Rules on Virtual Court Hearings Amended
The Supreme Court adopted key amendments to the 2020 Guidelines on the Conduct of Videoconferencing (A.M. No. 20-12-01-SC) to improve the accessibility of videoconferencing proceedings, particularly for participants with limited digital resources and those situated overseas.
The 2020 Guidelines institutionalized videoconferencing during the lockdowns and community quarantine measures imposed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The amendments will take effect on February 16, 2026, after posting of the Resolution dated November 5, 2025 (A.M. No. 24-11-02-SC) on the websites of the Supreme Court and the Office of the Court Administrator.
Videoconferencing refers to all court proceedings conducted using video, audio, and data transmission devices to allow participants in different locations to communicate in real-time by seeing each other. It may be fully remote where all participants join from remote locations without any of them being physically present inside the court, or partially remote where at least one participant is physically present inside the court while others join from remote locations.
The amended Guidelines apply to the conduct of videoconferencing before the first- and second-level courts, the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, and the Court of Tax Appeals. It covers all actions and proceedings conducted through videoconferencing, at whatever stage thereof, including mediation, consultation, and deliberation before the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, and the Court of Tax Appeals, and the promulgation of decisions and resolutions.
Key Amendments
Videoconferencing as the preferred mode in certain cases
While the 2020 Guidelines state that videoconferencing is only an alternative to in-court proceedings which is the primary mode in hearing cases, the amended Rules provide that videoconferencing shall be the preferred mode in criminal cases involving persons deprived of liberty (PDLs) and children in conflict with law (CICL) at all stages of the proceedings. It shall also be the preferred mode for arraignment, bail hearings, and hearings involving minor incidents of other accused, such as, but not limited to, clarificatory hearings, compliance hearings, and other similar ancillary matters where the presence of the accused is not necessary, unless the court deems it appropriate for the accused to appear in person.
The court may, on its own instance, order that the proceedings be conducted through videoconferencing at any or all stages for a just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of cases.
Expanding Access and Use of Videoconferencing
The amendments aim to ensure access and use of videoconferencing by digitally disadvantaged individuals, including those located in geographically or geopolitically marginalized areas. To facilitate connectivity and participation, the Court may deploy court personnel to hard-to-reach areas to provide temporary or mobile internet access, including through the use of satellite connections. The Court may also establish designated access points within judicial regions where litigants, witnesses, and other participants may use computers and videoconferencing equipment under court supervision.
Testimonies Taken Via Videoconferencing
Testimonies of child witnesses and victims of sexual abuse and gender-based violence may be taken remotely to protect their physical and emotional well-being. The court may, on its own or upon motion, direct that the accused will not be visible to them.
In all cases, the videoconferencing shall be conducted in a way that will allow the court to observe the demeanor and conduct of the witnesses for purposes of evaluating their credibility and testimony.
Right to Meet the Witnesses Face to Face
The right of the accused to meet the witnesses face to face is deemed satisfied through videoconferencing, provided that (a) the demeanor of the witness can be clearly observed by the court, the accused, and counsel; (b) the cross-examination of the witness is done effectively; (c) and the accused executes an informed written waiver of such right when the videoconferencing specifically involves the confrontation of a witness.
The informed written waiver is a voluntary and intelligent relinquishment by the accused of the right to meet witnesses face to face during trial. Despite such waiver, an accused may invoke his or her constitutional right to meet the witness face to face at any stage of the proceedings through proper motion, provided it is shown that the waiver was not made freely, voluntarily, and knowingly. The court shall grant the same, unless its denial is warranted by a compelling state interest or public policy. Should the motion be granted, the court shall suspend the videoconference testimony of the witness and direct all concerned parties to appear in court for the next scheduled hearings.
The court may, at its own instance, order that the confrontation of a witness be conducted in person when the demeanor of the witness cannot be clearly observed.
Videoconferencing from Overseas
The amended Rules provide that parties interested in participating from overseas venues through videoconferencing shall initiate such action by filing a written motion. The court cannot compel any litigant or witness to participate or testify through videoconferencing from overseas venues.
The previous Guidelines stated that videoconferencing may be conducted only from an embassy or consulate of the Philippines. The amended rules expanded the overseas venues to other Philippine government offices abroad, other places allowed under applicable bilateral or multilateral agreements, and any other venue authorized by the Supreme Court for videoconferencing from abroad.
The presentation of a witness who is overseas through videoconferencing may only be conducted in overseas venues authorized by the Supreme Court and must be scheduled during the working hours of the Supreme Court.
Cases where the witnesses and/or parties will remotely appear from abroad must be given priority in the calendars by the courts.
Motion to Participate Through Videoconferencing
The amended Rules provide that in civil and criminal cases, the parties, through their counsel, individually or jointly, may, by written or oral motion, move that they be allowed to participate via videoconferencing.
In criminal cases, a motion to participate via videoconferencing shall be accompanied by a waiver of the right of the accused to meet witnesses face to face when the videoconferencing specifically involves the confrontation of a witness.
A written motion to participate through videoconferencing, whether the concerned party is situated domestically or abroad, shall be filed and served at least seven calendar days before the scheduled hearing date. The adverse party may file and serve electronically their comment within three calendar days from receipt of the motion. An oral motion to participate through videoconferencing shall be made in open court, and the parties shall immediately be given the opportunity to argue their respective positions. The judge shall rule on the matter on the same hearing date.
The Court shall resolve a written motion within three calendar days before the scheduled videoconferencing, with or without the comment from the adverse party. The order granting the written or oral motion or directing the conduct of videoconferencing at the court’s instance, shall be served electronically within 24 hours from its issuance.
The order granting the written or oral motion, or directing the conduct of videoconferencing at the court’s instance, shall not be subject to a motion for reconsideration or petition for certiorari, except on constitutional grounds, but may instead be raised in an appeal on the merits. An order denying the motion shall direct the conduct of in-person proceedings as scheduled.
The 2020 Guidelines set longer time periods for the aforementioned actions and did not provide for a particular rule on oral motions.
Location of Justices or Judges During Videoconferencing
Justices may participate and judges may preside from remote locations within the country on justifiable grounds. Justices must file a proper notice to the chairperson and members of the divisions before participation in such proceedings.
If judges preside outside the court’s territorial jurisdiction but within the judicial region, they shall give prior written notice to the concerned Office of the Regional Court Manager. If they preside from outside from their court’s judicial region, they must first seek prior clearance or permission from the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), in accordance with existing OCA circulars.
Service of Court Orders Made During Videoconferencing
The court shall, on the same day of the videoconferencing, serve electronic copies of orders issued to the parties and their counsel.
Minutes of Videoconferencing
The minutes of the videoconferencing shall indicate the respective locations of the participants.
Recording of Videoconferencing
All videoconferencing proceedings shall be recorded by the court, except proceedings during Court-Annexed Mediation or Judicial Dispute Resolution, which are prohibited under the 2020 Guideline for the Conduct of the Court-Annexed Mediation and Judicial Dispute Resolution in Civil Cases.
The link to the videoconferencing recording and the relevant electronic documents taken up or issued during the hearing shall form part of the minutes of the case.
In the cases of appeals, the videoconferencing recordings shall form part of the records elevated to the higher court.
The recordings shall be retained for as long as they are necessary in accordance with privacy laws and shall be disposed of pursuant to relevant Supreme court issuances on the disposition and destruction of court records, papers, and exhibits.
Official Platform for Videoconferencing
Courts shall conduct videoconferencing using only the authorized platform, except in small claims cases where the courts may authorize the use of another platform, software, or application known or available to the parties.
The amended Rules may be accessed through this link.
Photo by Sasun Bughdaryan on Unsplash
Published on June 7, 2022
Canon, EOS 5D Mark II
Free to use under the Unsplash License
https://unsplash.com/photos/a-wooden-gaven-sitting-on-top-of-a-computer-keyboard-b0pNcKAPDSg