NICLD’s Founding Partner and CEO Atty. Migs Nograles-Almario recently published a think piece about the impact of screenshots (or “resibo culture”) in our daily lives. Here’s one particular quote in her article that we resonate with:
“Entire conversations archived inside phones, not for memory, but for protection. Messages are saved ‘just in case.’ Voice notes are preserved. Receipts are stored not to remember what was said, but to prove it was said at all.
And somewhere along the way, ordinary conversations began to feel less like conversations and more like potential evidence.”
Although the rise of messaging apps and the option of taking screenshots revolutionized the way we communicate, it also made conversations feel like potential evidence. It has made many people more guarded about what they say and whom they communicate with, for fear that their words may later be taken out of context or misconstrued.
With its social implications and how constant it became in our lives, screenshots eventually made their way to the legal system as digital evidence. But what does the law say about this?
How Screenshots Become Digital Evidence
A screenshot may be offered as evidence, but its admissibility and evidentiary value depend on compliance with the Rules on Electronic Evidence, including proper authentication.
- evidence that it had been digitally signed by the person purported to have signed the same;
- by evidence that other appropriate security procedures or devices as may be authorized by the Supreme Court or by law for authentication of electronic documents were applied to the document; or
- by other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge.
To fully understand how a screenshot can be admitted as evidence, let’s take a look at the case of Serrano v. Cruz-Angeles. This case involved multiple Facebook posts, which were alleged to be Atty. Cruz-Angeles and Atty. Paglinawan’s, about an ongoing case, and leaked an unsigned copy of the Complaint-Affidavit of their client.
The Court stated that the screenshots, although associated with the respondents, are only considered as documentary evidence, and their authenticity would still need to be proved. It is insufficient to allege that the post came from them just from the screenshot alone, and there must be proof that they owned the account and participated in the publishing of such posts.
To prove the identity of the social media account, the Court provided a guidepost in a recent case:
- Admission of ownership or authorship;
- Being seen accessing the account or composing the post;
- Containing information known only to the offender or a few people;
- Language consistent with the offender’s characteristics;
- Records from the internet service provider, telecommunications company, or social media site, and results from device forensic analysis showing geolocation features, and other attributes linking the account to the offender;
- Acts consistent with previous posts; or
- Other instances showing ownership, access, or authorship.
When “Receipts” Fail: Limitations of Screenshots as Evidence
Aside from proving the authenticity of the screenshots, other factors are considered to assess its evidentiary weight:
- The reliability of the manner or method in which it was generated, stored, or communicated;
- The reliability of the manner in which its originator was identified;
- The integrity of the information and communication system in which it is recorded or stored;
- The familiarity of the witness or the person who made the entry with the communication and information system;
- The nature and quality of the information which went into the communication and information system upon which the electronic data message or electronic document was based; or
- Other factors which the court may consider as affecting the accuracy or integrity of the electronic document or electronic data message.
Furthermore, other laws could affect the admissibility of the screenshots as evidence, and in some cases, could put you in trouble for it:
- Republic Act No. 10173 or the Data Privacy Act of 2012 – if the screenshot contains personal data or sensitive information and was transmitted to a third party, the person taking and sending the screenshot may be held liable under this law.
- Republic Act No. 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 – If screenshots are used to publish or circulate defamatory statements online, the responsible person may incur liability for cyber libel under applicable laws.
Based on our jurisprudence, having “receipts” alone is not enough to give you the upper hand in legal battles. Depending on the circumstances, screenshots may carry limited evidentiary value, be excluded for lack of proper authentication, or even expose a person to separate legal risks. But this doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t protect yourself; keeping receipts might help get you out of misunderstandings or disputes. However, when the situation escalates into a legal dispute, it is always best to have a lawyer by your side.