"There are three major classifications of evidence – object, documentary, and testimonial."
"There are three major classifications of evidence – object, documentary, and testimonial."
An important aspect of the administration of justice is ascertaining the truth of the material allegations in any adversarial proceeding. Truth can thus only be realized with the presentation of relevant, competent, authentic, reliable and trustworthy evidence in court. In a society where false testimonies, perjury, falsified and forged documents and objects are pervasive, our courts play an important role in being triers of facts, determining the admissibility or acceptability of evidence presented before them.
In an effort to maintain the balance of the scales of justice in our society, our Supreme Court through the Revision Committee amended not only the Rules of Civil Procedure but also the Rules of Evidence which took effect on May 1, 2020 and adopted in A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC.
The study of the Rules of Evidence carries a certain mystique. It is perceived to be complex and complicated, and that only those who are schooled in law are expected to understand its concepts and applications. Although its nuances may remain privy to lawyers and lawmakers, the general concepts are sufficiently manageable to grasp since the law and the rules are primarily issued to apply to real life situations.
There are three (3) major classifications of evidence, which are: (a) object, (b) documentary, and (c) testimonial. Object evidence are those which are addressed to the senses of the court (Section 1, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court). The objects may be real or personal property, these may be fruits of the crime, or objects used in the commission or the furtherance thereof; or the subject of the controversy. If possible, the objects are presented in court for its perception or appreciation; otherwise, ocular inspection is an option.
On the other hand, documentary evidence consists of writings, recordings, photographs or any material containing letters, words, sounds, numbers, figures, symbols, or their equivalent, or other modes of written expression offered as proof of their contents. The amendments included “recording,” “sound” and “photographs” in the definition of documentary evidence so long as it is offered as proof of its contents (Section 2, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court). Photographs include still pictures, drawings, stored images, x-ray films, motion pictures or videos. Traditionally, photographs, x-ray films, video and similar paraphernalia were considered as object evidence; however, as per the amendments these are now considered as documentary evidence.
The Rules on Evidence require the presentation of the original document in court for examination if the contents are the subject of the inquiry. The title of the Rule was changed from the “Best Evidence Rule” to the “Original Document Rule” which now accurately describes the requirements of the provisions. However, the Rule dispenses with the presentation of the original in court when: (a) the original is lost or destroyed; (b) the original is in the custody or under the control of the other party; (c) the original of the document is a public record; and (d) the original consists of numerous accounts which cannot be examined without great loss of time and the fact to be established is only the general result of the whole. The amendment added two exceptions, which are: (a) the original cannot be obtained by local judicial processes or procedures; and (b) the original is not closely related to a controlling issue in the case (Section 3, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court). The requirement of presenting the original document for examination in court is not necessary when the party in possession disregards the court processes, or if the contents of the document is not in issue.
As for testimonial evidence, the qualifications the witnesses have to meet in order to testify were retained – a witness is one who is able to perceive, and by perceiving can make his perception known to another (Section 21, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court). Hence, a witness can only testify on matters within his personal knowledge. Significantly, the amendment deleted mental incapacity or immaturity, and the Dead Man’s Statute (previously Sections 21 and 23 of the old Rules on Evidence) as disqualifications for witnesses to testify. It does not mean, however, that a witness with mental retardation or a child of tender years cannot testify. For as long as the witness with mental incapacity or mental immaturity can perceive and make known his perception at the time of his presentation in court, then he can testify. It has been settled that slight mental retardation is not a disqualification to testify. As for a child’s ability to testify, it will be subject to the results of the competency examination under the Child Witness Examination Rule. Important amendments are the deletion of the rule on the disqualification of the claimant, party or assignor of parties to testify against the estate of a deceased person or a person of unsound mind; as well as the transfer of portions of the provisions to make this disqualification as an exception to the Hearsay Rule in the new Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence. In simple words, the testimony of the claimant is given a certain level of reliability or trustworthiness if the statement was made upon the personal knowledge of the deceased or person of unsound mind, when the matter was recently perceived and while the recollection was clear.
The other concepts of privilege communication, hearsay and its exceptions, opinion rule, character evidence and its proof, and authenticity of documents will be explained in the subsequent columns of Footnotes.
