

deceased or of unsound mind; 3. The case is upon a claim or demand against the estate of
such deceased or unsound mind;

4. The testimony to be given is on a matter of fact occurring before the death of the deceased
person or before such person became of unsound mine.

REASON OR BASIS OF THE DEAD MAN STATUTE

1. If one party to the alleged transaction is precluded from testifying by death, insanity or
mental disabilities, the other party should not take advantage of it by giving his own
uncontradicted account of what transpired.

2. This rule is designed to close the lips of the party plaintiff when death has closed the lips
of the other party defendant, in order to remove from the surviving party the temptation
to falsehood and the great possibility of fictitious and exaggerated claims against the
deceased.

OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF DEAD MAN STATUTE - The object and purpose of this rule/law
is to guard against the temptation to give false testimony in regard to the transaction is
question on the part of the surviving party. The reason for the rule is that if persons having a
claim against the estate of the deceased or his properties were allowed to testify as to the
supposed statements made by him (deceased person), many would be tempted to falsely
impute statements to deceased persons as the latter can no longer deny or refute them, thus
unjustly subjecting their properties or rights to false or unscrupulous claims or demands.
Wherefore, ―if death has closed the lips of one party, the policy of the law is to close the lips
of the other”.

Note: The law on dead man statute appears to have be deleted under the new rules on
evidence.

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION — The following

persons cannot testify as to matters learned in confidence in the following cases:

(a) The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined without
the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other
during the marriage except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a
crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants;
(Marital Communication Rule/Spousal Immunity Rule/Husband and Wife Privilege) 3

3
Privileged Communication Between Husband and Wife

(b) An attorney or a person reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to

engage in the practice of law cannot, without the consent of his client, be examined as to any
communication made by the client to him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with
a view to, professional employment, nor can an attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk, or
other persons assisting the attorney be examined, without the consent of the client and his
employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity; 4

EXCEPTIONS

1. FURTHERANCE OF A CRIME OR FRAUD – If the service or advice of the lawyer were

sought or obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what the client knew or
reasonably should have known to be a crime or fraud;

2. CLAIMANTS THROUGH SAME DECEASED CLIENT – as to a communication relevant to

an issue between parties who claim through the same deceased client regard ess of whether
the claims are by testate or intestate or by inter vivos transactions;

3. BREACH OF DUTY BY A LAWYER OR CLIENT – as to communication relevant to a

breach of duty by a lawyer to his client, or by a client to his lawyer.

4. DOCUMENT ATTESTED BY A LAWYER – As to a communication relevant to an issue

concerning an attested document to which the lawyer is an attesting witness.

5. JOINT CLIENT – As to a communication relevant to a matter of common interest between

 two or more clients if the communication was made by any one of them to a lawyer retained or
consulted in common , when offered in an action between any of the clients ,unless they
expressly agreed otherwise.

Example: X, went to the law office of Atty. Cruz and told the latter that he had killed Jose and
he intended to kill Josefa in the future. Here only the past crime consisting of killing Jose is
covered by privileged communication, but the future crime consisting of the intent to kill Josefa
is not so privileged.

4
Privileged Communication Between Lawyer and Client

(c) A physician or psychotherapist or a person reasonably believed by the patient to

be authorized to practice medicine or psychotherapy cannot in a civil case, without the consent
of the patient, be examined as to any confidential communication made for the purpose of
diagnosis or treatment of the patients physical or mental or emotional condition including
alcohol or drug addiction, between the patient and his or her physician or psychotherapist. This
privilege also applies to persons including members of the patient’s family who have
participated in the diagnosis or treatment of the patient under the direction of the physician or
psychotherapist.5

A psychotherapist is a person licensed to practice medicine engaged in the diagnosis or

treatment of a mental or emotional condition, or a person licensed as a psychologist by the
government while similarly engaged.

Example: Mr. Falcon (who has 13-inch size penis) is married to Ms. Falcona. Mr. Falcon not
content with his wife had sex with Ms. Ravena causing the latter’s vagina to bleed profusely.
Dr. Aguila, an obstetrician treated Ms Ravena to whom confidential information was given by
Ms. Ravena. Question: Can Ms. Falcona use Dr. Aguila as a witness for the crime of
concubinage she will file against Mr. Falcon and Ms. Ravena? Answer: Yes. The physician
client privilege applies only to civil cases. Here what is being filed is a criminal case.

Case: RICARDO DE MESA died and he left certain properties. CAROLINA, DOLORES and
CESAR sisters and brother of Ricardo, were claiming Ricardo’s properties because according
to them Ricardo De Mesa had no spouse and had no children during the time that he was
living hence his property should be inherited by them. However, CECILIA and MARIAN
claimed that they were the illegitimate children of Ricardo, and therefore they should be the
ones to get their father’s property. To prove that Cecillia and Marian are not the children of
Ricardo, Carolina, Dolores and Cesar, presented in court the affidavit of DR. ARENAS.
According to the affidavit of Dr. Arenas, Ricardo was sterile because of gonorrhoea disease
that he contracted during his lifetime and therefore, it was impossible for him to bear children.
Is it proper for the court to admit the affidavit of Dr. Arenas?

5
Privileged Communication Between Doctor and Patient. Note: Autopsies conducted by Medico
Legal Officers on dead subjects are not covered by privilege communication. In autopsies there
is no doctor-patient (treatment) relationship is involved

a. yes

b. no

(d) A minister or priest or a person reasonably believed to be so cannot, without

the consent of the affected person, be examined as to any confession made to or any advice
given by him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to
which the minister or priest belongs; 6

Problem: A goes to the confessional box and confesses to a priest that he killed X. S, the
acolyte (sacristan) heard the crime committed by A which A confessed to the priest. Can the
acolyte be a witness in court regarding what he heard?

(e) A public officer cannot be examined during or after his tenure, as to communications made
to him in official confidence, when the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the
disclosure (Rule 130.Sec. 24).7

The communication shall remain privileged even in the hands of a third person who may have
obtained the information provided that the original parties to the communication took
reasonable precaution to protect its confidentiality (Rule 130 Sec. 24).
 Problem (Bar): Maria had been estranged from her husband Mario. Maria lived in the
meantime with her sister. One day, the house where Maria was living got burned by Mario. The
following were witness to Mario’s burning the house of Maria’s sister: Maria herself, Dr. Jose,
who is the psychiatrist of Mario and Father Damaso, the spiritual adviser of Mario. Can the four
testify against Mario?

PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION, DEFINED - Communications received in

confidence by a person from another by reason of trust or intimate relationship may not be
revealed to the court.

REQUISITES OF MARITAL PRIVILEGE:

1. There was a valid marital relation; 2. The privilege is invoked with respect to confidential
communication between the spouses during the marriage;

6
Privileged Communication Between Priest and Penitent.
7
Public Interest Privilege

3. The spouse against whose the testimony is offered has not given his consent.

THE MARITAL COMMUNICATION RULE MAY BE WAIVED BY

1. Failure to object to the testimony; 2. The spouse calls the other spouse to testify.

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE

Distinguished from

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARITAL PRIVILEGE

DQ BY DQ BY REASON
REASON OF OF MARITAL
MARRIAGE PRIVILEGE

1. May be It may be claimed

invoked if one of whether or not the
the spouses is a spouse is a party to
party to the the action.
action

2. Applicable only It can be claimed

if the marriage is even after the
existing at the marriage has been
time the dissolved.
testimony is
offered

3. It constitutes a Applies only to

total prohibition confidential
against any
testimony for or communication
against the
spouse of the between the
witness. spouses.

PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN LAWYER AND CLIENT, REASON - The

reason for this is to make the prospective client free to discuss whatever he wishes with the
lawyer without fear that what he tells the lawyer will be divulged or used against him, and for
the lawyer to be equally free to obtain information from the prospective client. This rule will
encourage

clients to make full disclosure to his lawyer in matters affecting his rights and obligations.
However, in order that communication between a lawyer and his client may be privileged, it
 must be for a lawful purpose or lawful end.

PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN LAWYER AND CLIENT, REQUISITES.

1. There exists an attorney-client relationship, or a prospective attorney-client relationship,

and it is by reason of this relationship that the client made the communication.

2. The client made the communication in confidence. (Thus the mere relation of attorney and
client does not raise a presumption of confidentiality. The client must intend the
communication to be confidential).

3. The legal advice must be sought from the attorney in his professional capacity

PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT, REASON - This

rule is intended to encourage the patient to open up to the physician, relate to him the history
of his ailment, and give him access to his body, enabling the physician to make a correct
diagnosis of that ailment and provide the appropriate cure. Any fear that a physician could be
compelled in the future to come to court and narrate all that had transpired between him and
the patient might prompt the latter to clam up, thus putting his own health at great risk.

REQUISITES OF PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT PRIVILEGE

1. The privilege is claimed in a civil case. 2. The person against whom it is claimed is duly
authorized to practice medicine. 3. The physician acquired the information while he was
attending to the patient in his professional capacity

4. The information was necessary for him to act in that capacity

5. The information must be confidential, that is if disclosed would blacken the reputation of the
patient.

OTHER PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS RA 11458 (Amending RA 54 and

RA 1477) – Under this law: Any publisher, owner, or duly recognized or accredited journalist,
writer, reporter, contributor, opinion writer, editor, columnist, manager, media practitioner
involved in the writing, editing, production, and dissemination of news for mass circulation, of
any print, broadcast, wire service organization, or electronic mass media, including cable TV
and its variants, cannot be compelled to reveal the source of any news item, report or
information appearing or being reported or disseminated through said media, which was
related in confidence to the abovementioned media practitioners unless the court or the House
of Representatives or the Senate or any committee of Congress finds that such revelation is
demanded by the security of the State.

RA 10029 - Philippine Psychology Act of 2009. Under this law, A psychologists or

psychometrician cannot, without the consent of the client/patient, be examined on any
communication or information disclosed and/or acquired in the course of giving psychological
services to such client. The protection accorded herein shall extend to all pertinent records
and shall be available to the secretary, clerk or other staff of the licensed psychologist or
psychometrician. Any evidence obtained in violation of this provision shall be inadmissible for
any purpose in any proceeding.

EXECUTIVE (President of the Philippines) PRIVILEGE – It is the power of the

Government to withhold information from the public, the courts, and the Congress.

It may also be defined as the right of the President and high-level executive branch officers to
withhold information from Congress, the courts, and ultimately the public.

PARENTAL AND FILIAL PRIVILEGE — No person may be compelled to testify

against his parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants, EXCEPT
WHEN SUCH TESTIMONY IS INDISPENSABLE IN A CRIME AGAINST THAT PERSON OR
BY ONE PARENT AGAINST THE OTHE (Rule 130 Sec.25).

Note: This rule is not strictly a rule on disqualification because a descendant is not
incompetent or disqualified to testify against an ascendant. The rule refers to a privilege not to
testify, which can be invoked or waived like other privileges. Thus, in one case the minor child
was allowed to testify against his own father since he chose to waive that filial privilege when
he voluntarily testified against his father. This privilege applies only to "direct" ascendants and
descendants, a family tie connected by a common ancestry. A stepdaughter has no common
ancestry by her stepmother. Hence a stepmother cannot use this privilege.
PARENTAL PRIVILEGE - Parents cannot be compelled to testify against his descendants. 8

FILIAL PRIVILEGE – A person cannot be compelled to testify against his parents or other
direct ascendants.9

PRIVILEGE RELATING TO TRADE SECRETS – A person cannot be compelled to testify

regarding any trade secret, uness the non-disclosure will conceal fraud or otherwise would
work injustice. When disclosure is directed the court shall take such protective measure as the
interest of the owner of the trade secret and of the
8
The parental privilege rule does not cover stepfather and stepmother relationships. 9 The
parental and filial privilege rule may be invoked not by the person against whom a witness will
testify but by the witness himself.

parties and the furtherance of justice may require (Rule 130 Sec 26)

ADMISSION OF A PARTY — The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact

may be given in evidence against him (Rule 130 Sec.27).

Note: The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in
evidence against him. For well-settled is the rule that "a man's acts, conduct, and declaration,
wherever made, if voluntary, are admissible against him, for the reason that it is fair to
presume that they correspond with the truth, and it is his fault if they do not. If a man's
extrajudicial admissions are admissible against him, there seems to be no reason why his
admissions made in open court, under oath, should not be accepted against him.

ADMISSION, DEFINED - It is a statement of fact which does not involve an acknowledgment

of guilt or liability.

CONFESSION, DEFINED - The declaration of an accused expressly acknowledging his guilt

of the offense charged.

ADMISSION DISTINGUISHED FROM CONFESSION

1. An admission does not necessarily

involve an acknowledgement of guilt
as in the case of confession;

2. An admission may be expressed or

tacit while a confession is always
express;

3. Admission may be made by third

persons and in certain cases
admissible against a party, while a
confession can be made only by the
party himself, and in some instances
are admissible against his co-
accused.

Note: Flight from justice is an admission by conduct. ―The wicked flees when no man
pursueth, but the innocent is as bold as a lion.‖

COMPROMISE, DEFINED - A contract whereby parties by making reciprocal

concessions, avoid a litigation or put an end to one already commenced. Compromise is an
agreement made between two or more parties as a settlement of matters in dispute.

OFFER OF COMPROMISE NOT ADMISSIBLE

RULE IN CIVIL CASES: An offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, and is not
admissible in evidence against the offeror. Neither is evidence of conduct or statement made in
compromise negotiations admissible, except evidence otherwise discoverable or offered for
another purpose, such as proving bias or prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of
undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution
 RULE IN CRIMINAL CASES - An offer of compromised by the accused may be
received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt. Exception: Those involving quasi-
offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to be compromised.

Example: X is charged with rape. X offered money to the family of the rape victim. The family
refused to accept the offer. Here, the offer of X may be received in evidence as an implied
admission of guilt.

RULE IN PLEA OF GUILTY LATER WITHDRAWN, OR AN UNACCEPTED OFFER OF A

PLEA OF GUILTY TO LESSER OFFENSE: Not admissible in evidence against the accused
who made the plea or offer. Neither is any statement made in the course of plea bargaining
with the prosecution, which does not result in a plea of guilty or which results in a plea of guilty
later withdrawn, admissible.

RULE IN AN OFFER TO PAY OR THE PAYMENT OF MEDICAL,

HOSPITAL OR OTHER EXPENSES OCCASIONED BY AN INJURY: Not admissible in
evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury (Rule 130.Sec.28).

ADMISSION BY THIRD PARTY — The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act,

declaration, or omission of another, except as hereinafter provided (Rule 130 Sec 29).

Note: This section is known as the RES INTER ALIOS ACTA ALTERI NOCERE NON DEBET
rule, which means ―things done between strangers should not injure those who are not
parties to them.‖

Note: The rule on res inter alios acta provides that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced
by an act, declaration, or omission of another. Consequently, an extrajudicial confession is
binding only on

the confessant, is not admissible against his or her co-accused and is considered as hearsay
against them. The reason for this rule is that on a principle of good faith and mutual
convenience, a man’s own acts are binding upon himself, and are evidence against him.

ADMISSION BY CO-PARTNER OR AGENT — The act or declaration of a partner or agent

authorized by the party to make a statement concerning a subject or within the scope of his
authority and during the existence of the partnership or agency, may be given in evidence
against such party after the partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act or
declaration. The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or
other person jointly interested with the party

(Rule 130 Sec.30).

Example: A and B formed a partnership business for the purpose of importing cigarettes and
selling them in the Philippines. A admitted in an investigation that he and B were engaged in
smuggling. This admission of A is admissible against B because of the admission by co-
partner rule.

REQUISITES OF ADMISSION BY A CO PARTNER OR AGENT

1. The act or declaration was made within the scope of his authority;

2. It was made during the existence of the partnership or agency;

3. The partnership or agency is proved by evidence other than such act or declaration.

ADMISSION BY CONSPIRATOR — The act or declaration of a conspirator in pursuance to

the conspiracy and during its existence, may be given in evidence against the co

conspirator after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act of declaration (Rule
130 Sec.31).

Note: This rule prescribes that the act or declaration of the conspirator relating to the
conspiracy and during its existence may be given in evidence against co-conspirators provided
that the conspiracy is shown by independent evidence aside from the extrajudicial confession.
Thus, in order that the admission of a conspirator may be received against his or her co-
conspirators, it is necessary that (a) the conspiracy be first proved by evidence other than the
admission itself (b) the admission relates to the common object and (c) it has been made
while the declarant was engaged in carrying out the conspiracy. Otherwise, it cannot be used
against the alleged co-conspirators without violating their constitutional right to be confronted
with the witnesses against them and to cross-examine them.

ADMISSION BY PRIVIES — Where one derives title to property from another the latter’s act,
declaration, or omission while holding the title, in relation to the property, is evidence against
the former if done while the latter was holding the title(Rule 130 Sec.32).

Q: Who is a privy?

A: He is one who derives his title to property from another by purchase, conveyance or some
other modes.

Example: A sold to B a fake jewel and uttered: ―B, kay mura yan peke kasi‖. This utterance
was heard by W. Later B sold the jewel to C but he represented that the jewel was genuine.
Here W can testify that he heard A admitting to B that the jewel was fake. The statement of A
binds B because it was made by a privy.

ADMISSION BY SILENCE (Adoptive Omission) - An act or declaration made in the presence

and within the hearing or observation of a party who does or says nothing when the act or
declaration is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and when proper and
possible for him to do so, may be given in evidence against him (Rule 130 Sec 33).

Example: X was asked by angry relatives of his deceased wife why he killed his own wife. X
gave no reply but simply bowed his head. This may be received as an admission by silence.
But if X was under custodial investigation his silence will not be considered as an admission by
silence since during custodial investigation, the accused has the right to remain silent.

Q: What is the basis for the rule on admission by silence?

A: The instinct of man is to resist an accusation or unfounded claim and defend himself,
because it is totally against human nature to remain silent and say nothing in the face of false
accusations.

ADOPTIVE ADMISSION - A party may, by his words or conduct, voluntarily adopt or ratify
another’s statement. Where it appears that a party clearly and unambiguously assented to or
adopted the statements of another, evidence of those statements is admissible against him.
This is the essence of the principle of adoptive admission. An adoptive admission is a party’s
reaction to a statement or action by another person when it is reasonable to treat the party’s
reaction as an admission of something stated or implied by the other person. It may occur
when a party:

(a) expressly agrees to or concurs in an oral statement made by another;

(b) hears a statement and later on essentially repeats it;

(c) utters an acceptance or builds upon the assertion of another;

(d) replies by way of rebuttal to some specific points raised by another but ignores further
points which he or she has heard the other make or

(e) reads and signs a written statement made by another.10

Example: A, B and C were charged with a crime. A and B admitted the crime and implicated C
as the mastermind. C merely bowed his head and said nothing though he heard these
statements.

JUDICIAL CONFESSION - One made before a court in which the case is pending and in the
course of the legal proceedings therein, and by itself, can sustain a conviction.

EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION - One made outside the court and cannot sustain a
conviction unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.

CORPUS DELICTI DEFINED- It may refer to:

1. The body of the crime or;

2. The actual commission of the crime charged; or

3. The fact that a crime has been actually committed.

REQUISITES OF A VALID CONFESSION

1. Confession must be express and categorical;

2. Confession must be intelligent; 3. Confession must be voluntarily given; 4. There must be no

violation of article III Sec. 12 of the Constitution.

INTERLOCKING CONFESSION, DEFINED - Is a confession in a criminal case so

corroborative of each other as to impose faith that they must have a basis in fact.

Where extrajudicial confession have been made by several persons charged with conspiracy
 and there could have been no collusion with reference to several confessions, the fact that
the statements are in all material respects identical is confirmatory of the testimony of the
accomplice.

PREVIOUS CONDUCT AS EVIDENCE

SIMILAR ACTS AS EVIDENCE — Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one
time is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another
time; but it may be received to prove a specific intent or knowledge; identity, plan, system,
scheme, habit, custom or usage, and the like (Rule 130 Sec. 35). (This is also known as RES
INTER ALIOS ACT ALTERI NOCERI NON DEBET

PART II)
10
RP vs. Kenrick Development Corp., G.R. No. 14957.

Note: This rule prohibits “propensity evidence‖, which is evidence that tends to show that what
a person has done at one time is probative of the contention that he has done a similar act at
another time. Evidence of similar acts or occurrences compels the defendant to meet
allegations that are not mentioned in the complaint, confuses him in his defense, raises a
variety of irrelevant issues, and diverts the attention of the court from the issues immediately
before it.

Example: The accused Salvador Santos was charged with sale of prohibited drugs. The court
trying the case convicted him of the offense. One of the reasons for his conviction was the
belief by the court that since the accused had previous records of selling prohibited drugs then
he is most likely to have committed the present offense. The court here in this case is not
correct because it violated the rule on similar acts as evidence.

Q: What is the basis of the rule on similar act rule or previous conduct rule or the res inter alios
acta alteri noceri non debet rule part 2?

A: The fact that a person has committed the same or similar acts at some prior time does not
mean that he committed the same act in question.

UNACCEPTED OFFER — An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of money or to deliver a

written instrument or specific personal property is, if rejected without valid cause, equivalent to
the actual production and tender of the money, instrument, or property (Rule 130.Sec.36).

TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE

TESTIMONY GENERALLY CONFINED TO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE; HEARSAY

EXCLUDED — A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his personal
knowledge; that is, which are derived from his own perception, except as otherwise provided in
these rules (Rule 130 Sec. 36)

Note: This Rule is no transposed to Section 22.

Notes: A witness can testify only to those facts he knows of his personal knowledge that is,
which are derived from his own perception, meaning the testimony of the witness must be
based on personal knowledge, not on what he heard from others or what other people told
him because what he heard or what the others told him is hearsay.

WHEN IS EVIDENCE HEARSAY? - An evidence is hearsay if its probative value is not based
on the personal knowledge of the

witness but on the knowledge of some other person not on the witness stand.

HEARSAY EVIDENCE, DEFINED - It is evidence not of what the witness knows himself by
personal knowledge but of what he has heard from others. Evidence is called hearsay when its
probative force depends, in whole or in part, on the competency and credibility of some
persons other than the witness by whom it is sought to produce it. Hearsay evidence as a
general rule is not allowed. It is also known as SECOND HAND EVIDENCE.

DOUBLE HEARSAY DEFINED - (MULTIPLE HEARSAY) - The testimony of a person with

respect to what was told him by another who was not a witness to a fact but who only obtained
knowledge thereof from another.

SELF-SERVING DECLARATIONS - It is declaration is one that is made by a party, out of

court and in his favor. They are inadmissible because the adverse party is not given the
opportunity for cross

examination. They are classified as hearsay.

REASONS WHY IS HEARSAY EVIDENCE EXCLUDED AS EVIDENCE

1. It is excluded because the party against whom it is presented is deprived of the right and
 opportunity to cross examine the persons to whom the statement is

attributed.

2. The declaration is not made under oath. 3. The court had not opportunity to observe the
demeanor of the witness.

ADMISSIBILITY OF AN AFFIDAVIT - An affidavit is hearsay and hence not admissible unless

the affiant (maker) is presented in court.

DOCTRINE OF INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT STATEMENT - It states that when the

testimony is presented to establish not the truth but only the tenor of the statement or the fact
that the statement was made, it is not hearsay and hence admissible.

Under the rule on independently relevant statement, only the fact that such statements were
made is relevant and admissible, but the truth or even the falsity thereof is not material.

Stated differently, the independently relevant statement rule states that conversations
communicated to a witness by third person may be admitted as proof that,

regardless of their truth or falsity, they were actually made.

Example: W heard A saying, “may tikbalang, duende, diwata at taga-ibang planeta akong
kausap at kaibigan”. Here, W has personal knowledge of A’s declarations he can testify
regarding having heard these statements, but he cannot prove the presence of these possibly
imaginary entities.

NEW SECTION 37 RULE 130 – HEARSAY – Is a statement other than the one made by the
declarant while testifying at a trial or hearing, offered to prove the truth of the facts asserted
therein. A statement is 1. An oral or written assertion or 2. A non-verbal conduct of a person, if
it is intended by him or her as an assertion.

A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to
cross-examination concerning the statement, and the statement is (a) inconsistent with the
declarant’s testimony, and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial,
hearing or other proceeding, or in a deposition; (b) consistent with the declarant’s testimony
and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication
or improper influence or motive; or (c) one of identification of a person made after perceiving
him or her (Rule 130. Sec. 37).

EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE

DYING DECLARATION — The declaration of a dying person, made under the consciousness
of an impending death, may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject of inquiry,
as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death (Rule 130.Sec 38).

STATEMENT OF DECEDENT OR PERSON OF UNSOUND MIND – In an action against an

executor or other representative of a deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind,
upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceasedperson or against such person of
unsound mind , where a party or assignor of a party or a person in whose behalf a case is
prosecuted testifies on amatter of fact occurring before the death of the deceased person or
before the person became of unsound mind , any statement of the deceased or the person of
unsound mind, may be received in evidence if the statement was made upon the personal
knowledge of the deceased or the person of unsound mind at the time when the matter had
been recently perceived by him or her and while his or her recollection was clear. Such
statement however is inadmissible if made under circumstances indicating its lack of
trustworthiness Rule 130. Sec. 39)

DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST — The declaration made by a person deceased, or

unable to testify, against the interest of the declarant, if the fact is asserted in the declaration
was at the time it was made so far contrary to declarant's own interest, that a reasonable man
in his position would not have made the declaration unless he believed it to be true, may be
received in evidence against himself or his successors in interest and against third persons. A
statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the
accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the
trustworthiness of the statement (Rule 130 Sec.40).

Example: Moises told Fernado, that he (Moises) killed Ernesto Flores. Unknown to Moises,
Fernando was a relative of Ernesto. Fernando now testified in court that Moises was the killer
of Fernando because Moises admitted that fact to him. Fernando may testify although his
testimony is hearsay because his testimony relates to the declaration against interest made by
Moises.
 ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE — The act or declaration of a person
deceased, or unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another person related to him by
birth, adoption, or marriage, or in the absence thereof, with whose family he or she may be
intimately associated as to be likely to have accurate information concerning his or her
pedigree, may be received in evidence where it occurred before the controversy, and the
relationship between the two persons is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration.
The word "pedigree" includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates
when and the places where these fast occurred, and the names of the relatives. It embraces
also facts of family history intimately connected with pedigree (Rule 130.Sec. 41).

FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE — The reputation or

tradition existing in a family previous to the controversy (ante litem motam), in respect to the
pedigree of any one of its members, may be received in evidence if the witness testifying
thereon be also a member of the family, either by consanguinity, affinity, or adoption. Entries in
family bibles or other family books or charts, engravings on rings, family portraits and the like,
may be received as evidence of pedigree (Rule 130 Sec.42).

Note: The witness here need not be dead or unable to testify.

COMMON REPUTATION — Common reputation existing previous to the controversy, as to

boundaries of or customs affecting lands in the community and

reputation as to events of general history important to the community , or respecting marriage

or moral character, may be given in evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in public places
may be received as evidence of common reputation (Rule 130 Sec.43).

Examples: Public boundaries may be proved by common reputation for public boundaries are
considered as matters of public interest, and therefore can be proved by common reputation
provided they are ancient, i.e. more than thirty years old, another example is the common
reputation that NAIA was named after Ninoy Aquino.

PART OF RES GESTAE — Statements made by a person while a starting occurrence is

taking place or immediately prior or subsequent thereto, under the stress of excitement caused
by the occurence with respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given in evidence as part
of res gestae. So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and
giving it a legal significance, may be received as part of the res gestae (Rule 130 Sec. 44).

Note: Parts of the res gestae are statements made by a wounded offended party immediately
after he received several stab or gunshot wounds narrating the circumstances thereof.

Res gestate means ―things done‖. It includes circumstances, facts and declarations incidental
to the main fact or transaction necessary to illustrate its character.

Parts of the res gestate also includes acts, words and declarations which are so closely
connected therewith as to constitute a part of the transaction.

Parts of the res gestae refers to those exclamations and statements made by either the
participants, victims, or spectators to a crime immediately before, during, or immediately after
the commission of a crime, when the circumstances are such that the statements were made
as a spontaneous reaction or utterance inspired by the excitement of the occasion and there
was no opportunity for the declarant to deliberate and to fabricate a false statement. This
utterance must be made under the influence of a startling event witnessed by the person who
made the declaration before he had time to think and make up a story, or to concoct or to
contrive a falsehood, or to fabricate an account, and without any undue influence in obtaining
it, aside from referring to the event in question or its immediate attending circumstances.

ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS — Entries made at, or near the time of
transactions to which they refer, by a person

deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a position to know the facts therein stated, may be
received as prima facie evidence, if such person made the entries in his professional capacity
or in the performance of duty and in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty (Rule
130 Sec.43).

RECORDS OF REGULARLY CONDUCTED BUSINESS ACTIVITY – A memorandum, report,

record or data compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions or diagnosis, made by writing,
typing, electronic, optical or other similar means at or near the time of or from transmission or
supply of information by a person with knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular course or
conduct of a business activity , and such was the regular practice to make the memorandum,
report, record or data compilation by electronic, optical or similar means all of which are shown
by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witnesses, is excepted from the rule on
hearsay evidence (Rule 130. Sec. 45)

Example: Entries made by security guards in their log books.

Case: Ramos sued Philippine Airlines for failure to board their flight. Ramos claims that no one
was at the PAL counter when he arrived on time and when the attendant came, his ticket was
 cancelled for being late. PAL, in its defense, presented in evidence the plane tickets of Ramos
with notations

―late 4:02‖ and the passenger manifest which showed the non accommodation of two other
passengers who arrived earlier than Ramos. Between the verbal allegation of Ramos and the
documented evidence of PAL like the notation and passenger manifests, which shall prevail?
The evidence for PAL should prevail. These pieces of documentary evidence presented by
PAL to corroborate the testimonies of its witnesses are admissible in court because they are:
entries made in the regular course of business.

ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS — Entries in official records made in the performance of

his duty by a public officer of the Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a duty
specially enjoined by law, are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated therein (Rule
130. Sec. 46).

Example: Certification from the PNP FEU that a certain person is not a licensee to carry and
owned a certain firearm.

Case: The deceased (Florence) is insured with Philamlife since 1989. He died later. When his
relatives were claiming the money that they are entitled with under the insurance policy,
Philamlife did not want to pay for the reason that according to its BACKGROUND
INVESTIGATION, the

insured Florence, died in 1988 which is prior to the application of insurance for his life was paid
in 1989. However the DEATH CERTIFICATE of Florence clearly stated that he died in 1991.
Which is more entitled to belief between the death certificate and the result of the background
investigation? Answer: Death Certificate prepared by government health officer being a public
are entries in official records made in the performance of his duty by a public officer of the
Philippines are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated therein.

COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE LIKE — Evidence of statements of matters of interest to

persons engaged in an occupation contained in a list, register, periodical, or other published
compilation is admissible as tending to prove the truth of any relevant matter so stated if that
compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation and is generally used
and relied upon by them therein (Rule 130. Sec.47).

LEARNED TREATISES — A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history,

law, science, or art is admissible as tending to prove the truth of a matter stated therein if the
court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies, that the writer of the
statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his profession or calling as
expert in the subject Rule 130 Sec.48).

TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A FORMER PROCEEDING — The testimony or

deposition of a witness deceased or out of the Philippines or who cannot, with due diligence3,
be found therein or is unavailable or otherwise unable to testify, given in a former case or
proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter, may be
given in evidence against the adverse party who had the opportunity to cross-examine him
(Rule 130.Sec 49).

Note: The accused in a criminal case is guaranteed the right of confrontation. Such right has
two purposes: first, to secure the opportunity of cross-examination; and, second, to allow the
judge to observe the deportment and appearance of the witness while testifying. This right,
however, is not absolute as it is recognized that it is sometimes impossible to recall or produce
a witness who has already testified in a previous proceeding, in which event his previous
testimony is made admissible as a distinct piece of evidence, by way of exception to the
hearsay rule. The previous testimony is made admissible because it makes the administration
of justice orderly and expeditious

DYING DECLARATION, DEFINED - The declaration of a person, made under the

consciousness of an impending death, maybe received in any case wherein his death is the
subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of his death.

Dying declaration is a statement made by the victim of homicide, referring to the material facts
which concern the cause and circumstances of the killing and which is uttered under a fixed
belief that death is impending and is certain to follow immediately, or in a very short time,
without an opportunity of retraction and in the absence of all hopes of recovery.

Dying declaration pertains to one’s statement, made under a consciousness of impending

death, on the cause and the surrounding circumstances thereof. It is given credence on the
premise that no one who knows of one’s impending death will make a careless and false
accusation.

OTHER NAMES FOR DYING DECLARATION - Ante Mortem Statement or Statement in

Articulo Mortis or Declaration in Extremis.

REQUISITES OF A DYING DECLARATION

 1. That death is imminent and the declarant is conscious of that fact;

2. The declaration refers to the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death; 3. The
declaration relates to facts which the victim is competent to testify to; 11

4. The declaration is offered in a case wherein the declarant’s death is the subject of inquiry.

5. The declaration was made under the consciousness of an impeding death 6. The declarant
thereafter dies.

REASON WHY DYING DECLARATION ADMISSIBLE - When a person is at the point of

death, every motive to falsehood is silenced and the mind is induced by the most powerful
considerations to speak the truth. Truth sits on the lips of dying men.

2 REASONS WHY DYING DECLARATIONS ARE ADMISSIBLE

a. NECESSITY - Because the declarant death makes it impossible for him to take the witness
stand and

b. TRUSTWORTHINESS - For when a person is at the point of death, every motive

11
Example: Jose was shot by someone. Before Jose died he uttered: “Sabi ng asawa ko si
Pedro daw ang bumaril sa akin”. You heard this declaration. Question: Is this admissible as
dying declaration? Answer: No. One of the requisites of Dying Declaration is that ―the
declaration relates to facts which the victim is competent to testify to‖.

for falsehood is silenced and the mind is induced by the most powerful consideration to speak
the truth.

DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST- This is the declaration made by a deceased person, or

unable to testify, against the interest of the declarant, if the fact asserted in the declaration

was at the time it was made so far contrary to declarant’s own interest that a reasonable man
in his position would not have made the declaration unless he believed it to be true, may be
received in evidence against himself or his successors in interest and against third persons.

Notes: Declaration against interest are those made by a person who is neither a party nor in
privity with a party to the suit, are secondary evidence and constitute an exception to the
hearsay rule. They are admissible only when the declarant is unavailable as a witness. Thus, a
man’s acts, conduct, and declaration, wherever made, if voluntary, are admissible against him,
for the reason that it is fair to presume that they correspond with the truth, and it is his fault if
they do not. This is different from admissions against interest which is described as those
made by a party to a litigation or by one in privity with or identified in legal interest with such
party, and are admissible whether or not the declarant is available as a witness.

REQUISITES OF DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST

1. That the declarant is dead or unable to testify;

2. That it relates to a fact against the interest of the declarant;

3. That at the time he made said declaration, the declarant was aware that the same was
contrary to his interest; 4. The declarant had no motive to falsify and believed such declaration
to be true.

ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE, DEFINED - By reputation or tradition in

matters of pedigree is meant such declarations and statements as have come down from
generation to generation from deceased relatives in such a way that even though it cannot be
said or determined which of the deceased relatives originally made them, or was personally
cognizant of the facts therein stated, yet it appears that such declarations and statements were
made as a family history, ante litem motam, by a deceased person connected by blood or
marriage with the person whose pedigree is established. Thus, One’s testimony regarding her
age is admissible although hearsay, for she can have no personal knowledge of the date of her
birth, as all knowledge as to one's age is acquired from whatever is told by the parents or
relatives and such testimony constitutes an assertion of family tradition.

ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE REQUISITES

1. The declarant is dead or unable to testify; 2. The declarant is related to the person whose
pedigree is subject of inquiry by birth or marriage;

3. There is evidence to prove the relationship other than such declaration;

4. That declaration was made ante litem motam (prior to the controversy).
 Example: In the settlement of the estate of deceased Pedro, Ruben who claims to be the son
of Pedro will present witness W. W will testify that he heard Jose say that his brother Pedro
had a son named Ruben. Jose is already dead at the time of W’s testimony. Here, Jose’s
declaration concerns the pedigree of his relative (brother) Pedro, that is, that Pedro has a son
named Ruben.12

Another Example: Pedro died. Maria wants to be recognized as the illegitimate daughter of
Pedro. To prove this Maria testified that her mother told her that her father was Pedro. Juan,
son of Maria claimed that he considered Pedro to be his grandfather because Maria always
said so and Pedro would always give him money during his lifetime. Other relative of Pedro
also testified the same thing. Maria may prove in court her relationship to Pedro based on
these acts or declaration about pedigree.

FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE REQUISITES

1. There is controversy in respect to the pedigree of any family member; 2. The reputation
or tradition of the pedigree of the subject person existed prior to the controversy;

3. The witness testifying to the reputation or tradition regarding the pedigree of the person
is also a member of the family of the subject person.

Note: One’s testimony regarding her age is admissible although hearsay, for she can have no
personal knowledge of the date of her birth, as all knowledge as to one's age is acquired from
whatever is told by the parents or relatives and such testimony constitutes family reputation or
tradition regarding pedigree.

PART OF RES GESTAE — Statements made by a person while a starting occurrence is

taking place or immediately prior or subsequent thereto, under the stress of excitement caused
by the occurence with respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given in evidence as part
of res gestae (first part of res gestae: excited

12
Example of Atty. Manuel R. Riguera,Primer Reviewer on Remedial Law 2, 5 th edition, page
827.

utterances). So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and
giving it a legal significance, may be received as part of the res gestae (2 ND part of res gestae:
verbal acts).13

REQUISITES OF RES GESTAE

1. The statement must be spontaneous; 2. Made while a startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto;

3. It must relate to the circumstances of the startling occurrence.

VERBAL ACT DOCTRINE (2ND PART OF RES GESTAE) - This doctrine admits in evidence,
the statements that are offered to give meaning to an ambiguous act. Under the verbal act
doctrine, it is allowed to ascertain the complete significance of a person's conduct by listening
to what s/he said while doing the act. According to the doctrine, an act as a whole consists of a
conduct-part and a verbal-part and the verbal-part may be put in as completing the conduct-
part. The conduct and the verbal utterance must be made by the same person.

Example: C was seen delivering money to D. C later dies. Relatives of C (estate) sued D to
recover the money. They claim that the money was loaned by C to D as that was the business
of their deceased relative. D said the money was given to him by C as a gift. W testified by
saying: I heard C told D: ―Hey D, this is a loan, pay me after a month” W’s testimony is
hearsay but admissible under the verbal act doctrine.

DISTINGUISH RES GESTAE FROM DYING DECLARATION

1. Dying declaration are made only after the homicidal attack has been committed; but in
res gestae, the statement may precede accompany or be made after the homicidal
attack.

2. Dying declaration are made only by the victim; while statements as part of res gestae
may be that of the killer himself or that of the third person.

3. The trustworthiness of the dying declaration is based upon its being given under an
awareness of impending death, while on res gestae has its justification on the
spontaneity of the statement.

ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS REQUISITES (Business Entries Rule or Shop

Book Rule)

1. The person made an entry;

 2. That person is either dead or unable to testify

13
Rule 130. Sec. 44

3. The entries were made at or near the time of the transaction

4. The entrant was in a position to know the facts stated therein

5. The entries were made in his professional capacity or performance of legal, moral or
religious duties.

Note: Entries in the course of business are accorded unusual reliability because their
regularity and continuity are calculated to discipline record keepers in the habit of precision. If
the entries are financial, the records are routinely balanced and audited. In actual experience,
the whole of the business world function in reliance of such kind of records.

ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS REQUISITES

1. An entry was made by a person; 2. He is a public officer or one enjoined by law to do so;

3. It was made in the performance of duty;

4. The entrant had sufficient knowledge of the facts stated by him

Note: The rule provides that entries in official records made in the performance of the duty of a
public officer of the Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined
by law, are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. The necessity of this rule consists
in the inconvenience and difficulty of requiring the official's attendance as a witness to testify to
the innumerable transactions in the course of his duty. The document's trustworthiness
consists in the presumption of regularity of performance of official duty

OPINION RULE

GENERAL RULE ON OPINION EVIDENCE — The opinion of a witness is not admissible,

except as indicated in the following sections (Rule 130.Sec.51).

OPINION OF EXPERT WITNESS — The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special

knowledge, skill, experience, training or education which he shown to posses, may be received
in evidence (Rule 130.Sec 52).

Note: The use of the word "may" in Section 49, Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence signifies
that the use of opinion of an expert witness is permissive and not mandatory on the part of the
courts.

OPINION OF ORDINARY WITNESSES The opinion of a witness for which proper basis is
given, may be received in evidence regarding —

(a) The identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge;

(b) A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity; and

(c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted.

The witness may also testify on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or
appearance of a person (Rule 130 Sec. 53).

DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN ORDINARY WITNESS AND EXPERT WITNESS

ORDINARY EXPERT WITNESS

WITNESS

1. Generally 1.. He is precisely

cannot give his in court to give
opinion his

opinion.

2. No need to 2. Must be
qualify as a qualified as a
witness. witness by the
 presenting lawyer.

3. Must have 3. Need not have

personal
personal knowledge
knowledge regarding the facts
regarding the testified to.
facts testified to

CHARACTER EVIDENCE

CHARACTER EVIDENCE NOT GENERALLY ADMISSIBLE; EXCEPTIONS – Evidence of a

person’s character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in
conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:

IN CRIMINAL CASES

(1) The character of the offended party may be proved if it tends to establish in any
reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged.

(2) The accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral trait
involved in the offense charged. However, the prosecution may not prove his bad moral
character unless on rebuttal.

IN CIVIL CASES

Evidence of the moral character of a party in civil case is admissible only when pertinent to
the issue of character involved in the case.

IN CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CASES

Evidence of the good character of a witness is not admissible until such character has
been impeached.

In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is

admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an
opinion. On cross

examination, an inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct.

In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element

of a charge, claim or defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person’s
conduct (Rule 130. Sec 54).

DISTINGUISH CHARACTER FROM REPUTATION - Character is what a man really is,

reputation is what other people a man say he is. As a general rule the prosecution cannot
prove the bad moral character of the accused. However, if the accused in his defense
attempts to prove his good moral character, then the prosecution can introduce evidence of
his bad moral character at the rebuttal stage.

RULE 131

BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS

BURDEN OF PROOF, DEFINED — Burden of proof is the duty of a party to

present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the
amount of evidence required by law. Burden of proof never shifts. (Rule 131.Sec.1).

Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to present evidence sufficient to establish or

rebut a fact in issue to establish a prima facie case. Burden of evidence may shift from one
party to the other in the course of the proceedings, depending on the exigencies of the case.

QUANTUM OF PROOF REQUIRED IN DIFFERENT CASES

QUANTUM OF
PROCEEDINGS
 PROOF REQUIRED

1. Civil Cases Preponderance of

Evidence

2. Administrative Substantial
Cases
Evidence

3. Criminal Cases Proof Beyond

Reasonable Doubt

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE - It means that the testimony adduced by one

side is more credible and conclusive than that of the other, or the evidence as a whole,
adduced by one side is superior to the other. It is not meant the mere numerical array of
witnesses, but it means the weight, credit and value of the aggregate evidence on either side.
Preponderance of evidence means evidence

which is of greater weight or more convincing than the other.

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - Such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as

adequate to support a conclusion.

CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE - Evidence more than preponderance of evidence but
less than proof beyond reasonable doubt. It is the quantum required to prove insanity,
paternity, filiation, self defense among others.

BURDEN OF PROOF (ONUS PROBANDI) distinguished from BURDEN OF EVIDENCE

(ONUS EVIDENTIAE)

Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence

1. Burden of proof Burden of evidence

does not shift shifts from one
because it remains party to another
with the party
upon whom it is
imposed

2. Burden of proof Burden of evidence

is determined by is determined by
the pleadings filed the development at
by the party the trial

CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS — The following are instances of conclusive presumptions:

(a) Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act, or omission, intentionally and
deliberately led to another to believe a particular thing true, and to act upon such belief, he
cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to falsify
it:

Note: This is ESTOPPEL IN PAIS.

(b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord at the time of commencement of
the relation of landlord and tenant between them.

This is known as: ESTOPPEL BY DEED/ESTOPPEL BY CONDUCT

CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION, DEFINED - It is an inference which the law makes so

peremptory that it will not allow such inference to be overturned by any contrary proof however
strong. Conclusive presumption is also known as presumption juris et de jure.

DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTION, DEFINED - It is a presumption which stands as true unless

rebutted by contrary evidence. This is also known as presumption juris tantum.

DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS — The following presumptions are satisfactory if

uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence:

(a)That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;

(b)That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent;

(c)That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act; (d)That a person
takes ordinary care of his concerns;

(e)That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced;

(f)That money paid by one to another was due to the latter;

(g)That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter;

(h)That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid;

(i)That prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later one is produced;

(j)That a person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent wrongful act is
the taker and the doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person possess, or
exercises acts of ownership over, are owned by him;

(m)That official duty has been regularly performed;

(w)That after an absence of seven years, (7) it being unknown whether or not the absentee
still lives, he is considered dead for all purposes, except for those of succession.

The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening his succession till after
an absence of ten years (10). If he disappeared after the age of seventy-five years, an
absence of five years (5) shall be sufficient in order that his succession may be opened.

The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the division of the estate
among the heirs:

(1)A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aircraft with is missing, who
has not been heard of for four years

since the loss of the vessel or aircraft; (2)A member of the armed forces who has taken part in
armed hostilities, and has been missing for four years;

(3)A person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances and whose
existence has not been known for four years; (4)If a married person has been absent for four
consecutive years, the spouse present may contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has
well-founded belief that the absent spouse is already death. In case of disappearance, where
there is a danger of death the circumstances hereinabove provided, an absence of only two
years shall be sufficient for the purpose of contracting a subsequent marriage. However, in
any case, before marrying again, the spouse present must institute summary proceedings as
provided in the Family Code and in the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the
absentee, without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse. aw library

(dd)That if the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another marriage within
three hundred days after such termination of the former marriage, these rules shall govern in
the absence of proof to the contrary:

(1)A child born before one hundred eighty days after the solemnization of the subsequent
marriage is considered to have been conceived during such marriage, even though it be born
within the three hundred days after the termination of the former marriage. (2)A child born after
180 days following the celebration of the subsequent marriage is considered to have been
conceived during such marriage, even though it be born within the three hundred days after the
termination of the former marriage.

(ff)That the law has been obeyed;

(jj)That except for purposes of succession, when two persons perish in the same calamity,
such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown who died first, and there are no
particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is determined from the
probabilities resulting from the strength and the age of the sexes, according to the following
rules:

1.If both were under the age of fifteen years, the older is deemed to have survived; 2. If both
were above the age sixty, the younger is deemed to have survived; 3. If one is under fifteen and
the other above sixty, the former is deemed to have survived; 4. If both be over fifteen and
under sixty and the sex be different, the male is deemed to have survived, if the sex be the
same, the older;

5.If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the other between those ages, the latter is deemed
to have survived.

(kk)That if there is a doubt, as between two or more persons who are called to succeed each
other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall
prove the same; in the absence of proof, they shall be considered to have died at the same
time (Rule 131 Sec.3).

PRESUMPTION OF LAW - Known as presumption presumtiones juris. They are the

conclusive (juris et de jure) and disputable presumptions (presumption juris tantum).

PRESUMPTION OF FACT - Known as presumtiones hominis.

SAMPLES OF COMMON AND WELL RECOGNIZED PRESUMPTIONS BY

JURISPRUDENCE

1. A man and a woman living together are married.

2. That every person is of sound mind as sanity is presumed and not insanity.

3. Good faith is always presumed and not bad faith.

4. That a person is potent because impotency being an abnormality is not presumed.

STALE DEMANDS, DEFINED - It is the failure or neglect for an unreasonable and

unexplained length of time to do that which, by exercising due diligence, could or should have
been done earlier, thus giving rise to a presumption that the party entitled to assert it has
abandoned or declined to assert it. The doctrine of stale demands is also known as LACHES.

RULE 132

PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE

EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

EXAMINATION TO BE DONE IN OPEN COURT — The examination of

witnesses presented in a trial or hearing shall be done in open court, and under oath or
affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the questions call for a different
mode of answer, the answers of the witness shall be given orally (Rule 132 Sec 1).

OATH - A form of attestation by which a person signifies that he is bound in

conscience and that in case he does not tell the truth divine retribution would follow against
him.

AFFIRMATION - A declaration instead of an oath that a person will tell the truth.

PROCEEDINGS TO BE RECORDED — The entire proceedings of a trial or

hearing, including the questions propounded to a witness and his answers thereto, the
statements made by the judge or any of the parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to the
case, shall be recorded by means of shorthand or stenotype or by

other means of recording found suitable by the court.

A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the official stenographer, stenotypist or
recorder and certified as correct by him shall be deemed prima facie a correct statement of
such proceedings (Rule 132.Sec.2).

RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF A WITNESS — A witness must answer questions, although

his answer may tend to establish a claim against him. However, it is the right of a witness:

1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting
demeanor;

2. Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require;

3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue;

4. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense unless
otherwise provided by law; or

Note: This is the right of the person against self incrimination. But it is not self executing or
automatically operational. It must be claimed. Otherwise it is considered waived, as by failure
to claim it at the appropriate time. Hence, the accused must actively invoke it. The proper time
to invoke it is when a question calling for incriminating answer is asked. Note also that it
applies to testimonial compulsion only.

5. Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it to be the very fact
at issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be presumed. But a witness must
answer to the fact of his previous final conviction for an offense (Rule 132 Sec 3).

ORDER IN THE EXAMINATION OF AN INDIVIDUAL WITNESS - The order in which the

individual witness may be examined is as follows;

1. Direct examination by the proponent; 2. Cross-examination by the opponent; 3. Re-direct

examination by the proponent; 4. Re-cross-examination by the opponent (Rule 132 Sec 4).

DIRECT EXAMINATION — Direct examination is the examination-in chief of a

witness by the party presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue Rule 132 Sec 5).

CROSS-EXAMINATION; ITS PURPOSE AND EXTENT — Upon the

termination of the direct examination, the witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party
as to any relevant matter with sufficient fullness and freedom to test his accuracy and
truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts
bearing upon the issue (Rule 132 Sec.6).

LAYING THE PREDICATE - A process of cross examining the witness by first laying a ground
upon cross examination, and if denied by the witness, then by introducing evidence of
contradictory statements to impeach him.

ENGLISH RULE ON CROSS EXAMINATION - Under this rule, a witness maybe examined not
only upon matters testified to by him on his direct examination, but also upon on all matters
relevant to the issue. We follow this style of cross examination.

RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION; ITS PURPOSE AND EXTENT — After the cross examination of
the witness has been concluded, he may be re-examined by the party calling him, to explain or
supplement his answers given during the cross examination. On re-direct-examination,
questions on matters not dealt with during the cross-examination, may be allowed by the court
in its discretion (Rule 132 Sec. 7).

RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION — Upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the adverse

party may re-cross-examine the witness on matters stated in his re-direct examination, and
also on such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its discretion (Rule 132.Sec. 8).

RECALLING WITNESS — After the examination of a witness by both sides has been
concluded, the witness cannot be recalled without leave of the court. The court will grant or
withhold leave in its discretion, as the interests of justice may require (Rule 132.Sec.9).

LEADING QUESTIONS — A question which suggests to the witness the answer which the
examining party desires is a LEADING QUESTION. It is not allowed, except:

1. On cross examination;

2. On preliminary matters;

3. When there is a difficulty is getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;

4. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or 5. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer,

director, or managing agent of a

public or private corporation or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.

A MISLEADING QUESTION is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the
witness, or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It is not allowed (Rule 132 Sec.10).

IMPEACHMENT OF ADVERSE PARTY'S WITNESS — A witness may be impeached by the

party against whom he was called, by:
1. Contradictory evidence,

2. By evidence that his general reputation for truth, honestly, or integrity is bad, or 3. By
evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his present, testimony,
but not by evidence of particular wrongful acts, except that it may be shown by the examination
of the witness, or the record of the judgment, that he has been convicted of an offense (Rule
132 Sec.11).

IMPEACHMENT BY EVIDENCE OF CONVICTION OF CRIME – For the purpose of

impeaching a witness, evidence that he or she has been convicted by final judgment of a
crime shall be admitted if (a) the crime was punishable by a penalty in excess of one year;
or (b) the crime involved moral turpitude, regardless of the penalty

However, evidence of a conviction is not admissible if the conviction has been the
subject of an amnesty or annulment of the conviction (Rule 132 Sec. 12)

PARTY MAY NOT IMPEACH HIS OWN WITNESS. — Except with respect to witnesses
referred to in paragraphs (d) and (e) of Section 10, the party producing a witness is not allowed
to impeach his credibility.

A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by the court upon
adequate showing of his adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or his having misled
the party into calling him to the witness stand.

The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the witness who is an adverse party, may be
impeached by the party presenting him in all respects as if he had been called by the adverse
party, except by evidence of his bad character. He may also be impeached and cross-
examined by the adverse party, but such cross-examination must only be on the subject matter
of his examination-in-chief (Rule 132. Sec 13)

HOW WITNESS IMPEACHED BY EVIDENCE OF INCONSISTENT

STATEMENTS — Before a witness can be impeached by evidence that he has made at other
times statements inconsistent with his present testimony, the statements must be related to
him, with the circumstances of the times and places and the persons present, and he must be
asked whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to explain them. If the statements
be in writing they must be shown to the witness before any question is put to him concerning
them. (Rule 132 Sec.14) (Note: This section is known as LAYING THE PREDICATE).

Q: State the steps by which a witness may be impeached by prior inconsistent statements.

A: They are:

1. SHOW to the witness the statement in writing.

2. RELATE to the witness the statement with the circumstances of time, persons and places.

3. ASK the witness if he made those statements.

4. EXPLAINATION is demanded of the witness regarding the alleged inconsistencies.

EVIDENCE OF GOOD CHARACTER OF WITNESS — Evidence of the good character of a

witness is not admissible until such character has been impeached (Rule 132 Sec.14). Note:
Incorporated now IN Sec 54, Rule 130.

EXCLUSION AND SEPARATION OF WITNESSES — The court motu proprio or upon motion,
shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. This
rule does not authorize exclusion of (a) a party who is a natural person, (b) a duly designated
representative of a juridical entity which is a party to the case, (c) a person whose presence is
essential to the presentation of a party’s cause, or (d) a person authorized by a statute to be
present.(Rule 132 Sec 15). The court may also cause witnesses to be kept separate and to be
prevented from conversing with one another, directly or through intermediaries, until all shall
have been examined.

WHEN WITNESS MAY REFER TO MEMORANDUM –

1. A witness may be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a fact, by anything written or
recorded by himself or under his direction at the time when the fact occurred, or immediately
thereafter, or at any other time when the fact was fresh in his memory and knew that the same
was correctly written or recorded (This is known as Present Recollection Revived); but in
such case the writing or record must be produced

and may be inspected by the adverse party, who may, if he chooses, cross examine the
witness upon it, and may read it in evidence.

2. A witness may testify from such writing or record, though he retain no recollection of the
particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record correctly stated the transaction
when made; but such evidence must be received with caution (This is known as Past
Recollection Recorded) (Rule 132.Sec 16).

WHEN PART OF TRANSACTION, WRITING OR RECORD GIVEN IN EVIDENCE, THE

REMAINDER, ADMISSIBLE — When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or
record is given in evidence by one party, the whole of the same subject may be inquired into by
the other, and when a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is given in
evidence, any other act, declaration, conversation, writing or record necessary to its
understanding may also be given in evidence (Rule 132 Sec 17).

Note: This is known as the OPEN YOUR DOOR POLICY OR THE COMPLETENESS RULE).

RIGHT TO INSPECT WRITING SHOWN TO WITNESS — Whenever a writing is shown to a

witness, it may be inspected by the adverse party (Rule 132 Sec.18).

LAYING THE PREDICATE, DEFINED - A rule of evidence which ordains that before a witness
can be impeached by evidence that he has made at other times statement inconsistent with his
present testimony, the statement must be related to him, with the circumstances of the times
and the places and the persons present, and he must be asked whether he made such
statements and if so, allowed to explain them. If the statement is in writing, they must be
shown to him before any question is put to him concerning them. This means giving the
witness a chance to reconcile his conflicting declarations, such that it is only when no
reasonable explanation is given by him that he should be deemed impeached.It is a process of
cross-examining a witness upon the point of prior contradictory statements.

REVIVAL OF PRESENT MEMORY or PRESENT RECOLLECTION REVIVED - A rule which

allows a witness to refer to a memorandum for the purpose of refreshing his memory
respecting a fact provided:

1. That the memorandum has been written by him or under his direction;

2. That it was written: When the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at anytime when
the fact was fresh in his memory and he knew that the same was correctly stated.

REVIVAL OF PRESENT RECOLLECTION or PAST RECOLLECTION RECORDED - A rule

which allows a witness to testify from a memorandum or writing, though he retains no
recollection of particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing correctly stated the
transaction when made.

AUTHENTICATION, DEFINED - The process of evidencing the connection and

genuineness of a thing or evidence.

CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS — For the purpose of their presentation evidence, documents

are either public or private.

Public documents are:

(a) The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official
bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country;

(b) Documents acknowledge before a notary public except last wills and testaments; ©
Documents that are considered public documents under treaties and conventions which are in
force between the Philippines and the country of source; and

(d) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to the entered
therein.

All other writings are private (Rule 132.Sec.19).

FOUR KINDS OF DOCUMENTS

1. PRIVATE DOCUMENTS - Are every deed or instrument executed by a private person

without the intervention of a public notary or other persons legally authorized; by which some
disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set forth.

2. COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT -Any document defined and regulated by the Code of

Commerce

3. OFFICIAL DOCUMENT - A document which is issued by a public official in the exercise of

the functions of his office. 4. PUBLIC DOCUMENT- (See above definition)

PROOF OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT — Before any private document offered as authentic is

received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be proved by any of the following
means:

(a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written;

 (b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker.

c. By other evidence showing its due execution and authenticity (Rule 132 Sec.20).

ANCIENT DOCUMENT RULE/WHEN EVIDENCE OF AUTHENTICITY OF PRIVATE

DOCUMENT NOT NECESSARY — Where a private document is more than thirty years old, is
produced from the custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine, and is unblemished
by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion, no other evidence of its authenticity need be
given (Rule 132 Sec. 21).

ANCIENT DOCUMENT - It is a document which is more than 30 years old found in the proper
custody and unblemished by any alteration or circumstance of suspicion.

HOW GENUINENESS OF HANDWRITING PROVED — The handwriting of a person may be

proved:

1. By any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he has seen
the person write, or

2. By a witness who has seen writing purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or
been charged, and has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person. Evidence
respecting the handwriting may also be given

3. By a comparison, made by the witness or the court, with writings admitted or treated as
genuine by the party against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the
satisfaction of the judge (Rule 132. Sec 22).

PUBLIC DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE — Documents consisting of entries in public records

made in the performance of a duty by a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts
therein stated. All other public documents are evidence, even against a third person, of the fact
which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the latter (Rule 132.Sec 23).

PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE - Evidence which standing alone unexplained or uncontradicted, is

sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed.

IRREMOVABILITY OF PUBLIC RECORD — Any public record, an official copy of which is

admissible in evidence, must not be removed from the office in which it is kept, except upon
order of a court where the inspection of the record is essential to the just determination of a
pending case (Rule 132 Sec.26).

PROOF OF LACK OF RECORD — A written statement signed by an officer having the

custody of an official record or by his deputy that after diligent search no record or entry of a
specified tenor is found to exist in the records of his office, accompanied by a

certificate as above provided, is admissible as evidence that the records of his office contain
no such record or entry (Rule 132. Sec 28).

PROOF OF NOTARIAL DOCUMENTS — Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and

certified as provided by law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate
of acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or document
involved (Rule 132 Sec 30).

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF NOTARIZATION OF A PRIVATE DOCUMENT? It converts

private documents into public documents. Hence it becomes admissible in evidence without
further proof of its authenticity.

SEAL — There shall be no difference between sealed and unsealed private documents insofar
as their admissibility as evidence is concerned (Rule 132 Sec 32).

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN AN UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE — Documents written in an

unofficial language shall not be admitted as evidence, unless accompanied with a translation
into English or Filipino. To avoid interruption of proceedings, parties or their attorneys are
directed to have such translation prepared before trial (Rule 132 Sec 33).

OFFER AND OBJECTION

OFFER OF EVIDENCE — The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally
offered. The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified (Rule 132 Sec.34).

WHEN TO MAKE OFFER — All evidence must be offered orally.

The offer of the testimony of witness in evidence must be made at the time the witness
is called to testify.

The offer of documentary and object evidence shall be made after the presentation of
a party’s testimonial evidence (Rule 132 Sec 35).
 OBJECTION — Objection to offer of evidence must be made orally immediately after the offer
is made.

Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack of formal offer must be made as soon
as the witness begins to testify. Objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral
examination of a witness must be made as soon as the grounds therefor become reasonably
apparent.

The grounds for the objection must be specified (Rule 132 Sec 36).

Note: During examination of a witness, the opposing lawyer said: ―Objection your honor‖. The
judge will most likely overrule the objection. What is the reason for overruling the objection?
Answer: The grounds for the objection must be specified

OFFER OF EVIDENCE - Means the presentation or introduction of evidence in court. The

court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered.

Notes: Objection to evidence must be made at the time it is formally offered. In case of
documentary evidence, offer is made after all the witnesses of the party making the offer have
testified, specifying the purpose for which the evidence is being offered. It is only at this time,
and not at any other, that objection to the documentary evidence may be made. And when a
party failed to interpose a timely objection to evidence at the time they were offered in
evidence, such objection shall be considered as waived.

WHEN REPETITION OF OBJECTION UNNECESSARY — When it becomes reasonably

apparent in the course of the examination of a witness that the question being propounded are
of the same class as those to which objection has been made, whether such objection was
sustained or overruled, it shall not be necessary to repeat the objection, it being sufficient for
the adverse party to record his continuing objection to such class of questions (Rule 132
Sec.37).

RULING — The ruling of the court must be given immediately after the objection is made,
unless the court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the question presented;
but the ruling shall always be made during the trial and at such time as will give the party
against whom it is made an opportunity to meet the situation presented by the ruling.

The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated. However, if the
objection is based on two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection on one or some of
them must specify the ground or grounds relied upon (Rule 132 Sec.38).

STRIKING OUT ANSWER — Should a witness answer the question before the adverse party
had the opportunity to voice fully its objection to the same, or where a question is not
objectionable, but the answer is not responsive, or where a witness testifies without being
posed or testifies beyond limits set by the court, or when the witness does a narration instead
of answering the question, and such objection is found to be meritorious, the court shall

sustain the objection and order such answer, testimony or narration to be stricken off the
record.

On proper motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers which are
incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise improper (Rule 132. Sec. 39).

TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE. — If documents or things offered in evidence are

excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the record. If
the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and other personal
circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony (Rule 132 Sec.40).

TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE - A procedure undertaken by a party normally through a

lawyer if the evidence is excluded by the court wherein the offeror may have the same
attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state
for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of
the proposed testimony.

TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE - Is the method properly preserving the record to the
end that the question may be saved for purposes of review. Where the court refuses to permit
the counsel to present testimony which he thinks is incompetent, material and necessary to
prove his case, the method of properly preserving the record to the end that question may
saved for the purpose of review, is through the making of an offer of proof.

If evidence is documentary or object evidence, the tender is made by having the document or
object attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is testimonial, the
offeror may state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and
the substance of the proposed testimony.

OTHER NAME FOR TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE - Offer of Proof/Proffer of

Evidence.
RULE 133

Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE, HOW DETERMINED — In civil cases, the party having

burden of proof must establish his case by a preponderance of evidence. In determining where
the preponderance or superior weight of evidence on the issues involved lies, the court may
consider:

1. All the facts and circumstances of the case,

2. The witnesses' manner of testifying, 3. Their intelligence,

4. Their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which there are testifying, 5. The nature
of the facts to which they testify,

6. The probability or improbability of their testimony,

7. Their interest or want of interest, and 8. Also their personal credibility so far as the same
may legitimately appear upon the trial. 9. The court may also consider the number of
witnesses, though the preponderance is not necessarily with the greater number (Rule 133 Sec
1).

PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT — In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an

acquittal, unless his guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt
does not mean such a degree of proof, excluding possibility of error, produces absolute
certainly. Moral certainly only is required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction in
an unprejudiced mind (Rule 133 Sec.2).

EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION, NOT SUFFICIENT GROUND FOR CONVICTION. — An

extrajudicial confession made by an accused, shall not be sufficient ground for conviction,
unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti (Rule 133 Sec.3).

REQUISITES SO THAT EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION MAY BE VALID AND

ADMISSIBLE IN EVIDENCE

1. It must be voluntary;

2. It must be made with the assistance of a lawyer who is competent and independent;

3. It must be in writing and must be express.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, WHEN SUFFICIENT — Circumstantial

evidence is sufficient for conviction if:

(a)There is more than one circumstances; (b)The facts from which the inferences are derived
are proven; and

(c)The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond

reasonable doubt (Rule 133 Sec.4).

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE — In cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial bodies, a

fact may be deemed established if it is supported by substantial evidence, or that amount of
relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion.

POWER OF THE COURT TO STOP FURTHER EVIDENCE — The court may stop the
introduction of further testimony upon any particular point when the evidence upon it is already
so full that more witnesses to the same point cannot be reasonably expected to be additionally
persuasive. But this power should be exercised with caution (Rule 133 Sec.7).

EVIDENCE ON MOTION — When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record the court
may hear the matter on affidavits or DEPOSITION presented by the respective

parties, but the court may direct that the matter be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or
depositions (Rule 133 Sec.8).

DEPOSITION, DEFINED - It is the written testimony of a witness given in the course of judicial
proceedings in advance of a trial or hearing upon oral examination.

FALSUS IN UNO FALSUS IN OMNIBUS - It literally means ―false in one thing false in
everything”. It refers to that principle where on one point, the witness has lied, his testimony
upon another points may be disregarded. This is no longer followed in the Philippines. The
modern trend of jurisprudence is to the effect that the testimony of a witness maybe believed in
part and disbelieved in part, depending upon the corroborative evidence and the probabilities
and improbabilities of the case.
COMPILED BY:

PSSg Renjomar C Baltazar,

RCrim., MGM, Ph.D.

LLB – Class Valedictorian

REFERENCES:

Judge Harold Cesar C. Huliganga/Atty. Glenna Mari M. dela Cruz, 2019

Amendments on the Revised Rules on Evidence

Dean Williard Riano, Evidence, Bar Lecture Series

Manuel R. Riguera, Primer Reviewer on Remedial Law

Ruben Agpalo, Handbook on Evidence Justice Oscar Herrera, Remedial Law V Generoso,
E.B., Evidence for Everybody, Central Bookstore

Ricardo, Francisco Evidence 1996 Edition Central Bookstore

Atty. Ramil G. Gabao, Evidence (PCCr Textbook)

Bernardo, Oscar Evidence Annotated, National Bookstore

Moreno, Federico, Philippine Legal Dictionary Central Bookstore

Supreme Court Reports Annotated Central Bookstore

lawphil.net

www.sc.judiciciary.gov.ph

Images downloaded from: images.google.com on various dates

TO GOD BE THE GLORY!

REPUBLIC ACT No. 11458

An Act Expanding the Coverage of Exemptions from Revealing the Source of Published
News or Information Obtained in Confidence by Including Journalists from Broadcast,
and News Agencies, Amending for the Purpose Section 1 of Republic Act No. 53, as
Amended By Republic Act No. 1477

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippine Congress

Assembled:

Section 1. Section 1 of Republic Act No. 53, otherwise known as "An Act to Exempt the
Publisher, Editor or Reporter of any Publication from Revealing the Source of Published News
or Information Obtained in Confidence", as amended by Republic Act No. 1477, is hereby
further amended, to read as follows:

"Sec. 1. Without prejudice to his hability under the civil and criminal laws, any publisher, owner,
or duly recognized or accredited journalist, writer, reporter, contributor, opinion writer, editor,
columnist, manager, media practitioner involved in the writing, editing, production, and
dissemination of news for mass circulation, of any print, broadcast, wire service organization,
or electronic mass media, including cable TV and its variants, cannot be compelled to reveal
the source of any news item, report or information appearing or being reported or

disseminated through said media, which was related in confidence to the abovementioned
media practitioners unless the court or the House of Representatives or the Senate or any
committee of Congress finds that such revelation is demanded by the security of the State."

Section 2. Repealing Clause.— All laws, decrees, executive orders, rules or regulations or
parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified.

Section 3. Effectivity.— This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its

publication in at least two (2) newspapers of national circulation.

Approved,

(Sgd) GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO Speaker of the House of Representatives

(Sgd) VICENTE C. SOTTO III

President of the Senate

This Act which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 1255 and House Bill No. 684 was passed
by the Senate of the Philippines and the House of

Representatives on June 3, 2019.

(Sgd) DANTE ROBERTO P. MALING Acting Secretary General

House of Representatives

(Sgd) MYRA MARIE D. VILLARICA Secretary of the Senate

(Sgd) RODRIGO ROA DUTERTE