THE USE OF DNA, OR

DEOXYRIBONUCLEIC ACID AS
EVIDENCE

WHAT IS DNA?
DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material in humans and
almost all other organisms. Nearly every cell in a persons body has the
same DNA. Most DNA is located in the cell nucleus (where it is called
nuclear DNA), but a small amount of DNA can also be found in the
mitochondria (where it is calledmitochondrial DNAor mtDNA).
The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical
bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human
DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of
those bases are the same in all people.

The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information

available for building and maintaining an organism, similar to the way in
which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and
sentences.
DNA bases pair up with each other, A with T and C with G, to form units
called base pairs. Each base is also attached to a sugar molecule and a
phosphate molecule. Together, a base, sugar, and phosphate are called a
nucleotide. Nucleotides are arranged in two long strands that form a spiral
called a double helix. The structure of the double helix is somewhat like a
ladder, with the base pairs forming the ladders rungs and the sugar and
phosphate molecules forming the vertical sidepieces of the ladder.

USE OF DNA IN THE

PHILIPPINES

The introduction and use of DNA technology as evidence is a recent development in

the Philippines. This Article sheds light on the use of DNA technology to give those in
the legal profession a better understanding of its application in the Philippine setting.
First, DNA evidence is presented in court through expert testimony. The witness must
be properly qualified as an expert. Second, the DNA evidence must pass the tests of
admissibility. Third, there are several recognized DNA testing methods. This includes
Polymerase Chain Reaction and Short Tandem Repeat.
The Article also discusses how DNA evidence has been utilized in Philippine
jurisprudence. First, DNA evidence is used in criminal cases to prove the guilt of the
accused, such as inPeople v. Vallejo, where the accused was found guilty of rape with
homicide through DNA evidence.

Two other significant cases arePeople v. YatarandIn re: The Writ of Habeas Corpus for
Reynaldo de Villa. Second, DNA evidence is also used in cases to prove paternity and
filiation, in such cases asPe Lim v. Court of AppealsandCabitania v. Court of Appeals.
Two notable cases involving the use of DNA evidence are Agustin v. Court of
AppealsandHerrera v. Alba.
The Article also examines the probative value and weight of DNA Evidence. The
Supreme Court in People v. Vallejoprovided some principles to consider in assessing
the probative value of DNA: (1) how the samples were collected; (2) how they were
handled; (3) the possibility of contamination; (4) the procedure followed in analyzing
the samples; (5) whether the proper standards and procedures were followed; and (6)
the qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests.
The Author concludes that DNA testing is a valid probative tool in the Philippines. Its
high level of accuracy is highly useful. Promoting its use not only protects the rights of
the people, it also results in the improvement of the administration of justice.

HISTORY AND NATURE OF

DNA EVIDENCE

The Supreme Court discussed the nature of a Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)

in the a recent criminal case in People vs. Yatar, G.R. No. 164545, November
20, 2006]
DNA is a molecule that encodes the genetic information in all living
organisms. A persons DNA is the same in each cell and it does not change
throughout a persons lifetime; the DNA in a persons blood is the same as
the DNA found in his saliva, sweat, bone, the root and shaft of hair, earwax,
mucus, urine, skin tissue, and vaginal and rectal cells. Most importantly,
because of polymorphisms in human genetic structure, no two individuals
have the same DNA, with the notable exception of identical twins.

USE IN CRIMINAL
CASES
The use of DNA evidence in criminal cases was tackled inPeople vs. Yatar,
G.R. No. 164545, November 20, 2006] criminal case for rape with homicide.
DNA print or identification technology has been advanced as a
uniquely effective means to link a suspect to a crime, or to exonerate a
wrongly accused suspect, where biological evidence has been left. For
purposes of criminal investigation, DNA identification is a fertile source of
both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence. It can assist immensely in
effecting a more accurate account of the crime committed, efficiently
facilitating the conviction of the guilty, securing the acquittal of the
innocent, and ensuring the proper administration of justice in every case.

DNA evidence collected from a crime scene can link a suspect to a crime or
eliminate one from suspicion in the same principle as fingerprints are used.Incidents
involving sexual assault would leave biological evidence such as hair, skin tissue,
semen, blood, or saliva which can be left on the victims body or at the crime scene.
Hair and fiber from clothing, carpets, bedding, or furniture could also be transferred to
the victims body during the assault.Forensic DNA evidence is helpful in proving that
there was physical contact between an assailant and a victim. If properly collected
from the victim, crime scene or assailant, DNA can be compared with known samples
to place the suspect at the scene of the crime.
In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, courts should consider,inter
alia, the following factors: how the samples were collected, how they were handled,
the possibility of contamination of the samples, the procedure followed in analyzing
the samples, whether the proper standards and procedures were followed in
conducting the tests, and the qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests.

DNA EVIDENCE IN OTHER

JURISDICTIONS
The use of DNA as evidence in the Philippines is relatively new. Prior to
the issuance of the Rule on DNA Evidence, there were no guidelines on
the use of this type of evidence, including its probative value. According
to the Supreme Court: "Admittedly, we are just beginning to integrate
these advances in science and technology in the Philippine criminal
justice system, so we must be cautious as we traverse these relatively
uncharted waters. Fortunately, we can benefit from the wealth of
persuasive jurisprudence that has developed in other jurisdictions.
Specifically, the prevailing doctrine in the U.S. has proven instructive.
"People vs. Yatar, G.R. No. 164545, November 20, 2006]