DOMINADOR B. BUSTOS v. ANTONIO G. LUCERO, GR No.

L-2068, 1949-03-08
Facts:
As applied to criminal law, substantive law is that which declares what acts are crimes and
prescribes the punishment for committing them, as distinguished from the procedural law
which provides or regulates the steps by which one who commits a crime is to be punished.
(22 C. J.
S. 49.) Preliminary investigation is eminently and essentially remedial; it is the first step
taken in a criminal prosecution.
As a rule of evidence, Section 11 of Rule 108 is also procedural. Evidence - which is "the
mode and manner of proving the competent facts and circumstances on which a party relies
to establish the fact in dispute in judicial proceedings" - is identified with and forms part of...
the method by which, in private law, rights are enforced and redress obtained, and, in
criminal law, a law transgressor is punished. Criminal procedure refers to pleading,
evidence and practice. (State vs. Capaci, 154 So. 419, 179 La. 462.) The entire rules of
evidence have been... incorporated into the Rules of Court. We can not tear down Section
11 of Rule 108 on constitutional grounds without throwing out the whole code of evidence
embodied in these Rules.
Issues:
This cause is now before us on a motion for reconsideration. In the decision sought to be
reconsidered, we said, citing Dequito, et al. vs. Arellano, G. R. No. L-1336: "The
constitutional right of an accused to be confronted by the witnesses against him does... not
apply to preliminary hearings; nor will the absence of a preliminary examination be an
infringement of his right to confront witnesses. As a matter of fact, preliminary investigation
may be done away with entirely without infringing the constitutional right of an accused...
under the due process clause to a fair trial." We took this ruling to be ample enough to
dispose of the constitutional question pleaded in the application for certiorari. Heeding  the
wishes of the petitioner, we shall enlarge upon the  subject.
Ruling:
We can not agree with this view. We are of the opinion that Section 11 of Rule 108, like its
predecessors, is an adjective law and not a substantive law or substantive right.
Substantive law creates substantive rights and the two terms in this respect may be said to
be... synonymous. Substantive rights is a term which includes those rights which one enjoys
under the legal system prior to the disturbance of normal relations. (60 C. J. 980.)
Substantive law is that part of the law which creates, defines and regulates rights, or which
regulates the... rights and duties which give rise to a cause of action; that part of the law
which courts are established to administer; as opposed to adjective or remedial law, which
prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtains redress for their invasion.
First. Because "preliminary investigation is evidently and essentially remedial; it is the first
step taken in a criminal prosecution." x x x "is a rule of evidence, section 11 of Rule 108 is
also procedural." x x x "The entire rules of evidence have been incorporated into the
Rules of Court." and therefore "we can not tear down section 11 of Rule 108 on
constitutional grounds without throwing out the whole Code of evidence embodied in these
Rules."
Secondly, Because, "preliminary investigation is not an essential part of the due process of
law. It may be suppressed entirely, and if this may be done, mere restriction of the privilege
formerly enjoyed thereunder can not be held to fall within the constitutional... prohibition."
Lastly. Because "the distinction between remedy and substantive law is incapable of exact
definition. The difference is somewhat a question of degree." x x x It is difficult to draw a line
in any particular case beyond which legislative power over remedy and procedure can
pass... without touching upon the substantive right of parties affected, as it is impossible to
fix the boundary by any general condition, x x x "This being so it is inevitable that the
Supreme Court in making rules should step on substantive rights, and the Constitution must
be... presumed to tolerate if not to expect such incursion as does not affect the accused in a
harsh and arbitrary manner or deprive him of a defense, but operates only in a limited and
insubstantial manner to his disadvantage."
Therefore, the motion for reconsideration is granted, and after the necessary proceedings
the decision of the majority reversed or modified in accordance with my dissenting opinion.
Principles:
(1) As to the first argument, the premise "that preliminary investigation is evidently and
essentially remedial is not correct. Undoubtedly the majority means to say procedural, in
line with the conclusion in the resolution, because remedial law is one thing, and procedural
law... is another. Obviously they are different branches of the law, "Remedial Statute" is "a
statute providing a remedy for an injury as distinguished from a penal statute. A statute
giving a party a mode of remedy for a wrong where he had none or a different one before, x
xx
Remedial statutes are those which are made to supply such defects, and abridge such
superfluities, in the common law, as arise either from the general imperfections of all human
law, from change of time and the mistakes and unadvised determination of unlearned (or
even learned)... judges, or from any other cause whatsoever.
It is also not correct to affirm that Sec. 11 of Rule 108 relating to right of defendant after
arrest "is a rule of evidence and therefore is also procedural." In the first place, the
provisions of said section to the effect that "the defendant, after the arrest and his delivery...
to the court has the right to be informed of the complaint or information filed against him,
and also to be informed of the testimony and evidence presented against him, and may be
allowed to testify and present witnesses or evidence for him if he so desires," are not rules
of... evidence; and in the second place, it is evident that most of the rules of evidence, if not
all, are substantive laws that defines, creates or regulate rights, and not procedural.
Therefore, the argumentative conclusion that "we can not tear down section 11, of Rule
108, on constitutional grounds without throwing out the whole code of evidence embodied in
these rules," is evidently wrong, not only for the reason just stated, but because our
contention... that the defendant can not be deprived of his right to be confronted with and
cross-examine the witness of the prosecution in a preliminary investigation under
consideration would not, if upheld, necessarily tear down said section.
"The law having explicitly recognized and established that no person charged with the
commission of a crime shall be deprived of his liberty or subjected to trial without prior
preliminary investigation provided for in General Orders No. 58, as amended that... shall
show that there are reasonable grounds to believe him guilty, there can be no doubt that the
accused who is deprived of his liberty, tried and sentenced without the proper preliminary
investigation having been made in his regard, is convicted without due process of... law."
Besides, depriving an accused of his right to be confronted and cross-examine the witness
against him in a preliminary investigation would affect the accused not in a limited and
unsubstantial but in a harsh and arbitrary manner. The testimony of a witness given in the
absence... of the defendant and without an opportunity on the part of the latter to cross-
examine him is a hearsay evidence, and it should not be admitted against the defendant in
a preliminary investigation that is granted to the latter as a protection against hasty,
malicious and... oppressive prosecutions