Trial in absentia

Trial in absentia | Trial (RULE 119) | CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

TRIAL IN ABSENTIA UNDER THE PHILIPPINE RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (RULE 119)
(With references to Constitutional provisions, jurisprudential rulings, and procedural guidelines)

I. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY BASES

  1. Constitutional Provision (1987 Constitution, Article III, Section 14, paragraph 2)

    • The accused has the right to be present and to meet the witnesses face-to-face.
    • However, this constitutional right may be waived—expressly or impliedly—by the accused.
    • Trial in absentia is thus rooted in the balancing of two vital interests:
      1. The accused’s fundamental right to appear and defend themself in person; and
      2. The State’s interest in the speedy and efficient administration of justice, ensuring that trials are not unduly delayed by the accused’s unjustified absence.

  2. Rules of Court Provisions

    • Rule 115, Section 1 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure details the rights of the accused, including the right to be present at the trial.
    • Rule 119 governs trial. Notably, trial in absentia is addressed in Section 14, which sets forth when and how trial may proceed despite the accused’s absence.

II. GENERAL RULE: PRESENCE OF THE ACCUSED IS REQUIRED

  • The general rule under the Rules of Court is that the accused’s presence is mandatory during certain critical stages of the criminal proceedings, particularly:

    1. Arraignment (Rule 116, Section 1) – The accused must be personally present to enter a plea.
    2. Promulgation of Judgment (Rule 120, Section 6) – As a rule, personal presence is required so the accused is made aware of the judgment and its consequences.

  • In all other stages of the trial, the accused’s presence is still a right, but the accused may waive it, or it may be dispensed with under certain conditions. It is in these situations that trial in absentia may be allowed.

III. EXCEPTIONS: WHEN TRIAL IN ABSENTIA IS ALLOWED

Under Rule 119, Section 14 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, the court may proceed with trial even if the accused is absent, provided the following three (3) essential requisites are present:

  1. The accused has already been duly arraigned.

    • Arraignment is indispensable. Without arraignment, there can be no valid waiver of the accused’s right to be present because the accused must know the nature of the charges and enter a plea.

  2. The accused had been duly notified of the trial dates.

    • This ensures that the absence is not due to lack of notice or fault of the court.
    • It also guarantees that the accused had the opportunity to attend but chose not to do so or failed without justification.

  3. The absence is without any justifiable cause.

    • The burden is on the accused to show a valid reason for nonappearance; otherwise, the nonappearance is deemed a waiver of the right to be present.
    • Common justifiable causes include grave illness, force majeure, or other serious grounds that genuinely prevent appearance.

If all these requirements are satisfied, the trial may validly proceed in absentia. The accused is deemed to have waived their right to confront witnesses and participate in the proceedings by failing to appear.

IV. RATIONALE AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

  1. Speedy Disposition of Cases

    • The courts are duty-bound to avoid undue delay. An accused who jumps bail or willfully absents themself after being arraigned should not be allowed to derail or frustrate the criminal justice process.

  2. Protection of the Accused’s Constitutional Rights

    • The accused’s right to be present at the trial is preserved by ensuring that the accused is arraigned and duly notified. Only when the accused, without valid reason, fails to appear is trial in absentia undertaken.

  3. Avoiding Undue Advantages

    • Trial in absentia prevents the accused from using absence as a tactic to indefinitely postpone the resolution of the case.

V. PROMULGATION OF JUDGMENT IN ABSENTIA

  • Rule 120, Section 6 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure requires that the judgment be promulgated in the presence of the accused.

  • However, if the accused is absent without justifiable cause, the court may proceed with promulgation of judgment in absentia by:

    1. Recording the judgment in the criminal docket; and
    2. Serving a copy of the judgment upon the accused or counsel.

  • Effect on Appeal Period:

    • The period to appeal begins to run (1) from notice to the accused or counsel of the judgment having been promulgated, or (2) from the time the accused is apprehended, if the accused was at large.
    • A convict at large who is absent at promulgation cannot claim ignorance of the judgment to avoid the running of the appeal period.

VI. EFFECT OF TRIAL IN ABSENTIA ON THE RIGHT OF CONFRONTATION

  • While the accused has the constitutional right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, the accused’s voluntary absence after arraignment is deemed a waiver of this right.
  • Courts nevertheless ensure that there is strict compliance with due process:
    • The prosecution still bears the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
    • Defense counsel, if present, may still cross-examine witnesses.
    • The accused cannot later claim a violation of the right to confrontation if the absence was voluntary and unjustified.

VII. CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH REQUISITES

  1. If the accused was not arraigned, the proceedings held in the accused’s absence are void for lack of a valid waiver.
  2. If the accused was not duly notified, the absence cannot be deemed voluntary; proceeding with trial may result in a violation of due process.
  3. If the accused’s absence was justifiable, forcing a trial in absentia infringes upon the accused’s rights.

Courts must carefully ascertain and document that arraignment, notice, and the lack of justifiable reason for absence are all present before proceeding.

VIII. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE

  1. People v. Salas

    • Emphasized that once the accused is arraigned and has been duly notified of the trial dates, their absence, if unjustified, amounts to waiver of the right to be present.

  2. People v. Acol

    • Clarified that due notice is crucial; the court cannot proceed in absentia if it is established that the accused never received proper notice.

  3. People v. Agbulos

    • Highlighted that the right to due process is paramount: Trial in absentia cannot be used to railroad the accused if the prerequisites (especially notice) are missing.

  4. People v. Achacoso

    • Restated that trial in absentia is a permissible measure to prevent undue delays by an accused who intentionally avoids attending hearings after arraignment.

IX. BEST PRACTICES AND PROCEDURAL POINTERS

  1. Court’s Duty to Issue Proper Notice

    • The court must ensure that notices of hearing are sent to the last known address of the accused or to their counsel on record.
    • Copies of such notices must be kept in the case records to prove compliance if the accused later questions the validity of the proceedings.

  2. Documentation of Waiver

    • The waiver of the right to be present is often implied when the accused fails to appear despite notice.
    • For clarity and to avoid future challenges, the trial court should explicitly note in the minutes or orders that the accused was:
      • Arraigned on a certain date;
      • Duly notified of subsequent hearing dates; and
      • Absent without justifiable cause.

  3. Role of Defense Counsel

    • Even in the accused’s absence, defense counsel (appointed or retained) is expected to protect the accused’s interest by cross-examining witnesses, making objections, and presenting evidence whenever feasible.
    • If the accused has no counsel, the court must ensure that counsel de officio is appointed to safeguard the accused’s rights.

  4. Promulgation and Appeal Issues

    • Should the accused remain absent, the court must carefully observe the rules on promulgation in absentia, including the recording of the judgment and service of copies upon counsel or the accused’s last known address.
    • This attention to detail prevents the accused from challenging the finality of judgment due to improper service.

X. SUMMARY

  • Trial in Absentia is not the norm but a valid exception designed to preserve both the accused’s rights and the State’s duty to prosecute crimes efficiently.
  • The three essentials—(1) arraignment, (2) notice, and (3) no justifiable cause for absence—protect the accused’s due process rights while allowing the court to proceed to avert undue delays.
  • Once properly conducted, the accused who voluntarily absents themself post-arraignment waives not only their presence but effectively waives confrontation rights. The burden on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt remains unchanged.
  • Upon conviction, promulgation may also proceed in absentia, activating the period to appeal from the time the accused or counsel is furnished with the decision or from the accused’s apprehension.

By strictly adhering to these procedural safeguards, Philippine courts ensure fairness, due process, and efficiency in criminal proceedings while upholding both constitutional rights and the public interest in the swift administration of justice.

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