Finally due process considerations require that the

Finally, due process considerations require that the
opposing party should, as a general rule, know his
adversary. “A party suing or sued is entitled to know who
his opponent is.” He cannot be obliged to grope in the
dark against unknown forces. Regala v.
Sandiganbayan – 262 SCRA 122
 Malimit robbed and stabbed Malaki in his store.
There were two witnesses, Batin and Rondon.
The appellant questions the credibility of
prosecution witnesses Florencio Rondon and
Edilberto Batin by pointing out their alleged
delay in revealing what they knew about the
incident. He posits that while the crime took
place on April 15, 1991, it was only on
September 17, 1991 when these witnesses
tagged him as the culprit. Appellant haphazardly
concluded that Rondon and Batin implicated the
appellant to this gruesome crime only on
September 17, 1991. The appellant also
asseverates that the admission as evidence of
Malaki’s wallet together with its contents, viz., (1)
Malaki’s residence certificate;22 (2) his
identification card;23 and (3) bunch of keys,
violates his right against self-incrimination.
Likewise, appellant sought for their exclusion
because during the custodial investigation,
wherein he pointed to the investigating
policemen the place where he hid Malaki’s
wallet, he was not informed of his constitutional
rights. Whether or not the trial court erred in
admitting as evidence the wallet and its
contents although the circumstances which
led to its production was obtained in
violation of the constitutional rights of the
accused
Answer : No. The right against self-incrimination
guaranteed under our fundamental law finds no
application in this case. This right, as put by Mr. Justice
Holmes in Holt vs. United States,26 “x x x is a prohibition
of the use of physical or moral compulsion, to extort
communications from him x x x.” It is simply a prohibition
against legal process to extract from the [accused]’s own
lips, against his will, admission of his guilt. It does not
apply to the instant case where the evidence sought to
be excluded is not an incriminating statement but object
evidence. People v. Malimit – 264 SCRA 167
 Former Senator Benigno S. Aquino, Jr. was
gunned down to death inside the premises of the
Manila International Airport (MIA) in Pasay City.
To determine the facts and circumstances
surrounding the killing and to allow a free,
unlimited and exhaustive investigation of all
aspects of the tragedy, PD 1886 was
promulgated creating an ad hoc Fact Finding
Board which later became more popularly
known as the Agrava Board. Pursuant to the
powers vested in it by PD 1886, the Board
conducted public hearings wherein various
witnesses appeared and testified and/or
produced documentary and other evidence
either in obedience to a subpoena or in
response to an invitation issued by the Board.