Rules on DNA Evidence

1. DNA EVIDENCE
[Rule On DNA Evidence]
A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC
(2 October 2007)

2. DNA : The
Code Of Life

3. DNA – Deoxyribonucleic
Acid Or Chain Of
Molecules In Cells Of
Body / Genetic Blueprint /
Unique To Individuals
Except Identical Twins /
Present In Blood, Skin
Cells, Hair Roots / Semen
/ Bone / Teeth / Saliva

4. 4 Chemical Bases Of DNA :
A-G-C-T /
Most Popular DNA Typing
Technique : STR [ Short
Tandem Repeats ] Takes
Measurements In 13
Separate Regions Of
DNA - 13th Gives Gender /
Y-STR : Male-Specific
[Rape When Female- Male
DNA Mixed Male Masked]

5. Uses Of DNA - In Human
Identification : Principle Of
Exchange: 2 Objects Into
Contact – Transfer Of
Material Between Them
/ Determination Of Human
Sources Of Biological
Samples From CSI /
Paternity / Identifying Mass
Disaster, War Victims /
Pedigree For Seed,
Livestock/ Identify Bacteria

6. DNA Paternity Testing
2 Genetic Types - 1 Inherited
From Mother, Other From
Father / Child - Father NO
Match : Excluded, Profiles
Match [Indistinguishable] :
NOT Excluded / Family
Trio : Higher Accuracy /
Better Than Blood
Grouping [ABO] Affected
By Blood Transfusion

7. Tijing vs. CA [ G.R.
125901, 8 March 2001]
Woman Took 12 Year-
Old Son Of Bienvenida
Tijing Whom Latter
Saw Again After 4
Years But Child Named
Already After Woman
Who Took Him And Her
Spouse / Tijing Filed
Habeas Corpus Case

8. SC Ruling : Tijing’s Son / Spouses
Could Not Bear Child / Trial Court
Observed Child , Tijing Had
Strong Similarities In The Face,
Eyes, Eyebrows, Head Shapes
* We Have Now Facility , Expertise
For DNA For Prompt Paternity Test
/ Open To Challenge / Courts Open

9. Jurisprudential
Background Of SC Rule
[1] People vs. Vallejo, G.R.
No. 144656, 9 May 2002
[2] Herrera vs. Alba, Hon.
Judge Nimfa C. Vilches
G.R. 148220, 15 June 2005
[3] Agustin vs. Court Of
Appeals, G.R. No.
162571, 15 June 2005

10. SC Rule On DNA Evidence [ 15
October 2007]
Scope : When Offered, Used,
Proposed To Be Offered Or Used
As Evidence In All Criminal, Civil
Cases And Special Proceedings

11. Applicability : Does Not
Adopt Specific Rule On
Admissibility Of DNA
Evidence, General Rules
On Relevancy And Not
Excluded By Law Or Rules
[Rule 128, Sec. 3] Are Only
Requirements / Matters
Not Specifically Covered -
Rules Of Court / Evidence

12. “Biological Sample” – Any
Organic Material From A
Person’s Body Even If
Found In Inanimate Object
Susceptible To DNA
Testing [ Blood, Saliva,
Body Fluids, Tissues,
Hair, Bones, Teeth ]
“DNA Evidence” – Totality
Of DNA Profiles, Results,

13. Other Genetic Information
Directly Generated
From DNA Testing
“DNA Testing” – Verified,
Credible Scientific
Extraction Of DNA From
Biological Samples,
Generation Of DNA
Profiles And Comparison
Of Information Obtained

14. To Determine With
Reasonable Certainty
Whether DNA Obtained
From Two Or More
Distinct Samples
Originates From The
Same Person [ Direct
Identification] Or
Originates From Related
Persons [Kinship Analysis]

15. Application / Order For DNA
Testing – [1] Appropriate
Court Motu Propio Or
[2] On Application Of Any
Person Who Has Legal
Interest / After Due Hearing
/ Notice To Parties Upon
Showing Of : [a] Biological
Sample Exists Relevant
To Case [b] Sample [1] Not

16. Previously Subjected To
Type Being Requested, Or
[2] Previously Subject But
For Confirmatory Testing
[3] DNA Testing Uses
Scientifically Valid
Technique [4] DNA Testing
Has Scientific Potential To
Produce New Information
Relevant To Proper
Resolution Of The Case And

17. [5] Existence Of Other
Factors Court Considers
Potentially Affecting
Accuracy, Integrity Of DNA
Testing / Confirmatory DNA
Testing - Not A Matter Of
Right / Who May Apply - Any
Person, Law Enforcement
May Apply Before Lawsuit
Is Commenced Without
Need Of Any Court Order

18. DNA Testing Order – [1]
Order, If Appropriate That
Biological Samples Taken
From Any Person, Crime
Scene [2] Impose
Reasonable Conditions On
DNA Testing For Integrity
Of Sample, Testing
Process And Reliability Of
Result Including Condition
That DNA Result Be
Simultaneously Disclosed

19. To Parties Involved, And
[3] Sample Of Amount
Preventing Confirmatory
Testing By Other, Adverse
Party, Other Additional
Samples Of Same Kind Can
No Longer Be Obtained,
Issue An ORDER Requiring
All Parties To The Case
To Witness The DNA
Testing To Be Conducted*

20. DNA Testing Order Is
Immediately Executory,
Not Appealable / In The
Absence Of Any
Injunctive Relief From
A Higher Court, DNA
Testing Order Not Stayed
By Certiorari Proceeding
Instituted To Nullify It

21. “Probability Of
Parentage” - Numerical
Estimate For The
Likelihood Of
Parenthood Of
Putative Parent
Compared With
Probability Of Random
Match Of Two
Unrelated Individuals
In A Given Population

22. Assessment Of Probative
Value – Consider : [1] Chain
Of Custody / How
Samples Were Collected,
Handled / Possibility Of
Contamination [2] DNA
Testing Methodology /
Procedure Followed To
Analyze Samples /
Advantages, Disadvantages

23. Of Procedure / Compliance
With Scientifically Valid
Standards In Conducting
Tests [3] Forensic DNA
Laboratory / Accreditation
By Any Reputable
Standard - Setting
Institution / Qualification
Of Analyst Who Conducted
Test / If Laboratory Not

24. Accredited, Relevant
Experience Of Laboratory
In Forensic Casework,
Credibility Shall Be
Established, And [4]
Reliability Of Testing
Result / Rules Of Evidence
Applies Suppletorily
Reliability Of DNA Testing
Methodology – Consider :
[1] Technique Has Been
Used [2] Method Subjected

25. To Peer Review And
Publication [3] General
Acceptance Of Method
By Relevant Scientific
Community [4] Standards,
Controls To Ensure
Correctness Of Data
Generated [5] Appropriate
Reference Population
Database, And [6] General
Degree Of Confidence
As To Mathematical
Calculations To Compare
DNA Profiles, Limitations

26. Evaluation Of DNA Testing
Results – Consider:
[1] Weight Of Matching DNA
Evidence / Relevance Of
Mismatching
[2] Result Of DNA Testing
In Light Of Totality Of
Other Evidence In Case
[3] Paternity - DNA Results
Excluding Putative Parent

27. From Paternity Shall Be
Conclusive Proof Of Non -
Paternity / Value Of
Probability Of Paternity
Is Less Than 99.9%,
Result Of DNA Testing
Considered Corroborative
Evidence / If Value Is
99.9% Or Higher, There
Shall Be Disputable
Presumption Of Paternity

28. “Probability Of Paternity
‘W’ Value Below 99.9%,
DNA Paternity Analysis Is
Corroborative Evidence”
Means Man Not Excluded,
Other Party [ Mother,
Child ] To Provide Other
Proofs Man Is Biological
Father [ DNA Result Only
Becomes Part Of Proof ]

29. 5 Existing DNA Laboratories
1. UP – NSRI DNA
Analysis Laboratory
2. National Bureau Of
Investigation [NBI]
DNA Laboratory
3. St. Luke’s Hospital
4. Philippine National Police
[PNP] DNA Laboratory
5. Nat’l. Kidney Institute

30. Database : To Calculate
“W”, Database Showing
Gene Frequencies Of
Appropriate Population
Must Be Used / Reflects
Population From Which
All Other Possible Father
Are Drawn / UP-NSRI DNA
Analysis Laboratory Has
Population Genetic
Database At 9 STR Loci

31. Forensic Science Service
[FSS] , UK [Biggest
Database / Uses Robotics
For More Analysis / DNA
Of FSS Forensic People
Included / Biggest - 3.4 M
Samples In 2005
CODIS, US - Combined
DNA Index System Of
FBI Convicted Offender

32. Database / Currently
400,000 @ 16 Loci
LCN – Low Copy Number :
New Technology When
Small Amounts Of DNA
Recovered [15-20 Cells :
Trace DNA From Skin By
Touching] / Very Costly /
Downside – More PCR
Cycles Of Replication,
Reliability Affected

33. Post Conviction DNA
Remedy If Results
Favorable To Accused /
Filed By Convict Or
Prosecution By Means Of
Petition For Writ Of Habeas
Corpus / After Hearing,
Court Finds Petition
Meritorious, Reverse Or
Modify Judgment Of
Conviction And Order
Release Of Convict

34. Filed In Court Of Origin, CA,
SC, Or With Any Member Of
Said Courts Which May
Conduct Hearing Thereon
Or Remand To Court Of
Origin / Confidentiality : On
DNA Profiles, Results / May
Be Released Upon, On
Terms, Conditions Set By
Court To: [1] Person

35. From Whom Sample Taken
[2] Lawyers Of Parties
[3] Lawyers Of Private
Complainants [4] Duly
Authorized Law
Enforcement Agencies [5]
Others As Determined By
The Court / Unauthorized
Disclosure Subject To
Indirect Contempt

36. Paternity Of Child Victim
Maybe Determined By DNA
Evidence / Use Standards
Of Rule / Preservation,
Confidentiality / May
Advance The Costs, If
Needed / A DCA Ordered To
Supervise Implementation
Of SC Resolution [People
vs. Umanito, G.R. No.
172607, 26 October 2007]

37. Preservation : Trial Court
Preserves DNA Evidence In Its
Totality Including All Biological
Samples And Order Agencies To
Preserve As Follows – [1] Criminal
Cases : For Not Less Than Period
Of Time Person Under Trial, If To
Serve Sentence, Until Served

38. [2] In Other Cases : Until
Decision Becomes Final
And Executory / Court May
Allow Physical Destruction
Of Biological Sample
Before Period Upon Court
Order Or Persons From
Whom Sample Obtained
Consented In Writing /
Applies To Cases Pending
Except On Post- Conviction

39. “Get It Right The 1st Time”
Ensure That Court Considers
DNA Analysis To Resolve
Issues, Decide The Case /
Expert Witness Aware That
When DNA Evidence Is
Rejected By Trial Court, It
Is Abuse Of Discretion Of
Judge Not Probative Value
Of The Technology That
Must Be Proved On Appeal

40. Legal Motherhood /
Surrogacy [DNA Donor]
Who Is Legal Mother?
1) Genetic Mother : Genetic
Mother Is Legal / Natural
Mother As ‘Family’ Implies
Biological Relationship /
Heredity Is Basis For
Connection For Two
Individuals In Their Lives

41. 2) Gestational Surrogate
Mother : Certainty Of
Identification Of Mother At
Birth / Significant Biological
Investment By Surrogate /
Psychological Connection
Of Child Before, During,
After Birth / Feminists -
Devalues Pregnant Women,
Experience Of Pregnancy

42. 3) Intended Mother :
Parental Rights Of
Those Who Conceive
Technologically Governed
By Contract / Intending
Mother Engineered The
Procreation Process /
Intending Mother Likely
To Be Good Mother By
Choosing To Parent,
Motivated To Do Good Job

43. Factors : a) 2/3 Rule [ If
Genetic Mother Is Intending
Mother, She Has 2/3 Claim
On Baby ] b) Best Interests
Of Child [ Most Congenial,
Least Detrimental To
Growth, Development ]
Judicial Discretion : For
Mother Deprived, May Be
Entitled To Visitation

44. B. GMOs [ Genetically Modified
Products ] - Genes Inserted To
Plants To Improve Characteristics
[ Bt Corn Engineered To Express
Toxin Resistant To Corn Borers ;
Transgenic Tomato With Carrot
Qualities For Longer Freshness]

45. “Frankenfood” / “Bitter
Harvest” - For World Food
Shortage / Health Issues :
Altered Nutrient Levels /
Toxicants / Allergic
Reactions / Antibiotic
Resistance / Spread Of
New Virulent Strains Of
Infectious Agents / Affects
Gastrointestinal Organs

46. Laws / Int’l. Instruments :
EO 430 [1990] - National
Commission On Biosafety
Of Philippines [NCBP] :
Biotechnology Guidelines,
Prevent Pernicious Effect
On Environment [DA, DENR,
DOH, DOST- Secretariat]
Cartagena Protocol : Safe
Transfer, Handling Of
Living Modified Organism

47. C. Other Life Technologies –
Genetic Enhancement /
Stem Cell Research /
Performance Enhancing
Drugs In Sports [ Cloning? ]
Morality / Ethics / Religion :
State Regulation vs. “Big
Brother”, Privacy Issues /
Unfairness / Negligence /
Injury To Others / Play GOD

48. Human Cloning
Not New - Natural Cloning
In Identical Twins Without
Benefit Of Human
Intervention / Purpose :
Create, Grow An Organism
Possessing Exact Genetic
Information As Donating
Parent / No Risk Of
Unknown Genetic Disease

49. Human Genome Project:
Identify 3 Billion Bases
[Recipe For Human Being,
Formula = 800 Volumes
Of Bible] / Completed
In 2000 / From 10-20
Anonymous Donors
Reflective Of Humanity /
To Recite Human Genome
1 Letter Per Second It

50. Would Take A Century
To Recite Book Of Life
* 97% : Has No Known
Function, “Junk DNA”
* 99.99% : We Are
Similar To Each Other
*99% : We Are All
Similar To Monkeys

51. Thanks
Much For
Lending
Me Your
Ears !