2004 Rules on Notary Public

View previous topic View next topic Go down

2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by chris on Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:53 am

Good day!


I am asking in behalf of the BAC. Is it possible for the BAC to disqualify a supplier with a lowest calculated bid after finding out during the Post Qualification that their documents which requires to be under oath did not comply with 2004 Rules on Notary Public as per advisory from the Office of the Solicitor General dated May 6, 2008? This was emphasized by the BAC Chairman durig Pre-Bid Conference to take note of the said advisory. Your views please. Thanks.
avatar
chris
New Member
New Member

Female Number of posts : 21
Company/Agency : gocc
Occupation/Designation : BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-10-15

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by chris on Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:08 am

I am referring to 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. I stand Corrected. Smile
avatar
chris
New Member
New Member

Female Number of posts : 21
Company/Agency : gocc
Occupation/Designation : BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-10-15

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Guest on Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:40 pm

BAC has the authority under the IRR of RA 9184 to determine whether or not a bidder is eligible or not. If a bidders documents fall short of what is required by the RA 9184 and its IRR therefore he/she must be disqualified.

Is there no notary or the person notarizing it has no authority? what do you mean do not comply?

If you like a more detailed form of answer please elaborate more on the facts.

Thanks. bounce

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by chris on Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:48 am

Thanks for taking time replying,sir.. Smile I appreciate it.. I'm actually referring to the sworn statement by the prospective bidder on its technical information. We conducted competetive biddding prior to the availablility of Ominibus Affidavit,thus we opted to use the old sample forms which the Jurat stated: SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this____, day____, affiant exhibiting to me his/her COMMUNITY TAX CERTIFICATE NO.xxxxxxx.

Please take note ,sir that in 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, the Supreme Court has strictly construed the requirements of Notarial Rules which among others, discouraging the use of Community Tax Cetificate because the jurat does not indicate competent evidence of the affiant's identity to the notary public..Competent evidence of identity under said Rules refers to the identification of an individual based on: at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing photograph and signature of the individual..

Advisory from the Office of the Solicitor General is to require affidavits or notarized documents to be submitted relative to bidding activities must strictly comply with 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice be made mandatory.

Your views, please. Thanks.
avatar
chris
New Member
New Member

Female Number of posts : 21
Company/Agency : gocc
Occupation/Designation : BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-10-15

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Guest on Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:08 pm

The matter is not of GPPBs concern because it is a question of the legality of the affidavit and it still within the jurisdiction of the BAC in the evaluation of the bid under IRR of RA 9184.

However for your guidance, in your case I believe that the CTC is enough to satisfy the 2004 notarial practice as amended by A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC (See below). Please see emphasis that the required "competent evidence of identity" is not limited to those enumerated.


I hope I answered your question.

A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC February 19, 2008

RE: 2004 RULES ON NOTARIAL PRACTICE -
The Court Resolved, upon the recommendation of the Sub Committee on the Revision of the Rules Governing Notaries Public, to AMEND Sec. 12 (a). Rule II of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, to wit:

Sirs/Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En Banc dated February 19, 2008.

"A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC-Re: 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. – The Court Resolved, upon the recommendation of the Sub Committee on the Revision of the Rules Governing Notaries Public, to AMEND Sec. 12 (a). Rule II of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, to wit:

Rule II

DEFINITIONS

xxx

"Sec. 12. Component Evidence of Identity. The phrase "competent evidence of identity" refers to the identification of an individual based on:

(a) at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of the individual, such as but not limited to, passport, driver’s license, Professional Regulations Commission ID, National Bureau of Investigation clearance, police clearance, postal ID, voter’s ID, Barangay certification, Government Service and Insurance System (GSIS) e-card, Social Security System (SSS) card, Philhealth card, senior citizen card, Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) ID, OFW ID, seaman’s book, alien certificate of registration/immigrant certificate of registration, government office ID, certification from the National Council for the Welfare of Disable Persons (NCWDP), Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) certification; or


Last edited by WormaixJr on Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:16 pm; edited 4 times in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by chris on Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:02 pm

I am exactly referring to that Rule of Notarial Practice you just cited, sir..although,it's not anymore in the jurisdiction of GPPB, your opinon matters a lot. After all, Post- Qualification is one activity of the Procurement that govern by R.A.9184. In my mind, how could a Community Tax Certificate be considered a Competent evidence when in fact, it does not bear photograph and signature of the individual?

Consider this case: In The President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints vs. BTL Construction/BPI-MS Insurance Corp. (G.R. NO.176439,February 26, 2007), The Supreme Court denied a Motion for Extension to file a petition for review on certiorari on the ground that Petioner submitted a defective affidavit of service of the Motion because the jurat does not indicate competent evidence of the affiant's identity other than his community tax certificate.

Thanks,sir.
avatar
chris
New Member
New Member

Female Number of posts : 21
Company/Agency : gocc
Occupation/Designation : BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-10-15

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Guest on Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:17 pm

Additional: I think the affidavit is still valid until proven otherwise and contested to the proper court or agency.

Basis: the documents still passed the process of regular notary and registered in the book of notary public. therefore until it is questioned, the document still considered as valid.

PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY


Last edited by WormaixJr on Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:15 am; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by amang'65 on Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:25 pm

chris,

i believe your BAC on that particular matter just did their part in disqualifying a certain bidder who has not complied with requirements discussed even in your pre bid conference and with basis which for this matter is the Rules on Notarial Practice. However, this bidder can always be given due process to appeal their disqualification given every provisions in the RA.
avatar
amang'65
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Female Number of posts : 282
Company/Agency : City of Baguio
Occupation/Designation : sekretarya
Registration date : 2009-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Guest on Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:51 am

It is not the fault of the bidder if his document is notarized and he was asked by a PUBLIC OFFICER to give him his CTC. The bidder is not the one who notarize the document but only executes it.

Second how could you know that at the time the document is being notarized the bidder, presented his Government issued I.D w/ picture but the CTC was the one included in the notarization of the document? (Process of Notary)

Neither the BAC nor the GPPB has the jurisdiction on the validity of the Notarized Document, however we could only presume that there is regularity on the process because it was issued by a PUBLIC OFFICER.

In the Pre Bid Conference, only clarifications and details of the requirement is agreed upon and it will not change or modify the bid document in any way unless otherwise provided in writing as a supplemental/bid bulletin.

bounce bounce bounce

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by amang'65 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:11 pm

i think the issue here is on simple instructions handed down by the BAC during a pre bid conference, wherein bidders should take note on the Rules on Notary Public as per advisory from the Office of the Solicitor General dated May 6, 2008, discouraging the use of Community Tax Cetificate for documents needing notarials. now for the case of chris a cetain bidder for unknown reasons still made use of his/her CTC as his/her identification, therefore it is clear according to the BAC's point of view that this bidder did not follow simple instructions, hence was disqualified. as i have quoted earlier the in as far as the BACs capacity is concerned, they could disqualify such bidder for simply not following instructions given during a pre bid conference where for this case i believe there was no change or modification of bid docs. but as i have said likewise, the bidder may always appeal for reconsideration.
avatar
amang'65
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Female Number of posts : 282
Company/Agency : City of Baguio
Occupation/Designation : sekretarya
Registration date : 2009-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Niwram on Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:30 pm

Rule X of the Revised IRR of RA 9184 on post qualification, the law states that the LCB/HRB shall undergo post-qualification in order to determine whether the bidder concerned complies with and is responsive to all the requirements and conditions as specified in the bidding documents.

Section 34.2 last par. is very clear that "failure to submit the above requirements on time or a finding against the veracity shall be ground for the forfeiture of the bid security and disqualify the bidder for award.

Reason is the soul of the law; when the reason of the law changes the law also is changed. silent
avatar
Niwram
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Male Number of posts : 263
Company/Agency : Matatag na Republika ng Pilipinas
Occupation/Designation : Katulong Pambatas II/Tagapayo sa Tawad at Parangal na Komite
Registration date : 2009-10-06

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by chris on Tue Nov 03, 2009 4:31 pm

Good day!

Just got the chance visiting this forum after that long weekend..wow! Several minds spoke up on this issue and it's good coz I get to gauge and weigh other's opinion..sir wormaixjr if we merely depend on "presumption" on validity of one's document simply because it is issued by a PUBLIC OFFICER despite of the information/advisory from a legitimate agency (Office of the Solicitor General, that is) did we not somehow violate any rule as to the procedure/process in conducting Post-Qualification? Section 34.3 clearly stated that post-qualification shall verify, validate and ascertain all statements made by the bidder...precisely it is not the fault of the bidder but it was emphasized during the pre-bid that all prospective bidders must take note of the 2004 Rules on Notary Practice. Pre-bid Conference does not only cover clarifications and details, it also a venue to discuss, among other things like eligibility requirements, etc.. and for the bidders to take note of a valid instructions pertainining to their documents is not at all deviating or changing the law of R.A. 9184 nor modifying the same. I must agree with Amang1965.. It's a matter of simply following instructions. Smile

Thanks to you ,sirs. Smile
avatar
chris
New Member
New Member

Female Number of posts : 21
Company/Agency : gocc
Occupation/Designation : BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-10-15

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Guest on Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:36 pm

In having the presumption of regularity, in the first place in the pre bid conf. it is very absurd to tell the bidders to follow the amendment of 2004 notarial practice because they are not the one covered by the law, it is the notary public.

Basis: INHERENT IMPOSSIBILITY of the condition and PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY

ow well you made up you mind. atleast I helped or I think so.
Question

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by chris on Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:00 am

Hi there, sir wormaixJr.. Smile your views did HELP a lot, sir.. no doubt about that, sir.. Smile thank you so much.. but you really think it is absurd to ask the bidders to take note such amendment on notarial practice? It is like saying sir - it is as well absurd for the Office of the Solicitor General to give us that advisory knowing we are not covered by that law, as you put it BUT the notary public? We are talking "Post-Evaluation" , sir wherein the BAC has to validate/verify veracity of the documents. I appreciate your points of view, sir and this forum is a good venue to express stuffs but since the BAC made their stand already regarding this concern and with this- I rest my case, sir. Smile
avatar
chris
New Member
New Member

Female Number of posts : 21
Company/Agency : gocc
Occupation/Designation : BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-10-15

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Guest on Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:00 pm

For purposes of discussion eto po ung orginal na section 12.

SEC. 12. Competent Evidence of Identity. - The phrase "competent evidence of identity" refers to the identification of an individual based on:

(a) at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of the individual; or

(b) the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy to the instrument, document or transaction who is personally known to the notary public and who personally knows the individual, or of two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument, document or transaction who each personally knows the individual and shows to the notary public documentary identification.

The amendment added an enumeration of what constitute competent evidence but as you could see in the amendment it is not limited to those enumerated.
Bear in mind na sa old section 12, CTC ang ginagamit dyan pero the notary public accepts it. (kahit na nakalagay e Photograph and Signature)


Base in my experience sa pagpapa notary the notary usually ask for my CTC para ilalagay ung number sa document and an I.D.

Question in 2004 and before the amendment of 2004 notarial practices, Do BAC check the section 12 or just now na may advisory (which d nmn pinagbawal ang sabi lang ay take note of the notarial amendments) kasi dati naman kahit wala sa pre conference eh it is a requirement db?

bounce

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by orlan747 on Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:50 pm

Hmmm.. this post maybe a month late but I will say my piece nevertheless:

I agree with WormaiXjr: It is not the fault of the Bidder that the Notary Public did not require the Bidder to submit an Identification Card with a picture and signature. Or maybe they did, but since most of the standard bidding forms dowloadable from GPPB and DPWH bears only this clause:

"SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this _________, day of ______ 200_, affiant exhibiting to me his/her Community Tax Certificate No. ________________ issued on _________ at _____________________, Philippines."

the notary public filled up only what needed to be filled up, in this case the data from the CTC. If the BAC really wanted to validate/verify the veracity of the documents, the most logical thing to do was to verify same from the Notary Public.

From my point of view as a contractor/bidder: We almost always use the same Notary Public for our "notariable documents". In a week's time, we may have had scores of documents notarized from the same Notary Public, especially during the time of IRR-A. I agree that a "Competent Evidence of Identity" is required by the Notary Public for those Affiants whom he may not know or has doubts on his identity. Unless the Notary Public is feeble-minded, he will not require "Competent Evidence of Identity" for somebody that has been using his services regularly. So, why use the CTC? That's our esteemed government's ploy to generate more income for the barangays/municipalities/cities.

No offense intended to "Chris", but it is our experience however, that unscrupulous procuring entity may look for loopholes to disqualify the lowest bidder if they have an anointed one. It does not matter that the PE may save millions, but, an unnumbered page or an uninitialed page will be a basis for disqualification. Now, if there are unscrupulous PEs out there reading this forum, they may think they have a new weapon, "a CTC-identified notarized docs".
avatar
orlan747
Active Poster
Active Poster

Male Number of posts : 93
Company/Agency : Golden OCS Construction
Occupation/Designation : Manager
Registration date : 2009-04-01

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by engrjhez® on Sun Dec 06, 2009 1:04 pm

This same issue brought a fiery discussion of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice in our recently concluded seminar last December 01-03, 2009 at Coron, Palawan.

After the presentation of sample forms (particularly the omnibus affidavit) our lawyer from the Sanggunian insisted that such documents follow "Competent Evidence of Identity" and wait no longer for court challenges. I certainly agree that compliance is mandatory. However, to the case whether to disqualify or not to disqualify a document on the basis of the deficient notary, I must agree with the PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY presented by WormaixJr.

Although the instruction to correct notarial practice during the Pre-Bid Conference, the adherence or violation of such is not covered by the definitions of the Bidding Documents (if it followed the PBDs). The ascertaining of validity and veracity of documents shall be only based on the realms of GPRA and whether the document present is satisfactorily complying to the required notarization. Whether the document is valid in terms of the notarial practice or not, is better left for the court to decide. The cited jurisprudence may be seen as a call for compliance, but the case was not entirely delivered on the grounds of GPRA, so we cannot entirely use the rulings.

Nevertheless, the discussion ended to a common agreement that to prevent further challenges and to redefine uniformity, the sample forms issued by the GPPB must be modified to compliant to the required competent evidence of identity.

I hope the GPPB resolve this issue by posting a circular regarding this matter followed by making their forms fully compliant to the 2004 Rules on Notary Public. Very Happy
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2480
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Guest on Sun Dec 06, 2009 4:00 pm

I`ll raise it right away!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by orlan747 on Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:12 pm

Wow... Well said Sir Engrjhez..

And wow... a quick promise of an action from Sir WormaiXjr.

Keep it up sirs!!!
avatar
orlan747
Active Poster
Active Poster

Male Number of posts : 93
Company/Agency : Golden OCS Construction
Occupation/Designation : Manager
Registration date : 2009-04-01

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by chris on Mon Dec 07, 2009 10:27 am

Good day everyone!

I must agree gentlemen with your points raised concerning Notarial Practice. True enough, it is not the bidders fault if the notarized documents did not comply with the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. But we CAN NOT leave the fact that such rules must be properly imposed as it is mandatory. The fact again that our institution was given an "advisory" from the Office of the Solicitor General to make sure this is properly followed, the BAC on its end has to advise the bidders to take note of this Rules relative to the bidding activities. I do not know how this is done by the bidders but I think it is for them also to make sure that the Notary Public follows this by presenting their valid I.D.insted of CTC so that it will not become an issue anymore during the Post Qualification. In the first place, they are aware already of the Advisory as it was announced during the Pre-Bid Conference. Not following instruction could be ground for disqualification and it is the Procuring Entity's prerogative. As to what orlan 747 cited about unscrupulous procuring entity's deceptive tactics whatsoever, im pretty sure it does not apply to the entity I belong for I know the integrity and transparency this people has (BAC). I agree with Sir Engrjhez that sample forms issued by the GPPB must be modified to compliant to the required competent evidence of identity. Thanks.

Smile
avatar
chris
New Member
New Member

Female Number of posts : 21
Company/Agency : gocc
Occupation/Designation : BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-10-15

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Guest on Mon Dec 07, 2009 11:19 am

Okay granting that they did not follow the 2004 notarial practice, but still you have the RESPONSIBILITY to validate such document to the proper agency of the courts if it is really NOTARIZED. Furthermore the bidder still comply with the IRR and PBD requirement of a sworn statement under oath.

The face of the document is not only the evidence that may be gathered here you could also validate or ascertain such document in the courts where the Book of notary is passed.

Take note that the violation of such provision of the Notarial practice will not automatically reverse the nature of a public document unless it is questioned in court.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by orlan747 on Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:57 pm

chris wrote:Good day everyone!

I must agree gentlemen with your points raised concerning Notarial Practice. True enough, it is not the bidders fault if the notarized documents did not comply with the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. But we CAN NOT leave the fact that such rules must be properly imposed as it is mandatory. The fact again that our institution was given an "advisory" from the Office of the Solicitor General to make sure this is properly followed, the BAC on its end has to advise the bidders to take note of this Rules relative to the bidding activities. I do not know how this is done by the bidders but I think it is for them also to make sure that the Notary Public follows this by presenting their valid I.D.insted of CTC so that it will not become an issue anymore during the Post Qualification. In the first place, they are aware already of the Advisory as it was announced during the Pre-Bid Conference. Not following instruction could be ground for disqualification and it is the Procuring Entity's prerogative. As to what orlan 747 cited about unscrupulous procuring entity's deceptive tactics whatsoever, im pretty sure it does not apply to the entity I belong for I know the integrity and transparency this people has (BAC). I agree with Sir Engrjhez that sample forms issued by the GPPB must be modified to compliant to the required competent evidence of identity. Thanks.

Smile

Kudos to you and your people in the BAC. Smile
avatar
orlan747
Active Poster
Active Poster

Male Number of posts : 93
Company/Agency : Golden OCS Construction
Occupation/Designation : Manager
Registration date : 2009-04-01

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:44 pm

engrjhez wrote:
This same issue brought a fiery discussion of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice in our recently concluded seminar last December 01-03, 2009 at Coron, Palawan.

After the presentation of sample forms (particularly the omnibus affidavit) our lawyer from the Sanggunian insisted that such documents follow "Competent Evidence of Identity" and wait no longer for court challenges. I certainly agree that compliance is mandatory. However, to the case whether to disqualify or not to disqualify a document on the basis of the deficient notary, I must agree with the PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY presented by WormaixJr.

Although the instruction to correct notarial practice during the Pre-Bid Conference, the adherence or violation of such is not covered by the definitions of the Bidding Documents (if it followed the PBDs). The ascertaining of validity and veracity of documents shall be only based on the realms of GPRA and whether the document present is satisfactorily complying to the required notarization. Whether the document is valid in terms of the notarial practice or not, is better left for the court to decide. The cited jurisprudence may be seen as a call for compliance, but the case was not entirely delivered on the grounds of GPRA, so we cannot entirely use the rulings.

Nevertheless, the discussion ended to a common agreement that to prevent further challenges and to redefine uniformity, the sample forms issued by the GPPB must be modified to compliant to the required competent evidence of identity.

I hope the GPPB resolve this issue by posting a circular regarding this matter followed by making their forms fully compliant to the 2004 Rules on Notary Public. Very Happy

Right, engrhjhez, I was the resource person when the issue was raised. I am fully aware of the particular Rule, except that not all notaries and lawyers are aware of the new rule and that is the reason why implementation is somewhat on a case-to-case basis.

I am also aware of the position raised by wormaixJr but I choose to remain silent since I am not a lawyer and not in full grasp of the situation, but we agreed that I will raise the issue to GPPB-TSO, but I thank wormaixJr for taking the cudgels to raise it with the GPPB. It is better to be pro-active in this particular issue instead of waiting for actual controversies to arise.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by sheena on Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:09 am

I just want to ask if we should consider disqualified a bidder if the technical components they have submitted were notarized by their own president/stockholder/notary

sheena
New Member
New Member

Female Number of posts : 1
Company/Agency : BIR
Occupation/Designation : TWG
Registration date : 2011-12-17

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Jovinal on Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:55 pm

No, as long as they are authorized by law to perform notarization.
avatar
Jovinal
Board Veteran
Board Veteran

Male Number of posts : 438
Company/Agency : LGU- Danao City
Occupation/Designation : City Accountant
Registration date : 2011-11-27

Back to top Go down

Re: 2004 Rules on Notary Public

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum