8/13/2019 judici
1/5
Page 1of 5
Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT
Manila
A.M. No. 12-8-8-SCJUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE
Whereas,case congestion and delays plague most courts in cities,
given the huge volume of cases filed each year and the slow and
cumbersomeadversarial syste1n that the judiciary has in place;
Whereas, about 40 of criminal cases are dismissed annually owing
to the fact that complainants simply give up con1ing to court after
repeatedpostponements;
Whereas, few foreign businessmen ma!e long"term investments in
the Philippines because its courts are unable to provide ample and
speedy protectionto their investments, !eeping its people poor;
Whereas, in order to reduce the time needed for completing the
testimonies of witnesses in cases under litigation, on #ebruary $1,
$01$ the %upreme&ourt approved for piloting by trial courts in
'ue(on &ity the compulsory use of judicial affidavits in place
of the direct testimonies of witnesses;
Whereas, it is reported that such piloting has )uic!ly resulted
in reducing by about two"thirds the time used for presenting the
testimonies of witnessesthus speeding up the hearing and
adjudication of cases;
Whereas, the %upreme &ourt &ommittee on the Revision of
the Rules of &ourt, headed by %enior *ssociate +ustice *ntonio
- &arpio, and the %ub"&ommittee on the Revision of the
Rules on &ivil Procedure, headed by *ssociate +ustice Roberto
*- *bad, have recommended for adoption a +udicia
*ffidavit Rule that will replicate nationwide the success of the
'ue(on &ity e.perience in the use of judicial affidavits;
and
Whereas, the %upreme &ourt /n anc finds merit in the
recommendation;
NOW, THEREFORE,the %upreme &ourt /n anc hereby issues and
promulgates the following
Sectio 1.Scope." 2a3 his Rule shall apply to all actions,
proceedings, and incidents re)uiring the reception of evidence
before
213 he Metropolitan rial &ourts, the Municipal rial
&ourts in &ities, the Municipal rial &ourts, the
Municipal &ircuit rial &ourtsand the %hari a &ircuit
&ourts but shall not apply to small claims cases under *-M-
05"5"6"%&;
2$3 he Regional rial &ourts and the %haria 7istrict
&ourts;
283 he %andiganbayan, the &ourt of a. *ppeals, the &ourt
of *ppeals, and the %haria *ppellate &ourts;
243 he investigating officers and bodies authori(ed by the
%upreme &ourt to receive evidence, including the 9ntegrated ar
of thePhilippine 29P3; and
2:3 he special courts and )uasi"judicial bodies, whose rules of
procedure are subject to disapproval of the %upreme &ourt,
insofaas their e.isting rules of procedure contravene the
provisions of this Rule-1
2b3 #or the purpose of brevity, the above courts, )uasi"judicial
bodies, or investigating officers shall be uniformly referred to
here as the court-
Sectio 2.Submission of Judicial Affidavits and Exhibits in lieu
of direct testimonies." 2a3 he parties shall file with the court
and serve on the adverseparty, personally or by licensed courier
service, not later than five days before pre"trial or preliminary
conference or the scheduled hearing with respect
to motions and incidents, the following
213 he judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which shall ta!e
the place of such witnesses direct testimonies; and
2$3 he parties docun1entary or object evidence, if any, which
shall be attached to the judicial affidavits and mar!ed as /.hibits
*, &, and so on in the case of the complainant or the
plaintiff, and as /.hibits 1, $, 8, and so on in the case of the
respondent or thedefendant-
2b3 %hould a party or a witness desire to !eep the original
document or object evidence in his possession, he may, after the
same has beenidentified, mar!ed as e.hibit, and authenticated,
warrant in his judicial affidavit that the copy or reproduction
attached to such affidavit is afaithful copy or reproduction of
that original- 9n addition, the party or witness shall bring the
original document or object evidence forcomparison during the
preliminary conference with the attached copy, reproduction, or
pictures, failing which the latter shall not be admitted-
http://www.lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_12-8-8-sc_2012.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_12-8-8-sc_2012.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_12-8-8-sc_2012.html#fnt1
8/13/2019 judici
4/5
Page 4of 5
2iii3 9dentify the attached documentary and object evidence and
establish their authenticity in accordance with the Rules of
&ourt;
:- he signature of the witness over his printed name;
A- * jurat with the signature of the notary public who
administers the oath or an officer who is authori(ed by law to
administer the same-
6- *ttestation of the lawyer-
W*t i/ * 0(*t
* jurat, which is different from an Bac!nowledgmentC as defined
under the Rules on =otarial Practice, refers to an act in which an
individual on a singleoccasion 2a3 appears in person before the
notary public and presents an instrument or document; 2b3 is
personally !nown to the notary public oridentified by the notary
public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these
Rules; 2c3 signs the instrument or document in the presence ofthe
notary; and 2d3 ta!es an oath or affirmation before the notary
public as to such instrument or document- 2Rule $, %ec- A of the
$004 Rules on =otariaPractice, *-M- =o- 0$"5"18"%&3
9t is important to note the strict re)uirement that, in the
e.ecution of the jurat, the re)uisite competent evidence of
identity must include at least onecurrent identification document
issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature
of the individual-
#or purposes of comparison, Bac!nowledgmentC refers to an act in
which an individual on a single occasion 2a3 appears in person
before the notarypublic and presents an integrally complete
instrument or document; 2b3 is attested to be personally !nown to
the notary public or identified by the notary
public through competent evidence of identity as defined by the
notarial rules; and 2c3 represents to the notary public that the
signature on the instrumenor document was voluntarily affi.ed by
him for the purposes stated in the instrument or document, declares
that he has e.ecuted the instrument odocument as his free and
voluntary act and deed, and, if he acts in a particular
representative capacity, that he has the authority to sign in that
capacity-
W*t i/ te /3o *tte/t*tio o te +*34e
Dne of the problems with the Rule is the fact that judges only
have limited opportunity to observe the demeanor of the
witnesses-
Moreover, even if lawyers briefed the witness, the oral answer
given by the witness during direct e.amination is almost wholly
dependent on the witnesshis is no longer true under this Rule
because the lawyer prepares the judicial affidavit which ta!es the
place of the direct testimony-
hus, it is now re)uired that the judicial affidavit shall
contain a sworn attestation at the end, e.ecuted by the lawyer who
conducted or supervised thee.amination of the witness, to the
effect that
1-
