Sunteți pe pagina 1din 2

Republic of the Philippines Sections 1 and 2 of Rule 132 of the Revised Rules of Court are

SUPREME COURT reproductions, respectively, of Sections 77 and 78 of Rule 123, of the Old
Manila Rules of Court. Section 77 in turn was taken from Section 381 of Act No.
190, 1 while Section 78 from Section 32 of General Order No. 58. 2
SECOND DIVISION
The main and essential purpose of requiring a witness to appear and
testify orally at a trial is to secure for the adverse party the opportunity of
G.R. No. L-41166 August 25, 1976
cross-examination. "The opponent", according to an eminent
authority, 3demands confrontation, not for the Idle purpose of gazing upon
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, AMELIA K. DEL ROSARIO and the witness, or of being gazed upon by him, but for the purpose of cross-
DIONISIO CERBO, petitioners, examination which cannot be had except by the direct and personal
vs. putting of questions and obtaining immediate answers." There is also the
HON NUMERIANO G. ESTENZO Judge, Court of First Instance of advantage to be obtained by the personal appearance of the witness
Iloilo, and GREGORIO OJOY respondents. before the judge, and it is this it enables the judge as the trier of facts "to
obtain the elusive and incommunicable evidence of a witness deportment
while testifying, and a certain subjective moral effect is produced upon the
witness. 4 It is only when the witness testifies orally that the judge may
have a true idea of his countenance, manner and expression, which may
ANTONIO, J.:p confirm or detract from the weight of his testimony. 5 Certainly, the physical
condition of the witness will reveal his capacity for accurate observation
and memory, and his deportment and physiognomy will reveal clues to his
Certiorari and prohibition with prayer for preliminary injunction to nullify the character. These can only be observed by the judge if the witness testifies
Order of respondent Judge, dated July 30, 1975, sustaining the procedure orally in court. Indeed, the great weight given the findings of fact of the trial
proposed by defense counsel that, in lieu of the testimony of the witnesses judge in the appellate court is based upon his having had just that
for the accused on direct examination in open court, he was filing their opportunity and the assumption that he took advantage of it to ascertain
affidavits, subject to cross-examination by the prosecution. Per Resolution the credibility of the witnesses. This has been explained by Chief Justice
dated August 22, 1975, this Court issued a temporary restraining order Appleton, thus:
enjoining the respondent Judge from enforcing the questioned Order.

The witness present, the promptless and


In Criminal Case No. 2891, entitled "People of the Philippines, plaintiff, unpremeditatedness of his answers or the reverse,
versus Gregorio Ojoy, accused", of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo, their distinctness and particularity or the want of these
Branch III, after the accused himself had testified in his defense, his essentials, their incorrectness in generals or
counsel manifested that for his subsequent witnesses he was filing only particulars, their directness or evasiveness are soon
their affidavits subject to cross-examination by the prosecution on matters detected. ... The appearance and manner, the voice,
stated in the affidavits and on all other matters pertinent and material to the gestures, the readiness and promptness of the
the case. Private prosecutor Atty. Amelia K. del Rosario, one of the answers, the evasions, the reluctance the silence, the
petitioners here, objected to the proposed procedure but this contumacious silence, the contradictions, the
notwithstanding, respondent Judge gave his conformity thereto and explanations, the intelligence or the want of
subsequently issued the questioned Order. Contending that respondent intelligence of the witness, the passions which more
Judge gravely abused his discretion because the aforesaid Orders violates or less control-fear, love, have, envy, or revenge are
Sections 1 and 2 of Rule 132 of the Revised Rules of Court, which all open to observation, noted and weighed by jury.6
requires that the testimony of the witness should be given orally in open
court, and there is no appeal nor any plain, speedy and adequate remedy
in the ordinary course of law, petitioners instituted the present petition. Thus, Section 1 of Rule 133 of the Rule 7 requires that in determining the
superior weight of evidence on the issues involved, the court, aside from
the other factors therein enumerated, may consider the "witness manner
We grant the petition. of testifying" which can only be done if the witness gives his testimony
orally in open court". If a trial judge prepares his opinion immediately after
Sections 1 and 2, Rule 132 and Section 1, Rule 133 of the Revised Rules the conclusion of the trial, with the evidence and his impressions of the
of Court clearly require that the testimony of a witness shall be given orally witnesses fresh in his mind, it is obvious that he is much more likely to
in open court. The afore-cited Sections 1 and 2 provide: reach a correct result than if he simply reviews the evidence from a
typewritten transcript, without having had the opportunity to see, hear and
observe the actions and utterances of the witnesses.
SECTION 1. Testimony to be given in open court.
The testimony of witnesses shall be given orally in
open court and under oath or affirmation. There is an additional advantage to be obtained in requiring that the direct
testimony of the witness be given orally ill court. Rules governing the
examination of witnesses are intended to protect the rights of litigants and
SEC. 2. Testimony in superior courts to be reduced to to secure orderly dispatch of the business of the courts. Under the rules,
writing.- In superior courts the testimony of each only questions directed to the eliciting of testimony which, under the
witness shall be taken in shorthand or stenotype, the general rules of evidence, is relevant to, and competent to prove, the
name, residence, and occupation of the witness being issue of the case, may be propounded to the witness. A witness in testify
stated, and all questions put to the witness and his only on those facts which he knows of his own knowledge. Thus, on direct
answers thereto being included. If a question put is examination, leading questions are not allowed, except or, preliminary
objected to and the objection is ruled on, the nature of matters, or when there is difficult in getting direct and intelligible answer
the objection and the ground on which it was from the witness who is ignorant, a child of tender years, or feebleminded,
sustained or overruled must be stated, or if a witness or a deaf mute. 8 It is obvious that such purpose may be subverted, and
declines to answer a question put, the fact and the the orderly dispatch of the business of the courts thwarted if trial judges
proceedings taken thereon shall be entered in the are allowed, as in the case at bar, to adopt any procedure in the
record. A transcript of the record made by the official presentation of evidence other than what is specifically authorized by the
stenographer or stenotypist and certified as correct by Rules of Court.
him shall be prima facie a correct statement of such
testimony and proceedings.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the petition for certiorari is hereby
granted and the order of respondent Judge, dated July 30, 1975, in
Criminal Case No. 2891 is hereby set aside, and the temporary restraining
order issued on August 22, 1975 is hereby made permanent, without any
pronouncement as to costs.

S-ar putea să vă placă și