Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 15

IV.

READMISSION TO THE BAR

Q: What is reinstatement? A: It is the restoration in disbarment proceedings to a disbarred lawyer the privilege to practice law.
Note: The power of the Supreme Court to reinstate is based on its constitutional prerogative to promulgate rules on the admission of applicants to the practice of law. (Sec. 5[5], Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution)

Q: What are the conditions in reinstatement? A: The applicant must, like a candidate for admission to the Bar, satisfy the Court that he is a person of good moral character a fit and proper person to practice law. A. READMISSION TO THE BAR OF LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED Q: Raul Gonzales was found guilty of both contempt of court in facie curiae and gross misconduct as an officer of court and member of the bar. For this, he was suspended indefinitely. After more than 4 years from his suspension, Gonzales filed an ex-parte motion to lift his suspension from the practice of law, alleging that he gave free legal aid services by paying lawyers to do the same as he could not personally represent said clients; pursued civic work for the poor; brought honor to the country by delivering a paper in Switzerland; that he has a long record in the service of human rights and the rule of law; his suspension of 51 months has been the longest so far; states his profound regrets for the inconvenience which he has caused to the Court; sincerely reiterates his respect to the institution as he reiterates his oath to conduct himself as a lawyer. May his suspension be lifted? A: Yes. The Gonzales contrition, so noticeably absent in his earlier pleadings, has washed clean the offense of his disrespe ct. His remorse has soften his arrogance and made up for his misconduct. Gonzales suspension has given him ample time and opportunity to amend his erring ways, rehabilitate himself, and thus, prove himself worthy once again to enjoy the privileges of membership of the Bar. His motion was granted. (Zaldivar v. Gonzales, G.R. Nos. 79690-707, April 7, 1993) Q: Is the lifting of the suspension order automatic? A: No. The lifting of a lawyers suspension is not automatic upon the end of the period stated in the Courts decision, and an o rder from the Court lifting the suspension at the end of the period is necessary in order to enable [him] to resume the practice of his profession. (J.K. Mercado and Sons Agricultural Enterprises, Inc. et al. v. Atty. de Vera, et al. and Atty. de Vera v. Atty. Encanto, et al.) Thus, according to the OBC, a suspended lawyer must first present proof(s) of his compliance by submitting certifications from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and from the Executive Judge that he has indeed desisted from the practice of law during the period of suspension. Thereafter, the Court, after evaluation, and upon a favorable recommendation from the OBC, will issue a resolution lifting the order of suspension and thus allow him to resume the practice of law. (Maniago v. Atty. De Dios, A.C. No. 7472, March 30, 2010) Q: What are the guidelines to be observed in case of lifting an order suspending a lawyer from the practice of law? A: The following guidelines were issued by the Supreme Court, the same to be observed in the matter of the lifting of an order suspending a lawyer from the practice of law: 1. After a finding that respondent lawyer must be suspended from the practice of law, the Court shall render a decision imposing the penalty; 2. Unless the Court explicitly states that the decision is immediately executory upon receipt thereof, respondent has 15 days within which to file a motion for reconsideration thereof. The denial of said motion shall render the decision final and executory; 3. Upon the expiration of the period of suspension, respondent shall file a Sworn Statement with the Court, through the Office of the Bar Confidant, stating therein that he or she has desisted from the practice of law and has not appeared in any court during the period of his or her suspension; 4. Copies of the Sworn Statement shall be furnished to the Local Chapter of the IBP and to the Executive Judge of the courts where respondent has pending cases handled by him or her, and/or where he or she has appeared as counsel; 5. The Sworn Statement shall be considered as proof of respondents compliance with the order of suspension; 6. Any finding or report contrary to the statements made by the lawyer under oath shall be a ground for the imposition of a more severe punishment, or disbarment, as may be warranted. B. READMISSION TO THE BAR OF LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN DISBARRED Q: What must the Supreme Court take into consideration in reinstatement? A: 1. The applicants character and standing prior to the disbarment; 2. The nature and character of the charge for which he was disbarred; 3. His conduct subsequent to the disbarment, and the time that has elapsed between the disbarment and the application for reinstatement; (Prudential Bank v. Benjamin Grecia, A.C. No. 2756, Dec. 18, 1990) 4. His efficient government service; (In re: Adriatico, G.R. No. L-2532, Nov. 17, 1910) 5. Applicants appreciation of the significance of his dereliction and his assurance that he now possesses the requisite prob ity and integrity; and 6. Favorable endorsement of the IBP and pleas of his loved ones. (Yap Tan v. Sabandal, B.M. No. 144, Feb. 24, 1989)
Note: Whether or not the applicant shall be reinstated rests on the discretion of the court. (Prudential Bank v. Benjamin Grecia, A.C. No. 2756, Dec. 18, 1990) The court may require applicant for reinstatement to enroll in and pass the required fourth year review classes in a recognized law school. (Cui v. Cui, In Re: Resian A.C. No. 270, Mar. 1974)

Q: What is the effect of reinstatement? A: 1. Reinstatement to the roll of attorneys wipes out the restrictions and disabilities resulting from a previous disbarment (Cui v. Cui, G.R. No. L-18727, Aug. 31, 1964);

2. Recognition of moral rehabilitation and mental fitness to practice law; 3. Lawyer shall be subject to same law, rules and regulations as those applicable to any other lawyer; and 4. Lawyer must comply with the conditions imposed on his readmission. Q: Is a disbarred lawyer by reason of conviction of a crime automatically reinstated to the practice of law upon being pardoned by the President? A: No. To be reinstated, there is still a need for the filing of an appropriate petition with the Supreme Court. (In re: Rovero, A.M. No. 126, Dec. 29, 1980) Q: What is the effect if during the pendency of a disbarment proceeding, the erring lawyer was granted executive pardon? A: If during the pendency of a disbarment proceeding the respondent was granted executive pardon, the dismissal of the case on that sole basis will depend on whether the executive pardon is absolute or conditional. 1. Absolute or unconditional pardon - the disbarment case will be dismissed. 2. Conditional pardon - the disbarment case will not be dismissed on the basis thereof. Q: X filed proceedings for disbarment against his lawyer, Atty. C, following the latters conviction for estafa for misappropriating funds belonging to his client (X). While the proceedings for disbarment was pending, the President granted absolute pardon in favor of Atty. C. Atty. C, then, moved for the dismissal of the disbarment case. Should the motion be granted? A: An absolute pardon by the President is one that operates to wipe out the conviction as well as the offense itself. The grant thereof to a lawyer is a bar to a proceeding for disbarment against him, if such proceeding is based solely on the fact of such conviction. (In re: Parcasio, A.C. No. 100, Feb. 18, 1976) But where the proceeding to disbar is founded on the professional misconduct involved in the transaction which culminated in his conviction, the effect of the pardon is only to relieve him of the penal consequences of his act and does not operate as a bar to the disbarment proceeding,

inasmuch as the criminal acts may nevertheless constitute proof that the attorney does not possess good moral character. (In re: Lontok, 43 Phil. 293, Apr. 7, 1922)
Note: In the light of recent court pronouncements that a lawyer may be disciplined even for non-professional misconduct, one may argue that a lawyer convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, and subsequently receives absolute pardon, may still be proceeded against under the Code of Professional Responsibility even if the acts of which he was found guilty did not involve professional misconduct (A modification of In Re Lontok, supra). The ground for the petition for disciplinary action under the Code must, however, not be founded alone on the conviction but must be based on the acts committed by the lawyer which rendered him morally unfit to be a member of the bar. (Aguirre, Legal and Judicial Ethics. A Pre-week Reviewer, 2006 Edition)

Q: X, a member of the Bar, was charged with and found guilty of estafa, for which he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment and to indemnify the offended party for the amount Involved. Not having taken an appeal from the judgment of conviction, upon finality thereof he was taken into custody to serve sentence. A month after he was incarcerated, he was granted pardon by the Chief Executive on condition that he would not commit another offense during the unserved portion of his prison sentence. Soon after Xs release from custody af ter being pardoned, the offended party in the criminal case filed a Complaint for Disbarment against X in the Supreme Court. X set up the defense that having been pardoned by the Chief Executive for which reason he was released from imprisonment, he may not be disbarred from the practice of law anymore. Is Xs contention tenable? A: Xs contention is not tenable. He was granted only a conditional pardon. Such conditional pardon merely relieved him of the penal consequences of his act but did not operate as a bar to his disbarment. Such pardon does not reach the offense itself. Hence, it does not constitute a bar to his disbarment. (In re Gutierrez, A.C. No. L-363, July 31, 1962; In re Avancena, A.C. No. 407, August 15, 1967). Furthermore, the acts of X leading to his conviction may be used to show that he does not possess the necessary requirement of good moral character for continued membership in the Bar (In re Valloces, A.C. No. 439, September 30, 1982). (1999 Bar Question) C. READMISSION TO THE BAR OF LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN REPATRIATED Q: What are the effects of loss and reacquisition of Philippine citizenship? A: The loss of Philippine citizenship ipso jure terminates the privilege to practice law in the Philippines. However, pursuant to R.A. No. 9225 of the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003, Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of another country is deemed never to have lost his Philippine citizenship IF HE REACQUIRES IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH R.A. NO. 9225. Nevertheless, his right to practice law DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY ACCRUE. He must first secure authority from the Supreme Court upon compliance with the following conditions: 1. The updating and payment in full of annual membership dues in the IBP; 2. Payment of professional tax; 3. Completion of at least 36 credit hours of mandatory continuing legal educations; and 4. Retaking of the lawyers oath Q: Dacanay practiced law until he migrated to Canada to seek medical attention to his ailments. He subsequently applied for Canadian citizenship to avail of Canadas free medical aid program. His application was approved and he became a Canadian citizen. Dacanay later on reacquired his Philippine citizenship by virtue of R.A. 9225. Did Dacanay lose his membership in the Philippine bar when he gave up his Philippine citizenship? Can he automatically practice law upon reacquiring Filipino citizenship? A: The Constitution provides that the practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens save in cases prescribed by law. Since Filipino citizenship is a requirement for admission to the bar, loss thereof terminates membership in the Philippine bar and, consequently, the privilege to engage in the practice of law. In other words, the loss of Filipino citizenship ipso jure terminates the privilege to practice law in the Philippines. The practice of law is a privilege denied to foreigners. The exception is when Filipino citizenship is lost by reason of naturalization as a citizen of another country but subsequently reacquired pursuant to R.A. 9225. This is because all Philippine citizens who become citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of R.A. 9225. Therefore, a Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of another country is deemed never to have lost his Philippine citizenship if he reacquires it in accordance with R.A. 9225. Although he is also deemed never to have terminated his membership in the Philippine bar, no automatic right to resume law practice accrues. Before a lawyer who reacquires Filipino citizenship pursuant to R.A. 9225 can resume his law practice, he must first secure from the SC the authority to do so, conditioned on: 1. The updating and payment in full of the annual membership dues in the IBP; 2. The payment of professional tax; 3. The completion of at least 36 credit hours of mandatory continuing legal education, this is specially significant to refresh the applicant/petitioners knowledge of Philippine laws and update h im of legal developments; and The retaking of the lawyers oath which will not only remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a lawyer and as an officer of the Court, but also renew his pledge to maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines. (Petition for Leave to Resume Practice of Law of Benjamin Dacanay, B.M. No. 1678, Dec. 17, 2007)

In which case, the following persons may be appointed as notaries: 1. Those who passed the studies of law in a reputable university; or 2. A clerk or deputy clerk of court for a period of not less than two years. Q: Can an RTC judge notarize a document? A: No. Section 35, Rule 138, of the Revised Rules of Court as well as Canon 5, Rule 5.07 of the Code of Judicial Conduct provides that no judge or other official or employee of the superior courts shall engage in private practice as a member of the bar or give professional advice to clients. Notarization of documents is considered a practice of law. It is based on sound reasons of public policy, for there is no question that the rights, duties, privileges and functions of the office of an attorney-at-law are so inherently incompatible with the high official functions, duties, powers, discretions and privileges of a judge of the Regional Trial Court. This rule makes it obligatory upon the judicial officers concerned to give their full time and attention to their judicial duties, prevent them from extending special favors for their own private interests and assure the public of impartiality in the performance of their functions. Q: Are MTC judges prohibited from acting as notary public? A: No. MTC and MCTC judges may act as notaries public ex-officio in the notarization of documents connected only with the exercise of their official functions and duties. They may not, as notaries public ex-officio, undertake the preparation and acknowledgment of private documents, contracts and other acts of conveyances which bear no direct relation to the performance of their functions as judges. However, MTC and MCTC judges assigned to municipalities or circuits with no lawyers or notaries public may, in the capacity as notaries public ex-officio, perform any act within the competence of a regular notary public, provided that: 1. All notarial fees charged be for the account of the Government and turned over to the municipal treasurer; and 2. Certification be made in the notarized documents attesting to the lack of any lawyer or notary public in such municipality or circuit. Q: Vicente Batic charged Judge Victorio Galapon Jr. with engaging in unauthorized notarial practice for having notarized a Deed of Absolute Sale between Antonio Caamic and Lualhati Ellert. Under the deed of sale, Lualhati Ellert, was described as single. At the time of Galapons notarization of the Deed of Sale, there was a notary public in Dulag, Leyte. Judge Galapon claims that he did not prepare the document and that his participation was limited to its acknowledgment, for which the corresponding fee was collected by and paid to the clerk of court. Are MTC judges like Judge Galapon absolutely prohibited from acting as notaries public? A: No. While Judge Galapon explains that he sincerely believed that when no notary public is available, the MTC may act as ex-officio notary public, provided the fees shall be for the government, such is not enough to exonerate him from liability. His acts do not fall under the exception because at the time of his notarization of the Deed of Sale, there was a notary public in Dulag, Leyte. (Vicente Batic v. Judge Victorio Galapon Jr., A.M. No. MTJ-99-1239, July 29, 2005) Q: Is the authority of MTC judges to notarize limited to their sala? A: Yes. Their authority to notarize is limited to their sala. Q: Can a judge of another town notarize the complaint to be filed in another town? A: No. It is considered as a practice of law. Q: Can a clerk of court notarize a document? A: Yes. A clerk of court can notarize a document provided he is commissioned and has been permitted by his superior. Such consent is necessary because the act of notarizing a document is a practice of law. Q: What are the rules with regard to fees that a notary public may charge? A: 1. For performing a notarial act, a notary public may charge the maximum fee as prescribed by the Supreme Court unless he waives the fee in whole or in part (Sec. 1, Rule V, A. M. 02-8-13-SC); 2. A notary public may charge travel fees and expenses separate and apart from the notarial fees when traveling to perform a notarial act if the notary public and the person requesting the notarial act agree prior to the travel (Sec. 2, Rule V, A. M. 02-813-SC); 3. No fee or compensation of any kind, except those expressly prescribed and allowed herein, shall be collected or received for any notarial service (Sec. 3, Rule V, A. M. 02-813-SC); 4. A notary public shall not require payment of any fees specified herein prior to the performance of a notarial act unless otherwise agreed upon( first par., Sec. 4, Rule V, A. M. 02-813-SC); 5. Any travel fees and expenses paid to a notary public prior to the performance of a notarial act are not subject to refund if the notary public had already traveled but failed to complete in whole or in part the notarial act for reasons beyond his control and without negligence on his part (second par., Sec. 4, Rule V, A. M. 02-813-SC).
Note: A notary public who charges fee for notarial services shall issue a receipt registered with the Bureau of Internal revenue and keep a journal of notarial fees. He shall enter in the journal all fees charges for services rendered. A notary public shall post in a conspicuous place in his office a complete schedule of chargeable notarial fees. (Sec. 5, Rule V, A. M. 02-813-SC)

B. TERM OF OFFICE OF A NOTARY PUBLIC Q: What is the term of office of a notary public? A: A notary public may perform notarial acts for a period of 2 years commencing the 1st day of January of the year in which the commissioning is made, unless earlier revoked or the notary public has resigned under the Rules on Notarial Practice and the Rules of Court.(Section 11, Rule III,A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) (1995 Bar Question)

Q: Juan dela Cruz was commissioned as a notary public in 2001. His friend asked him to notarize a deed of absolute sale sometime in 2004, to which he agreed free of charge. A complaint for malpractice was filed against him. Is Juan dela Cruz guilty of malpractice? A: Yes. Absent any showing that his notarial commission has been renewed, his act constitutes malpractice because at the time he notarized the document, his notarial commission has already expired. It is not a defense that no payment has been received. The requirement for the issuance of the commission as notary public must not be treated as a mere casual formality. In fact, Juans act also constitutes falsification of public document. Q: What is a commission? A: It refers to the grant of authority to perform notarial acts and to the written evidence of the authority (Sec. 3, Rule II, A.M. 02-8-13-SC). Q: Who issues a notarial commission? A: A notarial commission may be issued by an Executive Judge to any qualified person who submits a petition in accordance with the Rules on Notarial Practice. (first par., Sec. 1, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Q: What is the form of the petition and supporting documents for a notarial commission? A: Every petition for a notarial commission shall be in writing, verified, and shall include the following: 1. A statement containing the petitioner's personal qualifications, including the petitioner's date of birth, residence, telephone number, professional tax receipt, roll of attorney's number and IBP membership number; 2. Certification of good moral character of the petitioner by at least 2 executive officers of the local chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines where he is applying for commission; 3. Proof of payment for the filing of the petition as required by the Rules on Notarial Practice; and 4. Three passport-size color photographs with light background taken within 30 days of the application. The photograph should not be retouched. The petitioner shall sign his name at the bottom part of the photographs. (Sec. 2,Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Note: Every petitioner for a notarial commission shall pay the application fee as prescribed in the Rules of Court. (Sec. 3, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

Q: Before the Executive Judge shall conduct a summary hearing on the petition, what requirements must be met?

1. The petition is sufficient in form and substance; 2. The petitioner proves the allegations contained in the petition; and 3. The petitioner establishes to the satisfaction of the Executive Judge that he has read and fully understood the Rules on Notarial Practice.
Note:: The Executive Judge shall forthwith issue a commission and a Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal in favor of the petitioner. (Sec. 4, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Note: Any person who has any cause or reason to object to the grant of the petition may file a verified written opposition thereto. The opposition must be received by the Executive Judge before the date of the summary hearing.(Sec. 6, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Note: The commissioning of a notary public shall be in a formal order signed by the Executive Judge. (Sec. 7, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Note: Every person commissioned as notary public shall have only one official seal of office. (Sec. 10, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

Q: What must a notary public do when his commission expires? A: A notary public may file a written application with the Executive Judge for the renewal of his commission within 45 days before the expiration thereof. A mark, image or impression of the seal of the notary public shall be attached in the application. (first par., Sec. 13, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Note: If a person is applying for a commission for the first time, what he files is a petition and not an application.

Q: what is the effect of failure of the notary public to file an application for the renewal of his commission? A: Failure to file said application will result in the deletion of the name of the notary public in the register of notaries public. (second par., Sec. 13, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Note: The notary public thus removed from the Register of Notaries Public may only be reinstated therein after he is issued a new commission. (third par., Sec. 13, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Note: The Executive Judge shall, upon payment of the application fee, act on an application for renewal of a commission within thirty (30) days from receipt thereof. If the application is denied, the Executive Judge shall state the reasons therefor. (Sec. 14, Rule III, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

C. POWERS AND LIMITATIONS OF A NOTARY PUBLIC


Note: Notarial Act and Notarization refer to any act that a notary public is empowered to perform under these Rules. (Sec. 7, Rule II, A.M. 02-8-13-SC)

Q: What are the powers of a notary public? A: A notary public is empowered to perform the following notarial acts: JAO-CAS 1. Acknowledgements; 2. Oaths and affirmations; 3. Jurats; 4. Signature witnessings; 5. Copy certifications; and 6. Any other act authorized by these rules (Section 1(a), Rule IV, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Acknowledgements Q: What is an acknowledgement? A: Acknowledgment refers to an act in which an individual on a single occasion: 1. Appears in person before the notary public and presents an integrally complete instrument or document;
Note: A notary public cannot perform a notarial act over a document that has missing pages, or that contains blanks that should be filled-in prior to the notarial act.

2. Is attested to be personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by the Rules on Notarial Practice; and 3. Represents to the notary public that the signature on the instrument or document was voluntarily affixed by him for the purposes stated in the instrument or document, declares that he has executed the instrument or document as his free and voluntary act and deed, and, if he acts in a particular representative capacity, that he has the authority to sign in that capacity. (Sec. 1, Rule II, A.M. 02-813-SC)

Q: Cabanilla filed a complaint against Atty. Cristal-Tenorio with the IBP, alleging that he never appeared before her when she notarized the deed of sale of his house, and that the signatures appearing opposite their respective names were forgeries. Did Atty. Cristal-Tenorio fail to comply with the mandates of the law when she notarized the deed of sale without the complainant and his children? Does such failure warrant the revocation of her notarial commission? A: Yes. Under Section 1(a) of Act 2103, a notary public taking the acknowledgment in a document or instrument is mandated to certify that the person acknowledging the instrument or document is known to him and that he is the same person who executed it and acknowledged that the same is his free act and deed. To "acknowledge before" means to avow; to own as genuine, to assert, to admit; and "before" means in front or preceding in space or ahead of. A party acknowledging must appear before the notary public. A notary public should not notarize a document unless the persons who signed the same are the very same persons who executed and personally appeared before the said notary public to attest to the contents and truth of what are stated therein. The presence of the parties to the deed making the acknowledgment will enable the notary public to verify the genuineness of the signature of the affiant. A notary public is enjoined from notarizing a fictitious or spurious document. The function of a notary public is, among others, to guard against any illegal deed. (Cabanilla v. Cristal-Tenorio, A.C. No. 6139, Nov. 11, 2003) Oaths and Affirmations Q: What is affirmation or oath? A: It refers to an act in which an individual on a single occasion: 1. Appears in person before the notary public; 2. Is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by the Rules on Notarial Practice; and 3. Avows under penalty of law to the whole truth of the contents of the instrument or document. (Sec. 2,Rule II,A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Republic Act No. 9406. March 23, 2007. AN ACT REORGANIZING AND STRENGTHENING THE PUBLIC ATTORNEY'S OFFICE (PAO), AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE PERTINENT PROVISIONS OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 292, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE "ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF 1987", AS AMENDED, GRANTING SPECIAL ALLOWANCE TO PAO OFFICIALS AND LAWYERS, AND PROVIDING FUNDS THEREFOR Section 8. Sections 41 and 42, Chapter 10, Book I of the same Code, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows: Q: Who are the officers authorized to administer oaths? A: The following officers have general authority to administer oaths: 1. President; 2. Vice-President; 3. Members and Secretaries of both Houses of the Congress; 4. Members of the Judiciary; 5. Secretaries of Departments; 6. provincial governors and lieutenant-governors; 7. City mayors; 8. Municipal mayors; 9. Bureau directors; 10. Regional directors; 11. Clerk of courts; 12. Registrars of deeds; 13. Other civilian officers in the public service of the government of the Philippines whose appointments are vested in the President and are subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments; 14. All other constitutional officers; 15. PAO lawyers in connection with the performance of duty; and 16. notaries public. (Sec. 41) Q: What is the rule regarding the duty to administer oaths? A: Officers authorized to administer oaths, with the exception of notaries public, municipal judges and clerks of court, are not obliged to administer oaths or execute certificates save in matters of official business or in relation to their functions as such; and with the exception of notaries public, the officer performing the service in those matters shall charge no fee, unless specifically authorized by law. (Section 42)
Note: P.A.O. Lawyers now have the authority to administer oaths, provided it is in connection with the performance of their duties. The fiscal or the state prosecutor has the authority to administer oaths. (R.A. No. 5180, as amended by P.D. 911)

Jurats Q: What is a jurat? A: It refers to an act in which an individual on a single occasion: 1. Appears in person before the notary public and presents an instrument or document; 2. Is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by the Rules on Notarial Practice; 3. Signs the instrument or document in the presence of the notary; and 4. Takes an oath or affirmation before the notary public as to such instrument or document. (Sec. 6, Rule II, A.M. 02-8-13-SC)
Note: A jurat is not a part of a pleading but merely evidences the fact that the affidavit was properly made. The claim or be.lief of Atty. Dela Rea that the presence of petitioner Gamido was not necessary for the jurat because it is not an acknowledgment is patently baseless. If this had been his belief since he was first commissioned as a notary public, then he has been making a mockery of the legal solemnity of an oath in

a jurat. Notaries public and others authorized by law to administer oaths or to take acknowledgments should not take for granted the solemn duties appertaining to their offices. Such duties are dictated by public policy and are impressed with public interest. (Gamido v. Bilibid Prisons Officials, G.R. No. 114829, Mar. 1, 1995)

Q: Distinguish acknowledgement from jurat. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Act of one who has executed a deed, in going to some competent officer or court and declaring it to be his act or deed. The notary public or officer taking the acknowledgement shall certify that the person acknowledging the instrument or document is known to him and he is the same person who executed it and acknowledged that the same is his free act and deed. Two-fold purpose: to authorize the deed to be given in evidence without further proof of its execution, and, to entitle it to be recorded. Where used: 1. To authenticate an agreement between two or more persons; or 2. Where the document contains a disposition of property. E.g. The acknowledgement in a deed of lease of land. JURAT That part of an affidavit in which the notary public or officer certifies that the instrument was sworn to before him. It is not part of a pleading but merely evidences the fact that the affidavit was properly made.

Purpose: Gives the document a legal character.

Where used: 1. Affidavits; 2. certifications; 3. Whenever the person executing makes a statement of facts or attests to the truth of an event, under oath. E.g. An affidavit subscribed before a notary public or public official authorized for the purpose.

Note: If a document is certified by way of jurat, instead of acknowledgement, the document is a private one. Hence, to be admissible as evidence, the same must be offered and proven in accordance with the Rules on Evidence. Signature Witnessing

Q: What is signature witnessing? A: It refers to a notarial act in which an individual on a single occasion: 1. Appears in person before the notary public and presents an instrument or document; 2. Is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by the Rules on Notarial Practice; and 3. Signs the instrument or document in the presence of the notary public. (Sec. 14, Rule II, A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Q: Is a notary public authorized to certify the affixing of a signature by thumb or other mark on an instrument or document presented for notarization? A: Yes. It is also within the powers of a notary public, provided:

1. The thumb or other mark is affixed in the presence of the notary public and of two (2) disinterested and unaffected witnesses to the instrument or document; 2. Both witnesses sign their own names in addition to the thumb or other mark; 3. The notary public writes below the thumb or other mark: thumb or other mark affixed by (name of signatory by mark) in the presence of (names and addresses of witnesses) and undersigned notary public, and 4. The notary public notarizes the signature by thumb or other mark through an acknowledgment, jurat or signature witnessing. (Sec. 1(b), Rule IV, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) (1995 Bar Question) Q: Is a notary public authorized to sign on behalf of a person who is physically unable to sign or make a mark on an instrument or document? A: Yes. It likewise falls within the powers of a notary public, provided: 1. The notary public is directed by the person unable to sign or make a mark to sign on his behalf; 2. The signature of the notary public is affixed in the presence of 2 disinterested and unaffected witnesses to the instrument or document; 3. Both witnesses sign their own names; 4. The notary public writes below his signature: Signature affixed by notary in the presence of (names and addresses of person and 2 witnesses), and 5. The notary public notarizes his signature by acknowledgment or jurat. (Sec. 1(c), Rule IV, A.M. 02-8-13-SC) (1995 Bar Question) Copy Certifications Q: What is copy certification? A: It refers to a notarial act in which a notary public: 1. Is presented with an instrument or document that is neither a vital record, a public record, nor publicly recordable;

2. Copies or supervises the copying of the instrument or document; 3. Compares the instrument or document with the copy; and 4. Determines that the copy is accurate and complete. (Sec. 4, Rule II, A.M. 02-8-13-SC)
Note: The document copied must be an original document. It cannot be a copy itself.

Q: How should a notary public notarize a paper instrument or document? A: In notarizing a paper instrument or document, a notary public shall: 1. Sign by hand on the notarial certificate only the name indicated and as appearing on the notary's commission; 2. Not sign using a facsimile stamp or printing device; and 3. Affix his official signature only at the time the notarial act is performed.(Sec. 1, Rule VII, A.M. 02-8-13-SC) Q: What are the effects of notarization? A: 1. The notary, in effect, proclaims to the world that: a. All the parties therein personally appeared before him; b. They are personally known to him; c. They are the same persons who executed the instrument; d. He inquired into the voluntariness of the execution of the instrument; e. They acknowledge personally before him that they voluntarily and freely executed the same. 2. Converts a private document into a public one and renders it admissible in court without further proof of its authenticity. 3. Documents enjoy a presumption of regularity. It constitutes prima facie evidence of the facts which give rise to their execution and of the date of said execution, but not of the truthfulness of the statement.
Note: The reason for the presumption is that the law assumes that the act which the officer witnessed and certified to or the date written by him are not shown to be false since notaries are public officers. Note: A notarial document is by law entitled to full faith and credit upon its face and, for this reason, notaries public must observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the performance of their duties, lest, the confidence of the public in the integrity of the document will be undermined.

Q: What is a notarial certificate? A: It refers to the part of, or attachment to a notarized instrument or document that is completed by the notary public which bears the notary's signature and seal, and states the facts attested to by the notary public in a particular notarization as provided for by the Rules on Notarial Practice. (Sec. 8, Rule II, A. M. No. 02-8-13)
Note: Loose notarial certificate refers to a notarial certificate that is attached to a notarized instrument or document. Note: "Official seal" or "seal" refers to a device for affixing a mark, image or impression on all papers officially signed by the notary public conforming the requisites prescribed by the Rules on Notarial Practice. (Sec. 13,Rule II, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

Q: What must the notarial certificate contain? A: 1. The name of the notary public as exactly indicated in the commission; 2. The serial number of the commission of the notary public; 3. The words "Notary Public" and the province or city where the notary public is commissioned, the expiration date of the commission, the office address of the notary public; and 4. The roll of attorney's number, the professional tax receipt number and the place and date of issuance thereof, and the IBP membership number. (Sec. 2, Rule VIII, A.M. 02-8-13-SC)
Note: A notary public shall not: a. execute a certificate containing information known or believed by the notary to be false. b. affix an official signature or seal on a notarial certificate that is incomplete.

Q: What are the limitations to the performance of a notarial act of a notary public? A: A person shall not perform a notarial act if: 1. The person involved as signatory to the instrument or document is: a. Not in the notary's presence personally at the time of the notarization; and (Sec. 2(b)(1), Rule IV, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) b. Not personally known to the notary public or otherwise identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by the Rules on Notarial Practice. (Sec. 2(b)(2), Rule IV, A.M. No. 02-813-SC) c. The document is blank or incomplete; (Sec.6(a) Rule IV, A.M. 02-8-13-SC) d. An instrument or document is without appropriate notarial certification. (Sec. 6, Rule IV, A.M. 02-8-13-SC) Q: Engineer Cynthia de la Cruz Catalya filed an application for building permit in connection with the renovation of a building situated on a lot owned by her brother Rolando de la Cruz. One of the documents required in the processing of the application was an affidavit to be executed by the lot owner. Since Rolando de la Cruz was a resident abroad, an affidavit was prepared wherein it was made to appear that he was a resident of Leyte; that he was the owner of the lot whereon the building subject of the application for the issuance of a building permit was situated.

Atty. Francisco Villamor notarized the purported affidavit. According to him, a Chinese mestizo appeared in his law office one time, requesting that his affidavit be notarized. Said person declared that he was Rolando de la Cruz. Atty. Villamor then asked for the production of his residence certificate, but he said, he did not bother to bring the same along with him anymore as, he has already indicated his serial number, in the jurat portion together with the date of issue and place of issue. Did Atty. Francisco Villamor commit a violation of notarial law? A: Yes. It is the duty of the notarial officer to demand that the document presented to him for notarization should be signed in his presence. By his admission, the affidavit was already signed by the purported affiant at the time it was presented to him for notarization. Atty. Villamor thus failed to heed his duty as a notary public to demand that the document for notarization be signed in his presence. (Traya Jr. v. Villamor, A.C. No. 4595, Feb. 6, 2004) Q: During their lifetime, the Spouses Villanueva acquired several parcels of land. They were survived by their 5 children: Simeona, Susana, Maria, Alfonso, and Florencia. Alfonso executed an Affidavit of Adjudication stating that as the only surviving son and sole heir of the spouses, he was adjudicating to himself a parcel of land. Thereafter, he executed a Deed of Absolute Sale, conveying the property to Adriano Villanueva. Atty. Salud Beradio appeared as notary public on both the affidavit of adjudication and the deed of sale. Atty. Beradio knew of the falsity of Alfonsos statement. Florencia and descendants of the other children of the spouses were still alive at the time of execution of both documents. Was there a failure to discharge properly the duties of a notary public? A: Yes. Atty. Beradios conduct breached the Code of Professional Responsibility, which requires lawyers to obey the laws of the land and promote respect for the law and legal processes as well as Rule 1.01 of the Code which proscribes lawyers from engaging in unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct. She herself admitted that she knew of the falsity of Alfonsos statement that he was the sole heir of the spouses. She therefore notarized a document while fully aware that it contained a material falsehood. The affidavit of adjudication is premised on this very assertion. By this instrument, Alfonso claimed a portion of his parents estate all to himself, to the exclusion of his co -heirs. Shortly afterwards, Atty. Beradio notarized the deed of sale, knowing that the deed took basis from the unlawful affidavit of adjudication. (Heirs of the Late Spouses Lucas v. Atty. Beradio, A.C. No. 6270, Jan. 22, 2007)
Note: Where admittedly the notary public has personal knowledge of a false statement or information contained in the instrument to be notarized, yet proceeds to affix his or her notarial seal on it, the court must not hesitate to discipline the notary public accordingly as the circumstances of the case may dictate. Otherwise, the integrity and sanctity of the notarization process may be undermined and public confidence on notarial documents diminished. (Ibid)

Q: When is a notary public disqualified from performing a notarial act? A: When the notary public: 1. Is a party to the instrument or document that is to be notarized; 2. Will receive, as a direct or indirect result, any commission, fee, advantage, right, title, interest, cash, property, or other consideration, except as provided by the Rules on Notarial Practice and by law; or 3. Is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor, descendant, or relative by affinity or consanguinity of the principal within the fourth civil degree. (Sec. 3, Rule IV, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) (1995 Bar Question)
Note: The function of a notary public is, among others, to guard against any illegal or immoral arrangements. That function would be defeated if the notary public is one of the signatories to the instrument. For then, he would be interested in sustaining the validity thereof as it directly involves himself and the validity of his own act. It would place him in an inconsistent position, and the very purpose of the acknowledgment, which is to minimize fraud, would be thwarted. (Villarin v. Sabate, A.C. No. 3224, Feb. 9, 2000)

Q: When may a notary public refuse to notarize even if the appropriate fee is tendered? A: 1. The notary knows or has good reason to believe that the notarial act or transaction is unlawful or immoral; 2. The signatory shows a demeanor which engenders in the mind of the notary public reasonable doubt as to the former's knowledge of the consequences of the transaction requiring a notarial act; 3. In the notary's judgment, the signatory is not acting of his or her own free will; (Sec. 4, Rule V, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) or 4. If the document or instrument to be notarized is considered as an improper document by the Rules on Notarial Practice.
Note: Improper instrument/document is a blank or incomplete instrument or an instrument or document without appropriate notarial certification. (Sec. 6, Rule V, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

D. NOTARIAL REGISTER Q: What is a Notarial Register? A: It refers to a permanently bound book with numbered pages containing a chronological record of notarial acts performed by a notary public.(Sec. 5, Rule II, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Q: What is the form of notarial register? A: A notary public shall keep, maintain, protect and provide for lawful inspection as provided in these Rules, a chronological official notarial register of notarial acts consisting of a permanently bound book with numbered pages. The register shall be kept in books to be furnished by the Solicitor General to any notary public upon request and upon payment of the cost thereof. The register shall be duly paged, and on the first page, the Solicitor General shall certify the number of pages of which the book consists. For purposes of this provision, a Memorandum of Agreement or Understanding may be entered into by the Office of the Solicitor General and the Office of the Court Administrator. (Sec. 1(a), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Q: How many notarial register may a notary public keep? A: A notary public shall keep only one active notarial register at any given time. (Sec. 1(b), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Q: What information should be entered in the notarial register? A: a. For every notarial act, the notary shall record in the notarial register at the time of notarization the following:

1. the entry number and page number; 2. the date and time of day of the notarial act; 3. the type of notarial act; 4. the title or description of the instrument, document or proceeding; 5. the name and address of each principal; 6. the competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules if the signatory is not personally known to the notary; 7. the name and address of each credible witness swearing to or affirming the person's identity; 8. the fee charged for the notarial act; 9. the address where the notarization was performed if not in the notary's regular place of work or business; and 10. any other circumstance the notary public may deem of significance or relevance.(Sec. 2(a), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) b. In case of failure to complete a notarial act, record in the notarial register the reasons and circumstances for not completing a notarial act (Sec. 2(b), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) c. the circumstances of any request to inspect or copy an entry in the notarial register, including the requester's name, address, signature, thumbmark or other recognized identifier, and evidence of identity. (Sec.2(c),Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Note: The reasons for refusal to allow inspection or copying of a journal entry shall also be recorded. (Ibid.) d. When the instrument or document is a contract, keep an original copy thereof as part of his records and enter in said records a brief

description of the substance thereof and shall give to each entry a consecutive number, beginning with number one in each calendar year. (Sec.2(d),Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Note: He shall also retain a duplicate original copy for the Clerk of Court. (Ibid.) e. In case of a protest of any draft, bill of exchange or promissory note, make a full and true record of all proceedings in relation thereto and shall note therein whether the demand for the sum of money was made, by whom, when, and where; whether he presented such draft, bill or note; whether notices were given, to whom and in what manner; where the same was made, when and to whom and where directed; and of every other fact touching the same. (Sec. 2(f), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) f. At the end of each week, the notary public shall certify in his notarial register the number of instruments or documents executed, sworn to, acknowledged, or protested before him; or if none, this certificate shall show this fact. (Sec. 2(g), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13SC)
Note: A certified copy of each month's entries and a duplicate original copy of any instrument acknowledged before the notary public shall, within the first ten (10) days of the month following, be forwarded to the Clerk of Court and shall be under the responsibility of such officer. If there is no entry to certify for the month, the notary shall forward a statement to this effect in lieu of certified copies herein required. (Sec. 2(h), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Note: The notary public shall give to each instrument or document executed, sworn to, or acknowledged before him a number corresponding to the one in his register, and shall also state on the instrument or document the page/s of his register on which the same is recorded. No blank line shall be left between entries. (Sec. 2(e), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

Q: Who shall sign or affix a thumbmark in the notarial register? A: At the time of notarization, the notary's notarial register shall be signed or a thumb or other mark affixed by each: a. principal; b. credible witness swearing or affirming to the identity of a principal; and c. witness to a signature by thumb or other mark, or to a signing by the notary public on behalf of a person physically unable to sign. Sec. 3,Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Q: Can any person inspect an entry in the notarial register? A: Yes, provided: 1. The inspection is made in the notarys presence; 2. During regular business hours 3. The person's identity is personally known to the notary public or proven through competent evidence of identity as defined in these Rules; 4. The person affixes a signature and thumb or other mark or other recognized identifier, in the notarial .register in a separate, dated entry; 5. The person specifies the month, year, type of instrument or document, and name of the principal in the notarial act or acts sought; and 6. The person is shown only the entry or entries specified by him. (Sec.4(a), Rule VI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) Q: May a law enforcement officers examine the notarial register? A: Yes, the notarial register may be examined by a law enforcement officer in the course of an official investigation or by virtue of a court order. (Sec. 4(b), Rule VI, A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC)
Note: The notary public shall supply a certified true copy of the notarial record, or any part thereof, to any person applying for such copy upon payment of the legal fees. (Sec. 6, Rule VI, A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

Q: May a notary public refuse the request of inspection for register of deeds? A: Yes. if the notary public has a reasonable ground to believe that a person has a criminal intent or wrongful motive in requesting information from the notarial register, the notary shall deny access to any entry or entries therein. (Sec. 4(c), Rule VI, A. M. No. 02-813-SC) Q: State the rule in case of loss, destruction or damage of notarial register. A: 1. In case the notarial register is stolen, lost, destroyed, damaged, or otherwise rendered unusable or illegible as a record of notarial acts, the notary public shall, within ten (10) days after informing the appropriate law enforcement agency in the case of theft or vandalism, notify the Executive Judge by any means providing a proper receipt or acknowledgment, including registered mail and also provide a copy or number of any pertinent police report.

2. Upon revocation or expiration of a notarial commission, or death of the notary public, the notarial register and notarial records shall immediately be delivered to the office of the Executive Judge. (Sec. 5, Rule VI, A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC) E. JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC AND PLACE OF NOTARIZATION Q: What is the jurisdiction of a notary public? A: A notary public may perform notarial acts in any place within the territorial jurisdiction of the commissioning court. Q: What is the phrase regular place of work or business of a notary public mean? A: The regular place of work or business refers to a stationary office in the city or province wherein the notary public renders legal and notarial services. (Sec. 11, Rule II, 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice)
Note: Under the Notarial Law, the jurisdiction of a notary public is co-extensive with the province for which he was commissioned; and for the notarypublic in the city of Manila, the jurisdiction is co-extensive with said city. Circular 8 of 1985, however, clarified further that the notary public may be commissioned for the same term only by one court within the Metro Manila region.

Q: Can a notary public perform a notarial act outside his jurisdiction and his regular place of work or business? A: GR: A notary public shall not perform a notarial act outside his jurisdiction and his regular place of work or business. XPN: A notarial act may be performed at the request of the parties in the following sites, other than his regular place of work or business, located within his territorial jurisdiction: 1. Public offices, convention halls, and other appropriate public places for the purpose of administering oaths of office; (Sec. 2, Rule IV, A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC) 2. At the request of the parties, public function areas in hotels and other appropriate places for the signing of the contracts, deeds, and other documents requiring notarization; (Ibid.) 3. Residence of any party of a contract, deed, or other document requiring notarization; (Ibid.) 4. Hospitals and other medical institutions where a party to a contract is confined for treatment; (Ibid.) 5. Any place where for legal reason a party to a contract, deed, or other document requiring notarization may be confined, (Ibid.) and; 6. Such other places as may be dictated because of emergency.(1996 Bar Question)
Note: It is improper for a notary public to notarize documents in sidewalk since it is now required that a notary public should maintain a regular place of work or business within the city or province where he is commissioned. The SC evidently wants to eradicate the practice of fly by night notaries public who notarized documents in improvised offices.

F. COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY


Note: Competent evidence of identity is not required in cases where the affiant is personally known to the Notary Public. (Amora, Jr. v. Comelec, G.R. No. 192280, January 25, 2011)

Q: What is competent evidence of identity? A: It refers to the identification of an individual based on: 1. At least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of the individual such as but not limited to: a. Passport, b. Drivers license, c. Professional Regulation Commission ID, d. National Bureau of Investigation clearance, e. Police clearance, f. Postal ID, g. Voters ID, h. Barangay Certification, i. Government Service Insurance System e-card, j. Social Security System card, k. Philhealth card, l. Senior Citized card, m. Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) ID, n. OFW ID, o. sea mans book, p. alien certificate of registration, q. government office ID, r. certification from the National Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons (NCWDP), s. Department of Social Welfare Development (DSWD) certification; or 2. The oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy to the instrument, document or transaction who is personally known to the notary public and who personally knows the individual, or of two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument, document or transaction who each personally knows the individual and shows to the notary public documentary identification. (Amendment to Sec. 12 (a), Rule II of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, Feb. 19, 2008).
Note: These are in addition to the presentation of the signatories Community Tax Certificate (CTC) as required by Notarial Law (Act 2711). Notaries public are required by the Notarial Law to certify that the party to the instrument has

acknowledged and presented before the notaries public the proper residence certificate (or exemption from the residence certificate) and to enter its number, place, and date of issue as part of certification. Sec. 12, Rule II of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice now requires a party to the instrument to present competent evidence of identity. (Legaspi v. Atty. Dimaano, Jr., A.C. No. 7781, Sept. 12, 2008)

Q: Is a community tax certificate still a competent evidence of identity? A: No. A notary public can no longer accept a cedula or a community tax certificate (CTC), the successor document to the residence certificate originally required by the Notarial Law as proof of identity. Such does not even contain a photograph of the person to whom it is issued. Further, CTC may be easily obtained by anyone, without any supporting papers, thereby debasing its value as an identity document.
Note: In the list of grounds for disqualification of persons running for any local elective position under Section 40 of the LGC, nowhere therein does it specify that a defective notarization is a ground for the disqualification of a candidate. Thus, presentation of CTC before the notary public, in compliance with the requirement of presentation of competent evidence of identity, though improper, does not in itself warrant the disqualification of a candidate to run for any elective position. (Amora, Jr. v. Comelec, G.R. No. 192280, January 25, 2011)

Q: Is the presentation of Community Tax Certificate no longer necessary in view of the amendment? A: No. Its presentation is still mandatory pursuant to Local Government Code of the Philippines in order to show payment of taxes. Said law provides: When an individual subject to the community tax acknowledges any document before a notary public, takes the oath of office upon election or appointment to any position in the government service; receives any license, certificate, or permit from any public authority; pays any tax or fee; receives any money from any public fund; transacts other official business; or receives any salary or wage from any person or corporation, it shall be the duty of any person, officer, or corporation with whom such transaction is made or business done or from whom any salary or wage is received to require such individual to exhibit the community tax certificate. (Sec. 163, LGC) Q: Atty. Regino Tamabago notarized a last will and testament under which, the decedent supposedly bequeathed his entire estate to his wife, save for a parcel of land which he devised to Vicente Lee, Jr. and Elena Lee, half siblings of Manuel Lee, the complainant. The will was purportedly executed and acknowledged before respondent on June 30, 1965. However, the residence certificate of the testator noted in the acknowledgment of the will was dated January 5, 1962. There is also absence of notation of the residence certificates of the purported witnesses. Did Atty. Regino Tamabago violate any of the duties of a notary public? A: Atty. Tamabago, as notary public, evidently failed in the performance of the elementary duties of his office. There is absence of a notation of the residence certificates of the notarial witnesses in the will in the acknowledgment. Further, the notation of the testators old residence certificate in the same acknowledgment was a clear breach of the law. The Notarial Law then in force required the exhibition of the residence certificate upon notarization of a document or instrument. By having allowed decedent to exhibit an expired residence certificate, Atty. Tamabago failed to comply with the requirements of the old Notarial Law. As much could be said of his failure to demand the exhibition of the residence certificates of notarial witnesses. Defects in the observance of the solemnities prescribed by law render the entire will invalid. (Manuel Lee v. Atty. Regino Tamabago, A.C. No. 5281, Feb. 12, 2008) G. REVOCATION OF COMMISSION AND DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS Q: Who can revoke a notarial commission? A: The notarial commission may be revoked by 1. The Executive Judge of the RTC who issued the commission on any ground on which an application for commission may be denied (Sec. 1, Rule XI, A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC,) or; 2. By the Supreme Court itself in the exercise of its general supervisory powers over lawyer. Q: What are the grounds for revocation of notarial commission? A: The executive Judge shall revoke a notarial commission for any ground on which an application for a commission may be denied. In addition, the Executive Judge may revoke the commission of, or impose appropriate administrative sanctions upon, any notary public who: 1. Fails to keep a notarial register; 2. Fails to make the proper entry or entries in his notarial register concerning his notarial acts; 3. Fails to send the copy of the entries to the Executive Judge within the first ten (10) days of the month following; 4. Fails to affix to acknowledgments the date of expiration of his commission; 5. Fails to submit his notarial register, when filled, to the Executive Judge; 6. Fails to make his report, within a reasonable time, to the Executive Judge concerning the performance of his duties, as may be required by the judge; 7. Fails to require the presence of a principal at the time of the notarial act;

Note: "Principal" refers to a person appearing before the notary public whose act is the subject of notarization.

8. Fails to identify a principal on the basis of personal knowledge or competent evidence; 9. Executes a false or incomplete certificate under Section 5, Rule IV; 10. Knowingly performs or fails to perform any other act prohibited or mandated by these Rules; and 11. Commits any other dereliction or act which in the judgment of the Executive Judge constitutes good cause for revocation of commission or imposition of administrative sanction.(Sec. 1, Rule XI, Rule on Notarial Practice) Q: What are punishable acts under the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice? A: The Executive Judge shall cause the prosecution of any person who knowingly: 1. Acts or otherwise impersonates a notary public; 2. Obtains, conceals, defaces, or destroys the seal, notarial register, or official records of a notary public; and 3. Solicits, coerces, or in any way influences a notary public to commit official misconduct. (Sec. 1, Rule XII, Rule on Notarial Practice)