COURT DENIES ADMISSION OF DOCUMENTS IN RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE CASES VS GARIN ET. AL, CITING DR. LEACHON’S INCOMPETENCY AS A WITNESS, AMONG OTHER GROUNDS

The Regional Trial Court in Quezon City Branch 229 has denied admission of all the documents in two motions filed by the prosecution in reckless imprudence cases against former health secretary Janette Garin due to “utter lack of merit.”

In its decision, the trial court denied the admissibility of the testimony of Dr. Anthony C. Leachon on the grounds of incompetency.

“It must be pointed out that the TSN (transcript of stenographic notes) was already ruled to be inadmissible due to the failure of the Prosecution to attach the same to the Judicial Affidavit of Dr. Fausto R. Quizon, Jr. and later, on ground of incompetency of Dr. Anthony C. Leachon to testify on the same,” the court decision read.

RTC denied the prosecution’s motion to take Judicial Notice of the Proceedings in Congress praying for this Court to take judicial notice of the Blue Ribbon and Committee on Health and Demography and Finance inquiry in 2017 and 2018; Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability and the Committee on Health inquiry in 2018 and TSN in the above-mentioned inquiries.

“What the Court can take Judicial Notice of is the fact that hearings in aid of legislation and findings therein cannot be a substitute to the duty of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt based on competent and relevant evidence,” the decision stated.

The court also denied admission of Committee Report Nos. 368 and 1336; Motion to Take Judicial Notice of Republic Act No. 3720, as amended and Republic Act No. 9711; Issuance of Certificate of Product Registrations; FDA Circular No. 2013-004; FDA Decision dated December 29, 2017; and FDA Order dated December 21, 2018.

On the matters of the FDA decision, the court explained that failure of the Sanofi Pasteur, Inc. to comply with the requirements is a matter which must be proved through evidence during the trial of these cases.

“These documents cannot speak for itself. It has been held that testimonial evidence provides foundation for all types of evidence. Documentary evidence requires statement from the witness to make its way to the realm of admissible evidence.”