Introduction to and Discussion on the Judicial Affidavit Rule

On 4 September 2012, the Supreme Court issued A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC [full text], approving the JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE. The Rule, which is intended to expedite court proceedings, is new and far from complete, necessitating an extensive discussion to thresh out various issues. Lawyers could keep their observations to themselves and hope that the other party commits a mistake, most likely gaining an edge by reason of technicality. Still, considering that the unstated purpose of the Rule is to ferret out the truth in coming out with a decision based on the merits, and not on mere technicality, it would be helpful to start an open discussion to pick the brains of the legal-minded crowd.

I prepared a summary and an initial discussion of the Judicial Affidavit Rule, posted here. Each topic is contained in a separate post for better presentation/organization. Lumping all topics in a single post would lead to confusion because it would take more effort to correlate a comment to the particular portion of the whole discussion. A single-topic post would mean that all comments pertain only to that specific topic. You are most welcome to disagree with fellow participants in the discussion, but express the disagreement with the requisite degree of respect that befits a fellow member of the profession.

This is Part 1 of 11 of the discussion on the Judicial Affidavit Rule. Join the discussion of the following topics:

1. Introduction to the Judicial Affidavit Rule

2. Effectivity and Purpose of the Judicial Affidavit Rule

3. Scope of Application of the Judicial Affidavit Rule

4. Service and filing of the Judicial Affidavit

5. Required contents of a judicial affidavit under the Judicial Affidavit Rule

6. Offer of Testimony and Objections under the Judicial Affidavit Rule

7. Documentary and Object Evidence under the Judicial Affidavit Rule

8. Cross-examination and Re-Direct Examination under the Judicial Affidavit Rule

9. Resort to subpoena under the Judicial Affidavit Rule

10. Formal offer of evidence under the Judicial Affidavit Rule

11. Effects of Non-Compliance with the Judicial Affidavit Rule


  1. Thank you sir for this 11-part explanation on the JAR. Just learned that the SC extended it’s non application to public prosecutors.

  2. after its effectivity and up to date, there has been no study to assess the effectivity of JAR. however, before its effectivity date Hon. Arrelano criticize this rule saying that it is not effective in all courts specially on courts with few prosecutors.

    Hence, may i ask the author of the page to make some enlightenment as to this issue. thank you very much.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *