CONFESSIONS
of the crime’ or the offense. Strictly
Section 33. Confession. — the
declaration of an accused
acknowledging his guilt of the offense
charged, or of any offense necessarily
included therein, may be given in
evidence against him. (29a)
Rule 133, section 3. Extrajudicial
confession, not sufficient ground for
conviction. — an extrajudicial confession
made by an accused, shall not be
sufficient ground for conviction, unless
corroborated by evidence of corpus
delicti. (3)
Rule: the declaration of an accused
acknowledging his guilt of the offense
charged, or of any
Offense necessarily included therein,
may be given in evidence against him
WHAT ARE CONFESSIONS?
A confession is the declaration of
an accused acknowledging his guilt of
the offense charged, or of any offense
Necessarily included therein
It is a statement by the accused
that he engaged in conduct which
constitutes a crime
EFFECT OF JUIDCIAL AND
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSIONS OF
GUILT
Rule: while a judicial confession may
sustain a conviction, an extrajudicial
confession alone is not
Sufficient for conviction, to sustain a
conviction, it must be:
1. CORROBORATED EVIDENCE OF
THE CORPUS DELICTI
Corpus delicti is the ‘body
speaking, it means the actual
commission of the Crime and someone
criminally responsible therefor. It is the
substance of the crime; the fact that a
crime has actually been committed
Two elements:
1. Proof of the occurrence of a
certain event
for example, that a man
has died or a building has been burned
2. Some person’s criminal
responsibility for the act
Corpus delicti, and all the
elements thereof, may be proved by
circumstantial evidence but such proof
must be convincing and compatible with
the nature of the case
While an extrajudicial
confession will not be sufficient for
conviction unless corroborated by
evidence of corpus delicti, a judicial
confession will support conviction without
proof of corpus delicti independent of the
judicial confession
2. COMPETENT (made in accordance
with the rules on custodial investigation
and other pertinent Laws)
The rule on extrajudicial
confession in the rules of court must be
considered together with applicable
Constitutional and substantive laws
which must be complied with for the
confession to be admissible.
Any extrajudicial confession made
by a person arrested, detained, or under
custodial investigation shall be in writing
and signed by such person in the
presence of his counsel or in the latter’s
absence, upon a valid waiver, and in the
presence of any of the parents, older
brothers and sisters, his spouse, the
municipal mayor,the municipal judge,
district school supervisor, or priest or
minister of the gospel as chosen by him;
otherwise,such extrajudicial confession
shall be inadmissible as evidence in any
proceeding (sec. 2(d) of r.a. 7438: act
defining certain rights of persons,
arrested, detained or under custodial
investigation)
Constitutional procedures on
custodial investigation do not apply to
spontaneous statements, not elicited
through questioning by authorities, but
given in an ordinary manner whereby the
accused orally admitted having
committed the crime. Hence, such
confession is admissible in evidence
against him, even when he did so with-
out the assistance of counsel (people v.
Cabiles)
Custodial investigation has been
described as one which involves any
questioning initiated by law enforcement
officers after a person has been taken
into custody or otherwise deprived of his
freedom of action in any significant way.
It is only after the investigation ceases to
be a general inquiry into an unsolved
crime and begins to focus on a particular
suspect, the suspect is taken into
custody, and the police carries out a
process of interrogations that lend itself
to eliciting incriminating statements, that
the rule begins to operate (aquino
v.Paiste)
ADMISSION BY SILENCE
Section 32. Admission by silence. — an
act or declaration made in the presence
and within the hearing or observation of
a party who does or says nothing when
the act or declaration is such as naturally
to call for action or comment if not true,
and when proper and possible for him to
do so, may be given in evidence against
him. (23a)
ELEMENTS
1. He heard and understood the
statement
2. He was at liberty to make a
denial
3. The statement was about a
matter affecting his rights or in which he
was interested and which naturally calls
for a response
4. The facts were within his
knowledge; and
5. The fact admitted from his
silence is material to the issue
Admission by silence has been
traditionally received, even in common
law, as admissible evidence.
The usual pattern for its
admissibility involves a statement by a
person in the presence of a party to the
action, criminal or civil.The
statement contains assertions against
the party which, if untrue, would be
sufficient cause for the party to deny. His
failure to speak against the statement is
admissible as an admission.
Not every silence is an implied
admission. For instance, the silence of a
person under custodial investigation for
the commission of an offense should not
be construed as an admission by silence
because of constitutional reasons (sec.
2[b], r.a. 7438).
Note that admission by silence are
frowned up, before silence may be
construed as an admission, there must
be no other reasonable explanation why
the person would be silent
Example: suppose upon seeing a
policeman, a bystander, in the presence
of other people, points to a man and
accuses him as the killer of another man
found dead the night before. The man
pointed at does not respond. He does not
deny the accusation. His failure to
respond may be given in evidence
against him. The idea of the rule on
admission by silence is that if an
accusation is made, and a reasonable
person would have denied the same if it
were false, the failure to deny the
accusation by the person accused may
be construed as an implied admission of
the truth of the accusation and may be
given in evidence against him.
OFFER OF COMPROMISE
Section 27. Offer of compromise not
admissible. — in civil cases, an offer of
compromise is not an admission of any
liability, and is not admissible in evidence
against the offeror.
In criminal cases, except those
involving quasi-offenses (criminal
negligence) or those allowed by law to be
compromised, an offer of compromised
by the accused may be received in
evidence as an implied admission of
guilt.
1. OFFER OF COMPROMISE IN CIVIL
CASES
It is not an admission of any
liability, and is not admissible in evidence
against the offeror
2. OFFER OF COMPROMISE IN
CRIMINAL CASES
It may be received in evidence as
an implied admission of guilt
Exceptions: there is no
implied admission of guilt if the offer of
compromise is in relation to:
A. Quasi-offenses
(criminal negligence); or
B. Cases allowed by
law to be compromised
Example: although the
marriage of the accused in a rape case
extinguishes the penal action, an offer of
marriage is, generally speaking, an
admission of guilt
WITHDRAWAL OF GUILTY PLEA
Section 27. Offer of compromise not
admissible. —
A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an
unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to
lesser offense, is not admissible in
evidence against the accused who made
the plea or offer.
Rule: in case the accused withdraws his
guilty plea, that plea of guilty later
withdrawn is not admissible in evidence
against the accused who made the plea
The rules of criminal procedure
(sec. 2 of rule 116) allows the accused,
at arraignment, to plead guilty to a lesser
offense with the consent of the offended
party and the prosecutor provided that
the lesser offense is necessarily included
in the offense charged.
He may also plead guilty to a
lesser offense even after arraignment but
before trial, after withdrawing his plea of
not guilty.
If the plea of guilty to a lesser
offense is not accepted, the rule does not
provide for an adverse consequence of
the unaccepted plea. On the contrary, the
rule provides that an unaccepted plea of
guilty to a lesser offense is not admissible
in evidence against the accused who
made the plea or offer
OFFER TO PAY FOR EXPENSES
Section 27. Offer of compromise not
admissible. —
An offer to pay or the payment of
medical, hospital or other expenses
occasioned by an injury is not admissible
in evidence as proof of civil or criminal
liability for the injury. (24a)
Rule: An offer to pay or the payment of
medical, hospital or other expenses
occasioned by an injury is not admissible
in evidence as proof of civil or criminal
liability for the injury
In other jurisdictions, this act of
rendering aid is sometimes called the
“good, samaritan rule.” The phrase is
used to refer to the rendering of voluntary
aid to a suffering person.
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE IN
GENERAL
The expression if fully expressed
reads: res inter alios acta alteri nocere
non debet which literally means that
“things done between strangers ought
not to injure those who are not parties to
them”
The res inter alios acta rule has two
branches:
1. The rights of a party cannot be
prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another (sec. 28, rule 130)
2. Evidence of previous conduct or
similar acts at one time is not admissible
to prove that one did or did not do the
Same act at another time (sec. 34, rule
130)
Conduct and character
SECTION 34: SIMILAR ACTS AS
EVIDENCE
 Conduct as Evidence –
applicable to both civil and
criminal cases
GENERAL RULE: Evidence that
one did or did not do a certain
thing at one time is not
admissible to prove that he did or
did not do the same or similar
thing at another time
EXCEPTION:
1. INTENT- If it can be
established that the accused
had a truthful intent against
the crime charged.
2. KNOWLEDGE- If it can be
established that the accused
know where the stolen item is
located.
3. IDENTITY – If it can be
established that the previous
actions of the accused shows
interest that might compel him
in committing the crime
4. PLAN, DESIGN, OR
SCHEME – if it can be
established that he had
committed preparatory crimes
in the commission of the
crime charged.
5. HABIT OR CUSTOM – if it
can be established that the
accused always do acts that
is being charged to him.

-The offering party must
allege and prove specific,
repetitive conduct that
might constitute evidence
of habit. The examples
offered in evidence to
prove habit, or pattern of
evidence must be
numerous enough to base
on inference of systematic
conduct.
6. NEGLIGENCE – If it can be
established that damages due
to the same negligence was
committed and that such
negligent act continue.
7. USAGE; and
8. THE LIKE
RAPE SHIELD
-In prosecution for rape, evidence
of complainant’s past sexual conduct,
opinion thereof or of his/her reputation
SHALL NOT be admitted UNLESS, and
only to the extent that the court finds,
that such evidence is material and
relevant to the case ,
SEXUAL ABUSE SHIELD RULE
- Evidence is NOT
ADMISSIBLE in any criminal
proceeding involving alleged
child sexual abuse:
1. Evidence offered to prove
that the alleged victim
engaged in other sexual
behavior; and
2. Evidence offered to prove
the sexual predisposition
of the alleged victim.
EXCEPTION: Evidence of
specific instance of sexual
behavior by the alleged victim
to prove that a person other
than the accused was the
source of the semen, injury, or
other physical evidence.
SECTION 35: UNACCEPTED OFFER
An offer in writing to pay a
particular sum of money or to deliver a
written instrument or specific personal
property is, if rejected without valid
cause, equivalent to the actual
production and tender of the money,
instrument, or property.
The effect of tender without
consignation is to exempt the debtor
from payment of interest and/or
damages.
SECTION 51: CHARACTER
EVIDENCE
 Character – the possession by a
person of certain qualities of mind
and morals, distinguishing him
from others. It is the opinion
generally entertained of a person
derived from the common report
of the people who are acquainted
with him.
 Good moral Character –
includes all the elements
essential to make up such a
character; among these are
 common honesty and veracity,
especially in all professional
intercourse; a character that
measures up as good among
people of the community in which
the person lives, or that is up to
the standard of the average
citizen; that status which attaches
to a man of good behavior and
upright conduct.
GENERAL RULE: Character evidence
is not admissible in evidence.
EXCEPTION:
CRIMINAL CASES:
1. Accused may prove his good
moral character which is
applicable to the moral trait
involved in the offense charge.
When the accused
presents proof of his good moral
character, this strengthens the
presumption of innocence.
2. Prosecution may not prove bad
moral character of the accused
unless in rebuttal when the
accused opens the issue by
introducing evidence of his good
moral character.
3. Offended Party may prove his
good or bad moral character as
long as it tends to establish the
probability or improbability of the
offense charged.
EXCETION TO THE EXCEPTION:
1. Proof of bad character of the
victim in a murder case is not
admissible if the crime was
committed through treachery
and premeditation.
2. In prosecution for rape,
evidence of complainant’s
past sexual conduct, opinion
thereof or of his/her reputation
shall not be admitted unless,
and only to the extent that the
court finds that such evidence
is material and relevant to the
case.
CIVIL CASE: The moral character of
either party cannot be proved unless it is
applicable to the issue of character
involved in the case
Person’s character may be proved
by:
1. Evidence of reputation;
2. Witness who know him
personally; and
3. In some instances, by evidence
of particular acts of said person
from whom his character may be
inferred.
AS TO WITNESS: The bad moral
character of a witness may always be
proved by either party but not evidence
of his good moral character, unless such
character has been impeached.
Rule on common reputation (Sec. 41,
Rule 130 of the Rules of Court)
 6. Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule:
(SECTIONS 37-40, RULE 130-RULES
OF COURT)
I. Dying Declarations
Section 37. Dying declaration. — The
declaration of a dying person, made
under the consciousness of an
impending death, may be received in any
case wherein his death is the subject of
inquiry, as evidence of the cause and
surrounding circumstances of such
death. (31a)
What are the elements of a dying
declaration? (*Must comply with the
following foundational elements)
1. That the declaration is one made by a
dying person;
2. That the declaration was made by said
dying person under the consciousness
of impending death;
3. That the declaration refers to the cause
and circumstances surrounding the death of
the declarant and not of anyone else;
4. That the declaration is offered in a case
where the declarant’s death is the subject of
inquiry;
5. The declarant is competent as a witness
had he survived;
6. The declarant should have died. (Note:
must refer to the death of the declarant, not
merely injuries.) (*If the declarant survives
HIS DECLARATION MAY BE ADMISSIBLE
AS PART OF THE RES GESTAE.)
ii. Declaration against interest
Section 38. Declaration against interest.
— The declaration made by a person
deceased, or unable to testify, against
the interest of the declarant, if the fact is
asserted in the declaration was at the
time it was made so far contrary to
declarant's own interest, that a
reasonable man in his position would not
have made the declaration unless he
believed it to be true, may be received in
evidence against himself or his
successors in interest and against third
persons. (32a)
- The declaration made by a person
deceased, or unable to testify,
against the interest of the
declarant, if the fact asserted in
the declaration was at the time it
was made so far contrary to
declarant's own interest, that
reasonable man in his position
would not have made the
declaration unless he believed it to
be true, may be received in
evidence against himself or his
successors in interest and against
third person.
Requisites for the exception to apply:
a) That the declarant is dead or unable to
testify;
b) That it relates to a fact against the
interest of the declarant;
c) That at the time he made said
declaration the declarant was aware that
the same was contrary to his aforesaid
interest; and
d) That the declarant had no motive to
falsify and believed such declaration to
be true.
(Ex. A statement by the debtor before he
died that he owes the creditor a sum of
money, or an oral acknowledgment by
the principal that he received the money
previously entrusted to his agent, are
clear declarations against the interest of
the person making it. Note that
declaration against interest made by the
deceased, or by one unable to testify, is
admissible even against the declarant’s
successors in interest or even against
third person.)
iii. Act or declaration about pedigree
Section 39. Act or declaration about
pedigree. — The act or declaration of a
person deceased, or unable to testify, in
respect to the pedigree of another person
related to him by birth or marriage, may
be received in evidence where it
occurred before the controversy, and the
relationship between the two persons is
shown by evidence other than such act
or declaration. The word "pedigree"
includes relationship, family genealogy,
birth, marriage, death, the dates when
and the places where these fast
occurred, and the names of the relatives.
It embraces also facts of family history
intimately connected with pedigree. (33a)
- The word "pedigree" includes
relationship, family genealogy,
birth, marriage, death, the dates
when and the places where these
facts occurred, and the names of
the relatives. It embraces also
facts of family history intimately
connected with pedigree.
Pedigree is the history of family
descent which is transmitted from
one generation to another by both
oral and written declarations and
by traditions.
Requisites for applicability:
a) Declarant is dead or unable to testify;
b) Necessity that pedigree be in issue;
c) Declarant must be a relative of the
person whose pedigree is in question;
d) Declaration must be made before the
controversy occurred; and
e) The relationship between the
declarant and the person whose
pedigree is in question must be shown by
evidence other than such act or
declaration.
iv. Family reputation or tradition
regarding pedigree
Section 40. Family reputation or
tradition regarding pedigree. — The
reputation or tradition existing in a family
previous to the controversy, in respect to
the pedigree of any one of its members,
may be received in evidence if the
witness testifying thereon be also a
member of the family, either by
consanguinity or affinity. Entries in family
bibles or other family books or charts,
engraving on rings, family portraits and
the like, may be received as evidence of
pedigree.
- Entries in family bibles or other
family books or charts, engravings
on rings, family portraits and the
like, may be received as evidence
of pedigree.
Requisites for the exception to apply:
a) There is a controversy in respect to the
pedigree of any members of a family;
b) The reputation or tradition of the
pedigree of the person concerned
existed ante litem motam or pervious to
the controversy; and
c) The witness testifying to the reputation
or tradition regarding the pedigree of the
person concerned must be a member of
the family of said person, either by
consanguinity or affinity.
Sec. 41. Common Reputation. –
Common reputation existing previous to
the controversy, respecting facts of
public or general interest more than thirty
years old, or respecting marriage or
moral character, may be given in
evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in
public places may be received as
evidence of common reputation
What is the rule on common
reputation?
- it is admissible in evidence where
the reputation refers to a matter of public
or general interest, or respecting
marriage or moral character and said
matter is more than thirty (30) years old.
The common reputation must likewise be
one existing before the controversy. This
common reputation may, on the other
hand, be established by monuments and
inscriptions.
How to prove common reputation?
1.) By testimonial evidence of a
competent witness;
2.) Monuments and inscriptions in
public places; and
3.) By documents containing
statements of reputation
What are the requisites for common
reputation to be applied as an
exception to hearsay evidence rule?
1. The matter to which the reputation
referred to is of public or general
interest more than 30 years old
2. That the reputation is ancient;
3. That the reputation is one formed
in the community interested;
4. That it existed before any
controversy has arisen in the
matter sought to be proved
thereby; and
5. That common reputation is with
respect to the marriage or moral
character.
Rule on Part of Res Gestae (Sec. 42,
Rule 130 of the Rules of Court)
Sec. 42. Part of res gestae. –
Statements made by a person while a
starting occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto
with respect to the circumstances
thereof, may be given in evidence as part
of res gestae. So, also, statements
accompanying an equivocal act material
to the issue, and giving it a legal
significance, may be received as part of
the res gestae.
What is Res Gestae?
- Statements, otherwise
inadmissible in evidence because they
are hearsay, which are sufficiently
contemporaneous with the act they
accompany and explain, admissible in
evidence as part of res gestae.
Two (2) classes of res gestae
1.) Spontaneous statements; and
2.) Verbal Acts
Requisites of declaration deemed part
of res gestae:
1.) The principal act, the res gestae,
is a startling occurrence;
2.) The statements were made before
the declarant had time to contrive
or devise; and
3.) The statements concern the
occurrence in question and its
 immediately attending
circumstances.
Factors to be considered to determine
spontaneity of the declaration:
1. The time that has lapsed between
the occurrence of the act or
transaction and the making of the
statements;
2. The place where the statement is
made;
3. The condition of the declarant
when the utterance is given;
4. The presence or absence of
intervening events between the
occurrence and the statement
relative thereto; and
5. The nature and the circumstances
of the statement itself.
even itself, and also whether it clearly
negatives any premeditation or purpose
to manufacture testimony.
Doctrine of Independent Relevant
Statement
Under the doctrine of independent
relevant statements, regardless of their
truth or falsity, the fact that such
statement have been made is relevant.
Res Gestae vs Dying Declaration
Res Gestae Dying Declaration
a.) Res gestae may a.) a dying
be that of the killer declaration can only
himself after ir be made by a dying
during the killing victim

To be admissible in evidence, verbal b.) the statement b.) dying declaration

acts must have the following may precede, is made only after
requisites: accompany or be the homicidal attack
made after the has been committed
1. The principal act to be homicidal act was
characterized must be equivocal committed
(ambiguous; one which, in itself, c.) Res gestae has c.) dying declaration
does not signify anything when its basis on is being given based
taken separately); sponteinty of the upon the awareness
2. The equivocal act must be statement of impending death
material to the issue;
3. The statement must accompany
the equivocal act; and
4. The statement gives a legal Rule on the Course of Business (Sec.
significance to the equivocal act. 43, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court)

Test for the admissibility of res gestae
The test of admissibility of
evidence as part of the res gestae is
whether the act, declaration, or
exclamation is so intimately interwoven
or connected with the principal fact or
event that it characterizes as to be
regarded a part of the principal fact or
Sec. 43. Entries in the course of
business. – Entries made at, or near the
time of transactions to which they refer,
by a person deceased, or unable to
testify, who was in a position to know the
facts therein stated, may be received as
a prima facie evidence, if such person
made the entries in his professional
capacity or in the performance of duty
and in the ordinary or regular course of
business or duty.
Requisites for the application of the
entries in the course of business:
1. The person made the entry in his
professional capacity or in the
performance of a duty;
2. That the entry was made in the
ordinary course of business or
duty;
3. That the entry was made at or
near the time of the transaction to
which it relates; and
4. That the person who made the
entry is dead, outside of the
Philippines, or unable to testify
Rule on Entries in the Official Records
(Sec. 44, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court)
Sec. 44. Entries in official records. –
Entries in official records made in the
performance of his duty by a public
officer of the Philippines, or by a person
in the performance of a duty specially
enjoined by law, are prima facie evidence
of the facts therein stated.
Requisites for the admissibility of the
Entries in the Official Records:
1.) That the entries was made by a
public officer or by another person
specially enjoined by law to do so;
2.) That it was made by the public
officer in the performance of his
duties, or such other person in the
performance of a duty specially
enjoined by law; and
3.) That the public officer or the
person had sufficient knowledge
of the facts by him stated, which
must have been acquired by him
personally or through official
information.
What are the grounds for its
admissibility?
1.) Neccessity
2.) Trustworthiness
* Police report is admissible and an
exception to Hearsay Evidence Rule.
COMMERCIAL LIST (Rule 130, Sec.
45)
Section 45. Commercial lists and the
like. — Evidence of statements of
matters of interest to persons engaged
in an occupation contained in a list,
register, periodical, or other published
compilation is admissible as tending to
prove the truth of any relevant matter so
stated if that compilation is published for
use by persons engaged in that
occupation and is generally used and
relied upon by them therein. (39)
When is a document considered a
commercial list?
Under Section 45 of the aforesaid Rule,
a document is a commercial list if:
a) The commercial list is a statement of
matters of interest to persons engaged
in an occupation;
b) Such statement is contained in a list,
register, periodical or other published
compilation;
c) Said compilation is published for the
use of persons engaged in that
occupation; and

d) It is generally used and relied
upon by persons in the same
occupation. (PNOC Shipping and
Transport Co. vs. CA, 297 SCRA 402).
LEARNED TREATISES (Rule 130,
Sec. 46)
Section 46. Learned treatises. — A
published treatise, periodical or
pamphlet on a subject of history, law,
science, or art is admissible as tending
to prove the truth of a matter stated
therein if the court takes judicial notice,
or a witness expert in the subject
testifies, that the writer of the statement
in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is
recognized in his profession or calling
as expert in the subject. (40a)
Requisites for admissibility:
1. Published treatise, periodical or
pamphlet is on a subject of history, law,
science, or art; and
2. Court takes judicial notice of it, or
3. Witness expert in the subject testifies
that the writer of the statement in the
treatise, periodical or pamphlet is
recognized in his profession or calling
as expert in the subject
 Learned treatises are now
properly included in this
exception to the hearsay rule.
RIANO BOOK:
Histoy books, published findings of
scientists fall within this exception if an
expert on the subject testifies to the
expertise of the writer or if the court
takes judicial notice of such fact.
TESTIMONY OR DEPOSTION AT A
FORMER PROCEEDING
Section 47. Testimony or deposition at a
former proceeding. — The testimony or
deposition of a witness deceased or
unable to testify, given in a former case
or proceeding, judicial or administrative,
involving the same parties and subject
matter, may be given in evidence
against the adverse party who had the
opportunity to cross-examine him. (41a)’
Requisites for admissibility
In order to be admissible as an
exception to the hearsay evidence rule,
this section requires that:
1. The witness is dead or unable to
testify.
2. His testimony or deposition was
given in a former case or proceeding,
judicial or administrative, between the
same parties or those representing the
same interest.
3. The former case involved the same
subject as that in the present case,
although on different causes of action.
4. The issue testified to by the witness in
the former trial is the same
issue involved in the present case
5. The adverse party had the
opportunity to cross-examine the
witness in the former case.
Why is the testimony or deposition
taken at a former trial or proceeding
admissible?
The reasons for the admissibility of
testimony or deposition taken at a
former trial or proceeding are the
necessity for the testimony and its
trustworthiness. Inasmuch as the former
witness could no longer testify, his
former testimony is admitted to prevent
failure of justice.
CHILD WITNESS RULE
RULE ON EXAMINATION OF CHILD
WITNESS
The Supreme Court, in an en banc
Resolution adopted the so called-Rule
on Examination of a Child Witness
which became effective on December
15, 2000. The rule applies to child
witnesses who are victims of crimes,
accused of a crime, and witnesses to a
crime. It shall apply to criminal
proceedings and non-criminal
proceedings involving child witnesses.
“child witness” is any person who at the
time of giving testimony is below the age
of eighteen (18) years. In child abuse
cases, a child includes one over
eighteen (18) years but is found by the
court as unable to fully take care of
himself or protect himself from abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation or
discrimination because of a physical or
mental disability or condition.
Salient Features:
I. Creates a Presumption of
Competency in favor of a child-
witness subject to a Competency
Test.
 “Every child is presumed qualified
to be a witness. However the
court shall conduct a
competency examination o a
child moto proprio or on motion of
a party, when it finds that
substantial doubt exist regarding
the ability of the child to perceive,
remember, communicate,
distinguish truth from falsehood,
or appreciate the duty to tell the
truth in court”. ( Sec. 6).
 A party seeking a competency
examination must present proof
of necessity of competency
examination. The age of a child
shall not by itself is not a
sufficient basis for a competency
examination.
II. Allows the Court to, motu proprio
or on motion, appoint certain
persons to help in the testimony of
the child-witness:
 Guardian Ad Litem- a person to
protect the best interest of the
child whose appointment took
into consideration his familiarity
with the judicial process, social
service programs, and child
development. The parent if
preferred, if qualified. Has the
right to be present in all
proceedings, to obtain copies of
documents, interview witnesses,
make recommendations to the
court, and to do all to protect the
child.
 Interpreter- one, other than the
regular court interpreter, whom
the child can understands and
who understands the child.
 Facilitator- one who poses the
questions to the child who may
be a child psychologist,
psychiatrist, social worker,
guidance counselor, teacher,
religious leader, parent or
relative. Counsels shall pose
 questions only through the
facilitator.
 Support Person- person chosen
by the child to accompany him to
testify at or attend a judicial
proceeding or deposition to
provide emotional support to the
child

III. Contains Child Centered

Provisions during the actual
testimony such as :
 A separate waiting area furnished
to make the child comfortable
 To create a more comfortable
courtroom environment, the court
may direct and supervise the
location, movement, deportment
of all person in the court room;
 The child may testify from a place
other than the witness chair; child
is not required to look at the
accused
 To testify during the time of day
that the child is well rested
 Reasonable periods of relief is
allowed as often as is necessary
 The child is allowed to use
testimonial aids, such as dolls,
puppets, drawings, mannequins
or any other appropriate
devise to assist in the testimony
of the child.
 Child is allowed to have an
Emotional Security Item of his
own choosing as a blanket, toy,
doll.

IV. Manner of Questioning and

Objections

 Leading Questions are allowed

specially des for Child-Directs