Reason & Concern

Ronquillo C. Tolentino

A Look At The Judicial Affidavit Rule

The Supreme Court’s Judicial Affidavit  Rule (A.M. No.12-8-8-SC) is seen  and proven to be beneficial this early although it only took effect on January 1,2013 following its publication in two newspapers of general circulation  on September 15, 2012. The Supreme Court emphasized in its effectivity clause that the Judicial Affidavit Rule shall also apply to existing cases.

The Supreme Court, in approving the Judicial Affidavit Rule on September 4, 2012 succinctly stressed that “ 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”. The high tribunal clearly emphasized that about 40 percent of criminal cases are dismissed annually owing to the fact that complainants simply give up coming to court after repeated postponements.”

The Supreme Court, looking at the economic aspect also underscored that “few foreign businessmen make long-term investments in the Philippines because her courts are unable to provide ample and speedy protection to their investments, keeping its people poor.”

Early on February 21, 2012, the Supreme Court, as indispensable part of its piloting by the trial courts in Quezon City approved the compulsory use of judicial affidavits in place of the direct testimonies of witnesses. Reports reaching the Supreme Courts showed that the piloting “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.”

As provided in Section 1 of the Judicial Affidavit Rule, the Rule is applicable to all actions, proceedings and incidents requiring the reception of evidence before:

(1) The Metropolitan Trial  Courts, the Municipal Trial Courts in cities, the Municipal Trial Courts, the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts and the Shari’a Circuit Courts but shall not apply to small claim cases under A.M. 08-8-7-SC; 

(2) The Regional Trial Courts and the  Shari’a District Courts; 

(3) The Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax Appeals, the Court of Appeals and the Shari’a Appellate Courts; 

(4) The investigating officers and quasi-judicial bodies authorized by the Supreme Court to receive evidence, including the Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and 

(5) The special courts and quasi-judicial bodies, whose rules of procedures are subject to disapproval by the Supreme Court in so far as their existing rules of procedure contravene the provisions of this Rule. Enforcement of the Judicial Affidavit Rule in criminal prosecutions  has been suspended for at least one year per request of the Prosecutors League of the Philippines to defer the implementation subject to the resolution of the Supreme Court.

EARLY LEAD

Notes: Two surveys in a row conducted by the Makati-based Interlink Media Services  would show that Aklan congressional candidate Rep. Teodorico Haresco and gubernatorial candidate Rep. Florencio Miraflores are widening their leads over their respective opponents in the May 13,2013 elections.

In Aklan’s capital town of Kalibo, people are expressing strong and loud confidence of an election victory of former Kalibo mayor and three-termer congressman lawyer Allen Salas Quimpo. Quimpo has time-tabled his return to Kalibo politics where he started as Kalibo vice mayor for six years before becoming its mayor in 1988 and thence as congressman for three terms.  In all these positions, his achievements and accomplishments for development of Kalibo and the province of Aklan were outstanding and deserving of awards and recognition. /MP