RULE 132
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
A. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Section 1. 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 question calls for a different mode of answer, the answers of the
witness shall be given orally. (1)
Section 2. Proceedings to be recorded. - The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the
questions propounded to a witness and his or her answers thereto, and 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 or her, shall be deemed prima facie a correct statement of
such proceedings. (2a)
Section 3. Rights and obligations of a witness. — A witness must answer questions, although his or
her answer may tend to establish a claim against him or her. 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 or her to a penalty for an offense
unless otherwise provided by law; or
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his or her reputation, unless it be to 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 or her previous final conviction for an offense. (3a)
RIGHT AGAINST SELF INCRIMINATION
4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him or her to a penalty for an offense
unless otherwise provided by law; or
-article 3 sec 17 BOR
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself
-It is the prohibition of use of physical or moral cumpalsion to extort or get any information from the
accused.
-This available in all cases, admin civil or criminal.but only by natural person not artificial or juridical
person like corporation in search and seizure rights.
-Yes it can be waived expressly, and impliedly f not asserted at the opportune time or on behalf of
the witness.
RIGHT AGAINST SELF DEGRADATION
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his or her reputation, unless it be to 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 or her previous final conviction for an offense.
-An inquest to witness concerning a fact that would degrade his or her reputation is not allowed
under this rule
Key Differences:
Focus of Protection:
o Self-Incrimination: Focuses on protecting an individual from being forced to
provide testimony that could result in criminal penalties.
o Self-Degradation: Focuses on protecting an individual from being forced to
provide testimony that could harm their reputation or dignity.
Context of Use:
o Self-Incrimination: Applies when the testimony could directly result in the
individual being charged or punished for a crime.
o Self-Degradation: Applies when the testimony could harm the person's personal
reputation or dignity, even if it does not lead to criminal punishment.
Requirement to Answer:
o Self-Incrimination: A person can refuse to answer questions that might
incriminate them, and the court must respect this right.
o Self-Degradation: A person can refuse to answer questions that would degrade
their reputation, but they must answer questions related to their criminal record,
particularly prior convictions.
In summary, the right against self-incrimination safeguards an individual from providing
testimony that could lead to criminal liability, while the right against self-degradation
safeguards them from answering questions that could harm their personal reputation or dignity,
except when it is directly related to the issue at hand in the case.
Section 4. Order in the examination of an individual witness. - The order in which an individual
witness may be examined is as follows:
(a) Direct examination by the proponent;
(b) Cross-examination by the opponent;
(c) Re-direct examination by the proponent;
(d) Re-cross examination by the opponent. (4)
TRIAL- is the stage for presentation of witnesses
Section 5. Direct examination. - Direct examination is the examination-in-chief of a witness by the
party presenting him or her on the facts relevant to the issue.
Judicial Affidavit Rule, parties shall file judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which take place their
witness testimonies.
-Party presenting shall state the purpose of such testimony at the start of the presentation of
witness.
-It is where the one having burden of proof seeks to establish his prima facie case (Building the
case), or the defendant to bring about an equilibrium in a civil case, or a reasonable doubt in a
criminal case.
Requisites:
a. Firm grasp of the main lines of evidence, and the place of each line in the unfolding of the cae.
b. Skill in the use of words, to able to guide the witness in the right direction without leading him.
(Choose simple words to not lead)
Misleading question: one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified by the witness, or contrary
t00o that which he or she has previously stated. This is not allowed.
Note: In summary procedures examination of witness no longer required. The affidavit also
constitute direct testimony.
-Also, no witness shall be allowed to testify unless affidavit previously submitted except on rebuttal
or surrebuttal
Accused as witness v. mere witness
If the witness is the accused, he may totally refuse to take the stand.
A mere witness cannot altogether refuse to take the stand unless there is an incriminating question
The purpose isto protect the constitutional rights of the accused and to ensure that they are not
forced to testify in a way that could self-incriminate. For witnesses, while they are generally
required to testify to assist in the discovery of the truth, they are also protected from answering
questions that would expose them to criminal liability, maintaining fairness and protecting
individual rights.
In short, the Philippine legal system provides a balance between the right of an accused person
to remain silent and the obligation of a witness to testify, while both groups are protected from
self-incrimination under the Constitution.
Section 6. Cross-examination; its purpose and extent. - Upon the termination of the direct
examination, the witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party on any relevant matter, with
sufficient fullness and freedom to test his or her accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from interest
or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue. (6a)
right of confrontation 2 purpose:
a. Secure the opportunity of cross examination
b. Allow the judge to observe deportment and appearance of the witness while testifying.
Other purpose: to test truthfulness of statement in the direct examination.
Note: parties to first proceeding must be the SAME to later proceeding
BUT physical identity is not required: substantial identity of interest suffice
-Right to cross examine may be waived expressly or impliedly (when failed to avail) because it is
personal one.
-Judge CAN ALSO CROSS EXAMINE WITNESS, only on facts necessary to elicit pertinent facts.can also ak
LEADIng questions.
RESTRICTIONS:
a. Waiver
b. Relevant- cross examine should be restricted to matters competent, material and relevant.
c. Default-to enforce prompt filing of answer to the complaint.
d. Ex parte proceeding-
e. Best evidence and parol evidence rule-(Available only to the proponent of the originalll writing.
f. Former testimony and other excceptions tp hearsay rule
g. Defendant escape from confinement
h. Accused who testifies
i. Unwlling hostile wtiness
j. Misleading and inadmissible
Right to cross examine continues throught the case (based on discrertion of trial judge, subject to right
of witness of degradation)
3 techniques for cross examination:
a. Confrontation- confronting witness with facts which he cannot deny and are inconsistent with
his evidence.
b. Probing- carried by out by inquiring thoroughly into the details of the story to discover the
flaws.
c. Insinuation- most important technique. It is the building up of different versions of evidence in
chief by bringing out new facts and possibilities.
5 occassions that can impede cross examination
1. Witness death or illness
2. Witness refusal to answer on cros examination or party prevent him to answer
3. Non responsive with questions
4. Circumstances that prevent adequate cross examination
Section 7. Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent. - After the cross-examination of the
witness has been concluded, he or she may be re-examined by the party calling him or her to
explain or supplement his or her 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. (7a)
Purpose: to prevent injustice to witness
-to give him opportunity to explain his statements during the cross examination eve his
inconsistencies
-This completes his answer or adding new matter which has been omitted or misinterpreted.
Section 8. 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 or her re-direct examination, and
also on such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (8a)
-to allow examinationon of new matterss brought during redirect examination.
-this is confined only to matters previously testifiec during redirect examination or new matter
brought on direct examination.
-what is excluded are matters were not nnrought up during redirect examination, or those matter fully
discussed at the cross examination.
upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the adverse party may re-cross-examine the
witness on:
a. Matters stated in his or her re-direct examination
b. Such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its discretion
Section 9. 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. (9)
Day one Examination Rule– a witness has to be fully examined in one (1) day only, shall be
strictly adhered to subject to the court’s discretion during trial o whether or not to extend the
direct and/or cross-examination for justifiable reasons.
Most Important Witness Rule – determine the most important witnesses to be heard and limit
the number of witnesses.
Section 10. Leading and misleading questions. - A question which suggests to the witness the
answer which the examining party desires is a leading question. It is not allowed, except:
(a) On cross-examination;
(b) On preliminary matters;
(c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, a child of tender years, is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
(d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e) 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 or she has previously stated. It is not allowed. (10a)
Q: What is a leading question?
A: It is one that is framed in such a way that the question indicates to the witness the answer desired by
the party asking the question. It is not appropriate in direct and re-direct examinations particularly when
the witness is asked to testify about a major element of the cause of action or defense.
Yet, it is allowed in cross and re-cross examinations. In fact, it is the type of question that should be
employed in a cross examination.
Q: When are leading questions allowed in direct examination?
A: 1. On a preliminary matters;
2. When the witness is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is feeble-minded or a deaf-mute and there
is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from such witness;
3. When the witness is a hostile witness; or
4. When the witness is an adverse party, or when the witness is an officer, director, managing agent of a
corporation, partnership or association which is an adverse party.
(a) On cross-examination-leading question are allowed here , but subject to qualification that
the court, in discretion, may restrict the right where witness shows bias in favor of the
cross examiner. Or it appears to manipulate the witness into giving false testimony.
Example: leading: you saw the defendant holding the weapon, didn’t you?
Non-leading: what did you see happen in the scene
(b) On preliminary matters- LQ are allowed when they do not directly address the
substantive issues of the case but to streamline the process. This is to establish
background facts
Example: Leading: did you see him on March 2 20204
(c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, a child of tender years, is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
-LQ allowed by reason of tender years or old age, ignorance or some infirmity are unable
to state facts without aid or suggestion.
(d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e) 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.
Section 11. Impeachment of adverse party's witness. - A witness may be impeached by the party
against whom he or she was called, by contradictory evidence, by evidence that his or her general
reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is bad, or by evidence that he or she has made at other
times statements inconsistent with his or her present testimony, but not by evidence of particular
wrongful acts, except that it may be shown by the examination of the witness, or record of the
judgment, that he or she has been convicted of an offense. (11a)
Section 12. 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. (n)
Section 13. Party may not impeach his or her own witness. - Except with respect to witnesses
referred to in paragraphs (d) and (e) of Section 10 of this Rule, the party presenting the witness is
not allowed to impeach his or her credibility.
A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by the court upon adequate
showing of his or her adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or his or her having misled the
party into calling him or her 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 or her in all respects as if he or she had been called by the
adverse party, except by evidence of his or her bad character. He or she may also be impeached
and cross-examined by the adverse party, but such cross-examination must only be on the subject
matter of his or her examination-in-chief. (12a)
Section 14. How witness impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements. — Before a witness
can be impeached by evidence that he or she has made at other times statements inconsistent with
his or her present testimony, the statements must be related to him or her, with the circumstances of
the times and places and the persons present, and he or she must be asked whether he or
she 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 or her concerning them. (13a)
[Sec. 14. Evidence of good character of witness. - (Incorporated in Section 54, Rule 130)]
Section 15. 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 the party's cause, or (d) a person authorized by a statute to be present.
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. (15a)
Section 16. When witness may refer to memorandum. - A witness may be allowed to refresh his or
her memory respecting a fact by anything written or recorded by himself or herself, or under his or
her direction, at the time when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any other time
when the fact was fresh in his or her memory and he or she knew that the same was correctly
written or recorded; but in such case, the writing or record must be produced and may be inspected
by the adverse party, who may, if he or she chooses, cross-examine the witness upon it and may
read it in evidence. A witness may also testify from such a writing or record, though he or she retains
no recollection of the particular facts, if he or she is able to swear that the writing or record correctly
stated the transaction when made; but such evidence must be received with caution. (16a)
Section 17. 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. (17)
Section 18. Right to inspect writing shown to witness. - Whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it
may be inspected by the adverse party. (18)
B. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
Section 19. Classes of documents. - For the purpose of their presentation in evidence, documents
are either public or private.
Public documents are:
(a) The written official acts, or records of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals,
and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country;
(b) Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments;
(c) 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 be
entered therein.
All other writings are private. (19a)
Section 20. Proof of private documents. - 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; or
(c) By other evidence showing its due execution and authenticity.
Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be. (20)
Section 21. When evidence of authenticity of private document not necessary. - Where a private
document is more than thirty (30) years old, is produced from a 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. (21)
Section 22. How genuineness of handwriting proved. - The handwriting of a person may be proved
by any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he or she has seen the
person write, or has seen writing purporting to be his or hers 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 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. (22)
Section 23. 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. (23)
Section 24. Proof of official record. - The record of public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of
Section 19, when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or
by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his or her deputy, and
accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the
custody.
If the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, which is a contracting party to a treaty
or convention to which the Philippines is also a party, or considered a public document under such
treaty or convention pursuant to paragraph (c) of Section 19 hereof, the certificate or its equivalent
shall be in the form prescribed by such treaty or convention subject to reciprocity granted to public
documents originating from the Philippines.
For documents originating from a foreign country which is not a contracting party to a treaty or
convention referred to in the next preceding sentence, the certificate may be made by a secretary of
the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent or by any officer in
the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the record is kept, and
authenticated by the seal of his or her office.
A document that is accompanied by a certificate or its equivalent may be presented in evidence
without further proof, the certificate or its equivalent being prima facie evidence of the due execution
and genuineness of the document involved. The certificate shall not be required when a treaty or
convention between a foreign country and the Philippines has abolished the requirement, or has
exempted the document itself from this formality. (24a)
Section 25. What attestation of copy must state. - Whenever a copy of a document or record is
attested for the purpose of evidence, the attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a
correct copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must be
under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he or she be the clerk of a court
having a seal, under the seal of such court. (25 a)
Section 26. 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.
(26)
Section 27. Public record of a private document. - An authorized public record of a private document
may be proved by the original record, or by a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the
record, with an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody. (27)
Section 28. Proof of lack of record. - A written statement signed by an officer having the custody of
an official record or by his or her deputy that, after diligent search, no record or entry of a specified
tenor is found to exist in the records of his or her office, accompanied by a certificate as above
provided, is admissible as evidence that the records of his or her office contain no such record or
entry. (28a)
Section 29. How judicial record impeached. - Any judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
(a) want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer;
(b) collusion between the parties; or
(c) fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings. (29)
Section 30. 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. (30)
Section 31. Alteration in document, how to explain. - The party producing a document as genuine
which has been altered and appears to have been altered after its execution, in a part material to the
question in dispute, must account for the alteration. He or she may show that the alteration was
made by another, without his or her concurrence, or was made with the consent of the parties
affected by it, or was otherwise properly or innocently made, or that the alteration did not change the
meaning or language of the instrument. If he or she fails to do that, the document shall not be
admissible in evidence. (31a)
Section 32. Seal. - There shall be no difference between sealed and unsealed private documents
insofar as their admissibility as evidence is concerned. (32)
Section 33. 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. (33)
C. OFFER AND OBJECTION
Section 34. 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. (34)
Section 35. When to make offer. - All evidence must be offered orally.
The offer of the testimony of a 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. (35a)
Section 36. 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 a 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 objections must be specified. (36a)
Section 37. When repetition of objection unnecessary. - When it becomes reasonably apparent in
the course of the examination of a witness that the questions 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 or her continuing objection to such class of questions. (37a)
Section 38. 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. (38)
Section 39. Striking out of 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 a question 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. (39a)
ℒαwρhi ৷
Section 40. 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. (40)
