Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In the Philippines, amparo and habeas data are prerogative writs to supplement the inefficacy of the writ of habeas corpus (Rule 102, Revised Rules of Court). Amparo means 'protection,' while habeas data is 'access to information.' [1] Both writs were conceived to solve the extensive Philippine extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances since 1999.
The rules vary depending upon whether the venue is a criminal court, civil court, or family court, and they vary by jurisdiction. The quantum of evidence is the amount of evidence needed; the quality of proof is how reliable such evidence should be considered.
Thus, while the Civil Code seeks to govern all aspects of private law in the Philippines, a Republic Act such as Republic Act No. 9048 would concern itself with a more limited field, as in that case, the correction of entries in the civil registry. Still, the amendment of Philippine legal codes is accomplished through the passage of Republic Acts.
In March 2010 the Philippine Supreme Court Issued Bar Matter 1153, amending provisions in Sections 5 and 6 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, now allowing Filipino foreign law school graduates to take the Bar Exam provided that they comply with the following: Completion of all courses leading to a degree of Bachelor of laws or its equivalent;
The judiciary of the Philippines consists of the Supreme Court, which is established in the Constitution, and three levels of lower courts, which are established through law by the Congress of the Philippines. The Supreme Court has expansive powers, able to overrule political and administrative decisions, and with the ability to craft rules and ...
In the Bill of Rights of the Philippine constitution, habeas corpus is guaranteed in terms almost identically to those used in the U.S. Constitution. Article 3, Section 15 of the Constitution of the Philippines states that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of invasion or rebellion when the public ...
Under the common law, such evidence was at one time considered hearsay - a statement made out of court being introduced to prove the truth of the statement - and was not admissible except to rebut the testimony of an opposing expert witness. There were four ways to introduce such evidence: [citation needed]
Pursuant to the Constitution, the Court of Appeals "reviews not only the decisions and orders of the Regional Trial Courts awards, judgments, final orders or resolutions of, or authorized by administrative agencies exercising quasi-judicial functions mentioned in Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, plus the National Amnesty Commission ...