RULE 115: Rights of the Accused

 

RULE 115: RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

1.            What are the rights of the accused in a criminal proceeding?

Rights of accused at the trial. — In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled to the following rights:

(a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt.

(b) To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.

(c) To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of the judgment. The accused may, however, waive his presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail, unless his presence is specifically ordered by the court for purposes of identification. The absence of the accused without justifiable cause at the trial of which he had notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to be present thereat. When an accused under custody escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived his right to be present on all subsequent trial dates until custody over him is regained. Upon motion, the accused may be allowed to defend himself in person when it sufficiently appears to the court that he can properly protect his right without the assistance of counsel.

(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on matters covered by direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner prejudice him.

(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself.

(f) To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the trial. Either party may utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness who is deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be found in the Philippines, unavailable or otherwise unable to testify, given in another case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter, the adverse party having the opportunity to cross-examine him.

(g) To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and production of other evidence in his behalf.

(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.

(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law.

(Art. 115, Sec. 1)

2.             Does presumption of innocence admit exemptions?

The presumption of innocence admits no exemptions. It is a constitutional right and the accused is presumed innocent all throughout the trial. The presumption only ends when there is final conviction. In cases of reverse trial, it is only the burden of proof that shifts. Prosecution still has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction still rests upon the evidence introduced by the prosecution.

3.            When does right to counsel arise?

The right to counsel arises from the moment the person is under custody of the law. Under Sec. 12 of the 1987 Constitution, Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to . . . have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice.

4.            Is the client bound by his lawyer’s mistake?

As a rule, the mistake of counsel binds the client. Therefore, the client cannot question a decision on the ground that counsel was an idiot. However, an exception to this is if counsel misrepresents himself as a lawyer, and he turns out to be a fake lawyer. In this case, the accused is entitled to a new trial because his right to be represented by a member of the bar was violated. He was thus denied of his right to counsel and to due process.

5.            What is the difference between waiver or right to counsel during custodial investigation and during trial?

During trial, the right to counsel means the right to effective counsel. During trial, the purpose of the counsel is not so much to protect the accused from being forced to confess, but rather to defend the accused.

On the other hand, a custodial investigation has stricter requirements. A custodial investigation requires the presence of a

competent and independent counsel, who is preferably the accused’s own choice. Furthermore, the right to counsel could only be waived in writing and in the presence of counsel.

6.             Is the right to counsel absolute?

No. The right of choice must be reasonably exercised. The accused cannot insist on counsel that he cannot afford, one who is not a member of the bar, or one who declines for a valid reason, such as conflict of interest. Also, the right of the accused to choose counsel is subject to the right of the state to due process and to speedy and adequate justice.

7.            Is right to counsel applicable in administrative investigation?

No. A party in an administrative proceeding may or may not be assisted by counsel. Moreover, the administrative body is under no duty to provide the person with counsel because assistance of counsel is not an absolute requirement. There is no law, jurisprudence, or rule which mandates that an employee be assisted by counsel in an administrative case. Assistance of counsel is not indispensable in administrative proceedings.

8.            What is meant by Silence in Rules of Evidence?

Admission by silence. — An act or declaration made in the presence and within the hearing or observation of a party who does or says nothing when the act or declaration is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and when proper and possible for him to do so, may be given in evidence against him

9.            What is the extent of the right against self-incrimination?

The right against self-incrimination covers testimonial compulsion only and the compulsion to produce incriminating documents, papers, and chattels. It does not cover the compulsion to produce real or physical evidence using the body of the accused.             

10.   Exceptions to right against self-incrimination?

The right cannot be invoked when the State has the right to inspect documents under its police power, such as documents of corporations.

11.   What is the purpose of right to confrontation?

(a)    To allow the court to observe the demeanor of the witness while testifying;

(b)   To give the accused the opportunity to cross-examine the witness in order to test their recollection and credibility

12.    In people vs Berdaje (99 SCRA 388), how was the compulsory process to secure attendance of defense witness stressed?

Again, one of the rights of an accused is "to have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses on his behalf. ADELINO had stated that, while MARCELINA was in the house of Ceferino Armada, she curled the hair of Narita. One of the latter's children, as well as the hair of other girls in the vicinity. In capital cases, it should be desirable that, whenever a discrepancy is noted between the designation of the crime made by the Fiscal and the crime described by the facts pleaded in his Information. The lower Court should call attention of the accused to the discrepancy, so that the accused may be fully apprised of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. This was not done in regards to ADELINO who all the time was under the impression that he was being tried for Rape with Illegal Detention, and not for Forcible Abduction with Rape. If ADELINO had known that he was being tried for Forcible Abduction with Rape, he may have changed the strategy or tactics of his defense. Not that it could be said he would have done so; but he should have been advised he had the right, and given the opportunity, to do so. ADELINO wanted to have Narita testify on his behalf, and a subpoena had been issued to her. But instead of taking effective steps to have Narita brought to Court, the lower court gave responsibility for Narita's attendance to the defense, expressly stating that, if the defense was not able to bring her to the Court, her testimony will be dispensed with. Considering that this case involved a prosecution for a capital offense, the lower Court acted precipitously in not having Narita brought to Court, by ordering her arrest if necessary ADELINO was deprived of his right "to have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses on his behalf."

13.   . What is the purpose of public trial?

The trial should be public in order to prevent abuses that may be committed by the court to the prejudice of the defendant. Moreover, the accused is entitled to the moral support of his friends and relatives.

14.   Is there an exception to the requirement of public trial?

Yes. The court may bar the public in certain cases, such as when the evidence to be presented may be offensive to decency or public morals, or in rape cases, where the purpose of some persons in attending is merely to ogle at the parties.

15.   In determining whether or not the right to the speedy disposition of cases has been violated what are the guidelines set under MGen Carlos Garcia vs. Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 198554, July 30, 2012)?       

The concept of speedy disposition is relative or flexible. A mere mathematical reckoning of the time involved is not sufficient. Particular regard must be taken of the facts and circumstances peculiar to each case. Hence, the doctrinal rule is that in the determination of whether that right has been violated, the factors that may be considered and balanced are as follows:

(1) the length of the delay;

(2) the reasons for the delay;

(3) the assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused; and

(4) the prejudice caused by the delay.

16.   When is the right of the accused to speedy trial deemed violated? factors to consider (Braza vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 195032, February 20, 2013)?

The doctrinal rule is that in the determination of whether that right has been violated, the factors that may be considered and balanced are as follows:

(1) the length of the delay;

(2) the reasons for the delay;

(3) the assertion or failure to assert such right by the accused; and

(4) the prejudice caused by the delay.

17.   What is meant to the notion that right to appeal is not a natural right but a statutory right?

The right to appeal is neither a natural right nor is it a component of due process. It is a mere statutory privilege, and may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of law. To stress, the right to appeal is statutory and one who seeks to avail of it must comply with the statute or rules. The requirements for perfecting an appeal within the reglementary period specified in the law must be strictly followed as they are considered indispensable interdictions against needless delays. Moreover, the perfection of an appeal in the manner and within the period set by law is not only mandatory but jurisdictional as well, hence failure to perfect the same renders the judgment final and executory. And, just as a losing party has the privilege to file an appeal within the prescribed period, so also does the prevailing party have the correlative right to enjoy the finality of a decision in his favor.