to a fair and public established by law”.13 hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal Several jurisdictions have acknowledged the use of video-link testimony as sufficient to meet fair trial requirements.'4 Video-link evidence may even provide a greater capacity to assess Ms. Veloso’s demeanour with the ability to pause, slow down, and replay the footage. Due to significant technological advances, the similarities between evidence given by video-link and evidence given physically in court are great and would allow for the traffickers to test the evidence of Ms. Veloso effectively. The presiding judge would still be able to intervene and take appropriate action to rectify any problems, and could even “halt the procedure reliability of the cross-examination Video-link evidence confrontation’. Current Philippine has the legislation if these or of the observation capacity allows to meet electronic the problems threaten the of the witness’ demeanour.”'s requirement testimonies of ‘face-to-face in criminal matters of necessary circumstances.!¢ Rule 10, section 1 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence states:'7 “... the court may authorize the presentation of testimonial evidence by electronic means. Before so authorizing, the court shall determine the necessity for such presentation and prescribe terms and conditions as may be necessary under the circumstances, including the protection of the rights of the parties and witnesses concerned.” Given the circumstances of Ms. Veloso’s inability to present face-to-face, electronic testimony is a necessity and should be admissible under the Rules on Electronic Evidence. Recommendations on facilitating electronic testimony are made below in section V. Section 13 of the Rules on Examination of Child Witness also provides another exception to section 14(2), Article III of the Constitution. Children are considered vulnerable witnesses and therefore are afforded extra protection in court proceedings. The Court may regulate the courtroom environment to prevent the child from facing the accused. Children are exempt from testifying in the witness chair and may give testimony via video link.18 Ms. Veloso is a vulnerable witness and should be extended extra protection in the trial of her traffickers. VULNERABLE WITNESSES & USE OF VIDEO-LINK TECHNOLOGY Philippine legislation sets out the criteria for vulnerable child witnesses, and the current legislative framework would support an expansion of vulnerable witness categories, such as victims of human trafficking. Analysing the information available at this stage to the public, Ms. Veloso is a victim of human trafficking, and therefore is a vulnerable witness. 3 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art.14(1), open for signature Dec. 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S 171. 14 See ANNEXURES A AND B. So. 2d 1364, 1372 (1998). A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC. [Rules of Electronic Evidence], rule 1, s 2, (June 18, 2001); Rules on Electronic Evidence A.M. of the Coverage of the Rules on Electronic Evidence, rule 1 s 1 (September 24, 2002) affirmed in People of the No. 204894, (March 10, 2014). rule 10, § 1, (June 18, 2001). 15 Harell v. State of Florida, 709 !¢ Rules on Electronic Evidence No. 01-7-01-SC, Re: Expansion Philippines v. Noel Enojas, G.R. 17 Rules of Electronic Evidence, '8 Rule on Examination of a Chiid Witness [Rule on Examination of a Child Witness], § 25 (a), 15 December bg_g:j/_\niwh_@_ro_bIesAcomj_cbld__witnessexaminatiomhtm#RuIe%ZOOn%ZOExamination%ZOof%ZOa%ZOChild%ZOWitneS§ September 2019). 2000 (last available accessed at 26