Photo from Unsplash | Wesley Tingey
The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.
Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.
AT A GLANCE:
All persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make known their perception to others, may be witnesses.
Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime, unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be a ground for disqualification.
Meanwhile, the following are disqualified to be a witness:
- Disqualified by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity;
- Disqualified by reason of marriage;
- Disqualified by reason death or insanity of the adverse party; and,
- Disqualified by reason of privileged communication. (Rule 130, Rules of Court, as amended)
What are the qualifications of a witness?
The qualification of a person to testify rests on the ability to relate to others the acts and events witnessed. Towards that end, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court makes clear who may and may not be witnesses in judicial proceedings.
As the rules show, anyone who is sensible and aware of a relevant event or incident, and can communicate such awareness, experience, or observation to others can be a witness. Age, religion, ethnicity, gender, educational attainment, or social status are not necessary to qualify a person to be a witness, so long as he does not possess any of the disqualifications as listed the rules. The generosity with which the Rules of Court allows people to testify is apparent, for religious beliefs, interest in the outcome of a case, and conviction of a crime unless otherwise provided by law are not grounds for disqualification. (The People of the Philippines vs. Alvin Esugon y Avila, G.R. No. 195244, June 22, 2015)
Let’s consider a practical example to illustrate the qualifications of witnesses:
Scenario: A hit-and-run accident occurred on a busy street during rush hour. Several bystanders witnessed the incident and are potential witnesses in the ensuing legal proceedings.
Witness 1: Maria, a Homemaker
Maria, a homemaker in her mid-40s, was walking her dog near the scene of the accident when she saw a speeding car strike a pedestrian.
Qualification: Maria’s age, occupation, and gender are irrelevant to her qualification as a witness. What matters is her ability to sensibly observe and communicate the event she witnessed.
Disqualifications: Maria has no disqualifications listed in the rules, such as mental incapacity or legal incapacity, so she is eligible to testify.
Witness 2: John, a College Student
John, a college student studying engineering, was waiting for a bus nearby when he heard the screeching of tires and saw the accident unfold.
Qualification: John’s educational attainment is not a factor in his qualification as a witness. As long as he can accurately describe what he observed, he can be a witness.
Disqualifications: John is not disqualified based on the provided information, so he can testify about what he witnessed.
Witness 3: Pedro, a Construction Worker
Pedro, a construction worker in his early 30s, was working on a building renovation across the street when he witnessed the accident.
Qualification: Pedro’s occupation and social status do not affect his ability to testify. As long as he can convey what he saw, he meets the qualifications.
Disqualifications: There are no disqualifications mentioned for Pedro, so he is eligible to testify.
Witness 4: Emily, a Retired Teacher
Emily, a retired teacher in her late 60s, was sitting on a bench nearby, enjoying the afternoon sun, when she witnessed the accident.
Qualification: Emily’s age and retired status do not impact her ability to testify. As long as she can accurately describe the event, she can be a witness.
Disqualifications: There are no disqualifications apparent for Emily, so she can provide her account as a witness.
In this example, we see individuals from diverse backgrounds and occupations who all witnessed the same event. Despite their differences, they all meet the qualifications to testify as witnesses in legal proceedings. The focus is on their ability to observe and communicate what they saw, rather than factors such as age, occupation, or social status.
Meanwhile, who is disqualified to be a witness?
Under Rule 130 of the Rules of Court as amended, the following is disqualified to be a witness:
- Disqualified by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity (Section 21);
- Disqualified by reason of marriage (Section 22);
- Disqualified by reason death or insanity of the adverse party (Section 23); and,
- Disqualified by reason of privileged communication (Section 24).
Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity
The law says:
Section 21. Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity. — The following persons cannot be witnesses:
(a) Those whose mental condition, at the time of their production for examination, is such that they are incapable of intelligently making known their perception to others;
(b) Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable of perceiving the facts respecting which they are examined and of relating them truthfully.
Example: Imagine a situation where a child, let’s call her Sarah, who witnessed a crime, is called to testify in court. However, Sarah is only 7 years old and exhibits a lack of understanding about the events she witnessed. Due to her age and inability to comprehend the facts and truthfully relate them, Sarah is disqualified from being a witness under Section 21(b) of the Rules of Court.
Disqualification by reason of marriage
The law says:
Section 22. Disqualification by reason of marriage. — During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants.
Example: John and Mary are married. John is accused of a crime, and Mary is called to testify against him. However, without John’s consent, Mary cannot testify against her husband under Section 22 of the Rules of Court. This rule protects the sanctity of marriage and ensures spousal unity in legal proceedings.
Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party
The law says:
Section 23. Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party. — Parties or assignor of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, against an executor or administrator or other representative of a deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person or against such person of unsound mind, cannot testify as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind.
Example: Suppose a case involves a dispute over an inheritance, and the deceased’s executor, Tom, is being sued. Tom’s brother, Mike, wants to testify about conversations he had with Tom before their father’s death, relating to the inheritance. However, under Section 23 of the Rules of Court, Mike is disqualified from testifying about these pre-death conversations because Tom is deceased.
Disqualification by reason of privileged communication
The law says:
Section 24. Disqualification by reason of privileged communication. — The following persons cannot testify as to matters learned in confidence in the following cases:
(a) The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants;
Example: Jack and Jill are married. During their marriage, Jack confesses to Jill about his involvement in a financial fraud scheme. Later, Jack is accused of this fraud and Jill is called to testify against him. However, without Jack’s consent, Jill cannot testify about the confidential communication they shared during their marriage. This protection ensures trust and confidentiality within marriages.
(b) An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be examined as to any communication made by the client to him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can an attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity;
Example: Carla hires Attorney Alex to represent her in a legal dispute. During their meetings, Carla reveals sensitive information about the case to Alex. Now, Carla’s opponent wants to question Alex about the details of their discussions. However, without Carla’s consent, Alex cannot disclose any information shared with him by Carla during their attorney-client meetings. This privilege fosters open communication between clients and their legal counsel.
(c) A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have acquired in attending such patient in a professional capacity, which information was necessary to enable him to act in capacity, and which would blacken the reputation of the patient;
Example: John consults Dr. Smith about a medical condition that could damage his reputation if disclosed. Later, John’s medical history becomes relevant in a civil lawsuit. Despite the court’s interest in the information, Dr. Smith cannot testify about John’s medical condition without his consent. This safeguard protects patients’ privacy and encourages honesty during medical consultations.
(d) A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the person making the confession, be examined as to any confession made to or any advice given by him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs;
Example: Mary confesses her involvement in a crime to Father James during a religious confession. Subsequently, Mary is charged with the crime, and authorities seek to question Father James about her confession. However, Father James is bound by the confessional privilege and cannot divulge any information shared with him during the confession, even if it pertains to criminal activity. This privilege upholds the sanctity of religious confessions.
(e) A public officer cannot be examined during his term of office or afterwards, as to communications made to him in official confidence, when the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.
Example: LGU Official Mark receives confidential information about a criminal investigation while on duty. Later, this information becomes relevant in a court case. Despite the court’s desire for disclosure, LGU Official Mark cannot testify about the confidential details of the investigation without risking harm to the public interest. This provision ensures the integrity of ongoing investigations and protects sensitive information held by public officials.
In each scenario, the disqualifications outlined in Rule 130 of the Rules of Court prevent certain individuals from testifying due to specific legal constraints, ensuring fairness and protecting sensitive information in legal proceedings.
In summary:
- Qualification to testify: Ability to relate witnessed acts and events
- Who can be a witness: Anyone sensible and aware of relevant events or incidents, and capable of communicating them
- Irrelevant factors: Age, religion, ethnicity, gender, education, or social status do not disqualify a person
- Disqualifications: By reason of mental incapacity or immaturity, by reason of marriage, by reason death or insanity of the adverse party, and by reason of privileged communication.
Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding taxation and taxpayer’s remedies, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/0917-5772207.
All rights reserved.