Can a Lawyer Notarize Their Own Document?
A Comprehensive Guide Under Philippine Law
Executive Summary
Under the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC) and the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA, 2023), a lawyer-notary public in the Philippines may not notarize a document in which they are personally involved as a party, signatory, or beneficiary. Doing so violates explicit regulatory prohibitions, offends the principle of impartiality that underpins all notarial acts, and has consistently led to administrative sanctions—including suspension of both the notarial commission and the right to practice law.
1. Why Notarization Matters
Philippine law treats a notarized instrument as a public document:
- It enjoys prima facie authenticity;
- It becomes admissible in evidence without further proof of execution or authenticity;
- It can be the basis for obtaining new certificates of title, registering transactions, or enforcing obligations.
Because notarization converts a private act into one imbued with public trust, the notary public must be a neutral, disinterested witness—never an interested party.
2. The Core Legal Framework
| Source | Key Provision |
|---|---|
| 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice Rule III, §3(b)(1) & (2) |
A notary shall not perform a notarial act if (1) “the notary public is a party to the instrument or transaction” or (2) “the notary public will receive, as a direct or indirect result, any commission, fee, advantage or benefit”. |
| CPRA (2023) Canon II, §6 |
A lawyer must “avoid conflicts of interest and maintain independence and impartiality.” |
| Lawyer’s Oath / Rule 1.01 of the 1988 CPR | A lawyer must not engage in unlawful, dishonest, or deceitful conduct. Self-notarization has been deemed such conduct. |
| Civil Code, Art. 1318 & Art. 1358 | Certain contracts must appear in a public instrument; defective notarization may void or at least render them unenforceable. |
Bottom line: the rules leave no room for self-notarization; the notary must be a detached third party.
3. Typical Scenarios and Why They Are Prohibited
Affidavit of Self-Adjudication (estate documents) Atty. X signs as both affiant and notary. → Disallowed.
Real-estate Deed where the lawyer is one of the buyers Notary’s impartiality is destroyed. → Disallowed.
Lawyer‐corporate secretary notarizing board minutes for her own stock transfer She derives personal benefit. → Disallowed.
Pleading Verification sworn before counsel himself Even if “for convenience,” it breaches the Rules. → Disallowed.
4. Jurisprudence Snapshot
Although the facts differ, the Supreme Court has been uniform:
| Case (Administrative) | Conduct & Result |
|---|---|
| Sebastian v. Bajar (A.C. No. 10510, 19 Feb 2014) | Lawyer-notary notarized documents where he was counsel and beneficiary. Suspended for 6 months; notarial commission revoked 2 yrs. |
| Cordora v. Castillo (A.C. No. 8355, 23 Jul 2013) | Self-notarized verification of pleading. Suspended 1 yr; commission revoked. |
| In re: Atty. Mallari (A.C. No. 6788, 31 Jan 2006) | Notarized deed in favor of own spouse. Disbarred after prior warnings. |
Court’s constant theme: the notary must act with “utmost indifference to personal gain,” otherwise the public loses faith in notarized documents.
Note: Even minor clerical lapses (e.g., blank spaces, missing IDs) have drawn penalties; self-notarization is viewed as graver.
5. Administrative & Criminal Exposure
| Consequence | Legal Basis | Range |
|---|---|---|
| Revocation of Notarial Commission | 2004 Rules, Rule XI | Immediate to multi-year ban |
| Suspension or Disbarment | CPRA, Rules of Court, Bar Matter No. 850 | Months to disbarment, depending on gravity/recidivism |
| Criminal Liability | Revised Penal Code, Art. 171 (Falsification) | Prison correccional & fine if elements are met (e.g., false statements) |
| Civil Damages | Art. 20 & 34 Civil Code | Actual & moral damages to aggrieved party |
6. Ethical & Practical Rationale
- Impartiality – The notary’s certificate is an act of the State; personal interest corrupts the presumption of regularity.
- Conflict of Interest – A lawyer’s fiduciary duty to client and court clashes with self-interest.
- Public Confidence – Repeat offenders erode trust in land titles, contracts, and judicial processes.
- Pre-Emptive Deterrence – Strict sanctions deter would-be violators; the Court often imposes heavier penalties on repeat notarial offenders than on non-notary infractions.
7. Grey Areas & Frequently Asked Questions
| Question | Short Answer | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Can a lawyer notarize a document for a close relative? | Generally No. Same rule on interest applies; better to refer to another notary to avoid suspicions of partiality. | |
| What about simple verification or jurat on a pleading the lawyer prepared? | Also No. Lawyer acts as counsel (interested) and cannot act as notary. | |
| May the lawyer notarize an act where his law firm is a party? | No. Direct or indirect benefit to the notary’s firm counts as disqualifying interest. | |
| If already done, can the defect be cured by re-notarizing before another notary? | The new notarization may correct procedural defects, but any prior legal consequences (e.g., court filings, registry entries) may need formal withdrawal, re-filing, or judicial relief. |
8. Best-Practice Checklist for Lawyer-Notaries
- Screen every act for personal or firm interest—err on side of refusal.
- Maintain a conflict ledger separate from the notarial register.
- Explain the rule to clients so they understand the need for an outside notary.
- Keep detailed records; unauthorized notarization often surfaces years later (e.g., during land registration disputes).
- Renew commission responsibly—past infractions can bar renewal.
- Stay updated on Supreme Court pronouncements; the Court constantly refines what constitutes “personal interest.”
9. Conclusion
In the Philippines, the answer is categorical: a lawyer may not notarize his or her own document. The prohibition is explicit in the 2004 Notarial Rules, echoed by ethical canons, and strictly enforced through jurisprudence. Attempting to do so risks severe professional and even criminal sanctions, undermines the integrity of legal transactions, and erodes public confidence in the notarial system itself.
Guiding Principle: When in doubt, don’t notarize—refer. The minimal inconvenience of finding an independent notary is far preferable to the lasting consequences of violating the public trust.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific situations, consult a qualified Philippine attorney or the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).