“TAKE nothing on its looks; take everything on evidence. There’s no better rule.” — Charles John Huffam Dickens, Writer and Social Critic
In one case, our Supreme Court emphatically pointed out that good intentions do not win cases; evidence does. (Salvador A. Pleyto vs. Philippine National Police Criminal Investigation and Detection Group [PNP-CIDG], G.R. No. 169982, November 23, 2007)
As defined under our Rules on Evidence, evidence is the means (sanctioned by the Rules) of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. (Rule 128, Sec. 1)
At bottom, the rules on evidence are “principles which express the manner upon which a party relies to establish a fact in dispute.”
Best means of discriminating truth from error
Distilled from centuries of actual experience, the rules on evidence “are designed to enable the inquiry to proceed with the least waste of time and effort, and at the same time guard against prejudice and arbitrariness.” (Foreword, Philippine Law on Evidence by Salonga, cited in Herrera, Remedial Law Volume V Revised Rules on Evidence [1999 Edition]) And they are “maxims which the sagacity and experience of ages have established as the best means of discriminating truth from error…” (Sibal and Salazar, Jr., Compendium on Evidence [Fifth Edition, 2006])
Scope
The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearings, except as otherwise provided by law or the rules. (Rule 128, Sec. 2, the Revised Rules on Evidence) They are specifically applicable only in “judicial” proceedings. (Al-Amanah Islamic Investment Bank of the Phils. vs. CSC, 207 SCRA 801)
The rules of evidence are not strictly applied in proceedings before “administrative” bodies. As has been held in numerous decisions of the High Court, administrative bodies are not bound by the technical niceties of the rules obtained in a court of law. (El Greco Ship Manning and Management Corp. v. Commissioner of Customs, G.R. No. 177188, December 4, 2008)
Furthermore, under Rule 1, Sec. 4 of the Revised Rules of Court, the Rules of Court (including the Rules on Evidence) shall not apply to: (1) Election Cases; (2) Land Registration; (3) Cadastral; (4) Naturalization; (5) Insolvency Proceedings; (6) And other cases not (herein) provided for, except by analogy or in a suppletory character and whenever practicable and convenient.
Legal evidence vs. Scientific evidence
In Hart and McNaughton’s book, “Evidence and Inference in the Law” (1958), the authors postulate that “[L]egal evidence differs significantly from scientific evidence. Although some scientific evidence may be used in courts, the objective of litigation is to solve disputes, not to discover ultimate truths.”
“Evidence in the legal context is necessarily limited to whatever the parties decide to present. The time constraints inherent in the litigation process do not permit repetitive experimentation and extensive research. The law compromises certainty in favor of dispute resolution. Hence, the use of standards of proof: ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ and ‘preponderance of the evidence.’”
