Admissibility of Evidence (RULE 130) | EVIDENCE

Below is a comprehensive, meticulous, and straight-to-the-point discussion of Admissibility of Evidence under Rule 130 of the Revised Rules on Evidence in the Philippines. Although the topic is vast, this write-up endeavors to cover the essential doctrines, rules, and jurisprudential nuances as faithfully and systematically as possible. Citations to specific rule provisions are based on the 2019 Amendments to the Rules on Evidence (effective May 1, 2020) unless otherwise indicated.

I. OVERVIEW OF RULE 130: ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

A. Governing Principles

  1. Concept of Evidence (Rule 128, Sec. 1)

    • Evidence is the means sanctioned by the rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact.

  2. Admissibility (Rule 130, Sec. 1)

    • Two (2) core requisites for admissibility:
      1. Relevance – The evidence must have a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence.
      2. Competence – The evidence must not be excluded by law or by the Rules.

  3. General Rule

    • All relevant evidence is admissible unless excluded by the Constitution, the Rules, or existing statutes.

  4. Weight vs. Admissibility

    • Admissibility deals with whether or not the evidence can be received by the court.
    • Weight (or probative value) concerns the persuasiveness of the evidence once admitted.
    • Evidence may be admissible yet of little or no weight, depending on its credibility and the totality of the facts established.

II. RELEVANCY AND COMPETENCY

A. Relevancy (Rule 130, Sec. 4)

  • Relevance means that the evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue that it can “logically tend to establish or disprove” the fact in dispute.
  • Collateral Matters: Generally, evidence on collateral matters is not allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue.

B. Competency (Rule 130, Sec. 3)

  • Evidence must not be excluded by law or the Rules. Even if relevant, certain classes of evidence may be incompetent or barred by exclusionary rules (e.g., privileged communications, hearsay without exception, illegally obtained evidence, among others).

III. EXCLUSIONARY RULES IN ADMISSIBILITY

Despite relevance, evidence may still be barred under the following:

  1. Constitutional Exclusionary Rules

    • Right against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures (Art. III, Sec. 2, 1987 Constitution)
      • Evidence obtained from unreasonable searches and seizures is generally inadmissible for any purpose (“fruit of the poisonous tree” concept, although more narrowly applied in Philippine jurisprudence than in the U.S.).
    • Right against Self-Incrimination (Art. III, Sec. 17)
      • Any confession or admission obtained in violation of custodial rights is inadmissible in evidence.

  2. Hearsay Rule (Rule 130, Sec. 37, et seq.)

    • A statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered to prove the truth of the facts asserted, is generally inadmissible unless it falls under a recognized exception (e.g., dying declaration, statement against interest, business records, spontaneous statement, etc.).

  3. Privileged Communications (Rule 130, Sec. 24)

    • Certain communications are incompetent to be presented as evidence without the consent of the person entitled to the privilege. These include:
      1. Husband-wife communications (marital privilege)
      2. Attorney-client privilege
      3. Physician-patient privilege (in civil cases)
      4. Priest-penitent (confidential confession)
      5. Public officers and official confidential communications

  4. Disqualifications of Witnesses (Rule 130, Sec. 20-22)

    • Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity
    • Disqualification by reason of marriage (spousal immunity in certain contexts)
    • Dead Man’s Statute (now more narrowly applied and integrated in Rule 130, Sec. 23)

  5. Opinion Rule (Rule 130, Sec. 49-50)

    • Opinion testimony of a lay witness is generally inadmissible if it amounts to a legal conclusion or requires special knowledge.
    • Exceptions:
      • Opinions of expert witnesses on matters requiring special knowledge, skill, experience, or training.
      • Opinions of an ordinary witness as to the identity of a person, handwriting, or impressions of emotion, health, or condition of a person, etc.

  6. Character Evidence (Rule 130, Sec. 54-55)

    • Evidence of a person’s character or trait is generally inadmissible to prove conduct on a particular occasion, except in specific circumstances (e.g., in criminal cases where the accused may prove good moral character, or the prosecution may prove bad moral character if it is pertinent to the crime charged).

  7. Parol Evidence Rule (Rule 130, Sec. 8-11)

    • When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, generally, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the writing is admissible, subject to exceptions (e.g., intrinsic ambiguity, mistake, failure of the written agreement to express the true intent, validity issues, etc.).

  8. Best Evidence Rule (Original Document Rule) (Rule 130, Sec. 3 & 4)

    • When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, the original document must be produced, except as otherwise provided in the Rules (e.g., if the original is lost or destroyed, or if production of the original is excused, secondary evidence is allowed).

IV. KINDS OF EVIDENCE & THEIR ADMISSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

  1. Object (Real) Evidence (Rule 130, Sec. 2)

    • Physical objects intended for inspection, such as weapons, documents, clothing, etc.
    • Must be relevant, properly identified, and authenticated if necessary (particularly for documents, authenticity is crucial).

  2. Documentary Evidence (Rule 130, Sec. 2, 3, 4, 8-11)

    • Includes written instruments, records, or any material with letters, figures, or symbols.
    • Must comply with authentication and the best evidence rule (i.e., the original document is required unless properly excused).

  3. Testimonial Evidence (Rule 130, Sec. 20-50)

    • Oral statements made by witnesses under oath in open court.
    • Must be based on personal knowledge (Rule 130, Sec. 36).
    • Subject to examination, cross-examination, re-direct, re-cross (Rule 132, Sec. 3-9).
    • Subject to exclusionary rules: hearsay, privileged communications, disqualifications, etc.

  4. Electronic Evidence

    • Covered by the Rules on Electronic Evidence (A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC, as amended).
    • Electronic documents (emails, texts, digital records) are admissible when authenticated via their metadata or other accepted means.
    • The “best evidence rule” extends to electronic documents, requiring the original or a reliable copy that can be shown to reflect the data accurately.

  5. Demonstrative Evidence

    • Charts, maps, models, or other devices used for the purpose of illustration.
    • Admitted if it helps clarify testimony and does not mislead the trier of facts.

V. OFFER AND OBJECTION (RULE 132)

A. Offer of Evidence (Rule 132, Sec. 34)

  1. When Made
    • An offer of evidence is made orally at the time the evidence is presented, unless otherwise directed by the court.
  2. Form of Offer
    • Testimonial Evidence is offered after the witness has testified.
    • Documentary and Object Evidence are offered after the presentation of a party’s testimonial evidence.
  3. Purpose of Offer
    • Every offer must state the purpose for which the evidence is being offered (e.g., to prove ownership, to prove identity, etc.).
  4. Effect of No Offer
    • Evidence not formally offered is generally not to be considered by the court.

B. Objection (Rule 132, Sec. 36)

  1. When Made
    • Objections to evidence must generally be made as soon as the ground for objection becomes apparent.
  2. Grounds
    • Hearsay, incompetent, irrelevant, violates privileged communication, leading question, argumentative, etc.
  3. Waiver
    • Failure to timely object results in waiver, and the evidence may become admissible.

VI. SPECIAL DOCTRINES AND PRINCIPLES

  1. Multiple Admissibility

    • If evidence is admissible for several purposes, it cannot be excluded if it is competent and relevant for at least one legitimate purpose.
    • The court may, however, restrict its application to the relevant purpose.

  2. Curative Admissibility

    • Where one side introduces inadmissible evidence, the court may allow the adverse party to present similarly inadmissible evidence to negate or counteract the prior inadmissible evidence.
    • This is an exceptional remedy and not a blanket allowance.

  3. Conditional Admissibility

    • Sometimes evidence is admitted subject to the condition that its relevancy and competence will be connected or substantiated by subsequent testimony or proof.

  4. Independently Relevant Statements

    • Out-of-court statements used not for proving the truth of what is asserted but to prove the fact of the statement or its effect on the hearer (e.g., to show notice, knowledge, or motive) are generally not hearsay.

  5. Res Inter Alios Acta (Rule 130, Sec. 28-29)

    • Civil Cases: The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another.
    • Criminal Cases: The act or declaration of a conspirator relating to the conspiracy and during its existence may be used against a co-conspirator.

  6. Doctrine of Completeness

    • If one party introduces part of a writing or recorded statement, the adverse party may require the introduction of all or other parts thereof which, in fairness, ought to be considered with it.

VII. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE

  1. People v. Alicando, G.R. No. 117487 (1997)

    • Reiterated that extrajudicial confessions obtained in violation of custodial rights are inadmissible.

  2. Zalameda v. People, G.R. No. 183656 (2011)

    • Clarified the boundaries of admissibility of illegally seized evidence, reinforcing that evidence seized in violation of the right against unreasonable searches and seizures is generally inadmissible.

  3. Cia v. People, G.R. No. 197914 (2014)

    • Emphasized the best evidence rule and the necessity of presenting the original document unless its production is excused.

  4. Tan v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 136368 (2001)

    • Illustrated the principle that documentary evidence which was not formally offered cannot be considered by the court in deciding the case.

  5. Herrera v. Alba, G.R. No. 148220 (2002)

    • Discussed the rule on electronic documents and how they may be admitted under the Rules on Electronic Evidence.

VIII. PRACTICAL POINTERS FOR COUNSEL

  1. Foundation and Authentication

    • Always establish the proper foundation for any evidence—object, documentary, or electronic—by having the witness or appropriate custodian authenticate it.

  2. Timeliness of Objections

    • Objections must be made promptly; otherwise, they are deemed waived. Keep track of the specific ground for your objection (e.g., hearsay, best evidence rule, privilege).

  3. Offer of Evidence

    • Do not forget a formal offer of evidence (especially documentary and object evidence) before resting your case. Failure to do so renders the evidence outside judicial consideration.

  4. Anticipate Exclusionary Issues

    • Evaluate your evidence in light of the constitutional (e.g., illegally obtained) and statutory exclusions (privileges, disqualifications).

  5. Prepare to Argue Relevance

    • Courts often focus on the fact in issue. Plan to articulate why your evidence has a “tendency to prove or disprove” that fact and how it is not excluded by any rule.

  6. Keep an Eye on Exceptions

    • Many rules—particularly the hearsay rule—are broad but replete with exceptions. Familiarity with these ensures you maximize the evidence you can safely get in.

IX. CONCLUSION

Admissibility of Evidence under Rule 130 in Philippine procedure revolves around two key pillars: (a) relevance to the fact in issue, and (b) competence (not excluded by law or rules). The seemingly simple standard—“all relevant evidence is admissible unless excluded”—is complex in practice due to constitutional safeguards, privileges, exceptions to hearsay, best evidence, parol evidence, and a host of other doctrinal overlays.

To successfully navigate Rule 130:

  1. Identify the nature of your evidence (testimonial, documentary, real, electronic).
  2. Ensure compliance with foundational and authentication requirements.
  3. Anticipate any bar under the exclusionary or special rules.
  4. Offer the evidence properly, timely object to inadmissible evidence, and be ready to defend the probative value of what you get admitted.

This meticulous, step-by-step adherence to the Rules on Evidence—and to the jurisprudential doctrines that interpret them—will bolster the admissibility and eventual persuasive force of your evidence, paving the way to a just and efficient resolution of the issues at bar.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login