Can judges notarize documents?

By Joe Pallugna

THE Supreme Court has ruled on Feb. 24, 2014 that Municipal Trial Court (MTC) and Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) judges are empowered to perform the functions of notaries public ex officio under Section 76 of Republic Act No. 296 (The Judiciary Act of 1948) and Section 242 of The Revised Administrative Code provided that the notarization of documents are connected only with the exercise of their official functions and duties.

In addition, the Supreme Court defined that these judges can notarize documents only if lawyers or notaries public are lacking in their court’s territorial jurisdiction and they must certify as to the lack of lawyers or notaries public when notarizing documents ex officio.

It provided further that any fees collected from such notarization shall be to the account of the government and must be turned over to the municipal treasurer. This is the ruling in the case of Rex Tupal vs. Judge Remegio Rojo of the MTCC of Bacolod City (A.M. No. MTJ-14-1842).

So it is now clear that Regional Trial Court judges cannot notarize documents even in their ex officio capacities. And that municipal trial court and circuit court judges can notarize only in their ex officio capacities if there is no notary public or a lawyer in their judicial territorial jurisdictions.

In a way saying, judges cannot notarize documents anymore as there is not a single municipality, I believe, which does not have a lawyer. While it might be true that there are towns and municipalities which do not have doctors, I have not known of any town in the Philippines which does not have a single lawyer. As hell might even be full of souls of lawyers, all towns have their own lawyers.

The issue of Judge Rojo arose when he notarized affidavits of marital cohabitation for over five years of couples whom he married in his court in Bacolod City. The Supreme Court penalized him with suspension for six months upon finding him guilty of gross ignorance of the law for notarizing said affidavits as such act is not connected with the performance of his official functions and he did not also certify that notaries public and lawyers are lacking in Bacolod City, and that he violated Supreme Court Circular No. 1-90.

The parties to a document to be notarized must appear in person to subscribe to their affidavits and the notarizing authority must require the presentation of competent pieces of evidence of identity from the affiants. These twin requirements must be present in all instances when a lawyer notarizes a document or deed.

This recent ruling clearly defined the roles of judges in the matter of notarization of documents. This also emphasizes the importance of notarization which transforms private documents into public documents. And the next time you have a document to be notarized, make sure the formalities are all present and properly performed–and find a lawyer, not a judge.

(Joe Pallugna is a lawyer based in Cagayan de Oro. joepallugna@yahoo.com.)