AC 10562; (August, 2017) (Digest)
A.C. No. 10562. August 1, 2017. JEAN MARIE S. BOERS, Complainant, vs. ATTY. ROMEO CALUBAQUIB, Respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Jean Marie S. Boers, a co-owner of land in Tuguegarao City, discovered an adverse claim annotated on the title based on a 1991 Deed of Sale bearing her forged signature and notarized by respondent Atty. Romeo Calubaquib. Boers asserted she could not have signed or appeared before the notary on October 16, 1991, as she was in Canada, supported by passport and visa stamps showing her departure in December 1990 and a visa expiring in February 1991. She further noted the Deed lacked her residence certificate or any competent identification in the acknowledgment. Verification with the National Archives revealed the document was not recorded in Calubaquib’s notarial file; the entry for the cited document number corresponded to a different affidavit.
In defense, Calubaquib insisted Boers signed the document. However, his own evidence, a joint affidavit from Boers’ relatives, paradoxically stated that while Boers signed at his office, the document was not notarized immediately and was only brought for notarization after she had already left the country. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Board of Governors adopted the Commission on Bar Discipline’s recommendation for a two-year suspension, revocation of his notarial commission, and perpetual disqualification from being a notary public.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Atty. Romeo Calubaquib violated the Rules on Notarial Practice by notarizing a document without the personal appearance of the affiant.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court found Calubaquib guilty of violating the Rules on Notarial Practice. The Court affirmed the IBP’s findings but modified the penalty. The notarial act performed was an acknowledgment, which under Rule II, Section 1 of the Rules requires the individual to personally appear before the notary public, present the document, be identified through competent evidence, and declare the voluntary execution of the instrument. The Court, citing Cabanilla v. Cristal-Tenorio, emphasized that personal appearance is indispensable to allow the notary to verify the genuineness of the signature, confirm the signatory’s identity, and ensure the document was executed freely and voluntarily.
Calubaquib clearly breached this fundamental duty. Boers conclusively proved her absence from the country on the notarization date. Crucially, Calubaquib’s own evidence from the joint affidavit admitted that Boers was abroad when the document was finally presented for notarization, directly contradicting his claim and confirming the violation. Furthermore, the absence of the Deed in his notarial registry compounded his negligence. The Court noted his prior suspension in Lingan v. Calubaquib for a similar notarial violation as an aggravating circumstance. Consequently, the Court imposed a TWO-YEAR SUSPENSION from the practice of law, REVOKED his notarial commission, PERPETUALLY DISQUALIFIED him from being commissioned as a notary public, and issued a STERN WARNING against repetition of similar acts.