Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial has sparked conversations beyond politics, including a legal debate over whether a simple photocopy can actually be used as evidence in court. The issue trended after House prosecution lawyer Amando Virgil Ligutan argued that photocopies may be admitted as evidence, prompting an objection from defense lawyer Carlo Narvasa during the Senate impeachment trial. Their exchange quickly spread online, with many Filipinos wondering whether photocopies really carry legal weight in court.

As it turns out, the answer is yes. But not in every situation.

The case that clarified the rule

The issue was already settled by the Supreme Court in People of the Philippines v. Ybo Lastimosa in February 2025, where it clarified that a duplicate or photocopy of an original document may be admitted as evidence under the 2019 Revised Rules on Evidence, provided there is no genuine question regarding the authenticity of the original or that it would be unfair to rely on the duplicate.

The ruling stemmed from the murder case against Ybo Lastimosa, who was convicted over the fatal shooting of Ildefonso Vega Jr. in Cebu.

During trial, prosecutors presented a photocopy of the victim’s death certificate to support testimony that Vega died from gunshot wounds. Lastimosa later argued that the prosecution failed to prove the victim’s death because the original death certificate was never presented, and the photocopy had not been authenticated. The Supreme Court rejected that argument.

In a decision penned by Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo, the Court explained that Rule 130, Section 4(c) of the 2019 Revised Rules on Evidence now allows duplicates—including paper-based photocopies and electronic copies—to be treated the same as originals in most situations.

As the Court explained: “This approach reflects the practical realities of document usage and storage in the modern world, where duplicates are often indistinguishable from originals and can be more accessible.”

So, are photocopies always admissible?

Not necessarily. The Supreme Court emphasized that a photocopy may be admitted unless:

• There is a genuine question about whether the original document is authentic; or
• Admitting the duplicate would be unfair under the circumstances

The Court also clarified that while a photocopy may be admissible, its evidentiary weight is a separate matter. Judges still determine how much value to give the document based on the other evidence presented.

In Lastimosa’s case, the photocopy of the death certificate was supported by eyewitness testimony and the victim’s wife’s testimony, which together sufficiently established the victim’s death and the accused’s liability.

What this means

The ruling reflects a shift away from the old assumption that only the original paper document can be used in court.

Instead, Philippine courts now recognize that in an era of scanners, copiers, and digital records, duplicates are often just as reliable as originals—as long as no legitimate dispute exists over authenticity or fairness.

So while the exchange during the Sara Duterte impeachment trial brought renewed attention to the issue, the Supreme Court has already made its position clear: photocopies can be admissible evidence—but they are not automatically conclusive proof on their own.

Check us out on Facebook, Instagram, X, TikTok, and YouTube, to be the first to know about the latest news and coolest trends!