A.M. No.

12-8-8-SC
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE
Whereas, case congestion and delays plague most courts in cities, given the huge volume of cases
filed each year and the slow and cumbersome adversarial syste1n that the judiciary has in place;
Whereas, about 40% of criminal cases are dismissed annually owing to the fact that complainants
simply give up con1ing to court after repeated postponements;
Whereas, few foreign businessmen make long-term investments in the Philippines because its
courts are unable to provide ample and speedy protection to their investments, keeping its people
poor;
Whereas, in order to reduce the time needed for completing the testimonies of witnesses in cases
under litigation, on February 21, 2012 the Supreme Court approved for piloting by trial courts in
Quezon City the compulsory use of judicial affidavits in place of the direct testimonies of witnesses;
Whereas, it is reported that such piloting has 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;
Whereas, the Supreme Court Committee on the Revision of the Rules of Court, headed by Senior
Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, and the Sub-Committee on the Revision of the Rules on Civil
Procedure, headed by Associate Justice Roberto A. Abad, have recommended for adoption a
Judicial Affidavit Rule that will replicate nationwide the success of the Quezon City experience in the
use of judicial affidavits; and
Whereas, the Supreme Court En Banc finds merit in the recommendation;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Supreme Court En Banc hereby issues and promulgates the following:
Section 1. Scope. - (a) This Rule shall apply 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 claims 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 bodies authorized by the Supreme Court to receive
evidence, including the Integrated Bar of the Philippine (IBP); and

(5) The special courts and quasi-judicial bodies, whose rules of procedure are
subject to disapproval of the Supreme Court, insofar as their existing rules of
procedure contravene the provisions of this Rule.1
(b) For the purpose of brevity, the above courts, quasi-judicial bodies, or investigating officers
shall be uniformly referred to here as the "court."
Section 2. Submission of Judicial Affidavits and Exhibits in lieu of direct testimonies. - (a) The
parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse party, personally or by licensed courier
service, not later than five days before pre-trial or preliminary conference or the scheduled hearing
with respect to motions and incidents, the following:
(1) The judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which shall take the place of such
witnesses' direct testimonies; and
(2) The parties' docun1entary or object evidence, if any, which shall be attached to
the judicial affidavits and marked as Exhibits A, B, C, and so on in the case of the
complainant or the plaintiff, and as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on in the case of the
respondent or the defendant.
(b) Should a party or a witness desire to keep the original document or object evidence in his
possession, he may, after the same has been identified, marked as exhibit, and
authenticated, warrant in his judicial affidavit that the copy or reproduction attached to such
affidavit is a faithful copy or reproduction of that original. In addition, the party or witness
shall bring the original document or object evidence for comparison during the preliminary
conference with the attached copy, reproduction, or pictures, failing which the latter shall not
be admitted.
This is without prejudice to the introduction of secondary evidence in place of the original when
allowed by existing rules.
Section 3. Contents of judicial Affidavit. - A judicial affidavit shall be prepared in the language known
to the witness and, if not in English or Filipino, accompanied by a translation in English or Filipino,
and shall contain the following:
(a) The name, age, residence or business address, and occupation of the witness;
(b) The name and address of the lawyer who conducts or supervises the examination of the
witness and the place where the examination is being held;
(c) A statement that the witness is answering the questions asked of him, fully conscious that
he does so under oath, and that he may face criminal liability for false testimony or perjury;
(d) Questions asked of the witness and his corresponding answers, consecutively numbered,
that:
(1) Show the circumstances under which the witness acquired the facts upon which
he testifies;

(2) Elicit from him those facts which are relevant to the issues that the case presents;
and
(3) Identify the attached documentary and object evidence and establish their
authenticity in accordance with the Rules of Court;
(e) The signature of the witness over his printed name; and
(f) A jurat with the signature of the notary public who administers the oath or an officer who is
authorized by law to administer the same.
Section 4. Sworn attestation of the lawyer. - (a) The judicial affidavit shall contain a sworn attestation
at the end, executed by the lawyer who conducted or supervised the examination of the witness, to
the effect that:
(1) He faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the questions he asked and the
corresponding answers that the witness gave; and
(2) Neither he nor any other person then present or assisting him coached the
witness regarding the latter's answers.
(b) A false attestation shall subject the lawyer mentioned to disciplinary action, including
disbarment.
Section 5. Subpoena. - If the government employee or official, or the requested witness, who is
neither the witness of the adverse party nor a hostile witness, unjustifiably declines to execute a
judicial affidavit or refuses without just cause to make the relevant books, documents, or other things
under his control available for copying, authentication, and eventual production in court, the
requesting party may avail himself of the issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum or duces
tecum under Rule 21 of the Rules of Court. The rules governing the issuance of a subpoena to the
witness in this case shall be the same as when taking his deposition except that the taking of a
judicial affidavit shal1 be understood to be ex parte.
Section 6. Offer of and objections to testimony in judicial affidavit. - The party presenting the judicial
affidavit of his witness in place of direct testimony shall state the purpose of such testimony at the
start of the presentation of the witness. The adverse party may move to disqualify the witness or to
strike out his affidavit or any of the answers found in it on ground of inadmissibility. The court shall
promptly rule on the motion and, if granted, shall cause the marking of any excluded answer by
placing it in brackets under the initials of an authorized court personnel, without prejudice to a tender
of excluded evidence under Section 40 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court.
Section 7. Examination of the witness on his judicial affidavit. - The adverse party shall have the
right to cross-examine the witness on his judicial affidavit and on the exhibits attached to the same.
The party who presents the witness may also examine him as on re-direct. In every case, the court
shall take active part in examining the witness to determine his credibility as well as the truth of his
testimony and to elicit the answers that it needs for resolving the issues.

Section 8. Oral offer of and objections to exhibits. - (a) Upon the termination of the testimony of his
last witness, a party shall immediately make an oral offer of evidence of his documentary or object
exhibits, piece by piece, in their chronological order, stating the purpose or purposes for which he
offers the particular exhibit.
(b) After each piece of exhibit is offered, the adverse party shall state the legal ground for his
objection, if any, to its admission, and the court shall immediately make its ruling respecting
that exhibit.
(c) Since the documentary or object exhibits form part of the judicial affidavits that describe
and authenticate them, it is sufficient that such exhibits are simply cited by their markings
during the offers, the objections, and the rulings, dispensing with the description of each
exhibit.
Section 9. Application of rule to criminal actions. - (a) This rule shall apply to all criminal actions:
(1) Where the maximum of the imposable penalty does not exceed six years;
(2) Where the accused agrees to the use of judicial affidavits, irrespective of the
penalty involved; or
(3) With respect to the civil aspect of the actions, whatever the penalties involved
are.
(b) The prosecution shall submit the judicial affidavits of its witnesses not later than five days
before the pre-trial, serving copies if the same upon the accused. The complainant or public
prosecutor shall attach to the affidavits such documentary or object evidence as he may
have, marking them as Exhibits A, B, C, and so on. No further judicial affidavit, documentary,
or object evidence shall be admitted at the trial.
(c) If the accused desires to be heard on his defense after receipt of the judicial affidavits of
the prosecution, he shall have the option to submit his judicial affidavit as well as those of his
witnesses to the court within ten days from receipt of such affidavits and serve a copy of
each on the public and private prosecutor, including his documentary and object evidence
previously marked as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on. These affidavits shall serve as direct
testimonies of the accused and his witnesses when they appear before the court to testify.
Section 10. Effect of non-compliance with the judicial Affidavit Rule. - (a) A party who fails to submit
the required judicial affidavits and exhibits on time shall be deemed to have waived their submission.
The court may, however, allow only once the late submission of the same provided, the delay is for a
valid reason, would not unduly prejudice the opposing party, and the defaulting party pays a fine of
not less than P 1,000.00 nor more than P5,000.00 at the discretion of the court.
(b) The court shall not consider the affidavit of any witness who fails to appear at the
scheduled hearing of the case as required. Counsel who fails to appear without valid cause
despite notice shall be deemed to have waived his client's right to confront by crossexamination the witnesses there present.

(c) The court shall not admit as evidence judicial affidavits that do not conform to the content
requirements of Section 3 and the attestation requirement of Section 4 above. The court
may, however, allow only once the subsequent submission of the compliant replacement
affidavits before the hearing or trial provided the delay is for a valid reason and would not
unduly prejudice the opposing party and provided further, that public or private counsel
responsible for their preparation and submission pays a fine of not less than P1,000.00 nor
more than P 5,000.00, at the discretion of the court.
Section 11. Repeal or modification of inconsistent rules. - The provisions of the Rules of Court and
the rules of procedure governing investigating officers and bodies authorized by the Supreme Court
to receive evidence are repealed or modified insofar as these are inconsistent with the provisions of
this Rule.
1wphi1

The rules of procedure governing quasi-judicial bodies inconsistent herewith are hereby
disapproved.
Section 12. Effectivity. - This rule shall take effect on January 1, 2013 following its publication in two
newspapers of general circulation not later than September 15, 2012. It shall also apply to existing
cases.
CIRCULAR NO. 38-98 August 11, 1998
IMPLEMENTING THE PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8493, ENTITLED "AN ACT TO ENSURE A SPEEDY
TRIAL OF ALL CRIMINAL CASES BEFORE THE SANDIGANBAYAN, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT,
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT AND
MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES."
SECTION 1. PURPOSE OF CIRCULAR. This Circular is promulgated for the purpose of implementing the
provisions of Republic Act No. 8493, otherwise known as the "Speedy Trial Act of 1998," as directed in Section 15
hereof.
Sec. 2. TIME LIMIT FOR ARRAIGNMENT AND PRE-TRIAL. The arraignment and the pre-trial, if the accused
pleads not guilty to the crime charged, shall be held within thirty (30) days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the accused. The period of the pendency of a motion to quash, or for a bill of particulars, or other
causes justifying suspension of arraignment shall be excluded.
Sec. 3. MANDATORY PRE-TRIAL IN CRIMINAL CASES. In all criminal cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan,
Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court and Municipal
Circuit Trial Court, the court shall, after arraignment, order a pre-trial conference to consider the following:
(a) Plea bargaining;
(b) Stipulation of facts;
(c) Marking for identification of evidence of the parties;
(d) Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence; and
(e) Such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of
the case.

If the accused has pleaded not guilty to the crime charged, he may state whether he interposes a negative or
affirmative defense. A negative defense shall require the prosecution to proved the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt, while an affirmative defense may modify the order of trial and require the accused to prove such
defense by clear and convincing evidence.
Sec. 4. PRE-TRIAL AGREEMENT. All agreements or admissions made or entered into during the pre-trial
conference shall be reduced to writing and signed by the accused and counsel, otherwise the same shall not be used
against the accused. The agreements in relation to matters referred to in Section 3 hereof are subject to the approval
of the court; Provided, That the agreement on the please of the accused should be to a lesser offense necessarily
included in the offense charged.
Sec. 5. NON-APPEARANCE AT PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE. Where counsel for the accused or the prosecutor
does not appear at the pretrial conference and does not offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of cooperation, the
court may impose proper sanctions or penalties.
Sec. 6. PRE-TRIAL ORDER. After the pre-trial conference, the court shall issue an order reciting the actions
taken, the facts stipulated, and the evidence marked. Such order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not
disposed of and control the course of action during the trial, unless modified by the court to prevent manifest injustice.
Thereafter, where a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least fifteen (15) days to prepare for trial
which shall commence within thirty (30) days from receipt of the pre-trial order.
Sec. 7. EXTENDED TIME LIMIT. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding sections 2 and 6 for the first
twelve-calendar-month period following its effectivity, the time limit with respect to the period from arraignment to trial
imposed by said provision shall be one hundred eighty (180) days. For the second twelve-month period, the time limit
shall be one hundred twenty (120) days, and for the third twelve-month period the time limit shall be eighty (80) days.
Sec. 8. TIME LIMIT FOR TRIAL. In criminal cases involving persons charged with a crime, except those subject to
the Rule of Summary Procedure, or where the penalty prescribed by law does not exceed six (6) months
imprisonment, or a fine of one thousand pesos (P1,000.00) or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties, the
court shall, after consultation with the public prosecutor and the counsel for the accused, set the case for continuous
trial on a weekly or other short-term trial calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure speedy trial. In no case
shall the entire trial period exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the first day of trial, except as otherwise
authorized by the Court Administrator pursuant to Section 2, Rule 30 of the Rules of Court.
Sec. 9. EXCLUSIONS. The following periods of delay shall be excluded in computing the time within which trial
must commence:
(a) Any period resulting from other proceedings concerning the accused, including but not limited to
the following:
(1) delay resulting from an examination of the physical and mental condition of
the accused;
(2) delay resulting from proceedings with respect to other criminal charges
against the accused;
(3) delay resulting from extraordinary remedies against interlocutory orders;
(4) delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings; Provided, that the delay does not
exceed thirty (30) days;
(5) delay resulting from orders of inhibition or proceedings relating to change of
venue of cases or transfer from other courts;

(6) delay resulting from a finding of the existence of a valid prejudicial question;
and
(7) delay reasonably attributable to any period, not to exceed thirty (30) days,
during which any proceeding concerning the accused is actually under
advisement.
(b) Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of an essential witness.

For purposes of this subparagraph, an essential witness shall be considered absent when his
whereabouts are unknown or his whereabouts cannot be determined by due diligence. An essential
witness shall be considered unavailable whenever his whereabouts are known but his presence for trial
cannot be obtained by due diligence.
(c) Any period of delay resulting from the fact that the accused is mentally incompetent or physically
unable to stand trial.
(d) If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter a charge is filed
against the accused for the same offense, any period of delay from the date the charge was
dismissed to the date the time limitation would commence to run as to the subsequent charge had
there been no previous charge.
(e) A reasonable period of delay when the accused is mentally incompetent or physically unable to
stand trial.
(f) Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any court motu propio or on motion
of either the accused for the same offense, any period of delay from the date the charge was
dismissed to the date the time limitation would commence to run as to the subsequent charge had
there been no previous charge.
Sec. 10. FACTORS FOR GRANTING CONTINUANCE. The following factors, among others, shall be considered
by a court in determining whether to grant a continuance under subparagraph (f) of Section 9 hereof:
(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would be like to make a
continuation of such proceeding impossible, or result in a miscarriage of justice; and
(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number
of accused or the nature of the prosecution or otherwise, that it is unreasonable to expect adequate
preparation within the periods of time established herein.
No continuance under subparagraph (f) Section 9 hereof shall be granted because of congestion of
the courts calendar, or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain available witnesses on the
part of the public prosecutor.
Sec. 11. TIME LIMIT FOLLOWING AN ORDER FOR NEW TRIAL. If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to
an order of a court for a new trial, the trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from notice of that order, except that
the court retrying the case may extend such period but not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from notice of
said order for a new trial if unavailability of witnesses or other factors make trial within thirty (30) days impractical.
Sec. 12. PUBLIC ATTORNEYS DUTIES WHERE ACCUSED IS IMPRISONED. If the public attorney assigned to
defend a person charged with a crime knows that the latter is preventively detained, either because he is charged
with a bailable crime and has no means to post bail, or is charged with a non-bailable crime, or is serving a term of
imprisonment in any penal institution:

(a) The public attorney shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial, or
cause a notice to be served on the person having custody of the prisoner requiring such person to
so advise the prisoner of his right to demand trial.
(b) Upon receipt of that notice, the person having custody of the prisoner shall promptly advise the
prisoner of the charge and of his right to demand trial, If at any time thereafter the prisoner informs
his custodian that he demands such trial, the latter shall cause notice to that effect to be sent
promptly to the public attorney.
(c) Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to obtain the presence of
the prisoner for trial.
(d) When the person having custody of the prisoner receives from the public attorney a properly
supported request for the availability of the prisoner for purposes of the trial, the prisoner shall be
made available accordingly.
Sec. 13. SANCTIONS. In any case in which private counsel for the accused, the public attorney or the public
prosecutor:
(a) knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without disclosing the fact that a necessary witness
would be unavailable for trial;
(b) files a motion solely for the purpose of delay which he knows is totally frivolous and without
merit;
(c) makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining continuance which he know to be false and
which is material to the granting of a continuance; or
(d) otherwise willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent with the provisions
hereof, the court may punish any such counsel, attorney or prosecutor, as follows:
(1) in the case of a counsel privately retained in connection with the defense of
an accused, by imposing a fine of not exceeding twenty thousand pesos
(P20,000.00);
(2) by imposing on any appointed counsel de oficio, public attorney or public
prosecutor a fine not exceeding five thousand pesos (P5,000.00); and
(3) by denying any defense counsel or public prosecutor the right to practice
before the court considering the case for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days.
The authority to punish provided for by this section shall be without prejudice to any appropriate criminal action or any
other sanction authorized under the Rules of Court.
Sec. 14. REMEDY WHERE ACCUSED IS NOT BROUGHT TO TRIAL WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT. If the accused is
not brought to trial within the time limit required by Sections 2 and 6 hereof, as extended by Section 7, the information
may be dismissed on motion of the accused on the ground of denial of his right to speedy trial. The accused shall
have the burden of proving such motion by the prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence
in connection with the exclusion of time under Section 9 hereof. The dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double
jeopardy.
Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right to dismiss under this
section.

Sec. 15. REPUBLIC ACT NO 8493 NOT A BAR TO PROVISION ON SPEEDY TRIAL IN THE CONSTITUTION.
No provision of Republic Act No. 8493 shall be interpreted as a bar to any charge of denial of speedy trial as
provided by Article III, Section 14(2), of the 1987 Constitution.
Sec. 16. EFFECTIVITY. This Circular shall be published in two (2) newspapers of general circulation and shall
take effect on September 15, 1998.