Senator Leila de Lima has violated the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice when she submitted a notarized petition to the Supreme Court without personally appearing to the lawyer who notarized it, a Supreme Court justice said in the third part of the oral arguments on drug charges filed against her.
Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr. noted that in Atty. Maria Cecille Tresvalles-Cabalo’s affidavit, she admitted that the petition was signed by the senator when it was given to her by her staff.
Cabalo, in her affidavit, said that while she is already familiar with De Lima’s signature, she still asked for a government issued identification card to compare the signatures.
But Velasco pointed out that under Section 6 of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, the person must personally appear before the notary public to personally subscribe to her document.
Part of the requirement under the law is to attach a jurat on the petition filed by De Lima.
The jurat is an act in which an individual appears in person before the notary public and presents an instrument or document. The said person, who must be personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity, signs the instrument or document in the presence of the notary and takes an oath or affirmation before the notary public as to such instrument or document.
“So, the petition was already signed at the time she met Senator De Lima. She did not sign the petition before the notary public,” Velasco said.
READ: Notary public in De Lima petition ‘imaginary’—SolGen
“From the very affidavit alone [of Cabalo], there was non-compliance of our 2004 Rule on Notarial Practice,” Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco said.
Solicitor General Jose Calida said with a falsified jurat, De Lima’s petition is as if it has not been filed. IDL/rga