People of the Philippines v. Hon.

Judge Ruben Ayson

G.R. No. 85215 (July 7, 1989)

FACTS:

Felipe Ramos, a ticket freight clerk of the Philippine Airlines (PAL), was charged with
estafa for the irregularities of the sale of plane tickets. Respondent Judge admitted
all evidentiary and testamentary evidence offered against Ramos except for the
latter’s handwritten note expressing his willingness to settle the irregularities alleged
against him as well as his statement during an administrative investigation where he
admitted to the offense.

ISSUES:

Whether or not respondent judge is correct in not admitting the note and statement
as evidence.

HELD:

No. Felipe Ramos was not in any sense under custodial interrogation prior to and
during the administrative inquiry conducted by PAL. The constitutional right against
self-incrimination (Section 20, Article 4, 1973) did not therefore come into play. He
had voluntarily answered questions posed to him and agreed that the proceeding be
recorded. That the note he sent prior to investigation day offering to compromise his
liability in the alleged irregularity was free and a spontaneous act on his part.

Petition Granted. Respondent Judge order to admit in evidence Exhibit A and K.

Additional Notes:

1) the right against self-incrimination — i.e., the right of a person not to be compelled to be a
witness against himself — set out in the first sentence,

2) the rights of a person in custodial interrogation, i.e., the rights of every suspect "under
investigation for the commission of an offense."

The right against self- incrimination, "No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself," is
now embodied in Section 17, Article III of the 1987 Constitution. The lights of a person in custodial
interrogation, which have been made more explicit, are now contained in Section 12 of the same
Article III.

*As Regards Giving of Testimony

It is pertinent at this point to inquire whether the rights just discussed, i.e., (1) that against self-
incrimination and (2) those during custodial interrogation apply to persons under preliminary
investigation or already charged in court for a crime.

*Rules of Court

1) to be exempt from being a witness against himself, 31 and 2) to testify as witness in his own behalf;
but if he offers himself as a witness he may be cross-examined as any other witness; however, his
neglect or refusal to be a witness shall not in any manner prejudice or be used against him.