A N N O T A T I O N

THE FIVE PRINCIPLES

By

DAVID ROBERT C. AQUINO, CSEE*

___________________

Never mind the character, and stick to the aleybi.1

When an act is imputed to us which we did not commit, our knee-jerk reaction is usually to deny such accusation and thereafter provide for events, situations or people that would support our denial.

The first is called a denial, the second we know as an alibi.

A denial is simply a statement denying any involvement or participation in an alleged crime. An alibi, on the other hand, is a statement that provides for facts, witnesses or situations that places the accused elsewhere thereby making it physically impossible for him to have committed the alleged crime. Denial and alibi are self-serving negative evidence; they cannot prevail over the spontaneous, positive, and credible testimonies of the prosecution witnesses who pointed out to and

_______________

* Atty. Aquino is a practicing lawyer and professor of law in several law schools. He has authored more than 33 law books, most of which are published under the Centralbooks label. In mid-2008, he was appointed by the Supreme Court as a member of its Sub-Committee on the Revision of the Rules on Criminal Procedure. Prior to returning to the private sector he has held Director-level positions in several government agencies.

1 Charles Dickens, Pickwick Papers.

826

826

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Five Principles

identified the accused-appellant as the malefactor.2 These are the usual defenses raised by an accused in a crime of rape.3

These are the twin defenses used by the respondent accused of raping his minor step-daughter in the case under annotation.4 Stated briefly, the case discloses that the victim, a minor, was physically abused by the respondent several times in their home. Faced with the complaint of rape against him, he raised the twin defenses of denial and alibi. His twin defense of denial and alibi were premised mainly on the fact that he was deployed all over the country to repair hospital equipment in his capacity as bio-medical technician thus he was physically nowhere near the victim on the date the alleged rapes transpired. He also deplored the fact that it took the victim a long time before a complaint of rape was filed against him coupled with the fact that the victim seemed to have lived a normal life after the alleged acts of rape.

Unconvinced, the lower court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt. It dismissed his twin defenses of denial and alibi as weak in order to overcome the positive identification and testimony of the victim against him. Note that in a number of cases, the Supreme Court had ruled that mere denial, just like alibi, constitutes a self-serving negative evidence which cannot be accorded greater evidentiary weight than the declaration of credible witnesses who testify on affirmative matters.5 Moreover, it has consistently looked upon the defense of alibi with suspicion and received it with caution not only because it is inherently weak and unreliable but also is can be easily fabricated.6 Already beyond cavil is the evidentiary rule that mere denial does not overturn the relative

_______________

2 People vs. Adallom, 667 SCRA 652 (2012).

3 This is the act of attempting or having sexual intercourse with a woman by force or intimidation; People vs. Flores, G.R. Nos. 134488-89 (2002)

4 People vs. Lomaque, 697 SCRA 383 (2013).

5 People vs. Estomaca, 373 SCRA 197 (2002).

6 People vs. Villamor, 373 SCRA 254 (2002).

827

VOL. 701, JULY 23, 2013

827

The Five Principles

weight and probative value of an affirmative assertion. Denial is inherently a weak defense.7

Raised before the Court of Appeals, his conviction was sustained, hence the case found its way before the High Court which thereafter found the respondent guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

It should be noted that all cases of rape would invariably deal with the respondent questioning the integrity and credibility of the prosecutions lone witness the victim herself. More often than not, the victim is the sole witness for the prosecution as acts of rape usually occur in private where only the victim and the perpetrator are present. One would often wonder if charges of rape against persons are true or not, specially those hurled against public figures or people who we consider as pillars of society.

Thus, in the evolution of cases decided by the Supreme Court, it has formulated certain guidelines or principles in order to guide the courts and the prosecution service in determining the credibility of witnesses and the dutiful appreciation of evidence.

In a perusal of these cases where the guidelines or principles are used, the High Court sometimes mention three (3) and at other times enumerate them to as high as five (5) principles.

For purposes of our annotation, let us call them the five principles and consider them as fundamental assumptions when in comes to the appreciation of testimonial evidence, which more often than not, solely comes from the narration of the victim.

Note that in taking our bearings from these guiding principles the High Court had, on several occasions, reminded us that in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused in cases of rape, the victims testimony is crucial in view of the

_______________

7 Tan vs. Pacuribot, 540 SCRA 246 (2007).

828

828

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Five Principles

intrinsic nature of the crime in which only two persons are normally involved.8 As a result of the guiding principles in a prosecution for rape, credibility becomes the single most important issue.9

First principle Burden of the Prosecution.

The task of proving the guilt of the accused falls squarely on the shoulders of the prosecution service. It is incumbent upon the one alleging the crime to prove it. The successful prosecution of a criminal complaint depends largely on the strength of the evidence of the prosecution that would establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The law presumes that an accused in a criminal prosecution is innocent until the contrary is proved. The presumption of innocence of an accused in a criminal case is a basic constitutional principle, fleshed out by procedural rules which place on the prosecution the burden of proving that an accused is guilty of the offense charged by proof beyond reasonable doubt.10 In all criminal prosecutions, the burden is on the prosecution to prove the body or substance of the crime,11 which has the duty to prove all the essential ingredients of the crime.12

The prosecutions evidence must pass the exacting test of moral certainty that the law demands to satisfy the burden of overcoming the appellants presumption of innocence.13 The prosecution has to establish the guilt of the accused by proof beyond reasonable doubt or that degree of proof that, to an unprejudiced mind, produces conviction. Well-settled is the rule in criminal cases that the prosecution has the burden of

_______________

8 People vs. Padilla, 426 SCRA 648 (2004).

9 People vs. Andales, 422 SCRA 253 (2004).

10 People vs. Agulay, 566 SCRA 571 (2008).

11 People vs. Barangan, 534 SCRA 570 (2007).

12 Sierra vs. People, 591 SCRA 666 (2009).

13 People vs. Arpon, 662 SCRA 506 (2011).

829

VOL. 701, JULY 23, 2013

829

The Five Principles

proof to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.14

If the prosecution fails to meet the required quantum of evidence, the defense does not even need to present any evidence in its behalf, the presumption of innocence prevails and the accused should be acquitted.15 The Court has, in numberless instances, stressed that the burden of proving that an accused is guilty of the offense charged, lies upon the prosecution and that burden must be discharged on the strength of its own evidence and not upon the weakness or upon non-existence of the evidence submitted by the defense.16

Note however, that in one case, the Supreme Court held that an acquittal for failure of prosecution to prove all elements of the offense beyond reasonable doubt does not include the extinguishment of his civil liability. In case of acquittal, the accused may still be adjudged civilly liable. The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil action where (a) the acquittal is based n reasonable doubt as only preponderance of evidence is required (b) the court declared that the liability of accused is only civil (c) the civil liability of the accused does not arise for or is not based upon the crime of which the accused was acquitted.17

Second principle Burden of Proof.

Burden of proof refers to the quantum of evidence necessary to elicit a conviction from the court. In criminal cases, the quantum of proof required is that degree of proof which we normally know as proof beyond reasonable doubt. This quantum of proof sets a criminal case apart from civil and administrative cases.

_______________

14 People vs. Campos, 653 SCRA 99 (2011).

15 People vs. Alejandro, 655 SCRA 279 (2011).

16 People vs. Fider, 223 SCRA 117 (1993).

17 Alferez vs. People, 641 SCRA 116 (2011).

830

830

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Five Principles

The evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot draw strength from the weakness of the evidence of the defense. This particular guiding principle takes into consideration the quantum of proof, as required under the first principle, in order to sustain a conviction as well as the fact that the success of the prosecution shall rely solely on the merits of evidence presented and not on the weakness of the defense.

Considering that a conviction would deprive the accused of his liberty, and at one point in time in the past ones life, the quantum of proof required is set so high that it requires that no iota of doubt would persist in the mind of the court in order to sustain a conviction.

Third principle Findings of lower court.

Unless there are special reasons, the findings of trial courts, especially regarding the credibility of witnesses, are entitled to great respect and will not be disturbed on appeal.

This was reiterated by the High Court in the case under annotation when it observed that it is now too well-settled to require extensive documentation that where the issue is the extent of credence to be properly given to the declaration made by witnesses, the findings of the trial court are accorded great weight and respect. Such findings can only be discarded or disturbed when it appears in the records that the trial court overlooked, ignored or disregarded some facts or circumstances of weight or significance which if considered would have altered the result.18

What is important to note here is that the trial court is in a unique position to evaluate or assess the credibility of witnesses as well as to observe their demeanor and deportment while they gave their testimonies in open court. The assess-

_______________

18 Citing People v. Eling, G.R. No. 178546, 553 SCRA 724, 735-736 (2008).

831

VOL. 701, JULY 23, 2013

831

The Five Principles

ment of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies is best undertaken by the trial court, its findings are binding and conclusive on appellate courts.19

Fourth principle Lone Testimony.

An accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove.

Note that it also takes into consideration that accusations of rape are so easily made and puts the defendant between a rock and a hard place meaning that he may have a hard time disproving the accusation. Thus, it has been a standard practice that the testimony of the alleged rape victim is scrutinized with extreme caution. This is because the crime of rape is usually done under the cover of darkness and privacy where the victim is alone with her assailant.

This is in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved.20 Although lust is no respecter of time and place,21 rape is essentially an offense of secrecy, not generally attempted except in dark or deserted and secluded places away from the prying eyes, and the crime usually commences solely upon the word of the offended woman herself and conviction invariably turns upon her credibility, as the prosecutions single witness of the actual occurrence.22

In rape cases, the lone testimony of the victim, if credible and free from fatal and material inconsistencies and contradictions, can be the basis for the prosecution and conviction of an accused.23

_______________

19 People vs. Dumacuha, 422 SCRA 688 (2004).

20 People vs. Lou, 419 SCRA 345 (2004).

21 People vs. Layugan, 428 SCRA 98 (2004).

22 People vs. Rapisora, 430 SCRA 237 (2004).

23 People vs. Oden, 427 SCRA 634 (2004).

832

832

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Five Principles

Jurisprudence tells us that convictions over the years have been sustained on the basis of the lone testimony of the victim provided that the same is straightforward, consistent and credible. In a number of cases, the High Court had found the occasion to declare that even in the absence of corroborative testimony of other witnesses, the straightforward testimony of a rape victim should suffice.24

The rule is well-settled that an accused in rape cases may be convicted on the basis of the uncorroborated testimony of the rape victim.25 The lone testimony of the victim, if credible and free from fatal and material inconsistencies and contradictions, can be the basis for the prosecution and conviction of an accused.26

Moreover, it has been held repeatedly to the point of being doctrinal, an accused may be convicted on the sole testimony of the victim if such testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.27 Corroborative testimony frequently unavailable in rape cases, is not essential to warrant conviction for the crime.28

There is no rule requiring that a rape victims testimony, to be believed, must be corroborated. The established rule is that the testimony of a rape victim is convincingly credible and untainted with any serious inconsistency, such testimony alone may be relied upon to convict the accused of such a crime.29 Human experience tells us that it is unnatural for a victim to accuse someone other than his actual attackerin

_______________

24 People vs. Torres, 425 SCRA 563 (2004).

25 People vs. Islabra, 426 SCRA 547 (2004).

26 People vs. Oden, 427 SCRA 634 (2004).

27 People vs. Limio, 429 SCRA 597 (2004).

28 People vs. Mabonga, 433 SCRA 51 (2004).

29 People vs. Gonzales, 433 SCRA 102 (2004).

833

VOL. 701, JULY 23, 2013

833

The Five Principles

the normal course of things, the victim would have the earnest desire to bring the guilty person to justice, and no other.30

Fifth principle Credibility of Witness.

This is the most important principle.

In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape, in which only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution. It is here that courts are directed to be more inquisitive in order to determine if the testimony if truthful and not merely meant to perpetuate a malicious prosecution of the accused. This is not to say that minor inconsistencies of the testimony of the witness would prove fatal for the prosecution. On the contrary, such inconsistencies only strengthens the credibility of the witness rather than erode it.

As aptly declared by the High Court in the case under annotation the filing of complaints of rape months, even years, after their commission may or may not dent the credibility of witness and of testimony, depending on the circumstances attendant thereto. It does not diminish the complainants credibility or undermine the charges of rape when the delay can be attributed to the pattern of fear instilled by the threats of bodily harm, specially by one who exercises moral ascendancy over the victim. In this case, not long after the initial rape, appellant threatened AAA that he would kill her and her mother if ever she would tell anyone about what happened. At that time, AAA was only 11 years old and was living under the same roof with the latter whom she treated as a father. Obviously, the threat AAA received from appellant, coupled with his moral ascendancy, is enough to cow and intimidate AAA. Being young and inexperienced, it instilled tremendous fear in her mind.

_______________

30 Serrano vs. People, 623 SCRA 322 (2010).

834

834

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Five Principles

In People v. Domingo,31 the Supreme Court ruled that the effect of fear and intimidation instilled in the victims mind cannot be measured against any given hard-and-fast rule such that it is viewed in the context of the victims perception and judgment not only at the time of the commission of the crime but also at the time immediately thereafter. In any event, the failure of the victim to immediately report the rape is not necessarily an indication of a fabricated charge.32

To reiterate, in most rape cases, the lone testimony of the victim, if credible and free from fatal and material inconsistencies and contradictions, can be the basis for the prosecution and conviction of an accused.33 Moreover, it has been held repeatedly to the point of being doctrinal, an accused may be convicted on the sole testimony of the victim if such testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.34

To reiterate, corroborative testimony frequently unavailable in rape cases, is not essential to warrant conviction for the crime35 and there is no rule requiring that a rape victims testimony, to be believed, must be corroborated. The established rule is that the testimony of a rape victim is convincingly credible and untainted with any serious inconsistency, such testimony alone may be relied upon to convict the accused of such a crime.36

In trials involving rape, there are lots of tears involved. Thus it is no surprise if the testimony of the victim is usually interrupted with sudden outbreaks of hysteria, sobbing and outright crying. The crying of the victim during her testimony

_______________

31 G.R. No. 177136, 556 SCRA 788, 801-802 (2008).

32 Citing People v. Ricamora, 539 Phil. 565, 579; 510 SCRA 514, 526 (2006); and People v. Degala, 411 Phil. 650, 663; 359 SCRA 143, 153 (2001).

33 People vs. Oden, 427 SCRA 634 (2004).

34 People vs. Limio, 429 SCRA 597 (2004).

35 People vs. Mabonga, 433 SCRA 51 (2004).

36 People vs. Gonzales, 433 SCRA 102 (2004).

835

VOL. 701, JULY 23, 2013

835

The Five Principles

is eloquent evidence of the credibility of the rape charge with the verity born out of human nature and experience.37 The crying of the victim during her testimony is an added hallmark of the credibility of the rape charge.38 When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true.39

The experience of rape creates a disruption in lifestyle that realistically could last a lifetime. The physical trauma that which is visibly noted and treated quickly heals, creating the illusion of recovery. Unfortunately, the real trauma, because it is not of physical origin, frequently goes unnoticed and unattended. The common pattern of public blame and skepticism encourages irreparable and substantial injury to both their victim and the society and a repetition of their acts would pose actual threat to the safety of individuals and the survival of government, they must be permanently prevented from doing so.40

In sum, rape stigmatizes the victim more than the perpetrator.41

Rape is a crime that violates ones very essence. It is simply a defilement of ones person just so the assailant can quench his lustful thirst for selfish fulfilment and leaves the victim scarred emotionally, physically and socially for life.

o0o

_______________

37 People vs. Pacheco, 424 SCRA 164 (2004).

38 People vs. Espinosa, 432 SCRA 86 (2004).

39 People vs. Flores, 629 SCRA 478 (2011).

40 People vs. Alicante, 332 SCRA 440 (2000).

41 People vs. Caparas, 427 SCRA 286 (2004). [The Five Principles, 701 SCRA 825(2013)]