DURING plenary deliberations on the Judiciary’s 2026 budget on November 18, Senator Dante Marcoleta used the opportunity to ask the courts themselves to help resolve the alleged falsification of Mr. Orly Guteza’s sworn testimony.
In his Senate floor remarks, Marcoleta pointed out that the controversial document bearing Guteza’s name was fully notarized. Yet the notary whose name appears on it denies ever signing the document, even though it shows all the usual formalities, including a dry seal and detailed certification. Under the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, the person signing a document must personally appear before the notary, and the notary must personally verify the signer and affix their signature and seal.
Marcoleta and other legal experts have warned that notarial work has sometimes been treated as a quick money-making service. The Supreme Court has repeatedly disciplined notaries for such lapses. In some Supreme Court cases, notaries who were found grossly negligent for letting others forge their signatures and use their seals had their notarial commissions suspended or revoked.
But the Court has taken steps to modernize. Rules now require notaries to submit monthly certified PDF copies of their entries and the duplicate originals to the Clerk of Court. Electronic notarization is also being introduced, allowing documents to be notarized anywhere while feeding into a central repository.
Marcoleta’s call for full access to notarial registers, especially the entries for the months leading up to Guteza’s affidavit, is also a demand for transparency and accountability. With the Court’s willingness to assist him, it helps restore notarial solemnity and make sure that this important public function remains a matter of trust and not of commerce.
