Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC
(2 October 2007)
RULE ON DNA EVIDENCE
RESOLUTION
Acting on the recommendation of the Chairperson and
Members of the Subcommittee on Evidence submitting for the
Courts consideration and approval the proposed Rule on DNA
Evidence, the Court Resolved to APPROVE the same.
This Resolution shall take effect on October 15, 2007 following
its publication in a newspaper of general circulation.
October 2, 2007.
SECTION 1. Scope. This Rule shall apply whenever DNA
evidence, as defined in Section 3 hereof, is offered, used, or
proposed to be offered or used as evidence in all criminal and
civil actions as well as special proceedings.
Sec. 2. Application of other Rules on Evidence. In all matters
not specifically covered by this Rule, the Rules of Court and
other pertinent provisions of law on evidence shall apply.
Sec. 3. Definition of Terms. For purposes of this Rule, the
following terms shall be defined as follows:
Biological sample means any organic material originating
from a persons body, even if found in inanimate objects, that
is susceptible to DNA testing. This includes blood, saliva and
other body fluids, tissues, hairs and bones;
DNA means deoxyribonucleic acid, which is the chain of
molecules found in every nucleated cell of the body. The
totality of an individuals DNA is unique for the individual,
except identical twins;
DNA evidence constitutes the totality of the DNA profiles,
results and other genetic information directly generated from
DNA testing of biological samples;
DNA profile means genetic information derived from DNA
testing of a biological sample obtained from a person, which
biological sample is clearly identifiable as originating from that
person;
DNA testing means verified and credible scientific methods
which include the extraction of DNA from biological samples,
the generation of DNA profiles and the comparison of the
information obtained from the DNA testing of biological
samples for the purpose of determining, with reasonable
certainty, whether or not the DNA obtained from two or more
distinct biological samples originates from the same person
(direct identification) or if the biological samples originate from
related persons (kinship analysis); and
Probability of Parentage means the numerical estimate for
the likelihood of parentage of a putative parent compared with
the probability of a random match of two unrelated individuals
in a given population.
Sec. 4. Application for DNA Testing Order. The appropriate
court may, at any time, either motu proprio or on application of
any person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation,
order a DNA testing. Such order shall issue after due hearing
and notice to the parties upon a showing of the following:
1. A biological sample exists that is relevant to the case;
2. The biological sample:
(i) was not previously subjected to the type of DNA
testing now requested; or
(ii) was previously subjected to DNA testing, but the
results may require confirmation for good
reasons;
3. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique;
4. The DNA testing has the scientific potential to
produce new information that is relevant to the proper
resolution of the case; and
5. The existence of other factors, if any, which the court
may consider as potentially affecting the accuracy of
integrity of the DNA testing.
This Rule shall not preclude a DNA testing, without need of a
prior court order, at the behest of any party, including law
enforcement agencies, before a suit or proceeding is
commenced.
Sec. 5. DNA Testing Order. If the court finds that the
requirements in Section 4 hereof have been complied with, the
court shall
1. Order, where appropriate, that biological samples be
taken from any person or crime scene evidence;
2. Impose reasonable conditions on DNA testing
designed to protect the integrity of the biological
sample, the testing process and the reliability of the
test results, including the condition that the DNA test
results shall be simultaneously disclosed to parties
involved in the case; and
3. If the biological sample taken is of such an amount
that prevents the conduct of confirmatory testing by
the other or the adverse party and where additional
biological samples of the same kind can no longer be
obtained, issue an order requiring all parties to the
 case or proceedings to witness the DNA testing to be
conducted.
An order granting the DNA testing shall be immediately
executory and shall not be appealable. Any petition for
certiorari initiated therefrom shall not, in any way, stay the
implementation thereof, unless a higher court issues an
injunctive order. The grant of DNA testing application shall not
be construed as an automatic admission into evidence of any
component of the DNA evidence that may be obtained as a
result thereof.
Sec. 6. Post-conviction DNA Testing. Post-conviction DNA
testing may be available, without need of prior court order, to
the prosecution or any person convicted by final and executory
judgment provided that (a) a biological sample exists, (b) such
sample is relevant to the case, and (c) the testing would
probably result in the reversal or modification of the judgment
of conviction.
Sec. 7. Assessment of probative value of DNA evidence. In
assessing the probative value of the DNA evidence presented,
the court shall consider the following:
1. The chair of custody, including how the biological
samples were collected, how they were handled, and
the possibility of contamination of the samples;
2. The DNA testing methodology, including the
procedure followed in analyzing the samples, the
advantages and disadvantages of the procedure, and
compliance with the scientifically valid standards in
conducting the tests;
3. The forensic DNA laboratory, including accreditation
by any reputable standards-setting institution and the
qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests. If
the laboratory is not accredited, the relevant
experience of the laboratory in forensic casework and
credibility shall be properly established; and
4. The reliability of the testing result, as hereinafter
provided.
The provisions of the Rules of Court concerning the
appreciation of evidence shall apply suppletorily.
Sec. 8. Reliability of DNA Testing Methodology. In evaluating
whether the DNA testing methodology is reliable, the court
shall consider the following:
1. The falsifiability of the principles or methods used,
that is, whether the theory or technique can be and
has been tested;
2. The subjection to peer review and publication of the
principles or methods;
3. The general acceptance of the principles or methods
by the relevant scientific community;
4. The existence and maintenance of standards and
controls to ensure the correctness of data generated;
5. The existence of an appropriate reference population
database; and
6. The general degree of confidence attributed to
mathematical calculations used in comparing DNA
profiles and the significance and limitation of
statistical calculations used in comparing DNA
profiles.
Sec. 9. of DNA Testing Results. In evaluating the results of
DNA testing, the court shall consider the following:
1. The evaluation of the weight of matching DNA
evidence or the relevance of mismatching DNA
evidence;
2. The results of the DNA testing in the light of the
totality of the other evidence presented in the case;
and that
3. DNA results that exclude the putative parent from
paternity shall be conclusive proof of non-paternity. If
the value of the Probability of Paternity is less than
99.9%, the results of the DNA testing shall be
considered as corroborative evidence. If the value of
the Probability of Paternity is 99.9% or higher there
shall be a disputable presumption of paternity.
Sec. 10. Post-conviction DNA Testing Remedy if the Results
Are Favorable to the Convict. The convict or the prosecution
may file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the court of
origin if the results of the post-conviction DNA testing are
favorable to the convict. In the case the court, after due
hearing finds the petition to be meritorious, if shall reverse or
modify the judgment of conviction and order the release of the
convict, unless continued detention is justified for a lawful
cause.
A similar petition may be filed either in the Court of Appeals or
the Supreme Court, or with any member of said courts, which
may conduct a hearing thereon or remand the petition to the
court of origin and issue the appropriate orders.
Sec. 11. Confidentiality. DNA profiles and all results or other
information obtained from DNA testing shall be confidential.
Except upon order of the court, a DNA profile and all results or
other information obtained from DNA testing shall only be
released to any of the following, under such terms and
conditions as may be set forth by the court:
1. Person from whom the sample was taken;
2. Person from whom the sample was taken;
3. Lawyers of private complainants in a criminal action;
4. Duly authorized law enforcement agencies; and
5. Other persons as determined by the court.
Whoever discloses, utilizes or publishes in any form any
information concerning a DNA profile without the proper court
order shall be liable for indirect contempt of the court wherein
such DNA evidence was offered, presented or sought to be
offered and presented.

Where the person from whom the biological sample was taken
files a written verified request to the court that allowed the DNA
testing for the disclosure of the DNA profile of the person and
all results or other information obtained from the DNA testing,
he same may be disclosed to the persons named in the written
verified request.

Sec. 12. Preservation of DNA Evidence. The trial court shall

preserve the DNA evidence in its totality, including all
biological samples, DNA profiles and results or other genetic
information obtained from DNA testing. For this purpose, the
court may order the appropriate government agency to
preserve the DNA evidence as follows:

1. In criminal cases:
a. for not less than the period of time that any
person is under trial for an offense; or
b. in case the accused is serving sentence, until
such time as the accused has served his
sentence;

2. In all other cases, until such time as the decision in

the case where the DNA evidence was introduced
has become final and executory.

The court may allow the physical destruction of a biological

sample before the expiration of the periods set forth above,
provided that:

1. A court order to that effect has been secured; or

2. The person from whom the DNA sample was
obtained has consented in writing to the disposal of
the DNA evidence.

Sec. 13. Applicability to Pending Cases. Except as provided in

Section 6 and 10 hereof, this Rule shall apply to cases pending
at the time of its effectivity.

Sec. 14. Effectivity. This Rule shall take effect on October 15,
2007, following publication in a newspaper of general
circulation.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC July 17, 2001
RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
Acting on the Memorandum dated 18 June 2001 of the
Committee on the Revision of the Rules of Court to Draft the
Rules on E-Commerce Law [R.A. No. 8792] submitting the
Rules on Electronic Evidence for this Court's consideration and
approval, the Court Resolved to APPROVED the same.
The Rules on Electronic Evidence shall apply to cases pending
after their effectivity. These Rules shall take effect on the first
day of August 2001 following thier publication before the 20th
of July in two newspapers of general circulation in the
Philippines
17th July 2001.
RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
Rule 1
COVERAGE
Section 1. Scope. Unless otherwise provided herein, these
Rules shall apply whenever an electronic document or
electronic data message, as defined in Rule 2 hereof, is
offered or used in evidence.
Section 2. Cases covered. These Rules shall apply to all
civil actions and proceedings, as well as quasi-judicial and
administrative cases.
Section 3. Application of other rules on evidence. In all
matters not specifically covered by these Rules, the Rules of
Court and pertinent provisions of statutes containing rules on
evidence shall apply.
Rule 2
DEFINITION OF TERMS AND CONSTRUCTION
Section 1. Definition of terms. For purposes of these Rules,
the following terms are defined, as follows:
(a) "Asymmetric or public cryptosystem" means a system
capable of generating a secure key pair, consisting of a private
key for creating a digital signature, and a public key for
verifying the digital signature.
(b) "Business records" include records of any business,
institution, association, profession, occupation, and calling of
every kind, whether or not conducted for profit, or for legitimate
or illegitimate purposes.
(c) "Certificate" means an electronic document issued to
support a digital signature which purports to confirm the
identity or other significant characteristics of the person who
holds a particular key pair.
(d) "Computer" refers to any single or interconnected device
or apparatus, which, by electronic, electro-mechanical or
magnetic impulse, or by other means with the same function,
can receive, record, transmit, store, process, correlate,
analyze, project, retrieve and/or produce information, data,
text, graphics, figures, voice, video, symbols or other modes of
expression or perform any one or more of these functions.
(e) "Digital signature" refers to an electronic signature
consisting of a transformation of an electronic document or an
electronic data message using an asymmetric or public
cryptosystem such that a person having the initial
untransformed electronic document and the signer's public key
can accurately determine:
i. whether the transformation was created using the
private key that corresponds to the signer's public
key; and
ii. whether the initial electronic document had been
altered after the transformation was made.
(f) "Digitally signed" refers to an electronic document or
electronic data message bearing a digital signature verified by
the public key listed in a certificate.
(g) "Electronic data message" refers to information
generated, sent, received or stored by electronic, optical or
similar means.
(h) "Electronic document" refers to information or the
representation of information, data, figures, symbols or other
modes of written expression, described or however
represented, by which a right is established or an obligation
extinguished, or by which a fact may be proved and affirmed,
which is received, recorded, transmitted, stored, processed,
retrieved or produced electronically. It includes digitally signed
documents and any print-out or output, readable by sight or
other means, which accurately reflects the electronic data
message or electronic document. For purposes of these Rules,
the term "electronic document" may be used interchangeably
with "electronic data message".
(i) "Electronic key" refers to a secret code which secures and
defends sensitive information that crosses over public
channels into a form decipherable only with a matching
electronic key.
(j) "Electronic signature" refers to any distinctive mark,
characteristic and/or sound in electronic form, representing the
identity of a person and attached to or logically associated with
the electronic data message or electronic document or any
methodology or procedure employed or adopted by a person
and executed or adopted by such person with the intention of
authenticating, signing or approving an electronic data
message or electronic document. For purposes of these Rules,
an electronic signature includes digital signatures.
(k) "Ephemeral electronic communication" refers to
telephone conversations, text messages, chatroom sessions,
streaming audio, streaming video, and other electronic forms
of communication the evidence of which is not recorded or
retained.
(l) "Information and communication system" refers to a
system for generating, sending, receiving, storing or otherwise
processing electronic data messages or electronic documents
and includes the computer system or other similar devices by
or in which data are recorded or stored and any procedure
related to the recording or storage of electronic data messages
or electronic documents.
(m) "Key pair" in an asymmetric cryptosystem refers to the
private key and its mathematically related public key such that
the latter can verify the digital signature that the former
creates.
(n) "Private key" refers to the key of a key pair used to create
a digital signature.
(o) "Public key" refers to the key of a key pair used to verify a
digital signature.
Section 2. Construction. These Rules shall be liberally
construed to assist the parties in obtaining a just, expeditious,
and inexpensive determination of cases.
The interpretation of these Rules shall also take into
consideration the international origin of Republic Act No. 8792,
otherwise known as the Electronic Commerce Act.
Rule 3
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS
Section 1. Electronic documents as functional equivalent of
paper-based documents. Whenever a rule of evidence refers
to the term writing, document, record, instrument,
memorandum or any other form of writing, such term shall be
deemed to include an electronic document as defined in these
Rules.
Section 2. Admissibility. An electronic document is
admissible in evidence if it complies with the rules on
admissibility prescribed by the Rules of Court and related laws
and is authenticated in the manner prescribed by these Rules.
Section 3. Privileged communication. The confidential
character of a privileged communication is not lost solely on
the ground that it is in the form of an electronic document.
Rule 4
BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Section 1. Original of an electronic document. An electronic
document shall be regarded as the equivalent of an original
document under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a printout or
output readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the
data accurately.
Section 2. Copies as equivalent of the originals. When a
document is in two or more copies executed at or about the
same time with identical contents, or is a counterpart produced
by the same impression as the original, or from the same
matrix, or by mechanical or electronic re-recording, or by
chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent techniques which
accurately reproduces the original, such copies or duplicates
shall be regarded as the equivalent of the original.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, copies or duplicates shall not
be admissible to the same extent as the original if:
(a) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity
of the original; or
(b) in the circumstances it would be unjust or
inequitable to admit the copy in lieu of the original.
Rule 5
AUTHENTICATION OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS
Section 1. Burden of proving authenticity. The person
seeking to introduce an electronic document in any legal
proceeding has the burden of proving its authenticity in the
manner provided in this Rule.
Section 2. Manner of authentication. Before any private
electronic document offered as authentic is received in
evidence, its authenticity must be proved by any of the
following means:
(a) by evidence that it had been digitally signed by the
person purported to have signed the same;
(b) by evidence that other appropriate security
procedures or devices as may be authorized by the
Supreme Court or by law for authentication of
electronic documents were applied to the document;
or
(c) by other evidence showing its integrity and
reliability to the satisfaction of the judge.
Section 3. Proof of electronically notarized document. A
document electronically notarized in accordance with the rules
promulgated by the Supreme Court shall be considered as a
public document and proved as a notarial document under the
Rules of Court.
Rule 6
ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
Section 1. Electronic signature. An electronic signature or a
digital signature authenticated in the manner prescribed
hereunder is admissible in evidence as the functional
equivalent of the signature of a person on a written document.
Section 2. Authentication of electronic signatures. An
electronic signature may be authenticated in any of the
following manner:
(a) By evidence that a method or process was utilized
to establish a digital signature and verify the same;
(b) By any other means provided by law; or
(c) By any other means satisfactory to the judge as
establishing the genuineness of the electronic
signature.
Section 3. Disputable presumptions relating to electronic
signatures. Upon the authentication of an electronic
signature, it shall be presumed that:
(a) The electronic signature is that of the person to
whom it correlates;
(b) The electronic signature was affixed by that
person with the intention of authenticating or
approving the electronic document to which it is
related or to indicate such person's consent to the
transaction embodied therein; and
(c) The methods or processes utilized to affix or verify
the electronic signature operated without error or
fault.
Section 4. Disputable presumptions relating to digital
signatures. Upon the authentication of a digital signature, it
shall be presumed, in addition to those mentioned in the
immediately preceding section, that:
(a) The information contained in a certificate is
correct;
(b) The digital signature was created during the
operational period of a certificate;
(c) No cause exists to render a certificate invalid or
revocable;
(d) The message associated with a digital signature
has not been altered from the time it was signed; and,
(e) A certificate had been issued by the certification
authority indicated therein.
Rule 7
EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS
Section 1. Factors for assessing evidentiary weight. In
assessing the evidentiary weight of an electronic document,
the following factors may be considered:
(a) The reliability of the manner or method in which it
was generated, stored or communicated, including
but not limited to input and output procedures,
controls, tests and checks for accuracy and reliability
of the electronic data message or document, in the
light of all the circumstances as well as any relevant
agreement;
(b) The reliability of the manner in which its originator
was identified;
(c) The integrity of the information and communication
system in which it is recorded or stored, including but
not limited to the hardware and computer programs or
software used as well as programming errors;
(d) The familiarity of the witness or the person who
made the entry with the communication and
information system;
(e) The nature and quality of the information which
went into the communication and information system
upon which the electronic data message or electronic
document was based; or
(f) Other factors which the court may consider as
affecting the accuracy or integrity of the electronic
document or electronic data message.
Section 2. Integrity of an information and communication
system. In any dispute involving the integrity of the
information and communication system in which an electronic
document or electronic data message is recorded or stored,
the court may consider, among others, the following factors:
(a) Whether the information and communication
system or other similar device was operated in a
manner that did not affect the integrity of the
electronic document, and there are no other
reasonable grounds to doubt the integrity of the
information and communication system;

(b) Whether the electronic document was recorded or
stored by a party to the proceedings with interest
adverse to that of the party using it; or
(c) Whether the electronic document was recorded or
stored in the usual and ordinary course of business
by a person who is not a party to the proceedings and
who did not act under the control of the party using it.
Rule 8
BUSINESS RECORDS AS EXCEPTION TO THE HEARSAY
RULE
Section 1. Inapplicability of the hearsay rule. A
memorandum, report, record or data compilation of acts,
events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made by electronic,
optical or other similar means at or near the time of or from
transmission or supply of information by a person with
knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular course or conduct
of a business activity, and such was the regular practice to
make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation by
electronic, optical or similar means, all of which are shown by
the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witnesses, is
excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence.
Section 2. Overcoming the presumption. The presumption
provided for in Section 1 of this Rule may be overcome by
evidence of the untrustworthiness of the source of information
or the method or circumstances of the preparation,
transmission or storage thereof.
Rule 9
METHOD OF PROOF
Section 1. Affidavit evidence. All matters relating to the
admissibility and evidentiary weight of an electronic document
may be established by an affidavit stating facts of direct
personal knowledge of the affiant or based on authentic
records. The affidavit must affirmatively show the competence
of the affiant to testify on the matters contained therein.
Section 2. Cross-examination of deponent. The affiant shall
be made to affirm the contents of the affidavit in open court
and may be cross-examined as a matter of right by the
adverse party.
Rule 10
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Section 1. Electronic testimony. After summarily hearing the
parties pursuant to Rule 9 of these Rules, the court may
authorize the presentation of testimonial evidence by electronic
means. Before so authorizing, the court shall determine the
necessity for such presentation and prescribe terms and
conditions as may be necessary under the circumstances,
including the protection of the rights of the parties and
witnesses concerned.
Section 2. Transcript of electronic testimony. When
examination of a witness is done electronically, the entire
proceedings, including the questions and answers, shall be
transcribed by a stenographer, stenotypist or other recorder
authorized for the purpose, who shall certify as correct the
transcript done by him. The transcript should reflect the fact
that the proceedings, either in whole or in part, had been
electronically recorded.
Section 3. Storage of electronic evidence. The electronic
evidence and recording thereof as well as the stenographic
notes shall form part of the record of the case. Such transcript
and recording shall be deemed prima facie evidence of such
proceedings.
Rule 11
AUDIO, PHOTOGRAPHIC, VIDEO, AND EPHEMERAL
EVIDENCE
Section 1. Audio, video and similar evidence. Audio,
photographic and video evidence of events, acts or
transactions shall be admissible provided it shall be shown,
presented or displayed to the court and shall be identified,
explained or authenticated by the person who made the
recording or by some other person competent to testify on the
accuracy thereof.
Section 2. Ephemeral electronic communications.
Ephemeral electronic communications shall be proven by the
testimony of a person who was a party to the same or has
personal knowledge thereof. In the absence or unavailability of
such witnesses, other competent evidence may be admitted.
A recording of the telephone conversation or ephemeral
electronic communication shall be covered by the immediately
preceding section.
If the foregoing communications are recorded or embodied in
an electronic document, then the provisions of Rule 5 shall
apply.
Rule 12
EFFECTIVITY
Section 1. Applicability to pending cases. These Rules shall
apply to cases pending after their effectivity.
Section 2. Effectivity. These Rules shall take effect on the
first day of August 2001 following their publication before the
20th of July 2001 in two newspapers of general circulation in
the Philippines.