Jurisprudence

People v. Ugos, G.R. No. 181633, September 12, 2008

The line of leading questions objected to by accused-appellant was
warranted given the circumstances. A child of tender years may be
asked leading questions under Section 10, Rule 132 of the Rules of
Court. Sec. 20 of the 2000 Rule on Examination of a Child Witness
also provides, “The court may allow leading questions in all stages of
examination of a child if the same will further the interests of justice.”
The afore-cited rule was formulated to allow children to give reliable
and complete evidence, minimize trauma to children, encourage them
to testify in legal proceedings, and facilitate the ascertainment of
truth.

People vs. Santos GR No. 172322 8 September 2006

The trend in procedural law is to give a wide latitude to the courts in
exercising control over the questioning of a child witness. Under
Sections 19 to 21 of the Rules on Examination of a Child Witness,
child witnesses may testify in a narrative form and leading questions
may be allowed by the trial court in all stages of the examination if the
same will further the interest of justice.38 It must be borne in mind
that the offended party in this case is a 6-year old minor who was
barely five when she was sexually assaulted. As a child of such
tender years not yet exposed to the ways of the world, she could not
have fully understood the enormity of the bestial act committed on her
person.

Obedencio vs. Murillo A.M. No. RTJ-03-172322 5 February 2004

At the very least, herein respondent should have appointed a
guardian ad litem for Licel, to protect her welfare and interest, instead
of hastily dismissing the rape case. The Rule on Examination of a
Child Witness, which took effect on December 15, 2000, governs the
examination of child witnesses who are victims of, accused of, or
witnesses to a crime. In the absence or incapacity of the parents to
be the guardian, Section 5 (a) of said rule provides that the court
may appoint a guardian ad litem to promote the best interests of the
child. This rule was already in effect when respondent judge
dismissed the rape case on May 22, 2001.

People vs. Bisda GR No. 140895 17 July 2003

It cannot be argued that simply because a child witness is not
examined on the nature of the oath and the need for her to tell the
whole truth, the competency of the witness and the truth of her
testimony are impaired. If a party against whom a witness is
presented believes that the witness is incompetent or is not aware of
his obligation and responsibility to tell the truth and the consequence
of him testifying falsely, such party may pray for leave to conduct a
voire dire examination on such witness to test his competency. The
court may motu proprio conduct the voir dire examination. In United
States v. Buncad, this Court held that when a child of tender age is
presented as a witness, it is the duty of the judge to examine the child
to determine his competency.
People vs. Caete GR No. 142930 28 March 2003
Parenthetically, under Sections 19 to 21 of the Rule on Examination
of a Child Witness which took effect on December 15, 2000, child
witnesses may testify in a narrative form and leading questions may
be allowed by the trial court in all stages of the examination if the
same will further the interest of justice. Objections to questions
should be couched in a manner so as not to mislead, confuse,
frighten and intimidate the child:
Sec. 19. Mode of questioning. – The court shall exercise control over
the questioning of children so as to (1) facilitate the ascertainment of
the truth, (2) ensure that questions are stated in a form appropriate to
the developmental level of the child, (3) protect children from
harassment or undue embarrassment, and (4) avoid waste of time.
The court may allow the child witness to testify in a narrative form.
People vs. Hermosa GR No. 131805 7 September 2011
We should not take Macuibelle’s testimony lightly simply because she
was a mere child when she witnessed the incident and when she
gave her testimony in court. There is no showing that her mental
maturity rendered her incapable of testifying and of relating the
incident truthfully. Indeed, the time when we degrade a child witness
testimony is now passé. In the new Child Witness Rule, every child is
presumed qualified to be a witness. To rebut this presumption, the
burden of proof lies on the party challenging the child’s competence.
Only when substantial doubt exists regarding the ability of the child to
perceive, remember, communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood,
or appreciate the duty to tell the truth in court will the court, motu
proprio or on motion of a party, conduct a competency examination of
a child.

Examination of child witness bar question and answer.

1. Objectives and Applicability

Q: What are the objectives of the Rule on Examination of a Child
Witness?
A: The objectives are to create an environment that allows children to
give reliable and complete evidence, minimize trauma, encourage
children to testify, and facilitate ascertainment of truth.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: The Rule on Examination of a Child Witness
was promulgated to promote the best interests of the child and
ensure the reliability of the child's testimony. (Section 2, Rule on
Examination of a Child Witness)

Q: What proceedings does this Rule apply to?

A: This Rule governs the examination of child witnesses who are
victims, accused, or witnesses to a crime, in both criminal and non-
criminal proceedings.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: The Rule applies to all criminal proceedings
and non-criminal proceedings involving child witnesses. (Section 1,
Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)

2. Definitions
Q: Who is considered a "child witness" under this Rule?
A: A "child witness" refers to anyone below 18 years old at the time of
testimony. For child abuse cases, it includes those over 18 but unable
to fully care for or protect themselves.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: The definition of "child witness" under the
Rule includes minors below 18 years old, as well as those over 18
who are unable to fully care for or protect themselves due to a
physical or mental disability or condition. (Section 4(a), Rule on
Examination of a Child Witness)
Q: What is a "guardian ad litem"?
A: A "guardian ad litem" is a person appointed by the court to protect
the best interests of the child. Jurisprudential Doctrine: The court may
appoint a guardian ad litem for a child who is a victim of, accused of,
or a witness to a crime to promote the best interests of the child.
(Section 5(a), Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)

Q: Who is a "support person"?

A: A "support person" is someone chosen by the child to provide
emotional support during testimony.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: A child testifying at a judicial proceeding or
deposition has the right to be accompanied by one or two persons of
his own choosing to provide emotional support. (Section 11(a), Rule
on Examination of a Child Witness)

3. Competency Examination
Q: Is every child presumed competent to testify?
A: Yes, every child is presumed competent, but the court can conduct
a competency exam if there is substantial doubt about the child's
abilities.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: Every child is presumed qualified to be a
witness, but the court can conduct a competency examination if it
finds that substantial doubt exists regarding the child's ability to
testify. (Section 6, Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)
Q: Who has the burden of proof in challenging a child's competence?
A: The party challenging the child's competence has the burden of
proof.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: To rebut the presumption of competence
enjoyed by a child, the burden of proof lies on the party challenging
his competence. (Section 6(b), Rule on Examination of a Child
Witness)

4. Oath and Examination

Q: What must a child witness do before testifying?
A: The child shall take an oath or affirmation to tell the truth before
testifying.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: Before testifying, a child shall take an oath
or affirmation to tell the truth. (Section 7, Rule on Examination of a
Child Witness)
Q: What accommodations can the court make to aid the child's
testimony?
A: The court can appoint an interpreter or facilitator, and allow
support persons to accompany the child.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: The court can appoint an interpreter or
facilitator to aid the child's testimony, and allow support persons to
accompany the child to provide emotional support. (Sections 9 and
11, Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)

5. Courtroom Accommodations
Q: How can the court modify the courtroom environment to assist the
child?
A: The court can allow the child to testify from a different location,
prohibit the accused from approaching the child, and make other
changes to make the child more comfortable.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: The court can modify the courtroom
environment to create a more comfortable setting for the child, such
as allowing the child to testify from a different location and prohibiting
the accused from approaching the child. (Section 13, Rule on
Examination of a Child Witness)

6. Live-Link Television Testimony

Q: When can the court allow the child's testimony to be taken in a
separate room and transmitted live to the courtroom?
A: The court can allow this to avoid trauma from the child testifying in
the presence of the accused.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: The court can allow the child's testimony to
be taken in a separate room and transmitted live to the courtroom if
there is a substantial likelihood that the child would suffer trauma
from testifying in the presence of the accused. (Section 25, Rule on
Examination of a Child Witness)

7. Videotaped Deposition
Q: Under what circumstances can the court order a videotaped
deposition of the child's testimony?
A: The court can order a videotaped deposition if the child is unable
to testify at trial.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: The court can order a videotaped deposition
of the child's testimony if the court finds that the child will not be able
to testify in open court at trial. (Section 27, Rule on Examination of a
Child Witness)

8. Hearsay Exception and Admissibility of Investigative Interviews

Q: When can hearsay statements by child abuse victims be
admitted?
A: Hearsay statements can be admitted if found to be reliable.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: Hearsay statements by child abuse victims
can be admitted in evidence if the court finds that the statements
have sufficient indicia of reliability. (Section 28, Rule on Examination
of a Child Witness)
Q: What are the conditions for admitting videotaped/audiotaped
investigative interviews?
A: The child must be unavailable, and certain other conditions
regarding the interview must be met.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: Videotaped or audiotaped in-depth
investigative or disclosure interviews can be admitted as evidence if
the child witness is unable to testify and certain other conditions are
met. (Section 29, Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)

9. Protective Measures
Q: How are records regarding the child protected?
A: Records are confidential and subject to protective orders limiting
access.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: Records regarding a child are confidential
and can only be accessed by certain authorized persons pursuant to
a protective order. (Section 31, Rule on Examination of a Child
Witness)
Q: What is the consequence for publishing the child's identifying
information?
A: Publishing the child's identifying information can be punished as
contempt of court.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: Whoever publishes or causes to be
published the identifying information of a child who is a victim,
accused, or witness can be held liable for contempt of court. (Section
31(d), Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)

10. Q: How long must videotapes/audiotapes be retained?

A: Videotapes/audiotapes must be destroyed after 5 years.
Jurisprudential Doctrine: Any videotape or audiotape of a child that is
part of the court record must be destroyed after 5 years have elapsed
from the date of entry of judgment. (Section 31(f), Rule on
Examination of a Child Witness)