(Good Moral Character) 1 - Fr. Aquino Vs Pascua
(Good Moral Character) 1 - Fr. Aquino Vs Pascua
(Good Moral Character) 1 - Fr. Aquino Vs Pascua
In
his
letter-complaint,
Father
Aquino
Atty. Pascua falsified two documents committed as follows:
Father RANHILIO C. AQUINO, et al
Complainants,
- versus Atty. EDWIN PASCUA,
Promulgated:
Respondent.
alleged
that
x-----------------------------------------------------------------------x
Father Aquino further alleged that on June 23 and July 26, 1999, Atty.
Angel Beltran, Clerk of Court, Regional Trial Court, Tuguegarao, certified that
none of the above entries appear in the Notarial Register of Atty. Pascua; that
the last entry therein was Document No. 1200 executed on December 28,
1998; and that, therefore, he could not have notarized Documents Nos. 1213
and 1214 on December 10, 1998.
DECISION
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:
was not due to inadvertence but a clear case of falsification. [1] On November
16, 1999, we granted their motion.[2]
Thereafter, we referred the case to the Office of the Bar Confidant for
investigation, report and recommendation.
On April 21, 2003, the Office of the Bar Confidant issued its Report
and Recommendation partly reproduced as follows:
A notarial document is by law entitled to full faith and credit upon its
face. For this reason, notaries public must observe the utmost care to comply
with the formalities and the basic requirement in the performance of their
duties (Realino v. Villamor, 87 SCRA 318).
Under the notarial law, the notary public shall enter in
such register, in chronological order, the nature of each
instrument executed, sworn to, or acknowledged before him,
the person executing, swearing to, or acknowledging the
instrument, xxx xxx. The notary shall give to each instrument
executed, sworn to, or acknowledged before him a number
corresponding to the one in his register, and shall also state on
the instrument the page or pages of his register on which the
same is recorded. No blank line shall be left between entries
(Sec. 246, Article V, Title IV, Chapter II of the Revised
Administrative Code).
Failure of the notary to make the proper entry or
entries in his notarial register touching his notarial acts in the
manner required by law is a ground for revocation of his
commission (Sec. 249, Article VI).
In the instant case, there is no question that the subject
documents allegedly notarized by Atty. Pascua were not
recorded in his notarial register.
Atty. Pascua claims that the omission was not
intentional but due to oversight of his staff. Whichever is the
case, Atty. Pascua cannot escape liability. His failure to enter
into his notarial register the documents that he admittedly
notarized is a dereliction of duty on his part as a notary
public and he is bound by the acts of his staff.
After a close review of the records of this case, we resolve to adopt the
findings of facts and conclusion of law by the Office of the Bar Confidant. We
find Atty. Pascua guilty of misconduct in the performance of his duties for
failing to register in his Notarial Register the affidavit-complaints of Joseph
B. Acorda and Remigio B. Domingo.