Authentication and Proof of Documents
Those authenticated by a competent
(Rule 132)
- Objects introduced in evidence need to
be authenticated. It is the preliminary
step in showing the admissibility of an
evidence
- Authentication means it must be shown
to the satisfaction of the court that the
object in court is the very same object
used or found in the crime scene.
- Unless a document is considered self-
authenticating, it will not be admitted in
evidence without a prior
authentication.
- Presumption: “That objects and
documents presented in evidence, are
as a rule, counterfeit.” Evidence is not
presumed authentic. It is therefore,
incumbent upon the proponent of the
evidence to prove its authenticity.
What is a DOCUMENT?
- A deed, instrument or other duly
authorized paper by which something is
proved, evidenced or set forth.
Classes of Documents:
1. Public
2. Private
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS (Sec. 19, Rule 132)
a. The written official acts, or records of
the official acts of the sovereign
authority, official bodies and tribunals,
and public officers, whether of the
Philippines or of a foreign country
b. Documents acknowledged before a
notary public except last wills and
testaments
c. Public records, kept in the Philippines,
of private documents required by law
to be entered therein.
Public Documents are further divided into two:
1. Those which are authenticated by a
notary public; or
2.
public official.
Two classes of Public Documents:
1. Those executed by private individuals
which are authenticated by public
notaries; or
2. Those which are issued by competent
public officials by reason of their office.
 Public documents are admissible
without authentication. They are
admissible in evidence without further
proof of their authenticity, and all the
party has to do to present them as
evidence is to mark them as exhibits
and there after offer them as evidence
in accordance with the rules. Proof of
authenticity of Public Documents is
NOT necessary as the same is
presumed to be authentic.
 Written official acts or records of official
acts of the sovereign authority of a
foreign country are regarded as public
documents BUT before they can be
admitted in evidence, CERTIFIED TRUE
COPIES thereof must be authenticated
by the foreign official concerned, such
as the Secretary of State of the foreign
country or his authorized
representative and the latter’s
certification is in turn authenticated by
a Philippine consular officer or
representative in that country.
PRIVATE DOCUMENTS – those which are not
public. Those documents executed by private
persons without the participation of a public
officer or a notary public. As a rule, the
admission in evidence of private documents
requires that their due execution and
authenticity must be proved pursuant to Sec. 20
of Rule 132.
Sec. 20.Proof of private
document.  —  Before any private
document offered as authentic is
 received in evidence, its due execution
and authenticity must be proved either:
(a)By anyone who saw the document
executed or written;
(b)By evidence of the genuineness of the
signature or handwriting of the maker.
Any other private document need only
be identified as that which it is claimed
to be.
UNLESS, such private document may be
considered ancient document;
Sec. 21.When evidence of authenticity of
private document not
necessary.  —  Where a private
document is more than thirty years old,
is produced from the custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine, and
is unblemished by any alterations or
circumstances of suspicion, no other
evidence of its authenticity need be
given.
Or its due execution and authenticity has been
admitted by the adverse party.
 The due execution and authenticity of a
private document may also be proved
by evidence of the genuiness of the
signature or handwriting of the marker
in accordance with Sec. 22 of Rule 132.
Sec. 22.How genuineness of handwriting
proved. — The handwriting of a person
may be proved by any witness who
believes it to be the handwriting of such
person because he has seen the person
write, or has seen writing purporting to
be his upon which the witness has acted
or been charged, and has thus acquired
knowledge of the handwriting of such
person. Evidence respecting the
handwriting may also be given by a
comparison, made by the witness or the
court, with writings admitted or treated
as genuine by the party against whom
the evidence is offered, or proved to be
genuine to the satisfaction of the judge.
(23a)
 When photocopies of documents were
marked as exhibits and identified by a
witness and the same were examined
and admitted by the trial court, WITH
NO OBJECTIONS having been made as
to their authenticity and due execution,
said photocopies are admissible in
evidence and are deemed sufficient
proof of the facts contained therein.
HOW ARE PHOTOGRAPHS
AUTHENTICATED?
 General rule: when presented in
evidence, must be identified by the
photographer as to their production
and testified as to the circumstances
under which they were produced.
 Photographer is not the only person
who can testify. The faithful
reproduction of the photograph may
be proved prima facie by the testimony
of those who were present at the time
it was taken, or by any other
competent witness who can testify as
to its existence and accuracy.
 The value of a photograph is its being a
correct representation or reproduction
of the original, and its admissibility is
determined by its accuracy in
portraying the scene at the time the
picture was taken.
HOW CUSTOM AUTHENTICATED
 CUSTOM defined as a rule of conduct
formed by repetition of acts, uniformly
observed as a social rule, legally binding
and obligatory. The law requires that a
custom must be proved as a fact
according to the rules of evidence.
ANCIENT DOCUMENT
 Refers to a private document which is
more than 30 years old, produced from
a custody in which it would naturally be
found if genuine, and is unblemished by
alterations or circumstances of
suspicion. It must on its face appear to
be genuine.

 Requisites:
1. More than 30yrs old
2. Found in the proper custody
3. Unblemished by any alteration or
by any circumstance of suspicion.
 When the document has unexplained
erasures and alterations and on its face
showing superimpositions and the
signatures were dated to much later
than the document, the document has
not satisfied the requirements of the
rule on ancient documents. In such
case, the document has to be
authenticated to be admitted in
evidence by any of the person
mentioned in Sec. 20 of Rule 132 of the
Rules of Court.
HOW TO PROVE HANDWRITING GENERALLY
 A person can obtain knowledge of the
genuine writing of another by:
1. Seeing the person write some other
documents or signature;
2. Seeing documents otherwise known
to him to have been written by the
person in question;
3. Examining, in or out of court, for
the express purpose of obtaining
such knowledge, the document said
to have been written by the person
in question. It is essential that:
a. Certain specimen of
handwriting were seen and
considered by him; and
b. They were genuinely
written by the person in
question.
The genuiness of standard writing may be
established by any of the following:
a. By the admission of the person sought
to be charged with the disputed writing
made at or for the purpose of the trial,
or by his testimony;
b. By witnesses who saw the standards
written or to whom or in whose hearing
the person sought to be charged
acknowledged the writing thereof;
c. By evidence showing that the reputed
writer of the standard has acquiesced in
or recognized the same or that it has
been adopted and acted upon by him in
his business transaction or other
concerns.
ASSISTANCE OF HANDWRITING EXPERT
 Opinions of handwriting experts are not
necessarily binding upon the court, the
experts’ function being to place before
the court data upon which the court
can form its own opinion.
Public documents are prima facie evidence of
facts therein stated
Rule 130 Sec. 44. Entries in official records. — Entries
in official records made in the performance of his
duty by a public officer of the Philippines, or by a
person in the performance of a duty specially
enjoined by law, are  prima facie evidence of the
facts therein stated.
Rule 132 Sec. 23.Public documents as
evidence. — Documents consisting of entries in
public records made in the performance of a duty by
a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts
therein stated. All other public documents are
evidence, even against a third person, of the fact
which gave rise to their execution and of the date of
the latter. (24a)
Prima facie evidence means evidence which, if
unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient to
sustain the proposition it supports or to
establish the facts alleged. It is evidence which
is good and sufficient on its face.
Rule 132 Sec. 23.Public documents as
evidence. — Documents consisting of entries in
public records made in the performance of a duty by
a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts
therein stated. All other public documents are
evidence, even against a third person, of the fact
which gave rise to their execution and of the date of
the latter. (24a)
  Public documents are generally
irremovable from where they are
officially kept.
Rule 132 Sec. 26. Irremovability of public
record.  —  Any public record, an official copy of
which is admissible in evidence, must not be
removed from the office in which it is kept, except
upon order of a court where the inspection of the
record is essential to the just determination of a
pending case. (27a)
 For this reason, public documents to be
used as evidence may be evidenced by
any of the following:
1. By an official publication thereof;
2. By certified true copy or one
attested by the officer having the
legal custody of the record, or by
his deputy, and accompanied, if the
record is not kept in the Philippines,
with a certificate that such officer
has custody.
3. If the office in which the record is
kept is in the foreign country, the
copy of the document should have
a certificate made by a secretary of
the embassy or legation, consul
general, consul, vice consul or
consular agent or by any officer in
the foreign service officer of the
Philippines stationed in the foreign
country in which the record is kept,
and authenticated by the seal of his
office.
Sec. 25.What attestation of copy must
state. — Whenever a copy of a document or record
is attested for the purpose of evidence, the
attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is
a correct copy of the original, or a specific part
thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must be
under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there
be any, or if he be the clerk of a court having a seal,
under the seal of such court.  be presumed to be the same as
FOREIGN LAWS – may be written or unwritten.
Written laws must be proved in accordance
with Sec. 24 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court.
Sec. 24.Proof of official record. — The record of
public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of
Section 19, when admissible for any purpose, may be
evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a
copy attested by the officer having the legal custody
of the record, or by his deputy, and accompanied, if
the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a
certificate that such officer has the custody. If the
office in which the record is kept is in foreign
country, the certificate may be made by a secretary
of the embassy or legation, consul general, consul,
vice consul, or consular agent or by any officer in the
foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the
foreign country in which the record is kept, and
authenticated by the seal of his office. 
To be admissible as evidence, copy of the
foreign law must comply with the following
requisites:
1. An official publication containing the
foreign law must be submitted.
2. If no official publication can be
submitted, the copy of the foreign law
must be attested by the officer having
legal custody of the record, or by his
deputy; and the same must be
accompanied by a certificate made by a
secretary of the embassy or legation,
consul general, consul, vice consul or
consular agent or by any officer in the
foreign service officer of the Philippines,
with the seal of the office, and duly
ribboned. The requirement is not a
mere technicality but is intended to
justify the giving of full faith and credit
to the genuiness of a document in a
foreign country. Parole evidence is not
sufficient to prove written foreign laws,
as the best evidence rule requires that
they be proved by duly authenticated
copy of the statute. Absent any of these
requirements, the foreign law is not
deemed established and the same will
Philippine law on the subject.
 With respect to unwritten law, the oral
testimony of expert witnesses is
admissible, as are printed and public
 books of reports and decisions of the
courts of the country concerned of
proved to be commonly admitted in
such court.
Sec. 27.Public record of a private document.  —  An
authorized public record of a private document may
be proved by the original record, or by a copy
thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the
record, with an appropriate certificate that such
officer has the custody. (28a)
Sec. 28.Proof of lack of record. — A written
statement signed by an officer having the custody of
an official record or by his deputy that after diligent
search no record or entry of a specified tenor is
found to exist in the records of his office,
accompanied by a certificate as above provided, is
admissible as evidence that the records of his office
contain no such record or entry. (29)
HOW JUDICIAL RECORD IMPEACHED
Sec. 29.How judicial record impeached.  —  Any
judicial record may be impeached by evidence of: (a)
want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer, (b)
collusion between the parties, or (c) fraud in the
party offering the record, in respect to the
proceedings. (30a)
 Judicial proceedings are presumed to
be regular and should be given full faith
and credit, and that all steps required
had been taken.
 It is also presumed that the court or a
judge acting as such, whether in the
Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in
the lawful exercise of jurisdiction
 To impeach judicial record, therefore,
there must be evidence of want of
jurisdiction, collusion between the
parties or fraud on the part of the
party offering the record, which must
be CLEAR and CONVINCING and more
than merely preponderant, in order to
overcome the presumption of regularity
in the performance of official duties and
the presumption of regularity of the
judicial proceedings, and the burden of
proof lies on the part of the party who
challenges the validity of judicial
records.
 GROUNDS TO IMPEACH JUDICIAL
RECCORDS
1. By means of evidence of LACK OF
JURISDICTION
2. Evidence of COLLUSION BETWEEN
PARTIES
3. FRAUD on the part of the party offering
the record.
 Fraud refers to EXTRINSIC
FRAUD – any fraudulent act of
the prevailing party in the
litigation which is committed
outside of the trial of the case,
whereby the defeated party has
been prevented from exhibiting
fully his case by fraud or
deception practiced on him by
his opponent.
WHERE JUDICIAL RECORDS MAY BE IMPEACHED
 Appropriate action be filed either with
the Regional Trial Court or the Court of
Appeals, as the case may be under
Rule 47 of the Rules of Court.
Rule 132 Sec. 30. Proof of notarial documents.  —
Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and
certified as provided by law, may be presented in
evidence without further proof, the certificate of
acknowledgment being  prima facieevidence of the
execution of the instrument or document involved.
(31a)
Notarization – it converts a private document
into a public one and renders it admissible to
the court without further proof of its
authenticity. A notarial document is by law
entitled to full faith and credit upon its face.
Exception: However, not all notarized
documents are exempted from the rule on
authentication. An AFFIDAVIT does not
automatically become a public document just
because it contains a notarial jurat.
Rule 132 Sec. 31.Alteration in document, how to
explain. — The party producing a document as
genuine which has been altered and appears to have
been altered after its execution, in a part material to
the question in dispute, must account for the
alteration. He may show that the alteration was
made by another, without his concurrence, or was
made with the consent of the parties affected by it,
or was otherwise properly or innocent made, or that
the alteration did not change the meaning or
language of the instrument. If he fails to do that, the
document shall not be admissible in evidence. (32a)

Rule 132 Sec. 32.Seal.  —  There shall be no

difference between sealed and unsealed private
documents insofar as their admissibility as evidence
is concerned. (33a)

Rule 132 Sec. 33.Documentary evidence in an

unofficial language.  —  Documents written in an
unofficial language shall not be admitted as
evidence, unless accompanied with a translation into
English or Filipino. To avoid interruption of
proceedings, parties or their attorneys are directed
to have such translation prepared before trial. (34a)