December 9, 2020

A.M. No. 20-12-01-SC

RE: PROPOSED GUIDELINES ON THE CONDUCT OF VIDEOCONFERENCING

WHEREAS, the Supreme Court, under Section 5 (5), Article VIII of the
1987 Constitution, is vested with the power to "promulgate rules concerning
the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice,
and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the
Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged";
WHEREAS, pursuant to this power, the Supreme Court authorized "the
presentation of testimonial evidence by electronic means" in both civil and
criminal cases under the Rules on Electronic Evidence; 1 and the use of live-
link television testimony in criminal cases where the witness or the victim is
a child under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness; 2
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court, recognizing the wide acceptance of
"the use of videoconferencing technology" for "the remote appearance or
testimony of the parties in court proceedings," approved the Guidelines on
the Use of Videoconferencing Technology for the Remote Appearance and
Testimony of Certain Persons Deprived of Liberty (PDLs) in Jails and National
Penitentiaries, which is being pilot tested between the Davao City Hall of
Justice and Davao City Jail beginning September 1, 2019, "for a period of not
more than two (2) years"; 3
WHEREAS, in March 2020, the Novel Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19)
pandemic caused the declaration of states of public health emergency and
calamity and the imposition of community quarantine in varying degrees
across the country, resulting in reduced court operations, suspension of
hearings nationwide, except on urgent matters, and the physical closure of
courts;
WHEREAS, in order to address the effects of the restraint on the
movement and travel of court users for court proceedings, the Supreme
Court designated pilot courts that were authorized to conduct hearings
through videoconferencing, both in criminal and civil cases, through several
issuances, 4 specifically indicated to apply only during the duration of the
public health emergency;
WHEREAS, even with the gradual easing out of community lockdowns,
videoconferencing continued to be adopted as a mode of conducting court
proceedings;
WHEREAS, considering the commendable results of the use of
videoconferencing in pilot court stations, the Supreme Court issued
Memorandum Order No. 40-2020 dated May 29, 2020 creating the Special
Committee on Virtual Hearings and Electronic Testimony (Special
Committee) tasked, among other matters, to propose guidelines for the
conduct of videoconferencing which shall be applicable even after the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 current public health emergency ceases;
WHEREAS, in criminal cases, there is a need to ensure that the
constitutional rights of the accused are safeguarded during
videoconferencing; and
WHEREAS, the Special Committee on Virtual Hearings and Electronic
Testimony is composed of the following members:

Chairperson : Hon. Diosdado M. Peralta

Chief Justice

Vice/Working : Hon. Alexander G. Gesmundo

Chairperson Associate Justice, Supreme Court

Members : Hon. Henri Jean Paul B. Inting

Associate Justice, Supreme Court

Hon. Rodil V. Zalameda

Associate Justice, Supreme Court

Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez

Court Administrator

Hon. Maria Theresa Dolores C.

Gomez-Estoesta
Associate Justice, Sandiganbayan

Hon. Sarah Jane T. Fernandez

Associate Justice, Sandiganbayan

Hon. Raul B. Villanueva

Deputy Court Administrator

Atty. Jed Sherwin G. Uy

Representative, Office of the Chief Justice

Mr. Joselito N. Enriquez

Officer-in-Charge, Management
Information Systems Office

Secretariat : Atty. Ralph Jerome D. Salvador

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 Office of Chief Justice Diosdado M. Peralta

Atty. Antonio Ceasar R. Manila

Office of Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo

Atty. Camille Sue Mae L. Ting

Office of the Court Administrator

WHEREAS, as per Memorandum Order No. 40-A-2020 dated June 15,

2020, the Technical Working Group of the Special Committee on Virtual
Hearings and Electronic Testimony was created to fast-track the preparation
of a working draft comprised of the following members:

Chairperson : Hon. Rodil V. Zalameda

Associate Justice, Supreme Court

Vice-Chairperson : Hon. Henri Jean Paul B. Inting

Associate Justice, Supreme Court

Members : Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez

Court Administrator

Hon. Raul B. Villanueva

Deputy Court Administrator

Atty. Jed Sherwin G. Uy

Representative, Office of the Chief
Justice

Mr. Joselito N. Enriquez

Officer-in-Charge, Management
Information Systems Office

Atty. Ralph Jerome D. Salvador

Office of Chief Justice Diosdado M.
Peralta

Atty. Antonio Ceasar R. Manila

Office of Justice Alexander G.
Gesmundo

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

 Atty. Camille Sue Mae L. Ting
Office of the Court Administrator

NOW, THEREFORE, acting on the recommendation of Chief Justice

Diosdado M. Peralta, as the Chairperson of the Special Committee, the Court
resolves to APPROVE the following Guidelines on the Conduct of
Videoconferencing.

(SGD.) DIOSDADO M. PERALTA

Chief Justice

(SGD.) ESTELA M. PERLAS-BERNABE

Associate Justice

(SGD.) MARVIC M.V.F. LEONEN

Associate Justice

(SGD.) ALFREDO BENJAMIN S. CAGUIOA

Associate Justice

(SGD.) ALEXANDER G. GESMUNDO

Associate Justice

(SGD.) RAMON PAUL L. HERNANDO

Associate Justice

(SGD.) ROSMARI D. CARANDANG

Associate Justice

(SGD.) AMY C. LAZARO-JAVIER

Associate Justice

(SGD.) HENRI JEAN PAUL B. INTING

Associate Justice

(SGD.) RODIL V. ZALAMEDA

Associate Justice

(SGD.) MARIO V. LOPEZ

Associate Justice

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

 (SGD.) EDGARDO L. DELOS SANTOS
Associate Justice

(SGD.) SAMUEL H. GAERLAN

Associate Justice

(SGD.) RICARDO R. ROSARIO

Associate Justice

ATTACHMENT
Guidelines on the Conduct of Videoconferencing
I. Preliminary Provisions
1. Policy
(a) The conduct of videoconferencing shall be considered as an
alternative mode to in-court proceedings, which remains to be
the primary mode in hearing cases.
(b) The presiding judge or justice shall, at all times, supervise and
control the proceedings.
(c) The conduct of videoconferencing shall closely resemble in-
court hearings, with remote locations viewed as extensions of the
courtroom. The dignity and solemnity required in an in-court
hearing, as well as the rules and practices on proper court
decorum, shall be strictly observed. 1 Perjury and contempt laws
shall apply.
(d) The rights of the accused to be present and defend in person at
every stage of the proceedings, to testify as a witness in his or
her own behalf, and to confront and cross-examine the witness
against him or her at trial, are deemed observed when such
appearance and/or testimony are done remotely through
videoconferencing under these Guidelines with his or her
consent.
(e) The confidentiality of attorney-client communications shall
always be preserved. The litigants and their counsel participating
in a videoconferencing shall be provided with private means of
communication whenever necessary.
(f) The Rules of Court shall continue to be observed during
videoconferencing, except with regard to the requirement that
witnesses shall give testimony in open court under Section 1,
Rule 132 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, as well as other
special rules or issuances of the Supreme Court.
(g) When any party such as the accused Persons Deprived of
Liberty (PDLs) invoke their constitutional right, including their
right to confront witnesses in person at any stage of the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 proceeding, the court shall grant the same and suspend the
videoconferencing, unless denial is warranted by a compelling
state interest or public policy, as may be determined by the
justice or judge.
2. Definition of Terms
(a) Videoconferencing — court hearings and proceedings, including
the taking of testimony, conducted through videoconferencing
technology, or the use of video, audio, and data transmission
devices to allow participants in different physical locations to
simultaneously communicate by seeing and hearing each other. 2
Videoconferencing hearings can be fully or partially remote:
i. Fully-remote videoconferencing hearings —
videoconferencing where none of the participants is
physically present in court, as all participants appear from
remote locations using the authorized platform.
ii. Partially-remote videoconferencing hearings —
videoconferencing where at least one of the participants
appears physically in court, while the others appear from
remote locations using the authorized platform.
(b) Participants — includes litigants, counsel, testifying witnesses,
judges, justices, essential court staff, 3 and other interpreters.
(c) Compelling state interest — a valid or legitimate interest of the
State so paramount as to justify limiting or subordinating the
constitutionally-protected rights of the accused. 4
(d) Public policy — principles and standards regarded by the
legislature or courts as being of fundamental concern to the state
and the whole of society. 5
(e) High-risk PDL — a PDL who is:
i. charged with violation/s of laws penalizing terrorism and
terrorism-related offenses;
ii. charged with violation/s of laws penalizing crimes against
international humanitarian law, genocide, and other crimes
against humanity; or
iii. considered a "high-value target" because of the
considerable threat he or she poses to the security of the
jail facilities, the court, or the community, the risk of escape
or attempted escape, and other safety and welfare
considerations in transporting him or her to and from the jail
and courtroom. This includes, but is not limited to,
suspected members of local and foreign terrorist groups,
and drug and other organized crime syndicates.
(f) Consecutive interpretation — mode of interpreting in which the
speaker talks while the interpreter takes notes. The interpreter
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 then reproduces what the speaker has said for the audience. 6

(g) Other interpreters — includes foreign language, local dialect,

and sign-language interpreters, other than court official
interpreters.
(h) Shared document repository 7 — shared electronic storage
space that can be accessed by authorized participants.
(i) Virtual lobby or waiting area — virtual space where participants
wait before they are admitted to the videoconferencing by the
court, as the host.
3. Coverage and Applicability
(a) Courts covered by the Guidelines. — These Guidelines shall
govern the conduct of videoconferencing before the first and
second level courts, Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, and Court
of Tax Appeals.
(b) Cases covered by the Guidelines. — These Guidelines shall apply
to all actions and proceedings, including small claims cases, in
whatever stage thereof, as provided in the Rules of Court when,
based on the attending circumstances, the court finds that the
conduct of videoconferencing will be beneficial to the fair,
speedy, and efficient administration of justice, such as in the
following instances:
i. Acts of God, such as typhoons, floods, earthquakes, or other
unforeseen events, and human-induced events, such as
fires, strikes, lockdowns, those which limit physical access
to the courts, and other instances posing threats to the
security and safety of the courts and/or personnel;
ii. Periods of public emergencies officially declared by the
concerned agency of the government;
iii. The inability or difficulty of a litigant, witness, or counsel to
physically appear in court due to security risks in his or her
transport in going to and from the court, real and apparent
danger to his or her life, security or safety, serious health
concerns, vulnerability of the witness due to age, physical
condition, disability, or the fact that he or she is a victim of
a sexual offense or domestic violence;
iv. When the litigant or witness is a high-risk PDL, as defined
under these Guidelines;
v. When the litigant or witness is a PDL committed in a
detention facility, 8 or a Child in Conflict with the Law (CICL)
under A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC 9 committed in a center or
facility operated or accredited by the Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD);
vi. When the presence of a government agency witness 10 or
an expert witness 11 is required but for justifiable grounds,
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 he or she cannot attend an in-court hearing;
vii. When a litigant or witness is an Overseas Filipino Worker
or Filipino residing abroad or temporarily outside the
Philippines;
viii. When a litigant or witness is a non-resident foreign
national who, while in the Philippines, was involved in any
action pending before any court, and would like to appear
and/or testify remotely from overseas;
ix. When, based on the sound judgment of the court, there are
compelling reasons that justify the resort to
videoconferencing; and
x. Such other circumstances or grounds that may hereafter be
declared by the Supreme Court as sufficient to justify the
conduct of videoconferencing.
(c) These Guidelines shall be applicable during the duration of the
current pandemic and thereafter, unless revoked or modified by
the Supreme Court.
II. General Procedure
1. Immediate order for the conduct of videoconferencing. — In the
instances covered under Item I (3) (b) (i), (ii), (iv), (v), and (x), the court may
motu proprio order that hearings or proceedings be conducted through
videoconferencing. High-risk PDLs under Item I (3) (b) (iv) shall exclude
those considered as "high-value targets," which shall be the subject of a
motion under the next paragraph.
2. Videoconferencing initiated by motion of a party. — A party or
counsel may, by motion, request that the proceedings be conducted via
videoconferencing. To expedite the resolution of motions to conduct
hearings through videoconferencing based on Item I (3) (b) (iii), (vi) to (ix),
the movant shall file it electronically and/or personally with the court,
serving a copy on the adverse litigant by the same means, at least ten (10)
calendar days before the scheduled hearing dates.
a. Contents of the motion. — The motion to conduct hearings
through videoconferencing must include the following:
(i) the grounds being invoked by the movant;
(ii) documentary and object evidence to support the grounds
being invoked;
(iii) the proceedings proposed to be conducted through
videoconferencing;
(iv) the names of the witnesses to be presented and the
summaries of their testimonies;
(v) the expected location of each participant;
(vi) the e-mail addresses of the concerned litigants, their
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 counsel, and the witnesses to be presented;
(vii) special requirements necessary for the specific
videoconferencing, if any, such as specialized software for
the presentation of videos, and the like; and
(viii) statement that the movant and the intended witnesses
are technically ready to participate in the
videoconferencing.
b. Comment on or opposition to the motion. — The adverse litigants
shall file within five (5) calendar days from receipt of the motion
their comment or opposition, which shall be filed and served
electronically and/or personally.
c. Court's action on the motion. — The court shall resolve the
motion within five (5) calendar days before the scheduled
videoconferencing, with or without the comment or opposition
from the adverse litigant.
Should the court grant the motion, it shall issue an order, to be
served electronically, containing the following matters:
(i) the date and time of the videoconferencing;
(ii) the proceedings covered;
(iii) the names of the witnesses and the nature of their
testimonies;
(iv) the expected location of each participant;
(v) the software or platform to be used for the
videoconferencing;
(vi) the e-mail addresses of the participants as reflected in
court records and to be used for the purpose of the
videoconferencing, with notice that said e-mail addresses
are deemed valid unless the concerned participant informs
the court of any changes thereto at least three (3) calendar
days before the scheduled videoconferencing hearing; and
(vii) such other matters as may be necessary to define the
parameters of the videoconferencing.
Should the court deny the motion, in-court hearings shall proceed
as scheduled.
The order of the court granting or denying the motion for
videoconferencing shall not be subject to a motion for
reconsideration, appeal or certiorari, except on constitutional
grounds.
3. Electronic filing and service of pleadings and court submissions.
— Electronic filing and service of pleadings shall be governed by the relevant
provisions of the Rules of Court and pertinent or relevant issuances of the
Supreme Court.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 4. No cancellation of scheduled videoconferencing hearings. —
Except on meritorious grounds, the justice or judge shall not cancel
scheduled videoconferencing hearings.
5. Orders and actions issued during videoconferencing. — The court
shall issue its orders during the videoconferencing as if done in open court.
Such orders shall have the same effect for purposes of periods and remedies
that may be availed of by the litigants. On the same day, the court shall
send electronic copies of said open court orders to the litigants and their
counsel. The court shall produce hard copies of the order, which shall form
part of the records of the case.
6. Minutes of videoconferencing hearings. — It is sufficient that the
minutes of the videoconferencing hearings is signed by the clerk of court,
which shall form part of the records of the case.
A. Pre-Hearing Preparations
1. Official software or platform for videoconferencing. — Courts
shall conduct videoconferencing by using only the secure software or
platform authorized and provided by the Supreme Court, which contains or
integrates the official e-mail accounts of the courts and an application to
host the virtual hearings, with the capacity to record and store the same.
2. Sufficient time to prepare equipment and facilities for
videoconferencing. — Sufficient time shall be given by the court to allow
court personnel and the participants appearing remotely to test in advance
the system to be used, to resolve technical problems, and to ensure proper
and clear audio-video connection. For this purpose, the court shall ensure
that there are no technical issues regarding the conduct of the
videoconferencing at least one (1) day before the scheduled
videoconferencing hearing.
3. Notices, invitations and links for videoconferencing. — The
following shall be observed prior to a videoconferencing:
a. The court shall send out to all concerned participants' respective
e-mail addresses the invitation or link to the videoconferencing at
least twenty-four (24) hours before the scheduled hearing.
Separate invitations or links shall be sent for morning and
afternoon videoconferencing sessions.
b. Upon receipt of the invitation or link, participants shall
immediately respond to the invite or send an acknowledgment e-
mail confirming the receipt of the link to the videoconferencing.
Proofs of receipt of the invitations shall be properly recorded by
the court.
c. Any participant who has not received an invitation or link at least
twenty-four (24) hours before the scheduled videoconferencing,
or who cannot access it shall immediately inform the court of
such fact through e-mail, phone call, or other electronic means.
d. The invitation or link must be treated with strict confidentiality
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 and shall not be shared by its recipient with any other person.
However, in the case of counsel, if they are unable to participate
in the scheduled videoconferencing and have to be substituted by
another, they must inform the court at least twenty-four (24)
hours before the scheduled hearing so the court may notify the
substitute counsel. The unauthorized sharing of the invitation or
link may be considered a contempt of court.
e. Participants appearing remotely must be at the virtual or waiting
lobby at least twenty (20) minutes before the scheduled
videoconferencing.
4. Technical personnel in remote locations. — Where litigants and
witnesses are testifying from remote locations, there must be technical
personnel present in these remote locations to assist and address technical
issues that may arise during the videoconference. In the absence of
technical personnel, the litigants or witnesses testifying remotely shall
assure the court of their capability to address technical issues.
5. Public access to videoconferencing hearings. 12 — Any individual
who wishes to attend a videoconferencing hearing shall send a request to
the concerned court at least three (3) days before the scheduled hearing
through the court's official email address and provide the following
information:
a. Full name;
b. E-mail address;
c. Contact number;
d. Scanned copy of a government-issued ID bearing his or her
photograph and signature; and
e. Interest in attending the videoconferencing hearing. 13
The court shall send the invitation or link to the videoconference
through e-mail at least twenty-four (24) hours before the scheduled hearing.
The invitation or link must be treated with strict confidentiality and shall not
be shared by its recipient with any other person. The unauthorized sharing
of its details and information may be considered a contempt of court.
Individuals must be at the virtual or waiting lobby at least twenty (20)
minutes before the scheduled videoconferencing.
The court shall have the discretion to refuse access if it finds that the
information given is erroneous or fictitious. It may, likewise, exclude the
public when the evidence to be adduced is of such nature as to require their
exclusion in the interest of morality or decency 14 or when a child witness
will testify. 15 The court may immediately order an individual's removal from
a videoconferencing hearing to protect and preserve the dignity and
solemnity of the proceedings.
B. Hearing Proper
1. Location of justices or judges, and court personnel during
videoconferencing. — Justices or judges shall preside over, while court
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 personnel shall attend, videoconferencing hearings from the courtroom or
chambers at all times. In exceptional circumstances, and with prior
permission from the Presiding Justice or Executive Justices of the Court of
Appeals, justices may conduct videoconferencing from remote locations
within their territorial jurisdictions. Sandiganbayan and Court of Tax Appeals
justices, with prior permission from the Presiding Justices, may likewise
conduct videoconferencing from remote locations. For trial court judges, with
prior permission from the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), they may
preside or attend from remote locations, provided they do so within their
court's judicial region.
In all cases, said permission shall be reflected or stated in any order to
be issued by the court during the videoconferencing hearing.
2. Location of interpreter. — An interpreter other than the court
interpreter participating in a videoconference may either be co-located with
the remote witness, in court, or in another remote location. When the
interpreter participates from a remote location, the technical arrangements,
including acoustics and quality of sound, in such remote location shall be
tested beforehand to ensure that the interpretation will be properly
understood by all participants.
3. Use of earphones or headsets. — Participants are encouraged to
use earphones or headsets during videoconferencing, unless the courtroom
or remote locations from which they participate have dedicated
videoconferencing solutions with noise cancellation features in place.
4. Videoconferencing colloquy and protocol for speaking and
technical difficulties. — At the beginning of the videoconferencing, the court
shall conduct a colloquy with the participants appearing remotely (see Annex
A). It shall also inform the participants of the protocol for speaking, which
includes the order in which the participants shall be speaking, procedures for
interrupting another participant, raising objections during the hearing, and
conferring privately with counsel. When interpretation is to be used,
participants shall be instructed to speak at an appropriate pace and to
articulate and project their voice.
Participants shall also be informed of the procedure that the courts
shall adopt for alerting the presiding justice or judge of any technical
difficulties encountered during the hearing.
5. Virtual inspection of remote locations. — At the start of the
videoconferencing hearing, the court shall require participants at remote
locations to pan their cameras across the room to demonstrate that they are
alone in the room, the windows and doors are closed, and there are no
unauthorized means of communication available to them. This is to ensure
that there will be no coaching or disturbance that may affect the
proceedings. In the case of child witnesses, the court may allow them to
testify in the presence of the persons enumerated in Section 25 (g) (1) of
A.M. No. 004-07-SC.
6. Indication in case records of the conduct of videoconferencing
and the locations of participants. — The conduct of videoconferencing and
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 the respective locations of the participants shall be indicated in the case
records. Court orders issued during the videoconferencing hearings shall
reflect such facts, including any inconvenience or difficulty experienced, and
technical issues encountered which might affect the regularity of the
proceedings.
7. View and sound of speaking participants. — Participants speaking
or testifying must always be seen from a frontal angle and heard clearly by
all the other participants. In all cases, the videoconferencing hearing shall be
conducted in such a way that will not impede the court from exercising its
crucial role in determining the credibility of the witnesses and their
testimonies notwithstanding the remote observation of the latter's
demeanor, conduct, and attitude during the taking of their electronic
testimonies.
8. Recording the videoconferencing hearing. — The proceedings
through videoconferencing shall be recorded by the court. It shall form part
of the records of the case, appending thereto relevant electronic documents
taken up or issued during the hearing. An encrypted master copy shall be
retained by the court, while a backup copy shall be stored in a safe location.
Litigants and their counsel may be allowed to view the recording upon
application with and approval of the court. The court stenographer or other
recorder authorized for the purpose shall, nonetheless, still transcribe
stenographic notes to be attached to the records of the case.
Participants and other persons attending videoconferencing hearings
are strictly prohibited from recording any portion of the proceedings through
any means. Any unauthorized recording shall be considered a contempt of
court, and must be permanently deleted or surrendered to the court for
disposal.
9. Signing of documents during videoconferencing. — The OCA shall
issue guidelines concerning the digital signing of documents during
videoconferencing.
10. Suspension or discontinuance of videoconferencing. — The
court may, at any point during the videoconferencing, suspend the
proceedings should any technical issue tending to taint the regularity or
fairness of the proceedings arise. Should the said technical issue remain
unresolved despite efforts to fix the same, the court may altogether
discontinue the proceedings. The same action shall be taken when matters
arise warranting the physical appearance of a litigant or witness in the
courtroom. In all cases, the reason/s for the suspension or discontinuance
shall be reflected in an order to be issued by the court.
C. Presentation of Evidence
1. Documentary evidence and judicial affidavits. — Subject to the
provisions of the Rules on Evidence and of the Rules of Civil Procedure, for
purposes of these Guidelines, documentary evidence and judicial affidavits,
including attachments thereto, unless already part of the records of the
case, shall be filed and served at least three (3) calendar days prior to the
scheduled videoconferencing.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 Colored and legible electronic copies of these documents shall also be
made available through e-mail or the shared document repository of the
court, to ensure that all concerned participants receive the exact copies,
uneditable by any of them.
During the videoconferencing, the court may direct a counsel to share
documentary evidence on-screen. Means shall be provided for sharing and
viewing these documents for purposes of marking, authenticating and
presenting them, such as through document cameras, digital screen-sharing
function of the videoconferencing software or platform, and other electronic
means.
Should the exhibition, examination or viewing of the documentary
evidence be rendered impossible, insufficient or difficult by the limitations of
the platform or for some other compelling reasons, in-court hearings may
instead be ordered by the court for the purpose of presenting or completing
the testimony of a witness.
2. Object evidence. — Object evidence may be presented during
videoconferencing if the same can be exhibited to, examined or viewed by
all participants, by displaying the object on the screen, or physically showing
it to the witness testifying thereto at his or her location within full view of the
participants.
Should the marking of exhibits or the examination of the object
evidence be rendered impossible, insufficient or difficult by the limitations of
the platform or for some other reasons, the court may direct that in-court
hearings be held instead for the purpose of presenting the same for marking
or identification, presenting or completing the testimony of the witness.
3. Use of interpretation during videoconferencing. — Where
interpretation is required during videoconferencing, the court shall require
consecutive interpretation in the taking of testimonial evidence. The
interpreter shall always have a clear frontal view of all participants who will
be speaking to allow him or her to observe lip movements, expressions and
other non-verbal communications, avoid ambiguity and provide more
accurate interpretation. The interpreter may move to interrupt the
proceedings if the language becomes inaudible or the video unclear.
4. Private communications between litigants and counsel. — When
litigants and their counsel are not present at the same location during
videoconferencing, they shall be permitted to confer privately without the
other participants overhearing them through the provision of means such as
secure phone lines, separate meeting rooms within the videoconferencing
platform, and other suitable electronic means.
III. Additional Procedure in Criminal Cases
1. Motion to conduct videoconferencing by the warden. — In cases
involving high-risk PDLs alleged to be high value targets and those with
serious health conditions, the motion to conduct videoconferencing may be
filed by the jail warden of the jail or detention facility where the concerned
PDLs are being detained or held.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 When the videoconferencing is intended to allow an accused PDL to
testify or attend the proceedings, the motion may be granted ex parte by the
court.
2. Notices and service to PDLs and CICL. — Notices and service of
pleadings, motions, and other court papers to PDLs may be sent to the
official e-mail address provided by the person in charge of the detention
center or jail facility where the PDLs are currently being held or detained.
With respect to CICL committed in a center or facility operated or accredited
by the DSWD, notices may be sent to the official e-mail address of the
person in charge of the center or facility where they are committed.
3. PDLs and CICL appearing from remote locations. — PDLs
participating remotely shall appear from an enclosed room in the detention
center or jail facility where they are being detained or held. Jail facilities and
detention centers shall ensure that they have sufficient rooms, equipment,
and facilities appropriate for videoconferencing, even when such
proceedings need to be conducted simultaneously by different courts. In the
case of CICL committed in a center or facility operated or accredited by the
DSWD, they shall testify from an enclosed room in such center or facility.
4. Location of counsel for PDLs and CICL. — At the option of PDLs
and CICL, which choice shall be made on record at the start of the
videoconference, their counsel may be physically present with them at the
jail facility or detention center, in court, or in other remote locations. PDLs
and CICL and their counsel shall be provided with facilities or means to
privately communicate with each other throughout the videoconferencing.
5. Certificate of arraignment. — It is sufficient that the clerk of court
issues a certification that the accused was arraigned, personally entered a
plea of guilty or not guilty, or refused to enter a plea, as the case may be.
6. Promulgation of judgment. — If decisions or judgments are
promulgated through videoconferencing with the accused as participants,
said accused shall enjoy all the remedies available to them and within the
period provided under the Rules of Court, as if they were physically present
in court during promulgation.
IV. Additional Procedure for Videoconferencing for Overseas
Filipino Workers, Filipinos Residing Abroad or Temporarily
Outside the Philippines, and Non-resident Foreign Nationals
1. Videoconferencing from Philippine embassies or consulates. —
Litigants and witnesses who are Overseas Filipino Workers, Filipinos residing
abroad or temporarily outside the Philippines, or non-resident foreign
nationals who would like to participate or testify through videoconferencing
may do so upon proper motion with the court where the case is pending.
Such videoconferencing may be conducted only from an embassy or
consulate of the Philippines.
Philippine embassies and consulates shall conduct videoconferencing
in accordance with the technical and operational standards laid out in these
Guidelines.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 2. General procedure applicable. — The general procedure outlined
in these Guidelines shall be applicable insofar as these are not inconsistent
with the provisions under this section.
3. Motion for videoconferencing. — The motion shall be filed by the
litigants interested to avail of videoconferencing.
The same requirements for the contents of the motion under Item II (2)
(a) of these Guidelines shall apply, with the additional requirement that the
concerned embassy or consulate of the Philippines has allowed the use of its
facilities for videoconferencing. When the assistance of an interpreter is
needed in the videoconferencing, the movant shall secure the services of the
official interpreter of the Philippine embassy or consulate.
4. Embassy or consulate to be furnished with a copy of the court
order. — Should the court grant the motion for videoconferencing, it shall
also furnish the concerned Philippine embassy or consulate, by the fastest
means available, a copy of the said order.
5. Costs of videoconferencing from a Philippine embassy or
consulate. — The movant shall defray all the expenses and costs that may be
necessary for the conduct of videoconferencing from an embassy or
consulate of the Philippines.
V. Facilities, Equipment and Training for Videoconferencing
1. Minimum requirements for technology, facilities and equipment.
— The technology, facilities and equipment to be used must be of such
quality as to allow the conduct of videoconferencing as prescribed by these
Guidelines. These must allow the participants to clearly observe the
demeanor, non-verbal communications, and facial expressions of the other
participants, and see and hear what is taking place in the courtroom and
remote locations.
For this purpose, courtrooms shall be equipped with laptops and/or
computers, video cameras, microphones, speakers, high definition monitors,
printer-scanners, and other facilities needed for documentary and object
evidence, sufficient in specifications, size, number, and placement.
Jail facilities and detention centers shall likewise ensure that they have
sufficient equipment and facilities appropriate for videoconferencing, even
when such proceedings need to be conducted simultaneously by different
courts.
2. Telephone lines and internet connectivity . — Courts shall be
provided with telephone lines and internet connectivity of sufficient
bandwidth to support the conduct of simultaneous videoconferencing
hearings in accordance with these Guidelines.
3. Room set-up and layout. — The courts, agencies or local
government units managing the penal institutions and/or detention centers,
and other participants to videoconferencing hearings shall ensure that the
layout, lighting, acoustics, furniture design and décor of the courtroom and
remote locations, as the case may be, are optimal and appropriate for
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 videoconferencing purposes.
4. Technical personnel . — There shall be dedicated technical
personnel in the court to maintain, troubleshoot, and repair
videoconferencing equipment and manage internet connectivity.
5. Technical Training . — Justices, judges and concerned court
personnel shall undergo orientation seminar workshops on these Guidelines,
and the basic and essential features of the videoconferencing software or
platform and equipment.
VI. Gross Misconduct in Videoconferencing
Any intentional disruption of digital communications intended to deny
participation by any party, coaching of any witness presented for
examination, and knowingly presenting falsified digital images or evidence
shall be considered as gross misconduct and shall be dealt with severely.
VII. Repealing Clause
All prior Supreme Court issuances inconsistent with these Guidelines
are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
VIII. Transitory Provisions
1. Courts shall continue to conduct videoconferencing using
available facilities, equipment, computers, gadgets and devices, until such
time that those prescribed under these Guidelines are available.
2. The Management Information Systems Office of the Supreme
Court and the Management Information Systems Divisions of the tertiary
courts shall ensure that the internet connections of their concerned courts
are suitable for videoconferencing as contemplated under these Guidelines,
and shall make the necessary recommendation for the procurement of
higher quality internet connections or upgrading of bandwidth when needed.
IX. Reporting and Review
The OCA shall set a mechanism in place for the reporting of the
experience, issues, and challenges encountered by the courts, participants,
and other stakeholders in the conduct of videoconferencing, for the regular
review and improvement of these Guidelines.
X. Posting
These Guidelines shall be posted in every courtroom and floor of all
halls of justice nationwide, the Supreme Court website, Office of the Court
Administrator website, websites of the tertiary courts, and offices of
concerned government agencies, penal institutions and detention centers,
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and other Bar associations.
XI. Effectivity
These Guidelines shall take effect on January 16, 2021, following its
publication in two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

ANNEX A
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 Videoconferencing Colloquy 1
To guarantee the rights of litigants and protect the court records, the court
shall follow these procedures on the record at the start of each videoconferencing
hearing:
1. Justice/Judge should identify the persons appearing remotely and
then identify themselves and their court.
2. Questions for defendant:
a. "Can you hear me?"
b. "Can you see me?"
c. "If, at any time, there is a problem with your ability to hear or
see what is happening in this videoconferencing hearing, you
are to immediately inform the court by unmuting yourself and
saying so."
d. "Do you understand that you are testifying in connection with
[Case title and Case Number] today by means of
videoconferencing before a court of law?"
e. "Do you object to the use of videoconferencing in making your
testimony?" If yes, the court needs to rule on that objection.
f. "Even though your testimony and participation in this case is
occurring from a remote location, the same rules apply as if you
were physically present in court."
g. "Who is in the room with you at this time?"
h. "If at any time anyone in your room, other than your counsel,
tells you what to say or tries to influence your answers in any
way, you are to immediately inform the court."
i. "If, at any time, during this hearing you would like to speak with
your lawyer, please let the court know and I/we will give you the
opportunity to privately confer with him/her."
3. Remind the participants and other persons attending the
videoconferencing of the prohibition against photographing,
recording, and rebroadcasting of the court proceedings. Violations of
these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including contempt of
court.
4. Identify for those appearing from a remote location any person in the
courtroom who may not be visible to them. If the litigant or counsel
wishes to see a particular individual, the court shall accommodate the
request if appropriate.
5. Determine on record whether the equipment to be used and the
remote location(s) meet the minimum standards for
videoconferencing under the Guidelines approved by the Supreme
Court.

Footnotes

1. July 17, 2001 and September 24, 2002 Resolutions in A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC (Rules
on Electronic Evidence).
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 2. November 21, 2000 Resolution in A.M. No. 004-07-SC (Rule on Examination of a
Child Witness).
3. June 25, 2019 Resolution in A.M. No. 19-05-05-SC (Re: Proposed Guidelines on
the Use of Videoconferencing Technology for the Remote Appearance or
Testimony of Certain Persons Deprived of Liberty in Jails and National
Penitentiaries).
4. Administrative Circular (A.C.) No. 37-2020 dated April 27, 2020; OCA Circular No.
93-2020 dated May 4, 2020; A.C. No. 39-2020 dated May 14, 2020; and A.C.
No. 41-2020 dated May 29, 2020.

ATTACHMENT

1. Based on Sub-item 3, Item I (General Provisions), Proposed Guidelines on the Use

of Videoconferencing Technology for the Remote Appearance or Testimony of
Certain PDLs (A.M. No. 19-05-05-SC).
2. Definition of "Videoconferencing" under Item III, Proposed Guidelines on the Use
of Videoconferencing Technology for the Remote Appearance or Testimony of
Certain PDLs (A.M. No. 19-05-05-SC).
3. Based on WI Stat § 885.52 (2) (2013 through Act 380).

4. See Uphaus v. Wyman, 360 U.S. 72, 79 (1959); NAACP v. Button , 371 U.S. 415,
438 (1963); Sherbert v. Verner , 374 U.S. 398, 406 (1963); Maryland v. Craig,
497 U.S. 386 (1990) (a State's interest in the physical and psychological well-
being of child abuse victims may be sufficiently important to outweigh, at
least in some cases, a defendant's right to face his or her accusers in court.
That a significant majority of State have enacted statutes to protect child
witnesses from the trauma of giving testimony in child abuse cases attests to
the widespread belief in the importance of such a public policy); Stephen A.
Siegel, The Origin of the Compelling State Interest Test and Strict Scrutiny,
The American Journal of Legal History, Oct. 2006, Vol. 48, No. 4, 355-407.
5. Public policy, Black's Law Dictionary (10th Ed. for the iPhone and iPad 2014).

6. See Consecutive Interpreting, Knowledge Centre on Interpretation, (available at

https://ec.europa.eu/education/knowledge-centre-interpretation/conference-
interpreting/consecutive-interpreting_en).
7. https://www.business.com/articles/what-is-document-repository/; Examples
would be Files feature in Microsoft Teams, One Drive, Google Drive, iCloud,
Adobe Cloud, etc.
8. Based on Sub-item 2, Item II, Proposed Guidelines on the Use of
Videoconferencing Technology for the Remote Appearance or Testimony of
Certain PDLs (A.M. No. 19-05-05-SC). As a policy, PDLs committed in national
penitentiaries are not allowed to be brought outside said penal institutions to
appear or attend proceedings before any court, except by express authority
of the Court (19 November 2013 Resolution in A.M. No. 13-11-07-SC),
resulting in either the waiver of their right to be present at any stage of trial,
or the archival of the criminal case and suspension of the proceedings "until
the Court shall have adopted the appropriate rules governing the
continuation of proceedings where the accused refuses to waive his (or her
right) to be present" (10 November 2015 Resolution in A.M. No. 15-08-07-SC
(Re: Administrative Matter for Agenda Requesting the Transfer of Venue of
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 Pending Case/s Wherein the Accused is Currently Detained at the National
Penitentiary by Virtue of a Conviction in Another Case).
9. Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law.
10. Based on Sec. 5BAA, Evidence (Audio and Audio Visual Links) Act 1998 (New
South Wales): "Subject to any applicable rules of court, a government agency
witness must, unless the court otherwise directs, give evidence to the court
by audio link or audio visual link from any place within New South Wales."
These can cover forensic chemists and police officers, especially those who
have been re-assigned in other regions/provinces.
11. Whether locally-based or abroad.

12. Based on OCA Circular No. 166-2020 dated 9 October 2020 (Public Access to
Videoconferencing Hearings).
13. The court may ask the public who wish to attend the videoconferencing hearing
for their interest in doing so, considering that the public is not part of the
definition of "participants" under these Guidelines, which is based on the
Wisconsin statute.

14. Sec. 2, Rule 135, Rules of Court.

15. Sec. 23, A.M. No. 00-4-07-SC (Rule on Examination of a Child Witness).

ANNEX A
1. Based on the Waukesha County (County) Video Appearance Colloquy (Wisconsin
Supreme Court Planning and Policy Advisory Committee and
Videoconferencing Subcommittee, Bridging the Distance: Implementing
Videoconferencing in Wisconsin, August 2017, Appendix C, available at
https://www.wicourts.gov/courts/committees/docs/ppacvidconf.pdf) and
Telephonic and Video Hearings Colloquy, United States District Court of
Maine (available at
https://www.med.uscourts.gov/opt/sites/default/files/COVID-
19_Telephonic_and_Video_Conference_Script.pdf).

Published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on December 29, 2020.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com