1

TOPIC ON WITNESS

QUALIFICATION OF A WITNESS

Perception of the General Rule:

(BAR)X confided to Director Neri that she committed adultery.Is the statement
1. A person who takes the witness stand is presumed to posses the
admissible in evidence?
qualifications of a witness (Presumption of Competency)
2. unlike, Rule 601 of the Washington Federal Rule of Evidence and HELD:YES, since the Director is not a peace officer or investigating officer
the Oregon Federal Rules of Evidence, which unmistakably asserts conducting custodial investigation.He cannot claim that her admission is
that every person is competent as a witness except as otherwise inadmissible.Director Neri is a competent witness.There is no violation of
provided by statue or court rules, the Revised Rules on Evidence did constitutional right to remain silent or to counsel (Arroyo v CA)
not incorporate an unequivocal mark for competency of a testimonial
sponsors (Peralta Jr., Perspectives of Evidence, 2005 Edition, page
156)

Note: A child is legally presumed competent to testify, either as a victim, accused
or as a witness, subject to scrutiny by the court or he adverse party upon challenge
to the child’s fitness (Section 6, Rule on Examination of Child Witness)
Note: The 2019 amendments to the Rules of Evidence have deleted the previous
Sec. 21 relating to disqualifications by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity
since it is deemed superfluous, given that the general rule as to the competency of
a witness covers such disqualification necessarily.
WHO MAY BE WITNESSES - All persons who can perceive, and perceiving,
and can make known their perception to others, may be witnesses.
Unless otherwise provided by law, the following shall NOT be a ground for
disqualification:
1. Religious or political belief;
2. Interest in the outcome of the case; or
3. Conviction of a crime.
Exceptions: 1. Those convicted of falsification of a document,
perjury or false testimony cannot be witnesses to a will. (Civil Code,
Art. 821) 2. An accused convicted of a crime involving moral
turpitude, whenever made a coaccused in any criminal case, cannot
be discharged to become a witness for the Government. (Rule 119,
Sec. 17)
BAR: JP lived in Dvo City with his 17 yr old daughter CJ , who the former was
shot outside his house at around 8:25 pm on 16 May 2006. During trial of accused
M, CJ testified that she saw a gunman shot her father who hurriedly ran across the
street where a motorcycle was waiting. The gunman boarded the motorcycle
driven by M. The place where M waited for the gunman was illuminated by the
light coming from a nearby vulcanizing shop.
Another witness, a resident near the place testified that while he was at the store at
about 7 that night he saw 2 persons on board a motorcycle stopped and have some
beer at the store. Later, they left in the general direction of the place of the
incident. On his way home, he saw the motorcycle along the roadside and then he
heard a gunshot. He pointed M as the driver.
M claims that CJ when questioned by the police after the incident indicated that
she did not know who shot her father and did not identify the driver of the
motorcycle.
Granting arguendo that CJ did not identify M, was there a basis for the conclusion
of M?
HELD: YES,even assuming that CJ did not actually identify M as the driver of the
getaway motorcycle, sufficient circumstantial evidence was established to uphold
his conviction.
Sec 4,Rule 133 of the Revised Rule of Court provides requisites for circumstantial
evidence to be sufficient. In this case, the circumstantial evidence based on the
testimony of the other witness, pieced together with CJ is undisputed testimony
that she saw her father’s gunmen run to a getaway motorcycle driven by M, the
prosecutor has successfully conjured up a murder picture attributable to a
undisputed gunman and M as the motorcycle driver (Pp v Mansueto)

TEST OF COMPETENCY:Whether the individual has sufficient understanding to

appreciate the nature and obligation o an oath and sufficient capacity to observe
and describe the facts in regard to which he is called to testify.

A witness is presumed to be competent. The objection to the competency may be

raised at any time during the examination or cross-examination; but it should be
made as soon as the facts tending to show incompetency are discovered.

Two kinds of Incompetency to testify

1. Absolute – a person is forbidden to testify on any matter

2. Partial (relative) – a person is forbidden to testify only on certain
matters specified under Section 23 and 24 of rule 130 due to interest
or relationship or to privileges of other parties.

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION: a preliminary examination conducted by

the trial judge where the witness is duly sworn to answer as to his
competency.

CITIZEN’S TESTIMONIAL DUTY:As a general rule, every competent

person may be compelled to bear testimonial in the administration of the
laws by the duly constituted courts of the country. This can only be
invoked by the state after adequate notice is given, thru subpoena.
 2

DISQUALIFICATION OF A WITNESS

Those persons who, under the law, labor under:

1.DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE; (SEC. 22) 2.DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF PARENTAL AND FILIAL
PRIVILEGE (SEC 25)
GR: DURING THEIR MARRIAGE (ONLY!), spouses may not testify against
the other without the consent of the affected spouse
No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants,
Exceptions: children or other direct descendants. (20a)
a.in a civil case by one against the other, or
b.in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against There is no distinction between legitimate or illegitimate relations.
b1. the other or
b2. the other’s direct descendants or ascendants People v. Publico, 7 CAR (2s) 703 (1972) – information given by child to 3rd
person is protected
The marital disqualification rule refers to ALL MATTERS, whether or
communicated by one spouse to the other. It applies only during the existence of
the marriage. It can be invoked only if one spouse is a party to the action. It is an No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants,
absolute disqualification and can be invoked the moment that one spouse is called children or other direct descendants.
to testify.
Reason: To preserve family cohesion.
RULE MAY BE WAIVED.
Article 215 of the Family Code provides that “No descendant shall be compelled,
Disqualification by Disqualification in a criminal case, to testify against his parents and grandparents, EXCEPT when
such testimony is indispensable in a crime against the descendant or by one
REASON OF By REASON OF MARITAL against the other”
MARRIAGE PRIVILEGE (Sec. 24 (a)) Rule 130, Sec. 25 of the Rules of Court does not provide for an exception,
(marital disqualification) (marital communication) whereas, Art. 215 of the Family code does. Which should be applied in case of
conflict? It was suggested that the Rules of Court should apply because it tool
Can be invoked only in one of Can be claimed whether or not the effect in 1989 as compared to the Family Code which took effect in 1988. It may
the spouses is a party to the other spouse is a party to the action. be argued that the former is procedural and the latter, is substantive; however, it
action was further suggested that although the Family Code provision is substantive, it is
procedural in character. So, of these two provisions, the Rules of Court which was
Applies only if the marriage is Can be claimed even after the made by the Supreme court, should prevail.
existing at the time the marriage is dissolved
testimony is offered. 2023 NOTES: IT IS WAIVABLE ON THE PART OF THE PERSON WHO
WILL TESTIFY
Constitutes a total prohibition Applies only to CONFIDENTIAL
(ALL Matters) AGAINST the COMMUNICATIONS between the 4blue95:ALWAYS REMEMBER that this rule is only with regard prohibition on
spouse of the witness. spouses. compulsion of person to testify,but if latter wanted to testify ,then he may do so
since this time there is no more compulsion and that this privilege can now be
The objection would be raised The married person is on the stand
on the ground of marriage. but the objection of privileged is inoperative.
The married witness would raised when confidential marital
not be allowed to take the communication is inquired into.
stand at all because of the
disqualification. Even if the 4blue95: it cannot be used to prior
testimony is, for or against the communication before marriage,but
objecting spouse, the spouse- it can be used for communication
witness cannot testify. learned after marriage.
3. PRIVILEGE RELATING TO TRADE SECRETS (SEC 26)
4blue95:can be used only to 4blue95:if it is a suit, use marital
prior and during marriage but disqualification; if it is communication
then use marital communication rule. A person cannot be compelled to testify about any trade secret, unless non-disclosure will
cannot be invoke if marriage
conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice. When disclosure is directed, the court shall
is dissolved.
take such protective measure as the interest of the owner of the trade secret and of the
parties and the furtherance of justice may require (Rule 130, Sec. 26)
The disqualification does not apply where an offense directly attacks or directly and
A trade secret is defined as a plan or process, tool, mechanism or compound known only
vitally impairs the conjugal relations.
to its owner and those of his employees to whom it is necessary to confide it.
NATURE OF THE PROHIBITION:It is an absolute prohibition against the spouse’s
The definition also extends to a secret formula or process not patented, but known only to
testifying to any fact affecting the husband or the wife however the knowledge of these
certain individuals using it in compounding some article of trade having a commercial
facts may have been acquired.
value
MARRYING THE WITNESS – an accused can effectivity “seal the lips” of a witness by
A trade secret may consist of any formula, pattern, device, or compilation of information
marrying the witness. as long as a valid marriage is in existence at the time of the trial the
that: (1) is used in one's business; and (2) gives the employer an opportunity to obtain an
witness-spouse cannot be compelled to testify even where the crime charged is against
advantage over competitors who do not possess the information. (Air Philippines vs.
the witness’ person, and even though the marriage was entered into for the express
Pennswell, Inc., G.R. No. 172835, 2007)
purpose of suppressing the testimony.
The following are factors in determining if a piece of information is a trade secret
WHO MAY OBJECT? Only the spouse-party and not the other spouse who is offered as
protected from disclosure:
witness.
1. The extent to which the information is known outside of the employer’s
4blue95:self incrimination is applicable only in a criminal case.
business;
4blue95:reason for marital disqualification are (1)identity between husband and wife (2)
2. The extent to which the information is known by employees and others involved
avoid perjury and (3)avoid marital discord.
in the business;
4blue95: however, if relationship is strained ,disqualification does not apply since there is
3. The extent of measures taken by the employer to guard the secrecy of the
no more identity of interest and no danger of perjury.
information;
4. The value of the information to the employer and to competitors;
The disqualification is between husband and wife, the law not precluding the wife from
5. The amount of effort or money expended by the company in developing the
testifying when it involves other parties or accused. The wife may proceed and testify in
information; and
the murder case against the brothers who were jointly tried with her husband, but the
6. The extent to which the information could be easily or readily obtained through
testimony cannot be used against the husband through the guise of taking judicial notice
an independent source. (Air Philippines vs. Pennswell, Inc., G.R. No. 172835,
of the proceedings in the murder case without violating the rule. What cannot be done
2007)
directly cannot be done indirectly. (People v. Quidato, G.R. No. 117401, 1998)

Where the wife is a co-defendant in a suit charging fraud against the spouses, the wife
could not be compelled to testify as an adverse party witness concerning her participation
in the alleged fraud without violating [Sec. 23] of Rule 130. (Lezama v. Rodriguez, G.R.
No. L-25643, 1968)

4. DISQUALIFICATION ON GROUND OF PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION.
(SEC. 24)
WHO MAY ASSERT PRIVILEGE?
1. Holder of privilege
2. Authorized persons; and
3. Persons to whom privileged communication were made.
4.
We apply the privileged communication to both civil and criminal cases EXCEPT
as to the doctor-patient privilege, which is applicable only in CIVIL CASES.
Unless waived, the disqualification remains even after the various relationship
therein have ceased to exist.
A. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE
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
It has the same exceptions with Marital disqualification.
Requisites:
1. there was a valid marital relation;(PRIOR INFO NOT COVERED)
2. the privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential
communication between the spouses during said marriage(it is
confidential if its something the husband would not confide to wife
if they are not married); and
3. the spouse against whom such evidence is being offered has not
given his or her consent to such testimony.
There is a presumption of confidentiality on all communication between husband
and wife AND such privilege is applicable to matters even if marriage is not
anymore existing.
Communications overhead by third persons without knowledge of spouses is still
confidential but the third party is not disqualified to testify
Where there is collusion and voluntary disclosure to third party the later becomes
an agent and cannot testify.
Communication in furtherance of fraud and crime is not privileged.
B. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN PRIEST AND PENITENT
Requisites:
1. The confession must have been made to the priest in his professional
character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which
he belongs;
2. The communications made were confidential and PENITENTIAL in
character.
The Privilege Does Not Apply:
1. Where a minister is consulted not as such (e.g., he is consulted as a
friend or interpreter).
2. Where the confession is not made in the course of religious discipline.
3. When there is waiver.
C. OTHER PRIVILEGED MATTERS
1. The guardian ad litem shall not testify in any proceeding concerning any
information , statement, or opinion received from the child in the course of
serving as a guardian ad litem, unless the court finds it necessary to promote
the best interest of the child (Sec. 5 (e) of the Rule on Examination of a Child
Witness)
2. Editors may not be compelled to disclose the source of published news;
3. Voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted;
4 . Bank Deposits.
3
D. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN DOCTOR AND PATIENT
(WAIVABLE AS TO THE PATIENT)
Purpose: It is intended to facilitate and make safe fill and confidential disclosure by the
patient to the physician of all facts, circumstances and symptoms untrammeled by
apprehension of their subsequent and enforced disclosure and publication on the witness
stand to the end that the physician may form a correct opinion and enabled safety and
efficaciously to treat his patient.
NOTE: it is essential that at the time the communication were made the professional
relationship of physician and patient existed.
Dentist, pharmacist or nurses are disqualified if acting as agents.
TEST: whether a third person was an agent of the doctor in a professional capacity.
Scope of Prohibition
Applies not only to communication but also to opinions or prescriptions. Not all
information obtained confidentially by the physician from the patient and necessary for
his treatment are within the privilege. The information held to be privileged is that which
would blacken the reputation of the patient.
2023 NOTE: It is only the tenor of the communication by the patient to the doctor that is
privileged. Hence, the fact of communication the date and frequency of consultation with
the doctor are executed. (Lim vs. Court of Appeals, 214 SCRA 273,282-283 (1992), cited
at Peralta, Jr. Perspectives of Evidence, 2005 Edition, page 216)
Duration of the Prohibition : It continues after death but it may be waived by the personal
representative of the decedent.
2023 NOTE: Padilla was of the view that the privilege is eternal. However, passages
from ruling Case Law suggest the necessity of continuity of the bond between the patient
and the physician and it follows that the physician is not hampered from testifying as to
information respecting a patient which he acquired either before the relation began or
after its termination.
The Privilege Does Not Apply:
1. When the case is a criminal case.
2. When the testimony refers to information regarding a patient which the physician
acquired either before the relation of physician and patient began or after its
termination.
3. When there is waiver.
4. If the physician acted for purposes other than to prescribe for the patient.
5. When the information was not necessary for the proper treatment of the patient.
6. Where an action for damages is brought by the patient against his physician.
7. When the physician is presented as an expert witness and the facts testified to are
merely hypothetical. (Lim v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 91114, 1992)
8. When the information was intended to be public, such as results of physical and
mental examinations ordered by the court and results of autopsies. (See Rule 28,
Sec. 4)
Where the person against whom the privilege is claimed is the patient’s husband
who testifies on a document executed by medical practitioners, his testimony does
not have the force and effect of the testimony of the physician who examined the
patient and executed the report. Plainly, this does not fall within the prohibition.
(Krohn vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108854, 1994)
BUT NOTE THIS 2019 AMENDMENT: 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, last
paragraph)
Hospital Records during Discovery Procedure
To allow the disclosure during discovery procedure of the hospital records would be to
allow access to evidence that is inadmissible without the patient’s consent. Disclosing
them would be the equivalent of compelling the physician to testify on privileged matters
he gained while dealing with the patient, without the latter’s prior consent. (Chan v.
Chan, G.R. No. 179786, 2013)
4BLUE 95 Note: A psychologist 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. (Sec. 30 of
R.A. 10029, Philippine Psychology Act of 2009) This has been incorporated into the
privilege under the 2019 amendments which include “psychotherapists” within the
coverage of the privilege.

E. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.
Requisites:
1. There is an attorney and client relationship;
2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential communication
between them in the course of professional employment; and
3. The client has not given consent to the attorney’s testimony thereon; or if
the attorney’s secretary, stenographer or clerk is sought to be examined,
that both the client and the attorney have not given their consent thereto.
Purposes:To encourage full disclosure by client to his attorney of all pertinent matters so
as to further the administration of justice.
Test: Whether the communications are made to an attorney with a view of obtaining from
him professional assistance or advice regardless of whether there is pending or merely
impending litigation or any litigation.
2023 notes: applicable even if client has not paid any fee and there has been no formal
retainer. The attorney-client privilege does not apply if the attorney was sued by his
client.
2023 notes: does not extend to information gathered by an attorney from witnesses.
2023 notes: out of court admission (written or not) by attorney is not binding on the
client, as such, it is not admissible against his client.
It extends to an attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk concerning any fact the
knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity
2023 notes:the consent of both the attorney and the client is necessary for the attorney's
secretary, stenographer, or clerk to testify.
THE DISQUALIFICATION BASED ON THE ATTORNEY CLIENT
PRIVILEGE DOES NOT APPLY TO COMMUNICATIONS WHICH ARE:
1. When there is no attorney-client relationship
2. When the communication was not intended to be confidential
3. When the action is one brought by the client against the attorney and the
disclosure of the confidential information becomes necessary for the attorney (But
limited only for what is necessary for attorney's own protection).
4BLUE 95 Note: Contracts between attorneys and clients are inherently
personal and private matters, but they are a constant subject of litigation, and
contracts relating to fees are essentially not of a privileged nature. In other
words, the terms of employment between attorney and client are not of a
privileged nature. (Orient Insurance v. Revilla, G.R. No. 34098, 1930)
4. When there is waiver. The attorney cannot make a waiver without the client's
consent - express or implied. Waiver of the Privilege:
a) Client of the attorney consents to disclose privileged communication.
b) Giving evidence on the privileged communication.
c) When the privileged communication falls into the hands of the adverse
party.
BUT NOTE THIS 2019 AMENDMENT: 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, last
paragraph)
d) In calling or cross-examining his attorney regarding the privileged
communication.
5. The receipt of fees from a client is not usually within the privilege because the
payment of a fee is not normally a matter of confidence or a communication. The
ministerial or clerical services of an attorney in transferring funds to or from a
client is not a matter of confidence that is protected by the privilege. (In re Grand
Jury Investigation, 732 F.2d 447, 1983)
6. Provided by the Rules of Court
4
GENERAL RULE: A lawyer may not invoke the privilege and refuse to
divulge the name or identity of his client.
Exceptions:
1. where a strong possibility exists that revealing he client’s name
would implicate the client in the very activity for which he sought
the lawyer’s advice;
2. where disclosure would open the client to civil liability; and
3. where the prosecutors have no case against the client unless by
revealing the client’s name, the said name would furnish the only
link that would form the chain of testimony necessary to convict an
individual for a crime. (Regata vs. Sandiganbayan, 262 SCRA 122)
Attorney’s secretary, stenographer, clerk or other persons assisting the attorney are
also covered by the rule and cannot be examined concerning any fact the
knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity without the consent of the
client AND their employer.
4BLUE95 Note: Also covered is a “person reasonably believed by the client to be
licensed to engage in the practice of law”
4BLUE 95. It must be stressed, however, that the privilege against disclosure of
confidential communications or information is limited only to communications
which are legitimately and employment of a lawyer. It does not extend to those
made in contemplation of a crime or perpetration of fraud.
e.g. if the unlawful purpose is avowed, as in this case, the complainant’s
alleged intention to bribe government officials in relation to his case, the
communication is not covered by the privilege as the client does not consult
the lawyer professionally. It is not within the profession of a lawyer to advise
a client as to how he may commit a crime as a lawyer is not a gun for hire.
Thus, the attorney-client privilege does not attach, there being no
professional employment in the strict sense. (Genato vs. Silapan, Adm. Case
NO. 4078, Jul. 14, 2003)
WORK-PRODUCT DOCTRINE
The doctrine that the trial preparation materials of a lawyer or his representative
are protected from discovery unless the other party shows that it has a substantial
need for the materials to prepare its case, and cannot, without undue hardship,
obtain their substantial equivalent by other means. Trial preparation materials
include written documents, such as records, notes, memorandums, and tangible
things.
It is not a privilege but a special protective rule which limits discovery of an
attorney’s work product. (Riguerra, p. 741)
The doctrine protects the attorney’s right to work with a certain degree of privacy
in giving legal advice and in preparing for trial. If the lawyer’s trial preparation
materials could be obtained by discovery, much of what is now put down in
writing would remain unwritten. An attorney’s thoughts, heretofore inviolate,
would not be his own. (Riguerra, p. 741-742)
4BLUE 95 Note: While the work product doctrine is not expressly recognized in
Philippine law and jurisprudence, it is submitted that it may be invoked in the
Philippines pursuant to S16, R23 on motion for protective orders or to S18 R233
on motion to terminate or limit examination.
 5

F. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION TO PUBLIC OFFICERS

Requisites:
1. The holder of the privilege is the government acting through a public
officer;
2. the communication was given to the public officer in confidence;
3. The communication was given during the term of office of the public
officer or afterwards;
4. The public interest would suffer by the disclosure of the
communication
Exception to ALL this privilege: Court, a House or committee of Congress finds that
such revelation is demanded by the security of the State.
This privilege is intended not for the protection of public officers but for the protection of
public interest. Where there is no public interest that would be prejudiced, this invoked
rule will not be applicable (Banco Filipino v. Monetary Board, G.R. No. L-70054, 1986).
What is usually referred to as informer’s privilege is in reality the government’s privilege
to withhold from disclosure the identity of persons who furnish information of violations
of laws to officers charged with enforcement of that law. (People v. Ong, G.R. No.
137348, 2004)
JUDICIAL PRIVILEGE
At the most basic level and subject to the principle of comity, Members of the Court, and
Court officials and employees may not be compelled to testify on matters that are part of
the internal deliberations and actions of the Court in the exercise of their adjudicatory
functions and duties, while testimony on matters external to their adjudicatory functions
and duties may be compelled by compulsory processes.
To summarize these rules, the following are privileged documents or communications,
and are not subject to disclosure:
1. Court actions such as the result of the raffle of cases and the actions taken by the
Court on each case included in the agenda of the Court's session on acts done
material to pending cases, except where a party litigant requests information on the
result of the raffle of the case, pursuant to Rule 7, Section 3 of the Internal Rules of
the Supreme Court;
2. Court deliberations or the deliberations of the Members in court sessions on
cases and matters pending before the Court;
3. Court records which are "predecisional" and "deliberative" in nature, in
particular, documents and other communications which are part of or related to the
deliberative process, i.e., notes, drafts, research papers, internal discussions,
internal memoranda, records of internal deliberations, and similar papers.

PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS PRIVILEGE
There is a Recognized Presumptive Presidential Communications Privilege - it was the
President herself, through Executive Secretary Ermita, who invoked executive privilege
on a specific matter involving an executive agreement between the Philippines and
China, which was the subject of the three questions. (Neri v. Senate Committee, G.R. No.
180643, 2008)
4. Confidential Information secured by justices, judges, court officials and
employees in the course of their official functions, mentioned in (2) and (3) above,
are privileged even after their term of office.
5. Records of cases that are still pending for decision are privileged materials that
cannot be disclosed, except only for pleadings, orders and resolutions that have
been made available by the court to the general public.

Elements of Presidential Communications Privilege
1. Must relate to a “quintessential and nondelegable presidential power;”
2. Must be authored or “solicited and received” by a close advisor of the President or the
President himself; and
3. Privilege may be overcome by a showing of adequate need such that the information
sought “likely contains important evidence” and by the unavailability of the information
elsewhere (Neri v. Senate Committee, G.R. No. 180643, 2008)
6. The principle of comity or inter-departmental courtesy demands that the highest
officials of each department be exempt from the compulsory processes of the other
departments.
7. These privileges belong to the Supreme Court as an institution, not to any justice
or judge in his or her individual capacity. Since the Court is higher than the
individual justices or judges, no sitting or retired justice or judge, not even the
Chief Justice, may claim exception without THE CONSENT of the Court

NEWSMAN’S PRIVILEGE
WITNESS PROTECTION, SECURITY AND BENEFIT ACT
General Rule: Without prejudice to his liability under the civil and criminal laws, any
publisher, owner, or duly recognized or accredited journalist, writer, reporter, contributor, All proceedings involving application for admission into the Program and the action
opinion writer, editor, columnist, manager, media practitioner involved in the writing, taken thereon shall be confidential in nature. No information or documents given or
editing, production, and dissemination of news for mass circulation, of any print, submitted in support thereof shall be released except upon written order of the
broadcast, wire service organization, or electronic mass media, including cable TV and Department of Justice or the proper court. (R.A. 6981, Sec. 7)
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. (R.A. No. 53, as
amended by R.A. 11458, Sec. 1)
THIRD PERSONS
Exception: 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 The communication shall remain privileged, even in the hands of a third person who may
State. (R.A. No. 53, as amended by R.A. 11458, Sec. 1) have obtained the information, provided that the original parties to the communication
took reasonable precaution to protect its confidentiality (Rule 130, Sec. 24)
The State constitutional guarantee of a criminal defendant’s right to confront witnesses
prevails over the State statute granting privilege to newspersons regarding their sources
of confidential information. (Farber v. Jascalevich, 394 A.2d 330, 1978)

The Shield Law prevails over testimonial privileges of newsmen. They can be required to
appear and testify before state or federal grand juries since the ends of criminal justice
would be defeated if judgments were to be founded on a partial or speculative
presentation of the facts.

COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION AND JUDICIAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Any and all matters discussed, or communications made, including requests for
mediation, and documents presented during CAM or JDR proceedings, shall be
privileged and confidential.

If personal notes are taken for guidance, the notes shall be destroyed. Should such records
exist, the same shall also be privileged and confidential.

All privileged and confidential information obtained in CAM or JDR shall be

inadmissible as evidence for any purpose in any other proceedings.

However, evidence or information that is otherwise admissible does not become

inadmissible solely by reason of its use in CAM or JDR (Guidelines for the Conduct of
CAM and JDR in Civil Cases, A.M. No. 19-10-SC, Part D, Sec. 7).
 6

RELATIVE/PARTIAL QUALIFICATION OF A WITNESS

IT CAN BE IN ANY FORM, IT CAN BE IN ORAL OR WRITTEN.

DEAD MAN’S STATUTE

Facts favorable to the deceased are NOT prohibited
Section 23. Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party
(DEAD MAN’S STATUTE / THE RULE ON SURVIVING PARTIES) In as much as the statutes are designed to protect the interest of a deceased or
insane person, they do not exclude testimonies which are favorable to the
aka “Survivor Disqualification Rule”. Survivor cannot testify /claim against representative of such person.
the estate of a deceased person. Such incompetency is confined to giving of
objected testimony on matters of fact occurring before the death of deceased
or before such became of unsound mind.

Requisites:
The Dead Man’s Statute or the Survivorship Rule does not apply in the
1. The witness is a party or assignor of a party to a case or persons in following cases:
whose behalf a case is prosecuted;
1. Testimony of mere witnesses who are neither party plaintiffs, nor
2. the action is against an executor or administrator or other
their assignors, nor persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted;
representative of a deceased person or a person of unsound mind;
2. If the plaintiff is the executor or administrator or other representative
3. The subject-matter of the action is a claim or demand against the
of a deceased person, or the person of unsound mind;
estate of such deceased person or against person of unsound mind;
3. in an action against a partnership
4. The testimony refers to any matter of fact which occurred before the
4. If the person or person mentioned under the rule files a
death of such deceased person or before such person became of
counterclaim;
unsound mind.
5. When the testimony refers to fraudulent transactions, committed by
the persons mentioned in the rule;
BAR: what is the effect of the cross examination by a party of a witness he seeks 6. When there is waiver;
to disqualify under the “Dead Man’s Statute”HELD: when a party cross-examines 7. When the testimony of a plaintiff refers to the non-occurrence of a
a witness in matters that occurred during the lifetime of the deceased, such fact, because in that case, the plaintiff does not testify on the
protection under the Dead Man’s statute is effectively waived (Santos v Santos) occurrence of a fact but on its non-occurrence;
8. In cadastral cases;
2010 notes:It disqualifies only parties(and assignors of parties) but the 9. Testimony FOUNDED ON A WRITTEN INSTRUMENT on the
officers/stockholders of a corp are not disqualified from testifying for or against a possession by witness o made by the deceased, as such fact exits
corp which is a party to an action upon a claim/demand against the estate of a even after the decedent’s demise.
deceased person as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such
deceased person.

Previous testimony offered in evidence against one party ceases to be competent

upon new trial after death of such party.

Incompetency to testify applies whether the deceased died before or after the
commencement of the action against him if at the time the testimony was given he
was already dead and cannot disprove it.

“Assignor” – means assignor of a cause of action which has already arisen and not
the assignor of a right before any cause of action accrued.

DEAD MAN’S MARITAL DISQUALIFICATION

STATUTE RULE

Only a partial disqualification as the It is a complete and absolute

witness is not completely disqualified disqualification.
but is only prohibited from testifying
on the matters therein specified.

Applies only to a civil case or special Applies to a civil or criminal case,

proceeding over the estate of a subject only to the two exceptions
deceased or insane person. provided therein:

(1) except 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.

Purpose of the Rule

It is designed to close the lips of the party plaintiff when death has permanently
close he lips of the party defendant in order to remove from the surviving party the
temptation to give false testimony and the possibility of fictitious claims against
the deceased.

MATTERS PROHIBITED

Matters occurring in the presence and within the hearing of the decedent to which
he might testify of his personal knowledge if he were alive.