It is true that the Supreme Court recognizes DNA evidence to help in arriving at a decision, but it is only supplementary and not a mandatory requirement to arrive at a sound judgment. The Philippines does not have a legislation which systematizes forensic evidence collection, preservation, and utilization. Memory is one of the most fragile and most error-filled source of testimony. It can change based on context, influence, and time. Yet, testimonies are relied upon to convict a person with heinous crimes, and worse, it is relied upon to justify death.
Weak reliance to forensic evidence, unclear system of collection, preservation, and utilization of such pieces of evidence, and the over-reliance to testimonies have brought about an age of evidence based on subjective perception. This calls for a discussion on the human rights implications on children of (1) failing to establish a systemic and reliable forensic evidence collection, preservation, and utilization; (2) wrongful convictions relying on testimonial evidence in a science heavy case; and (3) death and convictions of a breadwinner in a family with children.
The creation of legislation, the execution of legal decisions, and the issuance of policies must consider that forensic evidence protects children’s safety and welfare, together with the rest of the public and to do so requires the better appreciation and utilization of forensic science through accumulation of funds and procurement of available technologies. It is not enough to view forensic science and evidence in a case-to-case basis. It requires looking into a larger picture of the effects and who are affected.