1) What a “witness affidavit” is (and why notarization comes up)

A witness affidavit is a written statement of facts made by a person (the affiant) based on personal knowledge, and sworn to as true before an officer authorized to administer oaths (most commonly, a notary public). In practice, witness affidavits are used to:

support criminal complaints (e.g., for preliminary investigation),
support administrative complaints (e.g., verified complaints before agencies),
serve as written direct testimony in court under the Judicial Affidavit Rule, or
document facts for private/legal transactions (e.g., affidavits of loss, one-and-the-same-person, residency, etc.).

Key point: In Philippine usage, an “affidavit” is not just any signed narrative. It is a sworn statement. The “sworn” part is what notarization (specifically, a jurat) typically supplies.

2) The short answer: “It depends”—but a real affidavit must be sworn

General rule

A document called an “affidavit” is expected to be subscribed and sworn before a person authorized to administer oaths. The most common method is notarization (jurat) by a notary public.

Practical rule-of-thumb

If the witness statement will be used in court filings, prosecution/complaint procedures, or official proceedings, it is usually required to be sworn, and notarization is the common route.
If the statement is only for informal or internal use, it may be left unsigned/unsigned but not sworn, but then it is not an affidavit in the strict sense and will carry less legal weight.

3) Notarization vs. “sworn before an authorized officer” (not always a notary)

Notarization is not the only way to make a statement sworn. Philippine rules often allow affidavits to be sworn before other officials who can administer oaths, depending on the proceeding (commonly including prosecutors and certain government officers).

So the better legal framing is:

A witness affidavit generally must be sworn before an authorized officer. A notary public is the most common authorized officer—but not always the only one allowed.

4) When notarization is typically REQUIRED (or practically unavoidable)

A) Criminal complaints and preliminary investigation (common scenario)

For criminal complaints filed with the prosecutor, supporting witness statements are ordinarily required to be sworn (often expressed as “subscribed and sworn”). In practice, the witness affidavit is sworn:

before the prosecutor (or an authorized administering officer), or
before a notary public.

If unsworn, prosecutors commonly treat them as defective supporting documents and may require resubmission.

B) Verified pleadings/complaints and sworn certifications

Many pleadings or complaints must be verified (sworn to) or accompanied by sworn certifications (e.g., certification against forum shopping in judicial practice). These are usually notarized because the oath and identity checks are central to compliance.

C) Judicial Affidavit Rule (testimony-in-chief in courts)

When a witness’s direct testimony is presented via a judicial affidavit, the rules require it to be sworn and in a prescribed form (with additional attestations). Courts generally expect proper swearing before an authorized officer—most commonly a notary.

D) Administrative proceedings requiring verified complaints

A wide range of administrative complaints (depending on the agency and governing rules) require a verified complaint and supporting affidavits that are sworn.

E) Transactions where institutions demand notarized affidavits

Even when not strictly mandated by a statute, many institutions (banks, insurers, schools, employers, registries) require notarized affidavits for risk management and evidentiary reliability.

5) When notarization may NOT be required (or there are alternatives)

A) If the witness will testify in person in court

If the witness will provide live testimony under oath in court, a separate notarized witness affidavit is not inherently required for the testimony itself (though it may still be used for case preparation, pleadings, or procedural requirements).

B) If rules allow swearing before another officer (instead of a notary)

Some procedures allow affidavits to be sworn before:

a prosecutor (common in complaint intake/preliminary investigation settings),
a judge or clerk of court (in some contexts),
or another government official legally authorized to administer oaths.

In such cases, the affidavit can still be validly sworn even if not notarized by a notary public—as long as the officer is authorized and properly administers the oath.

C) Purely informal “witness statements”

A signed narrative that is not sworn may be useful for investigation, leads, or internal documentation, but it is not an affidavit and is usually treated as a private document that needs authentication and carries limited evidentiary value on its own.

D) Unsworn declarations (limited/exception-based)

Unlike some jurisdictions that broadly accept unsworn declarations “under penalty of perjury,” Philippine practice still heavily relies on oaths. Unsworn substitutes exist only where specific laws, regulations, or agency rules permit them. As a general practice expectation, official processes still ask for subscribed and sworn statements.

6) What notarization actually does (and what it does NOT do)

What notarization does

Notarization—particularly via a jurat—generally:

requires the affiant’s personal appearance before the notary,
requires the notary to verify the affiant’s identity using “competent evidence of identity,”
requires the affiant to sign in the notary’s presence (or acknowledge a prior signature, depending on the act),
requires the affiant to take an oath or affirmation that the contents are true, and
results in an official notarial certificate and entry in the notary’s register.

A properly notarized affidavit becomes a public document for evidentiary purposes, which matters for authenticity and admissibility.

What notarization does NOT do

Notarization does not prove the facts are true. It mainly proves:

the signer is the person identified,
the signer appeared and signed (or acknowledged signature) properly, and
the signer swore/affirmed to the truthfulness.

False content can still be false—only now it is false under oath, creating potential criminal exposure.

7) Jurat vs. Acknowledgment (critical, and often done wrong)

For affidavits, the proper notarial act is usually a JURAT, not an acknowledgment.

Jurat: The affiant swears/affirms that the statements are true; the notary certifies the oath and that the document was signed in the notary’s presence.
Acknowledgment: The signer declares that signing was a voluntary act; it is common for deeds, contracts, and instruments—not primarily for truth-of-statements.

An affidavit notarized using the wrong certificate form can trigger challenges (especially if the proceeding strictly requires a sworn statement). In practice, many offices still accept defective forms, but the risk increases in litigation or contested proceedings.

8) Core requirements under Philippine notarial practice (high-impact rules)

While details vary by situation, these principles are central to valid notarization in the Philippines:

A) Personal appearance

The affiant must personally appear before the notary. “Left it with my secretary” or “signed it earlier at home” is a classic problem unless the notarial act is structured to comply with the rules (and even then, affidavits usually require signing in the notary’s presence for a jurat).

B) Competent evidence of identity

The notary must rely on valid identification (or other allowable methods under the rules) to confirm identity. Weak ID compliance is a common ground for challenging notarization.

C) The document must be complete

No material blanks. If corrections are made, they should be properly initialed and handled consistently with notarial standards.

D) Notary’s disqualifications and conflicts

Notaries should not notarize documents where they are disqualified—commonly involving personal interest or close family relationships (the rules restrict notarizing for certain relatives within a specified civil degree and for the notary’s spouse/partner).

E) Notarial register entry

Notarial acts are recorded in the notary’s register. Irregular or missing entries can create evidentiary and administrative problems.

9) Legal effects in evidence: notarized vs. not notarized

A) Classification: public vs. private

A notarized affidavit is typically treated as a public document.
An unnotarized statement is typically a private document.

B) Authentication and admissibility impact

Public documents generally enjoy a presumption of regularity and are easier to present as authentic.
Private documents typically require proof of due execution/authenticity before they can be received as evidence, unless admitted by the opposing party or covered by an evidentiary rule.

C) The “affidavit is hearsay” problem (often misunderstood)

Even a notarized affidavit is usually an out-of-court statement. In many trial settings, it cannot replace testimony because the opposing party is entitled to cross-examine. This is why the Judicial Affidavit Rule exists: it allows written direct testimony, but still requires the witness to appear for cross-examination unless properly dispensed with.

10) What happens if the witness affidavit is NOT notarized?

Consequences depend on the context:

If a rule requires a sworn statement: the affidavit may be rejected, treated as defective, or require re-execution.
If offered as evidence: it may be treated as a private, unauthenticated document and be given little or no weight, especially if objected to.
If used to support a filing: the office/court may require compliance (re-notarization or proper swearing) or, in stricter cases, dismiss or deny the pleading/complaint for non-compliance.

Some defects can be cured (especially procedural defects like verification issues in certain pleadings), but some requirements are treated more strictly (e.g., sworn certifications in specific procedural contexts).

11) Defective or fake notarization: bigger trouble than “no notarization”

A notarization can be attacked if:

the affiant did not personally appear,
the notary did not properly verify identity,
the notary’s commission/jurisdiction was invalid for the act,
the notarial certificate is improper,
the document was incomplete or altered improperly, or
the notarization was otherwise irregular.

If the notarization is void, the document may be treated as not notarized at all, and the notary may face:

administrative sanctions (including revocation of notarial commission),
criminal exposure (e.g., falsification-related offenses depending on circumstances), and
civil liability.

12) Perjury risk: why “sworn” matters

A false statement in a properly sworn affidavit can expose the affiant to perjury (false statements under oath), among other potential liabilities depending on the setting and harm caused.

This is one reason notarization is taken seriously: it formalizes the oath and discourages casual fabrication.

13) Executing a witness affidavit abroad (OFWs and overseas witnesses)

A witness affidavit executed outside the Philippines is commonly made usable in Philippine proceedings through one of these pathways:

Before a Philippine embassy/consulate (consular notarization / consularized document), or
Before a foreign notary, then authenticated as required for use in the Philippines—now commonly via apostille in countries covered by the Hague Apostille system (the Philippines has been participating since 2019).

Practical reminders:

Use the format required by the receiving court/agency.
Observe identity requirements and proper notarial certificate form.
Consider translation if executed in a foreign language.

14) Remote/online notarization: general caution

Philippine notarization traditionally requires personal appearance. The Supreme Court issued special rules allowing remote notarization in limited contexts (notably as interim measures during extraordinary periods), with strict requirements (identity verification, recording, document handling). The availability and scope of remote notarization depend on current Supreme Court issuances and implementing details, so it should not be assumed as a default substitute for physical appearance.

15) Best practices for preparing and notarizing witness affidavits

Content best practices

Stick to facts within personal knowledge; avoid speculation.
State how the witness knows the facts (relationship, presence, documents personally handled, etc.).
Use chronological, numbered paragraphs.
Attach and properly identify supporting documents where relevant.

Execution best practices

Bring current government-issued IDs.
Sign in the notary’s presence (unless the authorized procedure clearly allows otherwise).
Ensure the notarial certificate is a jurat (for affidavits).
Sign/initial each page if required by the receiving office; avoid blanks.
Read the full statement; the oath covers the entire content.

16) Bottom line

A “witness affidavit” used for official purposes in the Philippines generally needs to be sworn before an authorized officer.
Notarization is the most common method of making it sworn and acceptable.
In some contexts, swearing before a prosecutor or other authorized public officer can substitute for notarization by a notary public.
An unnotarized witness statement is usually not an affidavit in the strict sense and may be treated as a private document with reduced procedural and evidentiary utility.