A.C. No. 13911 - JOY CADIOGAN CALIXTO, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. CORA JANE P. BALEROS.

Ruling

Accordingly, as far as this Court is concerned, the IBP CBD sufficiently exhausted all avenues to provide Atty. Baleros the due process rights she deserves. Consequently, her failure to file an Answer will not be a hindrance for this Court to mete out an appropriate sanction. After all, it is well to remember the ruling in Dizon v. Atty. De Taza , [48] that "disciplinary proceedings are investigations by this Court to ascertain whether a lawyer is fit to be one. There is neither a plaintiff nor a prosecutor therein." [49] For another, as duly found by the IBP CBD, and as adopted by the IBP Board of Governors, Atty. Baleros failed to faithfully comply with her duties as a notary public. This Court, in Bernardo v. Atty. Ramos , [50] underscored the implications of a notary public's duty and function, to wit: The principal function of a notary public is to authenticate documents. When a notary public certifies to the due execution and delivery of the document under his hand and seal he gives the document the force of evidence. Indeed, one of the purposes of requiring documents to be acknowledged before a notary public, in addition to the solemnity which should surround the execution and delivery of documents, is to authorize such documents to be given without further proof of their execution and delivery. Where the notary public is a lawyer, a graver responsibility is placed upon him by reason of his solemn oath to obey the laws and to do no falsehood or consent to the doing of any. Failing in this, he must accept the consequences of his unwarranted actions. [51] (Citations omitted) Pertinent to this case, a notary public should not notarize a document unless the persons who signed the same are the very persons who executed and personally appeared before him or her, to attest to the contents and truth of what are stated therein. The purpose of the requirement of personal appearance by the acknowledging party before the notary public is to "enable the latter to verify the genuineness of the signature of the former." [52] Further, such personal appearances "are the core of the ritual that effectively convert a private document into a public document, making it admissible in court without further proof of its authenticity." [53] This duty is embodied in Rule IV, Section 2(b) of the 2004 Rules: . . . . (b) A person shall not perform a notarial act if the person involved as signatory to the instrument or document (1) is not in the notary's presence personally at the time of the notarization; and (2) is not personally known to the notary public or otherwise identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules. Also, in the 2004 Rules, and to further emphasize on the significance of this duty, the Executive Judge is empowered to revoke the commission of a notary public, or impose the corresponding administrative sanctions, if it fails to comply with the personal presence requirement: RULE XI Revocation of Commi