DOJ firm on objection vs judicial affidavit rule

MANILA, Philippines - The Department of Justice (DOJ) is standing by its objection to the new rule of the Supreme Court (SC) requiring submission of judicial affidavits in place of direct testimony from witnesses in criminal cases.

Prosecutor General Claro Arellano, chief of the DOJ’s national prosecution service, said that while the high court sees the Judicial Affidavit Rule (JAR) as practical, the rule can have unwanted repercussions in the fair dispensation of justice.

“JAR will result in numerous dismissals of cases due to technicalities,” Arellano stressed.

The DOJ official, who used to head the prosecutors of Quezon City, explained that under the JAR, judges would not be able to observe the demeanor of witnesses and make fair opinion of their credibility.

He said the new rule would also “unjustly burden the prosecutors, defense lawyers and private practitioners” and that “criminal cases will be resolved not on the basis of the evidence brought forth by the parties.”

On the issue of practicality, Arellano explained that prosecutors have limited time to prepare judicial affidavits since they are already burdened with heavy workload.

He also cited what he considered the shortage of prosecutors, support staff and supplies at the DOJ, and that complying with the JAR would take more time than conducting direct examinations.

The official lamented the SC’s failure to consult the prosecutors before coming up with JAR, despite their being major stakeholders in the implementation of the new rule.

Arellano argued that the JAR has not yet conclusively shown positive results since being tested in Quezon City courts in April last year. And even if it were successful in Quezon City, it would still have to be subjected to test on a national scale to validate its effectiveness.

The DOJ also relayed its position in a letter to the office of Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno.

The DOJ maintained its objection to JAR even after receiving flak recently over the detention of drug suspect Joanne Urbina for five years without a case filed against her in court.

Urbina’s case, however, had never reached the courts and JAR would not have helped in the case anyway.

JAR was approved by the high court last year when Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio was acting chief justice. It was set to be implemented last Jan. 2, but was suspended at the last minute following an objection from the Prosecutors’ League of the Philippines (PLP).