**Sworn Statements as Evidence of Unauthorized Collection of Money
(Philippine Legal Context – 2025)**
“An affidavit is a poor substitute for oral testimony, but it is often the doorway through which cases of financial abuse first reach the courts.”
1. What counts as “unauthorized collection of money”?
| Scenario | Governing provision(s) | Typical complainant’s sworn statement will allege… |
|---|---|---|
| Public officer charges fees not allowed by law | Art. 213(2), Revised Penal Code (Illegal exactions) | Demand for payment, lack of legal basis, personal handing-over of cash |
| Private individual solicits, collects or receives fees without the required license or permit (e.g., placement agencies, charitable fund drives, money-service businesses) | • Art. 315 & 318, RPC (Estafa & Other Deceits) • PD 1564 (Charitable Solicitations Act) • RA 10364 (Anti-Trafficking, for illegal recruitment payments) • Bangko Sentral regs on remittance & e-money |
Representation of authority; amount, date and mode of payment; absence of DOLE/SEC/BSP permit |
| Agent or employee collects company funds but pockets them | Art. 315(1)(b), RPC – Misappropriation | Entrustment, obligation to turn over money, subsequent demand and failure to account |
| School, training center, or condominium collects “advance” fees without CHED/TESDA/HUDCC approval | Sector-specific charters, Consumer Act (RA 7394) | Absence of statutory approval; copies of flyers or receipts; aggregate amount collected |
2. Nature of a sworn statement
Definition – A written narration of facts executed under oath before a notary public or other officer authorized to administer oaths (Rule 132 § 6, Rules of Court; 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice).
Components
- Caption & title (e.g., Complaint-Affidavit).
- Personal details of affiant (name, age, address, citizenship, capacity).
- Body in numbered paragraphs stating personal knowledge.
- Signature + jurat (“SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN…”).
- Annexes (receipts, screenshots, demand letters).
Electronic sworn statements – Permitted if:
- Signed with a digital certificate compliant with RA 8792 (E-Commerce Act); or
- Notarized through remote notarization under SC A.C. No. 127-2020 (extended to 2025).
Perjury exposure – Falsehoods are punishable under Art. 183, RPC, and now carry higher penalties under RA 11594 (2021 amendment).
3. Admissibility under the Rules on Evidence (as amended 2019)
| Stage | How the sworn statement is used | Key admissibility point |
|---|---|---|
| (a) Filing of criminal complaint with the Office of the Prosecutor | Complaint-Affidavit initiates preliminary investigation (Rule 112 § 3). | Prosecutor may rely on affidavits; cross-examination is not yet required. |
| (b) Application for search/arrest warrant | Affidavit supplies probable cause facts before the judge (Rule 126 § 5). | Must show personal knowledge; judge must personally examine affiant.* |
| (c) Trial proper | Affiant takes the witness stand; affidavit is offered as direct testimony and marked as Exhibit “A”. | Without cross-examination, the affidavit alone is hearsay (Rule 130 § 37). |
| (d) Administrative or civil actions | Affidavits often received in lieu of oral testimony (e.g., NLRC, SEC, PRC). | Tribunals may relax rules; weight depends on substantial evidence standard. |
* Lagman v. Paulate (G.R. 183348, Mar. 30 , 2011): judge’s “probing questions” requirement.
4. Weight & credibility considerations
Personal knowledge – The affiant must have first-hand knowledge of the handing of money; otherwise the statement is “conjectural”.
Corroboration by receipts or electronic records – Courts routinely look for bank slips, GCASH logs, emails, Viber chats.
Consistency & spontaneity – Time-lapse between the collection and execution of the affidavit; presence of motive or undue influence.
Opportunity for cross-examination – The defense may:
- Inspect the notarial register;
- Challenge identification of signatures;
- Impeach by prior inconsistent statements.
Self-serving vs. admission – An accused’s own sworn statement can be an extra-judicial admission, admissible even without cross (Rule 130 § 4).
5. Jurisprudence sampler
| Case | Holding relevant to affidavits & unauthorized collection |
|---|---|
| People v. Palma (G.R. 219381, Sept 14 2020) | Estafa conviction affirmed; victim’s sworn complaint with GCASH screenshots plus testimony sufficient to prove fraudulent collection. |
| People v. Rey (G.R. 246779, Jan 31 2022) | Affidavit alone insufficient where affiant failed to appear; accused acquitted for doubt. |
| Cagang v. Sandiganbayan (837 Phil 815 [2018]) | Clarified that affidavits in preliminary investigation are not evidence per se at trial; live testimony essential. |
| Heirs of Malate v. Gamboa (G.R. 196215, Feb 19 2020) | In civil action for recovery of sums, notarized sworn statements of payors raised a presumption of authenticity of receipts under Rule 132 § 20. |
| Soriano v. People (G.R. 210281, Apr 10 2019) | Illegal exactions: taxpayer’s sworn affidavit and uncertified photocopy of receipt were enough for probable cause, but not for conviction absent original receipt. |
6. Drafting tips for counsel and complainants
- Narrate the money flow chronologically – date collected, amount, purpose, authority invoked by collector, mode of payment, subsequent demand.
- Identify all persons present – necessary for corroborative witness affidavits.
- Attach primary documents – original receipt, screenshot, chat logs; label them Annex “A”, “B”… and cross-reference in the affidavit.
- State basis for knowledge – e.g., “I personally handed the cash to Mr. X…” or “I opened the company safe and saw…”.
- Include demand and refusal – especially for estafa prosecutions; a letter-demand is often A-1 evidence.
- Observe notarial formalities – affiant presents a current ID; notary keeps a thumb-mark and photograph where required (Notarial Practice Rule § 12).
- Consider multiple affidavits – Victim, witness, handwriting expert (to authenticate receipts), bank officer (to certify account).
7. Common defenses against the sworn statement
| Defense | Mode of attack |
|---|---|
| Hearsay objection | Argue that affiant did not testify, or facts stated are not of personal knowledge. |
| Defective notarization | Show expired commission, missing notarial seal, or failure to record in notarial book (renders document a private writing). |
| Variances & inconsistencies | Cross-examine on discrepancies between affidavit and in-court testimony. |
| Entrapment / payment was authorized | Produce board resolution, SPA, or permit authorizing collection. |
| Denial of due process in preliminary investigation | Show that affidavit was withheld or not supplied, violating Rule 112 § 3 rights. |
8. Interaction with other types of evidence
- Receipts & ledgers – fall under commercial lists and entries (Rule 130 § 42 & 43).
- Electronic data messages – admissible if authenticated as required by the Rules on Electronic Evidence.
- Object evidence – marked cash from entrapment operations (Rule 130 § 2).
- Judicial notice – prevailing exchange rates for damages computation.
9. Administrative & regulatory venues
- BSP Financial Consumer Protection Dept. – complaint-affidavit triggers examination of unauthorized remittance agents.
- DOLE / POEA – migrant-worker recruiters face suspension upon sworn complaints of illegal fees.
- SEC Enforcement & Investor Protection – affidavits on investment scams used to secure cease-and-desist orders.
- DepEd, CHED, TESDA – surcharge-collection complaints by students supported by affidavits can lead to permit revocation.
10. Practical checklist for litigators (2025 update)
- Verify notarization in the online Notary Public Roll (OCA website).
- E-notarized affidavits: Attach the XML Notarial Act Data or QR code.
- Ensure GDPR-like data privacy compliance when attaching IDs or bank details (DPA 2012).
- Bundle and paginate all affidavits and annexes in a single PDF with bookmarks for e-filing under A.M. 11-9-4-SC.
- Prepare a joint judicial affidavit (Rule 119-A) for speedy trial once information is filed.
Key Take-aways
- A sworn statement is indispensable for launching prosecutions or administrative actions over unauthorized monetary collections, but it is only the starting point.
- At trial, its probative value rises or falls on the presence of the affiant, corroborative documents, and credibility under cross-examination.
- Practitioners must keep abreast of the 2019 Evidence amendments, the Notarial Practice Rule, and digital-evidence protocols to harness affidavits effectively.
- Respondents can often defeat a bare affidavit through meticulous attacks on formal defects and by producing licensing documents that show authority to collect.
This article is for general guidance only and not a substitute for individualized legal advice. Laws and jurisprudence cited are current as of July 8, 2025, Philippines (UTC+8).