Williams v. Icao

A.C. No. 6882 (December 24, 2008)

Facts:

Maria Bacatan Williams and Orlando Verar Rian, Jr. (petitioners) filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Rodrigo Icao (respondent) for violations of the Notarial Law and for conduct unbecoming of an attorney. The complaint stemmed from an incident on May 23, 2002, when respondent notarized a Declaration of Heirship and Partition, falsely certifying that three signatories—Lucia Briones, Ramon Verar, and Martin Umbac—signed the document in his presence. Petitioners alleged that the signatories did not appear before respondent when the document was notarized, as evidenced by testimony from Francisco B. Ventolero during a trial in a related criminal case. Ventolero stated that he was responsible for collecting the signatures from the various parties.

Further discrepancies were noted, including the date of signing, the absence of Lucia Briones' residence certificate number, and inconsistencies in the signatures. Lucia Briones had been living in Cotabato for over 20 years and was gravely ill at the time, which made it implausible for her to have signed the document in Dumaguete City as claimed. Additionally, the document inaccurately listed Atty. Rudy T. Enriquez as one of the heirs, despite him being the legal counsel for the heirs.

In response, respondent admitted that the document was not executed in his presence but claimed that he verified the identities of the signatories and that they acknowledged their signatures before him. He also argued that the complaint was barred by prescription, as it was filed more than two years after the alleged misconduct.

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) was tasked with investigating the complaint. The IBP Commissioner found respondent guilty of violating the Notarial Law but recommended a reprimand. However, the IBP Board of Governors dismissed the case for lack of merit, prompting petitioners to file a motion for reconsideration.

Legal Issues:

1. Whether the administrative complaint against Atty. Icao was barred by prescription.
2. Whether Atty. Icao violated the Notarial Law and engaged in conduct unbecoming of an attorney.

Arguments:

• Petitioners' Arguments:

  • Respondent notarized a document without the signatories being present, violating the Notarial Law.
  • The notarization contained false statements, including the misrepresentation of Atty. Enriquez as an heir and inaccuracies regarding the death date of Aurea Briones.
  • The complaint was not subject to prescription as disbarment proceedings do not prescribe.

• Respondent's Arguments:

  • The signatories appeared before him, and he verified their identities and acknowledged their signatures.
  • The complaint was barred by prescription under the IBP's rules, which state that complaints must be filed within two years of the alleged misconduct.

Court's Decision and Legal Reasoning:

The Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, finding that the defense of prescription does not apply to administrative complaints against lawyers. Citing previous jurisprudence, the Court emphasized that disbarment proceedings are not subject to a prescriptive period, thus invalidating the IBP's rule on prescription as ultra vires.

On the merits, the Court found that respondent failed to comply with the Notarial Law by notarizing a document without the signatories being present. The absence of Lucia Briones' residence certificate number constituted a violation of the mandatory requirements for notarization. The Court noted that notarization is a significant act that requires the notary to ensure the authenticity of the signatures and the accuracy of the document's contents. Respondent's failure to do so, along with the presence of false statements in the notarized document, demonstrated a lack of diligence and integrity expected from a notary public.

As a result, the Court suspended Atty. Rodrigo Icao from the practice of law and from his commission as a notary public for one year, with a warning that similar future misconduct would result in more severe penalties.

Significant Legal Principles Established:

1. Disbarment proceedings against lawyers do not prescribe, and any rules suggesting otherwise are void.
2. Notaries public have a duty to ensure that documents are executed in their presence and to verify the identities of the signatories.
3. Notarization is a serious act that carries public interest, and notaries must adhere to strict standards to maintain the integrity of legal documents.