A.C. No. 12062 - HEIR OF HERMINIGILDO* A. UNITE, REPRESENTED BY HIS SOLE HEIR, FLORENTINO S. UNITE, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. RAYMUND P. GUZMAN.R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, the IBP-IC recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of six (6) months and be disqualified from being commissioned as a notary public for a period of one (1) year. [22] In a Resolution [23] dated June 20, 2015, the IBP Board of Governors adopted the above-findings but reduced the recommended penalty imposed on respondent to reprimand, "considering that [r]espondent personally knows the affiant and the [CTC] then will suffice." Dissatisfied, complainant moved for reconsideration, [24] which the IBP Board of Governors denied in a Resolution [25] dated April 20, 2017. The Issue Before the Court The issue for the Court's resolution is whether or not the IBP correctly found respondent liable for violation of the Notarial Rules. The Court's Ruling The Court affirms the findings and adopts the recommendations of the IBP with modifications. Time and again, the Court has emphasized that the act of notarization is impressed with public interest. Notarization converts a private document to a public document, making it admissible in evidence without further proof of its authenticity. [26] A notarial document is, by law, entitled to full faith and credence. [27] As such, a notary public must observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the performance of his duties in order to preserve the confidence of the public in the integrity of the notarial system. [28] In this light, the Court has ruled that notaries must inform themselves of the facts they certify to; most importantly, they should not take part or allow themselves to be part of illegal transactions. [29] Under Section 2 (b) (1) and (2), Rule IV of the Notarial Rules, a notary public should not notarize a document unless the signatory to the document is "in the notary's presence personally at the time of the notarization," and is "personally known to the notary public or otherwise identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity. " [30] Section 12, Rule II of the same rules, as amended by the February 19, 2008 En Banc Resolution in A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, defines "competent evidence of identity" thus: Section 12. Competent Evidence of Identity. The phrase "competent evidence of identity" refers to the identification of an individual based on: (a) 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, passport, driver's license, Professional Regulations Commission ID, National Bureau of Investigation clearance, police clearance, postal ID, voter's ID, Barangay certification, Government Service and Insurance System (GSIS) e-card, Social Security System (SSS) card, Philhealth card, senior citizen card, Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) ID, OFW ID, seaman's book, alien certificate of registration/immigrant certificate of registration, government office ID, certification from the National Council for the Welfare of Di