Notary Public Seal Misuse 1 Critical Case of Administrative Liability

Notary Public’s Notarial Seal

Written by

April 15, 2021

Notary public reviewing documents with notarial seal on desk.

A notary public should at, all times, safeguard his notarial seal. If somebody uses the notarial seal for any illegal act, the concerned notary public may be held administratively liable despite him/her having no knowledge of such illegal act.

Legal evidence of misused notary public seal on fraudulent contract.

In a very recent case, a lawyer was suspended from his law practice and was prohibited from being commissioned as notary public for a period of two years after a finding that he notarized consultancy service contracts between a certain local government and persons who are already deceased. In this case, the lawyer’s argument that his signatures in the said contracts were a forgery did not convince the Supreme Court. The lawyer showed the wide disparity between such signatures in the consultancy service contracts and the specimen signature he submitted to the Notarial Section of Manila Regional Trial Court but such was not enough.

The Supreme Court noted the striking dissimilarity between the signature appearing on the consultancy service contract and the specimen signature he submitted to the Notarial Section. Further, the high court noted that the consultancy service contract was not among the notarized document submitted to the Notarial Section by the lawyer as a Notary Public. Nonetheless, the consultancy services contract which the lawyer claims he did not notarize bore his notarial seal. Thus he could not be exculpated because he failed to safeguard his notarial seal. Let’s read the Supreme Court’s decision:

“The act of notarization is not an ordinary routine but is imbued with substantive public interest. A notary public is empowered to perform a variety of notarial acts, most common of which are the acknowledgment and affirmation of documents or instruments. In the performance of these notarial acts, the notary public must be mindful of the significance of the notarial seal affixed on documents. The notarial seal converts a document from a private to a public instrument, after which it may be presented as evidence without need for proof of its genuineness and due execution. A notarized document is entitled to full faith and credit upon its face. Thus, a notary public should observe utmost care in performing his duties to preserve public confidence in the integrity of notarized documents.

Official notarial seal design and notary public rules from the 2004 Notarial Rules.

A notarial seal is a mark, image or impression on a document which would indicate that the notary public has officially signed it. Section 2, Rule VII of the 2004 Notarial Rules states that every notary public shall have his own notarial seal, which shall have the name of the city or province and the word “Philippines,” and his own name on the margin and the roll of attorney’s number on its face. The said seal shall only be possessed by the notary public, to wit:

Section 2. Official Seal. – (a) Every person commissioned as notary public shall have a seal of office, to be procured at his own expense, which shall not be possessed or owned by any other person. It shall be of metal, circular in shape, two inches in diameter, and shall have the name of the city or province and the word “Philippines” and his own name on the margin and the roll of attorney’s number on the face thereof, with the words “notary public” across the center. A mark, image or impression of such seal shall be made directly on the paper or parchment on which the writing appears.

x x x x (Emphases supplied)

Further, the 2004 Notarial Rules is explicit on the duties and obligations of the notary public, which include the duty to secure and safeguard his notarial seal so that no unauthorized persons can have access thereto, viz.:

Section 2. Official Seal.- x x x

x x x x

(c) When not in use, the official seal shall be kept safe and secure and shall be accessible only to the notary public or the person duly authorized by him.

x x x x (Emphasis and italics supplied)

“In this case, Atty. X denied having authored or notarized the consultancy contracts and claimed that his signatures therein as notary public were forged. Although the IBP observed that Atty. X’s signatures in the subject contracts were strikingly dissimilar to his specimen signatures on file before the Notarial Section of the RTC, and while it may likewise be true that said contracts were not included in the notarial reports he submitted thereto, he cannot claim full deniability and be exculpated from administrative liability because the contracts bore his notarial seal.

“Instead of offering any plausible explanation as to how the Consultancy contracts came to be stamped with his notarial seal, Atty. X merely insisted that he never notarized nor authored said contracts, that his signatures therein were forgeries, and that said contracts were not included in his notarial reports.”