RULE 132

PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
A. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

Section 1. Examination to be done in open court. - The examination of witnesses presented in a trial
or hearing shall be done in open court, and under oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is
incapacitated to speak, or the question calls for a different mode of answer, the answers of the witness
shall be given orally. (1)

Reason for the rule:

1) to secure the opportunity of cross examination;
2) to allow the trial judge to observe the deportment and appearance of the
witness while testifying ;
Section 2. Proceedings to be recorded. - The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the questions
propounded to a witness and his or her answers thereto, and the statements made by the judge or any of the
parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to the case, shall be recorded by means of shorthand or
stenotype or by other means of recording found suitable by the court.
A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the official stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and
certified as correct by him or her, shall be deemed prima facie a correct statement of such proceedings. (2a)
Section 3. Rights and obligations of a witness. — A witness must answer questions, although his or
her answer may tend to establish a claim against him or her. However, it is the right of a witness:
(1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting
demeanor;
(2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require;
(3) Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue;
(4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him or her to a penalty for an offense unless
otherwise provided by law; or
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his or her reputation, unless it be to the
very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be presumed. But a witness must
answer to the fact of his or her previous final conviction for an offense. (3a)
Section 4. Order in the examination of an individual witness. - The order in which an
individual witness may be examined is as follows:
(a) Direct examination by the proponent;
(b) Cross-examination by the opponent;
(c) Re-direct examination by the proponent;
(d) Re-cross examination by the opponent. (4)
Gen. Rule: After the parties have rested their respective cases , the case may no longer be reopened.
Exceptions:
The trial court , upon proper motion and good reasons shown, ma reopen the case for the purpose of:
1) presenting new additional evidence upon the main issue;
2) admitting newly discovered evidence presenting new additional;
3) presenting evidence which has been omitted through inadvertence or mistake:
Section 5. Direct examination. - Direct examination is the examination-in-chief of a witness by the party
presenting him or her on the facts relevant to the issue. (5a)
Section 6. Cross-examination; its purpose and extent. - Upon the termination of the direct examination, the
witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party on any relevant matter, with sufficient fullness and
freedom to test his or her accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, or the reverse,
and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue. (6a)
Purposes of Cross-examination:
1) to test the accuracy and truthfulness of the witness and his freedom from interest or bias or the reverse;
2) to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue;
People Vs. Narca 275 SCRA 969(1997) – The right to cross examine is a personal one which may be waived
expressly or impliedly by conduct amounting to a renunciation thereof. Thus, when a party has had the
opportunity to cross-examine a witness but failed to avail himself of it, he necessarily forfeits his right to cross
examine and the testimony given on direct examination will be received or allowed to remain in the record.
Section 7. Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent. - After the cross-examination of the witness has been
concluded, he or she may be re-examined by the party calling him or her to explain or supplement his or
her answers given during the cross-examination. On re-direct examination, questions on matters not dealt
with during the cross-examination may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (7a)
Purpose of Re-direct examination:
1) to prevent injustice to the witness and the party who has called him by affording the opportunity to the
witness to explain the testimony given on cross-examination and to explain any apparent contradiction or
inconsistency in his statements, which opportunity is afforded to him during re-direct examination;
2) for the purpose of completing the answer of a witness, or adding a new matter which has been omitted or
of correcting a possible misinterpretation of testimony.
Section 8. Re-cross examination. - Upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the adverse party
may re-cross-examine the witness on matters stated in his or her re-direct examination, and also on
such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (8a)

Section 9. Recalling witness. - After the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded, the
witness cannot be recalled without leave of the court. The court will grant or withhold leave in its
discretion, as the interests of justice may require. (9)

Note: Recalling a witness should have leave of court and may be granted upon showing of some
concrete , substantial grounds such as:
1) when particularly identified material points were not covered;
2) when particular vital documents were not presented to the witness;
3) the cross-examination was conducted in in so inept manner as to result in a virtual absence of
cross examination;
Section 10. Leading and misleading questions. - A question which suggests to the witness the answer which the
examining party desires is a leading question. It is not allowed, except:
(a) On cross-examination;
(b) On preliminary matters;
(c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, a child
of tender years, is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
(d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e) Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private
corporation, or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.
A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to
that which he or she has previously stated. It is not allowed. (10a)
Gen Rule : leading questions are not allowed.
Except on the following instances, leading questions are allowed
A. On cross
B. On preliminary matters
C. Difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers
D. Unwilling or hostile witness
E. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private
corporation, or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.
Section 12. Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime. - For the purpose of impeaching a witness,
evidence that he or she has been convicted by final judgment of a crime shall be admitted if (a) the crime was
punishable by a penalty in excess of one year; or (b) the crime involved moral turpitude, regardless of the
penalty.
However, evidence of a conviction is not admissible if the conviction has been the subject of an amnesty or
annulment of the conviction. (n)

A new provision, which provides that, for purposes of impeaching a witness, evidence
that he or she had been convicted by final judgment of a crime is admissible only if:
1) the crime is punishable by imprisonment of more than one year;
2) the crime involves moral turpitude regardless of the penalty

Note: If such conviction had been the subject of an amnesty or was annulled , such
evidence of conviction is not admissible .
Section 13. Party may not impeach his or her own witness. - Except with respect to witnesses referred to in
paragraphs (d) and (e) of Section 10 of this Rule, the party presenting the witness is not allowed to impeach his or
her credibility.
A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by the court upon adequate showing of
his or her adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or his or her having misled the party into calling him or
her to the witness stand.
The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the witness who is an adverse party, may be impeached by the
party presenting him or her in all respects as if he or she had been called by the adverse party, except by
evidence of his or her bad character. He or she may also be impeached and cross-examined by the adverse party,
but such cross-examination must only be on the subject matter of his or her examination-in-chief. (12a)

NOTE: One who voluntarily offers a witness’ testimony is bound by such (i.e. cannot impeach or contradict),
except:
i. Hostile witness
ii. Adverse party or rep. of adverse party
iii. Not voluntarily offered but required by law (e.g., subscribing witnesses to a will)
Section 14. How witness impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements. — Before a witness can be
impeached by evidence that he or she has made at other times statements inconsistent with his or her
present testimony, the statements must be related to him or her, with the circumstances of the times and
places and the persons present, and he or she must be asked whether he or she made such statements, and
if so, allowed to explain them. If the statements be in writing, they must be shown to the witness before any
question is put to him or her concerning them. (13a)
[Sec. 14. Evidence of good character of witness. - (Incorporated in Section 54, Rule 130)]

Impeaching witness of adverse party

a. Contradictory evidence from testimony in same case
b. Evidence of prior inconsistent statement
c. Evidence of bad character/general reputation for truth, honesty, integrity
d. Evidence of bias, interest, prejudice or incompetence
e. Evidence of mental, sensory derangement or defect
f. Evidence of conviction of an offense which affects credibility of witness
Section 15. Exclusion and separation of witnesses. - The court, motu proprio or upon motion, shall order
witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. This rule does not authorize
exclusion of (a) a party who is a natural person, (b) a duly designated representative of a juridical entity
which is a party to the case, (c) a person whose presence is essential to the presentation of the party's cause,
or (d) a person authorized by a statute to be present.
The court may also cause witnesses to be kept separate and to be prevented from conversing with one
another, directly or through intermediaries, until all shall have been examined. (15a)

With this amendment, judges may no longer exclude from the trial proceeding, the following:
a) a party who is a natural person ;
b) a duly designated representative of a juridical entity which is a party to the case;
c) a person whose presence is essential to the presentation of the party’s cause;
d) a person authorized by law to be present;
Section 16. When witness may refer to memorandum. - A witness may be allowed to refresh his or her memory
respecting a fact by anything written or recorded by himself or herself, or under his or her direction, at the time
when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any other time when the fact was fresh in his or
her memory and he or she knew that the same was correctly written or recorded; but in such case, the writing or
record must be produced and may be inspected by the adverse party, who may, if he or she chooses, cross-
examine the witness upon it and may read it in evidence. A witness may also testify from such a writing or
record, though he or she retains no recollection of the particular facts, if he or she is able to swear that the
writing or record correctly stated the transaction when made; but such evidence must be received with caution.
(16a)

Requisites of revival of present memory

a. Memorandum has been written by him or under his direction; and
b. Written by him:
i. When the fact occurred or immediately thereafter; or
ii. At any other time when the fact was fresh in his memory and he knew that the same was correctly
recorded
 Requisites of Revival of Past Recollection
a) Witness retains no recollection of the particular facts;
b) But he his able to swear that the record or writing correctly stated the transaction
when made
 Revival of present memory and Revival of past recollection distinguished

PRESENT RECOLLECTION PAST RECOLLECTION

REVIVED RECORDED
•Applies if the witness remembers the -Applies where the witness does
facts regarding his entries not recall the facts involved
•Entitled to greater weight -Entitled to lesser weight
•Evidence is the testimony -Evidence is the writing or record
-Rule of evidence affected is the best
•Rule of evidence affected is evidence rule
competency of witness, examination of
witness (laying the predicate)
Section 17. When part of transaction, writing or record given in evidence, the remainder admissible. - When
part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is given in evidence by one party, the whole of the
same subject may be inquired into by the other, and when a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing or
record is given in evidence, any other act, declaration, conversation, writing or record necessary to its
understanding may also be given in evidence. (17)
Section 18. Right to inspect writing shown to witness. - Whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it may be
inspected by the adverse party. (18)
 B. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
Section 19. Classes of documents. - For the purpose of their presentation in evidence, documents are either
public or private.
Public documents are:
(a) The written official acts, or records of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and
public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country;
(b) Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments;
(c) Documents that are considered public documents under treaties and conventions which are in force
between the Philippines and the country of source; and
(d) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be entered
therein.
All other writings are private. (19a)

In response to developments in international treaties and conventions, this Section now additionally
considers as public documents those that are considered as such under treatises and conventions which are in
force between the Philippines and the country of source
Section 20. Proof of private documents. - Before any private document offered as authentic is received in
evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be proved by any of the following means:
(a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written;
(b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker; or
(c) By other evidence showing its due execution and authenticity.
Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be. (20)

Under this Section, the due execution and authenticity of private documents may now be proved by
other evidence showing such due execution and authenticity
Section 21. When evidence of authenticity of private document not necessary. - Where a
private document is more than thirty (30) years old, is produced from a custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine, and is unblemished by any alterations or
circumstances of suspicion, no other evidence of its authenticity need be given. (21)
When authentication is not required?
a) Ancient document is more than 30 years old; Contains no alterations or circumstances of suspicion
and produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine
b) Public document or record
c) Notarial document acknowledged, proved or certified
d) Authenticity and due execution has been expressly or impliedly admitted (e.g., actionable documents,
failure to deny under oath)

Computer printouts are inadmissible unless properly authenticated by a witness attesting

that they came from the computer system or that the data stored in the system were not and
could not have been tampered with before the same were printed out.
Section 22. How genuineness of handwriting proved. - The handwriting of a person may be
proved by any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he or
she has seen the person write, or has seen writing purporting to be his or hers upon which the
witness has acted or been charged, and has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of
such person. Evidence respecting the handwriting may also be given by a comparison, made
by the witness or the court, with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against
whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the judge. (22)

How to prove the genuineness of the handwriting of a person?

a) Witness actually saw person writing the instrument
b) Familiar with handwriting and witness can give opinion
c)Comparison of questioned handwriting and admitted genuine specimens
d) Expert evidence
Section 23. Public documents as evidence. - Documents consisting of entries in public
records made in the performance of a duty by a public officer are prima facie evidence of
the facts therein stated. All other public documents are evidence, even against a third
person, of the fact which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the latter. (23)

Two kinds of Public Documents

1) those issued by competent public officials by reason of their office;
2) those executed by private individuals which are authenticated by notaries public
Section 24. Proof of official record. - The record of public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when
admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer
having the legal custody of the record, or by his or her deputy, and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the
Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the custody.
If the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, which is a contracting party to a treaty or convention to
which the Philippines is also a party, or considered a public document under such treaty or convention pursuant to
paragraph (c) of Section 19 hereof, the certificate or its equivalent shall be in the form prescribed by such treaty or
convention subject to reciprocity granted to public documents originating from the Philippines.
For documents originating from a foreign country which is not a contracting party to a treaty or convention referred to
in the next preceding sentence, the certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general,
consul, vice-consul, or consular agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign
country in which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his or her office.
A document that is accompanied by a certificate or its equivalent may be presented in evidence without further proof,
the certificate or its equivalent being prima facie evidence of the due execution and genuineness of the document
involved. The certificate shall not be required when a treaty or convention between a foreign country and the
Philippines has abolished the requirement, or has exempted the document itself from this formality. (24a)
 Under this new Section 24, if the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country which is a
party to a treaty or convention to which the Philippines is also a party, public documents considered as
such under said treaty or convention shall be accompanied by a certificate or its equivalent in the form
prescribed in the same treaty or convention, subject to reciprocity granted to public documents
originating from the Philippines.
The subject certificate or its equivalent constitutes prima facie evidence of the execution and
geniuses of the document it accompanies. Thus, the document involved may be presented in evidence
without further proof. However, if the treaty or convention aforementioned has abolished such
requirement or has exempted the document itself from this formality, no such certificate is necessary.
For documents originating from a foreign country which is not a contracting party to a treaty or
convention referred to in the preceding sentence, the old provision applies. Hence, the certificate may be
made by a secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or
by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines, stationed in the foreign country in which the
record is kept, authenticated by the seal of his or her office.
Section 25. What attestation of copy must state. - Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for the
purpose of evidence, the attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a
specific part thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must be under the official seal of the attesting officer,
if there be any, or if he or she be the clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of such court. (25 a)
Section 26. Irremovability of public record. - Any public record, an official copy of which is admissible in
evidence, must not be removed from the office in which it is kept, except upon order of a court where the
inspection of the record is essential to the just determination of a pending case. (26)
Section 27. Public record of a private document. - An authorized public record of a private document may be
proved by the original record, or by a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the record, with an
appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody. (27)
Section 28. Proof of lack of record. - A written statement signed by an officer having the custody of an official
record or by his or her deputy that, after diligent search, no record or entry of a specified tenor is found to exist
in the records of his or her office, accompanied by a certificate as above provided, is admissible as evidence
that the records of his or her office contain no such record or entry. (28a)
Section 29. How judicial record impeached. - Any judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
(a) want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer;
(b) collusion between the parties; or
(c) fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings. (29)
Section 30. Proof of notarial documents. - Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and certified as
provided by law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate of acknowledgment
being prima facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or document involved. (30)
Section 31. Alteration in document, how to explain. - The party producing a document as genuine which has
been altered and appears to have been altered after its execution, in a part material to the question in dispute,
must account for the alteration. He or she may show that the alteration was made by another, without his or
her concurrence, or was made with the consent of the parties affected by it, or was otherwise properly or
innocently made, or that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument. If he or
she fails to do that, the document shall not be admissible in evidence. (31a)
Section 32. Seal. - There shall be no difference between sealed and unsealed private documents insofar as
their admissibility as evidence is concerned. (32)
Section 33. Documentary evidence in an unofficial language. - Documents written in an unofficial language
shall not be admitted as evidence, unless accompanied with a translation into English or Filipino. To avoid
interruption of proceedings, parties or their attorneys are directed to have such translation prepared before
trial. (33)
 C. OFFER AND OBJECTION

Section 34. Offer of evidence. - The court shall consider no evidence which has
not been formally offered. The purpose for which the evidence is offered must
be specified. (34)

Gen Rule : The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally
offered. The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified.

Exception: If there was repeated reference thereto in the course of the trial by
adverse party’s counsel and of the court, indicating that the documents were
part of the prosecution’s evidence.
 Two requisites must concur (People vs. Napta)
1) The document must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded.
2) The document must have been incorporated to the records of the case.
 A party who has introduced evidence is not entitled as matter of right to withdraw it in finding that it
does not answer his purpose; BUT he may withdraw an offer of an exhibit any time before the court has
passed on its admissibility.
3. Evidence offered is presumed to be admissible or competent until the contrary has been
established.

 Thus, the opposing party must OBJECT to its introduction.

 
Section 35. When to make offer. - All evidence must be offered orally. The offer of the testimony of a witness in
evidence must be made at the time the witness is called to testify. The offer of documentary and object evidence shall
be made after the presentation of a party's testimonial evidence. (35a)
It is now specifically mandated by the new rules that formal offer of evidence must be made orally. Hence, written
formal offer of evidence may no longer be allowed or required by the court
 When to object

Offer Time to object

• Offered orally • Made immediately after the offer is made

• Question propunded in the course of the oral • Shall be made as soon as the grounds thereof
examination of a witness become reasonably apparent

• Offer of evidence in writing • Shall be objected to within 3 days after notice

of the offer unless a different period is allowed
by the court.
Section 36. Objection. - Objection to offer of evidence must be made orally immediately after the offer is made.
Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack of a formal offer must be made as soon as the witness begins
to testify. Objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a witness must be made
as soon as the grounds therefor become reasonably apparent.
The grounds for the objections must be specified. (36a)
To reconcile with section 35, this Section likewise specifically mandates that objections to the oral formal
offer of evidence be likewise made orally. Upon the other hand, objection to the testimony of a witness for lack
of formal offer must be done as soon as the witness begins to testify.
Section 37. When repetition of objection unnecessary. - When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the
examination of a witness that the questions being propounded are of the same class as those to which objection
has been made, whether such objection was sustained or overruled, it shall not be necessary to repeat the
objection, it being sufficient for the adverse party to record his or her continuing objection to such class of questions.
(37a)
Section 38. Ruling. - The ruling of the court must be given immediately after the objection is made, unless the
court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the question presented; but the ruling shall always be
made during the trial and at such time as will give the party against whom it is made an opportunity to meet the
situation presented by the ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated. However, if the objection is based on
two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection on one or some of them must specify the ground or
grounds relied upon. (38)
Section 39. Striking out of answer. - Should a witness answer the question before the adverse party had the
opportunity to voice fully its objection to the same, or where a question is not objectionable, but the answer is not
responsive, or where a witness testifies without a question being posed or testifies beyond limits set by the
court, or when the witness does a narration instead of answering the question, and such objection is found to be
meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection and order such answer, testimony or narration to be stricken off
the record.
On proper motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers which are incompetent, irrelevant, or
otherwise improper.  (39a)
ℒαwρhi৷

When is a motion to strike out answer proper?

1)When the witness answered the question before the counsel has a chance to object
2) Where a question which is not objectionable may be followed by an objectionable unresponsive
answer
3) Where a witness has volunteered statements in such a way that the party has not been able to object
thereto
4) Where a witness testifies without a question being addressed to him
5)Where a witness testifies beyond the ruling of the court prescribing the limits within which he may
answer
6)When a witness dies or becomes incapacitated to testify and the other party has not been given the
opportunity to cross-examine the witness.
Note: There must be an objection first before a motion to strike. If the party slept on his right to object,
he cannot later on avail a motion to strike to exclude the evidence.
When is a motion to strike out improper?

1) A party cannot insist that competent and relevant evidence be stricken out
for reasons going to his weight, sufficiency or credibility
2) One cannot move to strike it out because it proves unfavorable to him
Section 40. Tender of excluded evidence. - If documents or things offered in evidence are
excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the
record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and
other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony.
(40)

If court improperly excludes an otherwise admissible evidence, remedy is to tender the

excluded evidence, also known as OFFER OF PROOF:
Documentary – by attaching the document or making it part of the record
Testimonial – by stating the personal circumstances of witness and the substance of
proposed testimony