The Supreme Court grants supplemental application of Rule 23 of the Rules of Civil Procedure in a criminal case on the grounds of substantial justice and fairness.
-- Where a prosecution’s vital witness in a [criminal proceeding] is unavailable for reasons [other than] those listed in Section 15, Rule 119 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure vis-à-vis the enforcement of the accused’s constitutional right to confront witnesses face-to-face.
Section 15 of Rule 119, which provides the examination of witnesses for the prosecution, states that:
“[w]hen it satisfactorily appears that a witness for the prosecution is:
(1.) too sick or infirm to appear at the trial as directed by the court, or
(2.) has to leave the Philippines with no definite date of returning, he may forthwith be conditionally examined before the court where the case is pending.” [.] (End of emphasis).
The Court held that the RTC did not gravely abuse its discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it [granted] the taking of testimony of Mary Jane by way of deposition through written interrogatories in light of the conditions of Mary Jane’s reprieve and her imprisonment in Indonesia.
Ads.
Simply scroll down to continue reading this article.
 |
| 2023 Bar Exam Quiz Cards Reviewer for ₱150 - ₱500. |
Ads.
 |
| ▶️ Watch here |
Ads.
 |
| ▶️ Watch here |
Ads.
.jpeg) |
| ▶️ Watch here |
ads.
ang buhay mo? Este ang books 
mo?
LAW BOOK FLAGS / FILING TABS
Shop here: https://go.shopple.co/spm01i
More @ https://shopple.co/Lex-curiae
Visit 
"Bar techniques"
: Abubot ni atorni
Legal Writing (2023) by Dean David Robert C. Aquino, CSEE, MAED, PHD, LLM.
🛒 SHOP HERE!
SHP: https://go.shopple.co/spmg77
LZD: https://go.shopple.co/spmg74
It further held that there are compelling reasons to liberally construe the procedural rules and apply [suppletorily] the Rules on Civil Procedure.
The Court further held that in light of the [unusual circumstances] surrounding Mary Jane’s case, it saw no reason not to apply suppletorily the provisions of Rule 23 of the Rules on Civil Procedure in the interest of substantial justice and fairness.
"The Court said that [to disallow] the written interrogatories will curtail Mary Jane’s right to due process."
✍️⚖️People v. Maria Cristina P. Sergio and Julius L. Lacanilao (G.R. No. 240053, 2019).
TAKE NOTE:
The general rule is that the accused has the right to confront or to meet the prosecution's witness face to face. As a result, written interrogatories under Rule 23 (Rules of Court) are inapplicable because they violate the accused's constitutional right to confront.
However, in a landmark case penned by Justice Hernando, this Court has allowed the suppletory application of Rule 23, without violating the accused's constitutional right to confrontation, citing the special circumstances in this particular case to serve the substantial interest of justice.
READ MORE:
• WEBSITE:
📎 https://bit.ly/m/AttyEblogger
Visit 🔎 "Hernando Case Digest"
• Shopple Store 🛒
📎 https://shopple.co/Lex-curiae
Visit 🔎 "Hernando Case Digest"
•Telegram
• Discord
You must be logged in to post a comment.