00:00The Supreme Court of the Philippines upheld the validity of rules issued by the Department of Justice,
00:05raising the standard of proof and preliminary investigations and inquest proceedings.
00:10The high court affirmed DOJ Department Circular No. 15 Series of 2024,
00:16which requires prosecutors to establish prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction
00:23instead of merely determining probable cause.
00:26The policy, introduced during the tenure of former DOJ Secretary and now Jesus Remulia,
00:32aims to improve conviction rates and filter out nuisance or harassment complaints.
00:37The high court also dismissed the petition filed by lawyer Hazel L. Mekin,
00:42emphasizing that preliminary investigations are not executive, not a judicial function.
00:51To tell us more about the movement, we have Department of Justice Spokesperson Attorney Paolo Martinez.
00:57Good evening. This is Sharm Zespina from PTV News tonight. Welcome to Interface.
01:03Good evening, Sharm. Thank you for having me. Good evening to the viewers.
01:06Good evening, attorney. So let's get right down to the issues. We've talked about the recent changes,
01:12but what exactly changes for prosecutors now that the standard in preliminary investigations and inquests
01:19has been raised from certifying probable cause to prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction?
01:28Right. Okay. So the increase in the standard of evidence,
01:33it's meant to lower the filing of cases, which are weak in court.
01:41So oftentimes, we've had situations where although the evidence was not strong enough,
01:47the case was filed in court, and at the end of the day,
01:50what happens is it just clogged court dockets with unmeritorious cases.
01:55So with this new standard of prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction,
01:59it's a lot closer now to the standard required for convicting people.
02:06So we know that the standard of proof required for a conviction or a guilty verdict is beyond reasonable doubt.
02:13So with the new quantum of evidence being reasonable certainty, reasonable certainty of conviction,
02:20you know, it's a lot closer to that.
02:22It's to ensure that more meritorious cases are filed,
02:25and we do away with re-cases being filed so that as to not clog the dockets of the courts.
02:31So to clarify, attorney, the goal here is stronger cases before they reach the courts.
02:38That's correct. That's correct.
02:40Okay. But how would prosecutors determine if the available evidence already meets the threshold
02:45or the requirement of establishing all the elements of the crime
02:49and showing a reasonable certainty of conviction before filing these cases in court?
02:55Yeah. So that's done on a case-to-case basis.
02:58Each case is different.
02:59Each crime in the revised penal code under our special penal laws have their own set of elements.
03:06So that's up to the assessment by the prosecutors in charge of the evidence at their disposal or submitted to
03:13them.
03:15And it's all that assessment, all that scrutiny has to be done in accordance with the rules.
03:22Also, there's an assessment of not just the documentary evidence,
03:25but also the credibility of the witnesses available,
03:28looking into the probative value of the evidence as a whole in totality.
03:34Okay. The new ruling under Department Circular No. 15 series of 2024,
03:40just for the benefit of the listening public,
03:43was introduced during the term of Ombudsman Jesus Ramulia when he was DOJ's secretary,
03:48as we previously mentioned.
03:49But how significant is this policy in addressing low conviction rates in cases filed by prosecutors?
04:00Well, again, as I mentioned earlier,
04:02it's to ensure that by the time the case is filled in court,
04:05the evidence is strong enough, substantial, and sufficient enough to merit a guilty conviction.
04:11As in fact, our conviction, our institutional target of 90 percent,
04:15as it stands, our conviction rate is at 99.52 percent for the past year of 2025.
04:21So, you know, it's indicative of a continued level of success,
04:27demonstrating that the new quantum of proof really does aid in making sure that we meet this institutional target
04:35and that we do away with the little things that erode public trust in the criminal justice process.
04:41Because, you know, it's very easy to say that the justice system is slow.
04:45So, what's hard is to see or to determine exactly what makes it slow in some instances or to be
04:52perceived as slow, no?
04:54Okay. The Supreme Court ruled that a preliminary investigation is an executive function, not a judicial one.
05:02But how does this decision affirm the Department of Justice's authority to issue rules governing prosecutors?
05:10Okay. So, you know, the argument, just to give some context to that, you know,
05:16the argument by the complainant in the Supreme Court decision recently is that
05:20when the DOJ changed the quantum of evidence,
05:23it encroached on the rulemaking authority or power of the Supreme Court as provided in the Constitution.
05:29But, you know, as early as 1997, in fact, in one case,
05:34the Supreme Court already ruled that preliminary investigation is an executive function, not a judicial one.
05:40So, it may be a part of the criminal justice process.
05:43And although the courts will ultimately decide whether or not the person should be held guilty or to be acquitted,
05:49preliminary investigation, which is the first stage of the criminal justice process, is an executive function.
05:55And then later on, you know, 10 years after, 20 years after, rather, from that case in 1997, in 2017,
06:02the Supreme Court terrified that the power to promulgate rules of pleadings, practice, and procedure,
06:08which is its power as courts, is within the court's exclusive domain.
06:13Although, despite this fact, the DOJ, as part of the executive department,
06:19has exclusive rulemaking authority with respect to the prosecutorial process.
06:25So, it's with regard to preliminary investigation, the first stage of the criminal justice process.
06:31So, the decision is very reaffirming.
06:35Okay, recently, we've spoken about a lawyer that challenged the DOJ's circular,
06:40claiming that it encroached on the Supreme Court's power to set rules of procedure.
06:45Just for the benefit of those who did not get a whiff of all of this,
06:49why did the court ultimately reject this argument?
06:54Okay, so, yeah, so, like I said, it's the rulemaking power of the Supreme Court.
06:59No one is contesting that.
07:01That's not what the rulemaking authority of the DOJ to promulgate its own rules for preliminary investigation
07:12is touching on, no?
07:14So, again, we have to make a distinction between the rulemaking power of the Supreme Court
07:18with respect to the practice of law in general, because that's within the judicial domain.
07:26One thing we have to clarify is that the DOJ, on its own, has its rulemaking power
07:32pertaining specifically to preliminary investigation, which is part of the prosecutorial process.
07:38Okay, so, as we know, before a case is filed in court or before an accused is to stand trial,
07:46any complaint against that person has to undergo preliminary investigation
07:50to determine if the evidence is sufficient to stand or to withstand the rigors of trial,
07:56to withstand judicial scrutiny.
07:58So, there is no conflict.
08:00The rulemaking power of the DOJ with that of the Supreme Court or the courts go hand in hand, no?
08:08Okay, raising some possible public interest concerns here, with a higher standard of proof,
08:15is there a possible expectation that fewer cases could be filed in court?
08:20And how might this change affect both the complainants seeking justice
08:24and also accuse individuals facing criminal charges?
08:30Okay, so, we can't really say that it will be expecting fewer cases, per se, no?
08:36But that in the case of DOJ, in cases that we do file in court,
08:43the prosecution will have sharper teeth, so to speak.
08:48So, as I've said earlier, we now have met, more than met, actually,
08:53our institutional targets for higher conviction rates.
08:56So, it's not so much fewer cases we're looking into,
08:59but more meritorious cases being filed, a higher conviction rate for these cases,
09:04so that, at the end of the day, public trust in the criminal justice system
09:09could be reinforced, could be supplemented.
09:14So, it's all in giving the public the reassurance that things are being done
09:19to make sure that the criminal justice system is not as slow as they perceive it to be.
09:25Okay, Attorney Paolo, just for the benefit of those listening as well right now
09:31and other attorneys, how would we make sure that prosecutors
09:35will be bringing to the table the requirement or the possible required threshold needed
09:42just to file these cases in court?
09:46You know, it's really hard to give a specific answer to that
09:49because, again, every case is different.
09:51One guarantee is that when we look at the evidence now,
09:56when prosecutors, like myself, look at the evidence now,
09:59it's through a stricter lens.
10:01Okay, meaning to say that, whereas before, you know, let's make a,
10:05let's just do a comparison.
10:06Probable cause, the definition of which under the law is that
10:11a person, no, I'm just going to truncate the definition for a bit, no?
10:15A person who is suspected of committing a crime is likely to have committed that crime.
10:21So, you know, in the vernacular, yun yung mga,
10:24pupwede na, sige, ipasanan natin to, let's file it.
10:27And then, let's just later on see how it will play out in court.
10:32Now, we're mandated to look at the evidence with stricter lens,
10:40with more in accordance with the technical rules of procedure,
10:44whereas before, when the quantum of proof was probable cause,
10:48we were not bound by strict rules of evidence,
10:50because that's for the courts to adopt or to adhere to.
10:55Again, may mga kasong pupwede na,
10:57iahain, pupwede na yan, di ba?
10:59Just looking at it, let's see how it stands on trial.
11:02And then later on, ultimately, it's found that, okay,
11:06there really was no, the evidence really was not strong enough
11:09to merit a guilty conviction and that the accused,
11:12who was eventually acquitted,
11:14had to withstand all that shame,
11:18all that embarrassment,
11:19all that stress during trial, no?
11:22So now, we're mandated to really scrutinize
11:27and make sure that when the evidence is filed in court,
11:30it's strong enough to merit a guilty conviction.
11:33So it's a lot closer to beyond reasonable doubt.
11:36Okay, thank you for specifying that, Attorney Polo.
11:39At the end of the day,
11:41what is the most important thing that the public
11:43should understand about this new standard
11:46and preliminary investigation?
11:52Um, you know, well, I guess it's that,
11:55as with all things, as with all things, no?
11:57Uh, modifications, as with all changes,
12:00uh, it will take some time for us to see
12:03if there is, um, uh, if there's, uh,
12:06if there are weaknesses to it.
12:08Again, it's a systemic issue.
12:09The whole reason why we changed the quantum of proof
12:12is to address the systemic problem, um,
12:15that has plagued the criminal justice system
12:17for quite some time.
12:19Uh, so, you know, um,
12:21one thing we advise the public
12:22is to just trust in the, in the, in this change,
12:25but to bear with us, um,
12:27in addressing any perceived weaknesses
12:29or holes it may have.
12:30Uh, it's a learning process for us as well.
12:33Um, but at the end of the day,
12:35to trust that the prosecutors
12:37are doing their very best,
12:39uh, and the department is doing its very best
12:41to ensure that, again,
12:43the criminal justice system is not as slow
12:44as people may perceive it to be.
12:47All right, many thanks,
12:48attorney Paolo Martinez,
12:50DOJ spokesperson,
12:51for shedding light on this ruling.
12:53Have a great evening.
12:55Have a good evening.
12:55Good evening.
12:56Good evening.
Comments