Here are important updates in the last couple months based on recent decisions and advisories of the Supreme Court (SC) and circular of the Department of Justice (DOJ):
The filing of complaint before the DOJ stops the prescriptive period for crimes
The SC has clarified that the time limit or prescriptive period for prosecuting crimes, including those under the 2022 Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts (Rules of Expedited Procedures), stops running once a complaint is filed with the DOJ) – not when the case reaches the court.
In People v. Consebido (G.R. No. 258563, April 2, 2025), as written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC En Banc abandoned its rulings in the 2023 cases of Republic v. Desierto and Corpus, Jr. v. People, which previously held that the prescriptive period for crimes covered by the 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure (Rules on Summary Procedure) stops only when the information is filed in court.
In 2022, the Rules on Expedited Procedures replaced the Rules on Summary Procedure, unifying and streamlining the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure and the 2016 Revised Rules on Small Claims Cases. It expanded the coverage of summary procedure to include those crimes punishable by up to one year of imprisonment and fines up to PHP 50,000 (or ₱150,000.00 in cases involving damage to property through criminal negligence). It also provides that criminal cases may be filed either by complaint or information.
In 2024, the DOJ issued its Rules on Summary Investigation and Expedited Preliminary Investigation, which provide that a summary investigation shall be done if the prescribed penalty is imprisonment of up to one year.
Given these developments, the SC clarified that the prescriptive period for crimes is tolled upon the filing of a complaint with the prosecution and the start of the summary investigation.
The SC recognized that while criminal cases should ideally be resolved promptly, delays are sometimes unavoidable. Therefore, the State, as the offended party, should not be disadvantaged by delays in the DOJ’s preliminary investigations, even in criminal cases under summary procedure.
The SC’s ruling on the interruption of the prescriptive period for prosecuting crimes will apply prospectively.
*****
Electronic filing for annulment and nullity of marriage cases, now required
In a recent Resolution (A.M. No. 25-01-13-SC), the SC En Banc expanded Rule 13-A of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which mandates electronic filing and service of pleadings, motions, and other papers in civil cases in first- and second-level courts. Before this change, Rule 13-A did not cover special proceedings like annulment and nullity of marriage cases. The Office of the Court Administrator recommended their inclusion, noting that these cases follow similar procedures to civil actions.
The amendment takes effect after publication of the Resolution on April 24, 2025. Beginning December 1, 2024, all filing and service of pleadings, motions, outgoing court documents, and other papers in civil cases in the trial courts must be done electronically through email, except for initiatory pleadings.
*****
Testimonies of family and friends can prove psychological incapacity
The SC in Green v. Green (G.R. No. 255706, February 17, 2025) has reaffirmed that testimonies from a spouse’s family and friends can help prove psychological incapacity in cases seeking to nullify a marriage.
The SC emphasized that in nullity of marriage cases, psychological incapacity can be evaluated using statements from people other than the spouses, especially from those close to the allegedly incapacitated spouse. This approach helps avoid potential bias from the spouse who filed the petition.
This is a realistic reception of psychological assessments considering that the friends or relatives of the alleged psychologically incapacitated spouse will not be inclined to give hostile testimonies against the latter. According to the SC, unless these testimonies are falsified to favor the petitioning spouse, they should be considered.
Also, the SC reiterated that so long as the totality of the evidence can prove a spouse’s psychological incapacity at the time the marriage was celebrated, the marriage can be nullified under Article 36 of the Family Code.
*****
Photocopies now admissible as evidence in court
In People v. Lastimosa (G.R. No. 265758, February 3, 2025) the SC has ruled that a duplicate or photocopy of original documents, whether in paper or electronic form, can be admitted as evidence in court, provided there is no genuine question regarding the original’s authenticity or fairness in using the copy.
This approach reflects the practical realities of document usage and storage in the modern world, where duplicates are often indistinguishable from originals and can be more accessible.
A photocopy is considered a duplicate as defined under the Revised Rules on Evidence – “a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures, or by mechanical or electronic re-recording, or by chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original.”
However, the SC emphasized that while a photocopy may be admissible, its weight or value depends on how well it corroborates or supports other available evidence.
*****
Highlights of DOJ-NSP Rules on Summary Investigation and Expedited Procedures (Department Circular No. 28 series of 2024)
The recent Circular governs the conduct of investigation of crimes or offenses in the National Prosecution Service of the DOJ where the penalty prescribed by law is one (1) day to six (6) years, fine regardless of the amount, or both.
The quantum of evidence for summary and expedited preliminary investigation is now prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty.
Summary investigation is an ex parte proceeding to determine whether a person should be indicted in court after ascertaining, based on the evidence provided, that there is prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty for the respondent’s conviction and that he/she should be held for trial. This shall be required for crimes or offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is one (1) day to one (1) year, fine, regardless of the amount, or both.
On the other hand, an expedited summary investigation is a proceeding to determine whether a person should be indicted in court, after ascertaining, based on evidence provided, and if necessary, after Case Build-Up, that there is prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty for the respondent’s conviction and that he/she should be held for trial. This shall be required for crimes or offenses where the penalty prescribed by law is one (1) year and one (1) day to six (6) years without regard to fine, or both, if exclusively falling within the jurisdiction of first level courts such as Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, provided that, if the cases are by law cognizable by the Regional Trial Courts, they shall be subjected to regular preliminary investigation or inquest proceedings.
