A.C. No. 12375 - Ick vs. Amazona

Complainants: Clara R. Ick, Ruby Elinbergsson, and Teresita Edosada.
Respondent: Atty. Allan S. Amazona, facing a complaint for notarizing an allegedly false document.

The complaint-affidavit was filed before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
The alleged misconduct occurred on March 9, 2016, when respondent notarized a letter dated March 7, 2016.
The letter was signed by Michelle B. Lotho, identified as the Director and Auditor of South Forbes Phuket Mansions Homeowners Association, Inc.

The letter was purportedly used to facilitate the registration of South Forbes Phuket Mansions Homeowners Association, Inc.
It was alleged that the letter contained a false assertion indicating that most of the subdivision lot buyers were out of the country, suggesting that securing their signatures was highly improbable.
Complainants maintained that respondent was aware this assertion was untrue since he had constant communication with the residents of South Forbes Phuket Mansions, including the complainants.
Additionally, a list of members with corresponding signatures was attached to the letter.

This list was claimed to be false since it referred to attendance at a meeting for a property manager on December 3, 2015, rather than a meeting for homeowners in connection with the association’s registration.
The complainants asserted that no such homeowners meeting actually took place.

Investigating Commissioner Jose Villanueva Cabrera prepared a Report and Recommendation on January 12, 2017.
The Commissioner recommended the dismissal of the administrative complaint against respondent for lack of merit.
His rationale was that notarizing the letter, per se, did not violate the Notarial Rules.

Respondent merely attested that Michelle B. Lotho personally appeared before him and consented to the truth of the letter’s contents.
The responsibility for the truth or falsity rested solely with the affiant, namely Lotho, not with the notary public.

On January 26, 2017, the IBP Board of Governors adopted Commissioner Cabrera’s findings and recommendation.
The IBP resolved to dismiss the complaint based on the conclusion that the complaint lacked merit.

Whether notarizing a document that contains allegedly false information constitutes a violation of the Notarial Rules, the Rules of Court, or the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Whether the respondent, in notarizing the March 7, 2016 letter, acted beyond his duty by failing to ascertain the truth of the contents of the document.
Whether sufficient substantial evidence was presented to justify disciplinary action, particularly disbarment against the respondent.