Judicial Affidavit Rules.

Effectivity and Purpose of the Judicial Affidavit Rule

The Judicial Affidavit Rule requires that direct examination of a witness, which  is the examination-
in-chief of a witness by the party presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue, shall be in the
form of judicial affidavits, subject to the usual mode of cross-examination.

When is the Rule effective?

The Rule took effect on 1 January 2013. However, in criminal cases without private prosecutors,
the Supreme Court allowed public prosecutors in first- and second-level courts until the end of
2013 to utilize the affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses prepared and submitted in
connection with the investigation and filing of the Information in court. Public prosecutors are
required to fully comply with the Rule by 1 January 2014.

During the one-year period when the concession is in effect, the attending public prosecutor, upon
presenting the witness, shall require the witness to affirm what the sworn statement contains and
may only ask the witness additional direct examination questions that have not been amply
covered by the sworn statement.

The concession does not apply in criminal cases where the private complainant is represented by a
duly empowered private prosecutor, who has the obligation to comply with the Rule.

The reasons for the issuance of the Rule

Case congestion and delays plague most courts in cities, given the huge volume of cases filed each
year and the slow and cumbersome adversarial system that the judiciary has in place. About 40%
of criminal cases are dismissed annually owing to the fact that complainants simply give up coming
to court after repeated postponements. Few foreign businessmen make long-term investments in
the Philippines because its courts are unable to provide ample and speedy protection to their
investments, keeping its people poor.

In order to reduce the time needed for completing the testimonies of witnesses in cases under
litigation, on 21 February 2012 the Supreme Court approved for piloting by trial courts in Quezon
City the compulsory use of judicial affidavits in place of the direct testimonies of witnesses. It is
reported that such piloting has quickly resulted in reducing by about two-thirds the time used for
presenting the testimonies of witnesses, thus speeding up the hearing and adjudication of cases.
The adoption of the Rule hopes to replicate nationwide the success of the Quezon City experience
in the use of judicial affidavits.

These reasons for the issuance of the Judicial Affidavit Rule are contained in the “whereas” clauses
of A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC.

What is the scope of application of this rule?

The applicability of this rule may refer to: (a) the courts where the rule will apply; (b) the kinds of
cases or proceedings where the rule will apply; (c) the stage of the proceeding.

Type of cases
This Rule shall apply to all actions, proceedings, and incidents requiring the reception of evidence.
However, the Rule shall not apply to small claims cases under A.M. 08-8-7-SC.
The Rule may apply to criminal cases in three situations, as follows: (1) The maximum of the
imposable penalty does not exceed six years; (2) regardless of the penalty involved, with respect to
the civil aspect of the actions, or where the accused agrees to the use of the Rule.

Courts where the Rule are applicable

1. The Metropolitan Trial Courts, the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, the Municipal Trial Courts,
the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts.

2. Shari’a Circuit Courts, Shari’a District Courts and the Shari’a Appellate Courts.

3. Regional Trial Courts.

4. Sandiganbayan.

5. Court of Tax Appeals.

6. Court of Appeals.

7. Investigating officers and bodies authorized by the Supreme Court to receive evidence, including
the Integrated Bar of the Philippine (IBP).

8. Special courts and quasi-judicial bodies, whose rules of procedure are subject to disapproval of
the Supreme Court, insofar as their existing rules of procedure contravene the provisions of this
Rule.

Parts of the Judicial Affidavit

The judicial affidavit shall contain the following:

1. The name, age, residence or business address, and occupation of the witness;

2. The name and address of the lawyer who conducts or supervises the examination of the witness
and the place where the examination is being held;

3. A statement that the witness is answering the questions asked of him, fully conscious that he
does so under oath, and that he may face criminal liability for false testimony or perjury;

4. Questions asked of the witness and his corresponding answers, consecutively numbered, that:

(i) Show the circumstances under which the witness acquired the facts upon which he testifies;

(ii) Elicit from him those facts which are relevant to the issues that the case presents; and

(iii) Identify the attached documentary and object evidence and establish their authenticity in
accordance with the Rules of Court;

5. The signature of the witness over his printed name;

6. A jurat with the signature of the notary public who administers the oath or an officer who is
authorized by law to administer the same.

7. Attestation of the lawyer.