RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE [A.M. NO.

01-701- SC]
APPLICABILITY
The Rules on Electronic Evidence applies only to civil
actions, quasi-judicial proceedings and administrative
proceeding, not to criminal action. [Ang v. CA (2010)]
MEANING OF ELECTRONIC DEVICE; ELECTRONIC DATA
MESSAGE
Electronic document
(1) Information or the representation of information, data,
figures, symbols or other modes of written expression,
(2) Described or however represented, by which a right is
established or an obligation extinguished, or by which a
fact may be proved and affirmed,
(3) Which is received, recorded, transmitted, stored
processed, retrieved or produced electronically.
(4) It includes digitally signed documents and any printout or output, readable by sight or other means, which
accurately reflects the electronic data message or
electronic document.
For purposes of these Rules, the term electronic
document may be used interchangeably with electronic
data message.
Electronic data message
Information generated, sent, received or stored by
electronic, optical or similar means
PROBATIVE VALUE OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS OR
EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT; METHOD OF PROOF
Factors in assessing evidentiary weight of electronic
evidence [Rule 7, Sec. 1]
In assessing the evidentiary weight of an electronic
document, the following factors may be considered:
(1) The reliability of the manner or method in which it was
generated, stored or communicated, including but not
limited to
(a) Input and output procedures,
(b) Controls, tests and checks for accuracy and
reliability of the electronic data message or
document,
(c) In the light of all the circumstances as well as
any relevant agreement;
(2) The reliability of the manner in which its originator was
identified;
(3) The integrity of the information and communication
system in which it is recorded or stored, including but not
limited to the hardware and computer programs or
software used as well as programming errors;
(a) Whether the information and communication
system or other similar device was operated in a
manner that did not affect the integrity of the
electronic document, and there are no other
reasonable grounds to doubt the integrity of the
information and communication system [Rule 7,
Sec. 2];
(b) Whether the electronic document was
recorded or stored by a party to the proceedings
with interest adverse to that of the party using it
[Rule 7, Sec. 2]; or

(c) Whether the electronic document was

recorded or stored in the usual and ordinary
course of business by a person who is not a party
to the proceedings and who did not act under the
control of the party using it [Rule 7, Sec. 2]
(4) The familiarity of the witness or the person who made
the entry with the communication and information system;
(5) The nature and quality of the information which went
into the communication and information system upon
which the electronic data message or electronic document
was based; or
(6) Other factors which the court may consider as
affecting the accuracy or integrity of the electronic
document or electronic data message.
In any dispute involving the integrity of the information
and communication system in which an electronic
document or electronic data message is recorded or
stored, the court may consider, among others, the
following factors:
(1) Whether the information and communication system or
other similar device was operated in a manner that did not
affect the integrity of the electronic document, and there
are no other reasonable grounds to doubt the integrity of
the information and communication system;
(2) Whether the electronic document was recorded or
stored by a party to the proceedings with interest adverse
to that of the party using it; or
(3) Whether the electronic document was recorded or
stored in the usual and ordinary course of business by a
person who is not a party to the proceedings and who did
not act under the control of the party using it.
Text messages have been classified as ephemeral
electronic communication under Section 1(k), Rule 2 of
the Rules on Electronic Evidence, and shall be proven by
the testimony of a person who was a party to the same or
has personal knowledge thereof. [Vidallon-Magtolis v.
Salud (2005)]
Method of Proof
(1) Affidavit of Evidence [Rule 9, Sec. 1]
(a) Must state facts:
(i) Of direct personal knowledge, or
(j) Based on authentic records
(b) Must affirmatively show the competence of the
affiant to testify on the matters contained in the
affidavit
(2) Cross-Examination of Deponent [Rule 9, Sec. 2]
(a) Affiant shall affirm the contents of the affidavit
in open court.
(b) Affiant may be cross-examined as a matter of
right by the adverse party.
AUTHENTICATION OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS &
ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
[Rule 5, secs. 1 to 3; Rule 11, secs. 1 to 2, Rules on
electronic evidence]
Of Electronic Documents
Burden of proving authenticity: The person seeking to
introduce the electronic document [Rule 5, Sec. 1]

EVID - Page 1 of 5

Manner of Authentication:
(1) By evidence that it had been digitally signed by the
person purported to have signed the same;
(2) By evidence that other appropriate security procedures
or devices as may be authorized by the Supreme Court or
by law for authentication of electronic documents were
applied to the document; or
(3) By other evidence showing its integrity and reliability
to the satisfaction of the judge. [Rule 5, Sec. 2]
Of Electronic Signatures [Rule 6, Sec. 2]
(1) By evidence that a method or process was utilized to
establish a digital signature and verify the same;
(2) By any other means provided by law; or
(3) By any other means satisfactory to the judge
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS & THE HEARSAY RULE
Business Records as Exception to the Hearsay Rule
What Constitute Business Records: Records of any
business, institution, association, profession, occupation,
and calling of every kind, whether or not conducted for
profit, or for legitimate purposes [Rule 2, Sec. 1b]
Requisites
(1) Made by electronic, optical or other similar means
(2) Made at or near the time of or from transmission or
supply of information
(3) Made by a person with knowledge thereof
(4) Kept in the regular course or conduct of a business
activity,
(5) Such was the regular practice to make the
memorandum, report, record, or data compilation by
electronic, optical or similar means
(6) Abovementioned facts shown by the testimony of the
custodian or other qualified witnesses [Rule 8, Sec. 1]
Exception to the Exception
(1) Untrustworthiness of the source of information
(2) Untrustworthiness of the method of the preparation,
transmission or storage thereof
(3) Untrustworthiness of the circumstances of the
preparation, transmission or storage thereof [Rule 8, Sec.
2]
AUDIO, PHOTOGRAPHIC, VIDEO & EPHEMERAL EVIDENCE
If the foregoing communications are recorded or embodied
in an electronic document, then the provisions of Rule 5
(Authentication of Electronic Documents) shall apply.
EXCEPTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE ON
EXAMINATION OF CHILD WITNESS
A statement made by a child describing any act or
attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise admissible
under the hearsay rule, maybe admitted in evidence in
any criminal or non-criminal proceeding subject to the
following rules:
(a) Before such hearsay statement may be admitted, its
proponent shall make known to the adverse party the
intention to offer such statement and its particulars to

provide him a fair opportunity to object. If the child is

available, the court shall, upon motion of the adverse
party, require the child to be present at the presentation
of the hearsay statement for cross-examination by the
adverse part. When the child is unavailable, the fact of
such circumstance must be proved by the proponent.
(b) In ruling on the admissibility of such hearsay
statement, the court shall consider the time, content and
circumstances thereof which provide sufficient indicia of
reliability. It shall consider the following factors:
(1) Whether there is a motive to lie;
(2) The general character of the declarant child;
(3) Whether more than one person heard the
statement;
(4) Whether the statement was spontaneous;
(5) The timing of the statement and the
relationship between the declarant child and
witness;
(6) Cross-examination could not show the lack of
knowledge of the declaration child;
(7) The possibility of faulty recollection of the
declarant of child is remote; and
(8) The circumstances surrounding the statement
are such that there is no reason to suppose the
declarant child misrepresented the involvement of
the accused.
(c) The child witness shall be considered unavailable under
the following situations:
(1) Is deceased, suffers from physical infirmity,
lack of memory, mental illness, or will be exposed
to severe psychological injury; or
(2) Is absent from the hearing and the proponent
of his statement has been unable to procure his
attendance by process or other reasonable
means.
When the child witness is unavailable, his hearsay
testimony shall be admitted only if corroborated by other
admissible evidence.
RULE ON EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS
A.M. No. 004-07-SC
MEANING OF CHILD WITNESS
(1) Any person who at the time of giving testimony is less
than 18 years;
(2) In child abuse cases, a child includes one over 18 years
but is found by the court as
(a) Unable to fully take care of himself, or
(b) Protect himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, or discrimination
(c) Because of a physical or mental disability or
condition.
APPLICABILITY OF THE RULE
(1) Shall apply in all criminal proceedings and noncriminal
proceedings involving child witnesses. [Sec. 1]
(2) The ROC provisions on deposition, conditional
examination of witnesses and evidence shall be applied
suppletorily. [Sec. 32]
COMPETENCY OF A CHILD WITNESS

EVID - Page 2 of 5

Every child is presumed qualified to be a witness. To rebut

the presumption of competence enjoyed by a child, the
burden of proof lies on the party challenging his
competence. [Sec. 6(b)]

HEARSAY EXCEPTION IN CHILD ABUSE CASES [Sec. 28]

Proponent of hearsay statement shall make known to the
adverse party the intention to offer such statement and its
particulars.

Requisites of Competency of a Child as Witness

[People v. Mendoza (1996)]:
(1) Capacity of observation;
(2) Capacity of recollection;
(3) Capacity of communication.

If the child is available, court shall require the child to be

present at the presentation of the hearsay statement for
cross-examination by the adverse party.

When the court finds that substantial doubt exists

regarding the ability of the child to perceive/remember/
communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood, or
appreciate the duty to tell the truth in court, a
competency exam shall be conducted.
The age of the child by itself is not a sufficient basis for a
competency examination. [Sec. 6(a)]
The court has the duty of continuously assessing the
competence of the child throughout his testimony. [Sec.
6(f)]
EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS
(1) In open court [Sec. 11]
(2) Alternative Modes
(a) Live-Link TV Testimony, in Criminal Cases where Child
is a Victim or a Witness [Sec. 25]
(i) If there is a substantial likelihood that the child
would suffer trauma from testifying in the
presence of the accused, his counsel or the
prosecutor.
(ii) Trauma must be of a kind which would impair
the completeness or truthfulness of the childs
testimony.
(b) Videotaped Deposition of a Child Witness [Sec. 27]
(i) If the court finds that the child will not be able
to testify in open court at trial, it shall issue an
order that the deposition of the child be taken and
preserved by videotape.
(ii) The rights of the accused during trial,
especially the right to counsel and to confront and
cross-examine the child, shall not be violated
during the deposition.
LIVE-LINK TV TESTIMONY OF A CHILD WITNESS [SEC. 25]
The court may order that the testimony of the child be
taken by live-link television if there is a substantial
likelihood that the child would suffer trauma from
testifying in the presence of the accused, his counsel or
the prosecutor.
The trauma must be of a kind which would impair the
completeness/truthfulness of the childs testimony.
If it is necessary for the child to identify the accused at
trial, the court may allow the child to enter the courtroom
for the limited purpose of identifying the accused, or the
court may allow the child to identify the accused by
observing the image of the latter on a television monitor.

If unavailable, the fact of unavailability must be proved by

the proponent and his hearsay testimony must be
corroborated by other admissible evidence.
SEXUAL ABUSE SHIELD RULE
General Rule [Sec. 30(a)]: The following are INADMISSIBLE
in any criminal proceeding involving alleged child sexual
abuse:
(1) Evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim
engaged in other sexual behavior;
(2) Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of
the alleged victim.
Exception [Sec. 30(b)]: Evidence of specific instances of
sexual behavior by the alleged victim to prove that a
person other than the accused was the source of semen,
injury or other physical evidence
PROTECTIVE ORDERS
Video/audio tapes that are part of the court record may be
viewed only by parties, their counsel, their expert witness
and the guardian ad litem. [Sec. 31(b)]
The court may issue additional orders to protect the
childs privacy. [Sec. 31(c)]
Publication (or causing it) in any format any identifying
information of a child who is or is alleged to be a
victim/accused of a crime or a witness thereof, or an
immediate family of the child, shall be liable for contempt
of court. [Sec. 31(d)]
A child has a right at any court proceeding not to testify
regarding personal identifying information that could
endanger his physical safety or his family. [Sec. 31(e)]
CHAIN OF CUSTODY
In relation to Sec. 21 of the Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002
MEANING OF CHAIN OF CUSTODY
A method of authenticating evidence which 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 [Lopez v People
(2008), as cited in People v Dela Cruz (2008) and People v
Agulay (2008)]
IN RELATION TO DRUG CASES
The apprehending team having initial custody and control
of the drugs shall:
(1) Physically inventory, and
(2) Photograph the same,
(3) In the presence of

EVID - Page 3 of 5

(a) Accused or the person/s from whom the drugs

were seized, or his/her representative or counsel
(b) Representative from the media and the
Department of Justice
(c) Any elected public official
(4) Who shall be required to sign the copies of the
inventory and be given a copy thereof. [Sec. 21, Art. II,
R.A. 9165 or the comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002]
Non-compliance with Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165, particularly the
making of the inventory and their photographing of the
drugs confiscated will not render the drugs inadmissible in
evidence. The issue if there is non-compliance with the
law is not admissibility, but of weight evidentiary merit
or probative value. [People v Del Monte (2008)]
PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING CHAIN OF CUSTODY
To guaranty the integrity of the physical evidence and to
prevent the introduction of evidence which is not
authentic. [Riano]
Note: A unique characteristic of narcotic substances is that
they are not readily identifiable. Hence, in authenticating
the same, a more stringent standard than that applied to
readily identifiable objects is necessary. This exacting
standard entails a chain of custody of the item with
sufficient completeness to render it improbable for the
original item to be exchanged with another, contaminated
or tampered with [Lopez v. People (2008)]
RULE ON DNA EVIDENCE
[A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC]
MEANING OF DNA
The totality of the DNA profiles, results and other genetic
information directly generated from DNA testing of
biological samples. [Sec. 3c]
APPLICATION FOR DNA TESTING ORDER
With prior court order
(1) The appropriate court may, at any time, either (i) motu
proprio or (ii) on application of any person who has a legal
interest in the matter in litigation, order a DNA testing.
(2) Such order shall issue after due hearing and notice to
the parties upon a showing of the following:
(a) A biological sample exists that is relevant to
the case;
(b) The biological sample: (i) was not previously
subjected to the type of DNA testing now
requested; or (ii) was previously subjected toDNA
testing, but the results may require confirmation
for good reasons;
(c) The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid
technique;
(d) The DNA testing has the scientific potential to
produce new information that is relevant to the
proper resolution of the case; and
(e) The existence of other factors, if any, which
the court may consider as potentially affecting the
accuracy of integrity of the DNA testing. [Sec. 4]
Without prior court order

This Rule shall not preclude a DNA testing, without need of

a prior court order, at the behest of any party. [Sec. 4]
POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING
How obtained:
(1) Without need of prior court order
(2) Available to the prosecution or any person convicted
by final and executory judgment
Requisites:
(1) A biological sample exists
(2) Such sample is relevant to the case
(3) The testing would probably result in the reversal or
modification of the judgment of conviction.[Sec. 6]
Remedy if Results Favorable to the Convict
Convict or the prosecution may file a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus in the court of origin, CA or SC or any
member of said courts. [Sec. 10]
General Rule: If the court, after due hearing, finds the
petition meritorious, it shall reverse or modify the
judgment of conviction and order the release of the
convict. [Sec. 10]
Exception: If continued detention is justified for a lawful
cause. [Sec. 10]
ASSESSMENT AND PROBATIVE VALUE OF DNA EVIDENCE
AND ADMISSIBILITY
Factors in assessing the probative value of DNA evidence
(1) Chain of custody
(a) How the biological samples were collected
(b) How they were handled
(c) Possibility of contamination
(2) DNA testing methodology
(a) Procedure followed in analyzing the samples
(b) Advantages and disadvantages of the
procedure
(c) Compliance with scientifically valid standards
in conducting the tests
(3) Forensic DNA laboratory
(a) Accreditation by any reputable standards
setting institution
(b) Qualification of the analyst who conducted the
tests
(c) If not accredited, relevant experience of the
laboratory in forensic work and its credibility
(4) Reliability of the testing result [Sec. 7]
Vallejo Standard
In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, courts
should consider the following:
(a) How the samples were collected
(b) How they were handled
(c) The possibility of contamination of the samples
(d) The procedure followed in analyzing the samples,
whether the proper standards and procedures were
followed
(e) Qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests
[People v. Vallejo (2002)]
RULES ON EVALUATION OF RELIABILITY OF THE DNA
TESTING METHODOLOGY

EVID - Page 4 of 5

Factors that determine the reliability of the DNA Testing

Methodology
(1) Falsifiability of the principles or methods used
(2) Subject to peer review and publication of the principles
or methods
(3) General acceptance of the principles or methods by
the scientific community
(4) Existence and maintenance of standards and controls
to ensure the correctness of data generated

(5) Existence of an appropriate reference population

database
(6) General degree of confidence attributed to
mathematical calculations used in comparing DNA profiles
(7) Significance and limitation of statistical calculations
used in comparing DNA profiles

EVID - Page 5 of 5