3. Offer and Objection

OFFER AND OBJECTION

Offer of and objections to testimony in judicial affidavit—

The party presenting the judicial affidavit of his witness in place of direct testimony shall state the purpose of such testimony at the start of the presentation of the witness. The adverse party may move to disqualify the witness or to strike out his affidavit or any of the answers found in it on ground of inadmissibility. The court shall promptly rule on the motion and, if granted, shall cause the marking of any excluded answer by placing it in brackets under the initials of an authorized court personnel, without prejudice to a tender of excluded evidence under Section 40 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court. (JAR, Sec. 6)

Oral offer of and objections to exhibits—

• Upon the termination of the testimony of his last witness, a party shall immediately make an oral offer of evidence of his documentary or object exhibits, piece by piece, in their chronological order, stating the purpose or purposes for which he offers the particular exhibit.
• After each piece of exhibit is offered, the adverse party shall state the legal ground for his objection, if any, to its admission, and the court shall immediately make its ruling respecting that exhibit.
• Since the documentary or object exhibits form part of the judicial affidavits that describe and authenticate them, it is sufficient that such exhibits are simply cited by their markings during the offers, the objections, and the rulings, dispensing with the description of each exhibit. (JAR, Sec. 8)

Motion to postpone due for absence of evidence no longer allowed. (provision was deleted in revised rules)

Section 6. Oral offer of exhibits. — The offer of evidence, the comment or objection thereto, and the court ruling shall be made orally in accordance with Sections 34 to 40 of Rule 132. (n)

Purpose of Offer

Formal offer is necessary because it is the duty of the judge to rest his findings of facts and his judgment only and strictly upon the evidence offered by the parties at the trial. (Candido v. CA, G.R. No. 107493, 1996)

The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified because such evidence may be admissible for several purposes under the doctrine of multiple admissibility, or may be admissible for one purpose and not for another; otherwise the adverse party cannot interpose the proper objection. Evidence submitted for one purpose may not be considered for any other purpose. (Catuira v. CA, G.R. No. 105813, 1994)

NOTE: A party who has offered evidence is NOT entitled as a matter of right to withdraw it on finding that it does not answer his purpose.

NOTE: A party who calls for the production of a document and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence. (Rule 130, sec. 9)

NOTE: A party has the option of not offering into evidence the evidence identified at the trial and marked as an exhibit

NOTE: The mere fact that a particular document is identified and marked as an exhibit does not mean it will be or has been offered as part of the evidence of the party. The party may decide to formally offer it if it believes this will advance its cause, and then again it may decide not to do so at all. (Interpacific Transit v. Aviles, G.R. No. 86062, 1990)

There are instances when the Court relaxed the foregoing rule and allowed evidence not formally offered to be admitted. Citing People v. Napat-a and People. v. Mate, the Court in Heirs of Romana Saves, et al., v. Heirs of Escolastico Saves, et al. (G.R. No. 152866, 2010), enumerated the requirements for the evidence to be considered despite failure to formally offer it, namely: “first, the same must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded and, second, the same must have been incorporated in the records of the case.”

In People v. Vivencio De Roxas et al. (G.R. No. L16947, 1962), the Court also considered exhibits which were not formally offered by the prosecution but were repeatedly referred to in the course of the trial by the counsel of the accused.

In the instant case, the Court finds that the above requisites are attendant to warrant the relaxation of the rule and admit the evidence of the petitioners not formally offered. As can be seen in the records of the case, the petitioners were able to present evidence that have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded. To identify is to prove the identity of a person or a thing. Identification means proof of identity; the proving that a person, subject or article before the court is the very same that he or it is alleged, charged or reputed to be. (Rodolfo Laborte, et al. v. Pagsanjan Tourism Consumers’ Cooperative, et al., G.R. No. 183860, 2014)