ADJUDICACIÓN E INICIO DEL CONTRATO

forgery because although the offender has performed all the acts of execution, it is not possible because by simply looking at the forged document, it could be seen that it is not genuine. It can only be a consummated forgery if the document which purports to be genuine is given the appearance of a true and genuine document. Otherwise, it is at most frustrated.

IV. Forgeries Upon Documents  The proper term is Falsification

 Falsification is the commission of any of the eight acts mentioned in Article 171 on legislative (only the act of making alteration), public or official, commercial, or private documents, or wireless, or telegraph messages.

The term forgery as used in Article 169 refers to the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury or bank notes or any instruments payable to bearer or to order.

Note that forging and falsification are crimes under Forgeries.

 Document (in the legal sense) is :

(1) any writing, whether paper based or in any solid surface, which is complete in itself and capable of creating rights or extinguishing obligations, or defining the relations between persons. Examples: deeds and contracts, receipts, promissory notes, checks.

(2) a writing used as evidence of the facts contained in the document such as death/birth certificates; clearances, medical records, x- rays; driver‘s license.

 a customer in a hotel did not write his name on the registry book, which was intended to be a memorial of those who got in and out of that hotel. There is no complete document to speak of.

Note that a check is not yet a document when it is not completed yet. If somebody writes on it, he makes a document out of it

 A mere blank form of an official document is not in itself a document

 General Classification: (In falsification, it is essential to specify the document falsified)

1. Falsification of Legislative Document punished under Art. 170- bills, resolutions, ordinances whether approved or pending approval, by any legislative body

a). the act of falsification is limited to alterations of a genuine legislative document

b). if by any other means, such as simulating a legislative document, the offense is ordinary falsification.

2. Falsification of a Non-Legislative Document

a). Document proper under Article 171 and 172

b). Wireless, Telegram, cablegram, telephone Messages under Article 173

c). Certificates under Article 174  Kinds of Documents Proper

1. Public Documents: they consists of the following

a). Those which embody the official acts or records of acts of the sovereign authority,

160 Legal resources @ www.sophialegis.weebly.com

official bodies and tribunals, and of the

public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, whether of the Philippines or of a foreign country such as Decisions / Resolutions; Administrative Orders; Marriage Contract; Oaths of Office (Public Document Proper)

b). Those created, executed, or issued by a public officer or in which he participates,

virtute officii (by virtue of his office) such as clearances; certificates of appearance, designation of personnel; receipts. These are the so called ―Official Documents‖.

Public document is broader than the term official document. Before a document may be considered official, it must first be a public document. Thus all official documents are public documents but not all public documents are official documents. To become an official document, there must be a law which requires a public officer to issue or to render such document. Example: A cashier is required to issue an official receipt for the amount he receives. The official receipt is a public document which is an official document.

c). Those acknowledged before a Notary Public such as deeds and conveyances except last wills and testaments

d). Private documents (punished as falsification of public documents):

i). which already formed part of the public records (Public by Incorporation) such as private deeds submitted to the office of the Register of Deeds; acknowledgment letter sent to the Local \Civil Registrar; Protest letters to the Assessor‘s Office; libelous letters offered as exhibits in a trial; letters formally seeking opinions (ii). those which are intended to form part

of the public record (Public by Intention)

Per Monteverde vs. PP ( Aug. 12, 2000) involving falsification of sales invoices required by the BIR, it was held: : ― If the document is intended by law to be part of the public or official record, the preparation of which being in accordance with rules and regulations issued by the government, the falsification of that document, although it was a private

document at the time of the falsification ton, is regarded as falsification of public or official documents‖

Examples: Falsification of Civil Service or Bar Exam Booklets; Application letters and personal data sheets sent to personnel officers.

Query: What about attendance sheets during seminars or conferences? If the purpose is to use as evidence of those who attend and reference for sanction, the crime would be falsification of public document. If only for personal purpose, falsification of private document.

Note: In case of falsification of Travel Documents (Visa, Passport, and any document submitted in connection therewith) the law applicable is R.A. 8239 or the Philippine Passport Act.

2. Commercial Documents:

(a) those used by merchants or business people to promote trade or credit transactions or commercial dealings; and (b) those defined and regulated by the Code

of Commerce or other commercial laws.. Examples: commercial checks; sales receipts and invoices; trust receipts; deposit and withdrawal slips and bank passbooks; tickets issued to passengers; enrollment forms; grades; warehouse receipts; airway bills; bank checks, cash files, journals, books, ledgers, drafts, letters of credit and other negotiable instruments.

 Cash disbursement vouchers or receipts evidencing payments are not commercial documents

.

3. Private Documents - any other document, deed or instruments executed by private persons without the intervention of a notary public or of other persons legally authorized, by which some disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set forth.

Examples: unnotarized deeds, letters, private receipts, class cards, time records in private employment. Vouchers of business people are private, not commercial, documents (Batulanon vs. PP, 502 SCRA 35)

161 Legal resources @ www.sophialegis.weebly.com

Importance of distinguishing Falsification of

Public from Falsification of Private Documents

1. As to penalty: a higher penalty is imposed for falsification of public documents

2. As to modes of commission: there are 8 ways of falsifying a public documents as against 7 as to private documents

3. As to complexing with Estafa: Estafa cannot be complexed with Falsification of Private document. The reason is because both have a common element which is damage

a). The crime is falsification if the deception cannot be committed without falsification, i.e. the falsification is committed as a means to commit estafa.

b). It is estafa if the estafa can be committed without the necessity of falsifying a document

4. As to requirement of damage: In falsification of a private document the act of falsification must be coupled with either (a) actual damage even if there was no intent to cause damage or (b) an intent to cause damage even if no actual damage resulted. In falsification of public document, the gravamen of the offense is the perversion of truth; the loss of faith and confidence by the public in the document even if there is no actual damage t the public Principles Involving Falsification:

1. The Falsification maybe complexed with the crimes of Estafa (save private documents) malversation or theft.

2. Maybe committed intentionally or through negligence

a). Examples through negligence: (i) The Register of Deeds who issued a duplicate title without noting on its back a notice of the encumbrances (ii) A Clerk who issues a certified true copy of a birth certificate but inadvertently copied the wrong entries (iii) a person who signs a check to accommodate a payee without verifying the payee‘s identification

b). Thus the accused who is charged with intentional falsification may be convicted for falsification thru negligence without amending the Information because the former includes the latter (see PP vs Uy 475 SCRA 248)

3. As to the liability of Heads of Offices as final approving authority if it turns out the document to which they affixed their signatures contains falsities:

a). The Arias Principle (Arias vs. Sandiganbayan, 180 SCRA 315) as reiterated in Magsuce vs. Sandiganbayan (Jan. 3, 1995) holds: ―All heads of offices have a right to rely to a reasonable extent on their subordinate and on the good faith of those who prepared the documents, and are not liable for the falsification‖ b). Exceptions: (i). Where there is a clear

evidence of conspiracy with the authors (ii) if through their negligence, they brought about the commission of the crime. Thus in PP. vs. Rodis the Head of Office was held liable where the document signed by him contained anomalies which were glaring in the document.

4. The following are accepted as defenses

a). Good faith and lack of intent to pervert the truth. As in the case of a co-employee who signed for another in the payroll because the latter was sick

b). Alterations which are in the nature of corrections such as changing the civil status from single to married in a Community Tax Certificate

c). Alterations which do not affect the integrity or veracity of the document. Example: The Certification by the treasurer that he paid the salary on July 10 when in truth it was on July 12

d) Minor inaccuracies as in a deed of sale which declared the consideration was paid in cash when it was paid in two installments

5. Presumption of Authorship of the Falsification: In the absence of satisfactory explanation, one found in possession of and who used a forged document is the forger of said document. If a person had in his possession a falsified document and he made sue of it, taking advantage of it and profiting thereby, the clear presumption is that he is the material author of the falsification. ( Nierva vs. PP. 503 SCRA 114).

6. There is a ruling that generally, falsification of public/commercial documents have no attempted or frustrated stages unless the falsification is so imperfect that it may be

162 Legal resources @ www.sophialegis.weebly.com

considered as frustrated. (Personal Opinion:

the crime should be consummated since what was frustrated was not the act but the purpose of the offender)

7. There are as many falsifications as there are documents falsified; or as there are separate acts of falsification committed by one person within the same period of time.

a). The falsification of several signatures in one payroll is only one falsification

b). Several checks falsified at the same time gives rise to several separate crimes

8. Falsification is not a continuing crime (NOT an instantaneous crime)

Proof of Falsification

 An allegation of forgery and a perfunctory comparison of the signature/handwritings by themselves cannot support a claim of forgery, as forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved by clear, positive and convincing evidence and the burden of proof lies on the party alleging forgery.

 Criteria to determine forgery or falsification: per Ladignon vs. CA (390 Phil. 1161 as reiterated in Rivera vs. Turiano ( March 7, 2007)

The process of identification must include not only the material differences between or among the signatures/handwritings but a showing of the following:

(i) the determination of the extent, kind and significance of the resemblance and variation (of the handwriting or signature) (ii) that the variation is due to the operation of

a different personality and not merely an expected and inevitable variation found in the genuine writing of the same writer (iii) that the resemblance is a result more or

less of a skillful imitation and not merely a habitual and characteristic resemblance which normally appears in genuine handwriting

Article 170. Falsification of Legislative Documents

Elements

1. There is a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or approved or pending approval by either House of

the Legislature or any provincial board or municipal council;

2. Offender alters the same;

3. He has no proper authority therefor;

4. The alteration has changed the meaning of the documents.

 Accused must not be a public official entrusted with the custody or possession of such document, otherwise Art 171 applies.

 Offender may be a public official or a private individual.

 The bill, resolution or ordinance must be genuine.  The words "municipal council" should include the

city council or municipal board – Reyes. Article 171. Falsification by Public Officer, Employee or Notary or Ecclesiastical Minister Coverage

This article provides: (1) the penalty of falsification if committed by a public officer or employee or a notary or an ecclesiastical minister. The penalty is higher if committed by public officer than if committed by a private person. The document may be any document. (2) the eight acts of falsification.

Elements

1. Offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public;

 As for an ecclesiastic, the document he falsified must affect the civil status of a person, else he will be considered as a private person. The usual document involved is a marriage contract

2. He takes advantage of his official position; When:

 He has the duty to make or prepare or otherwise to intervene in the preparation of the document

The public officer must take advantage of his official position or that there was abuse of office. By this is meant that his functions include participating in the preparation, recording, keeping, publishing or sending out to the public of the falsified document otherwise he will be punished as a private person. As for instance: secretaries, the Clerk of Court; the record officers; those who issue receipts or licenses; the Register of Deeds; Local Civil Registrar.

If he did not take advantage of his official position, he would be guilty of falsification of public document by a private individual.

163 Legal resources @ www.sophialegis.weebly.com

 He has the official custody of the document

which he falsifies

3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the modes of falsification.

DOCUMENT- any written statement by which a right is established or an obligation extinguished or by which a fact may be proven or affirmed.

Modes of Falsifying a Document:

a. BY COUNTERFEITING, IMITATING ANY HANDWRITING, SIGNATURE OR RUBRIC. Elements:

1. that there be an intent to imitate, or an attempt to imitate; and

2. that the two signatures or handwritings, the genuine and the forged, bear some semblance, to each other.

 To counterfeit a handwriting or signature is to create one that is so similar to the genuine as to make it difficult to distinguish and thus easily fool the public. This act includes creating or simulating a fictitious handwriting or signature

 Lack of similitude/imitation of a genuine signature will not be a ground for conviction under par. 1 but such is not an impediment to conviction under par.2. b. CAUSING IT TO APPEAR THAT PERSONS HAVE

PARTICIPATED IN ANY ACT OR PROCEEDING WHEN THEY DID NOT IN FACT SO PARTICIPATE

Requisites:

a) that the offender caused it to appear in a document that a person or persons participated in an act or proceeding (refers to document)

b) that such persons did not in fact so participate in the action proceeding  There is no need to imitate the signature

or handwriting

 This includes simulating a public document like a Warrant of Arrest as having been issued by a judge

 Examples: impersonating a person in a document; voting in place of a registered voter, posing as payee if a negotiable instrument in order to encash the same

c. ATTRIBUTING TO PERSONS WHO HAVE PARTICIPATED IN AN ACT OR PROCEEDING STATEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE IN FACT MADE BY THEM

Requisites:

a) that persons participated in an act or proceeding

b) that such person or persons made statements in that act or proceeding c) that the offender in making a document,

attributed to such person, statements other than those in fact made by such person.

 This is twisting the statements or putting words into the mouth of another

 Substituting a forged will where the accused is now named as an heir in lieu of the original where he was not so named  Where the accused was instructed to

prepare a Special Power of Attorney over a parcel of land, with himself as the agent but he instead prepared a deed of sale with himself as the vendee

d. MAKING UNTRUTHFUL STATEMENTS IN A NARRATION OF FACTS

Requisites:

a) That the offender makes in a document statements in a narration of facts

b) That he has the legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him c) That the facts narrated by the offender

are absolutely false

d) That the perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful intent of injuring a third person (accused knows what he imputes is false)  The falsity involves a material fact  Untruthful statements are not contained in

an affidavit or a statement required by law to be sworn to.

 by legal obligation is meant that the law requires a full disclosure of facts such as in a public official‘s Statements of Assets and Liabilities; the Personal Data Sheet submitted to the NBI; the contents of an Application for Marriage; the Community Tax Certificate

 Narration of facts means an assertion of a fact and does not include statements of opinion or conclusions of law. Thus when the accused placed himself as ―eligible‖ in his statement of candidacy when in truth he is disqualified, this is not a narration of fact but a conclusion of law. Similarly, the accused as claimant to a land stated in his application that he entitled to the ownership when under the law he is disqualified, is not liable

 There is no falsification if there is some colorable truth in the statement of facts by the accused

164 Legal resources @ www.sophialegis.weebly.com

 False statements in an application form of

the Civil Service, which was under oath, for police examination is perjury not falsification

 But when a third person, not the Affiant, alters a prepared Affidavit, the crime committed by him is falsification under mode number 6

 This kind of falsification may be committed by omission.

 Enemecio v. Office of the Ombudsman,1/13/04

As the ombudsman correctly pointed out, Enemecio was not able to point to any law imposing upon Bernante the legal obligation to disclose where he was going to spend his leave of absence. ―Legal obligation‖ means that there is a requiring the disclosure of the truth of the facts narrated. Bernante may not be convicted of the crime of falsification of public document by making false statements in narration of facts absent any legal obligation to disclose where he would spend his vacation leave and forced leave. e. ALTERING TRUE DATES

 This requires that the date must be material as in the date of birth or marriage; date of arrest; date when a search warrant was issued; date of taking the oath of office

 The alteration of the date or dates in a document must affect either the veracity of the document or the effects thereof.  Alteration of dates in official receipts to

prevent discovery of malversation is falsification

f. MAKING ALTERATIONS (CHANGE) OR INTERCALATIONS (INSERTIONS) IN A GENUINE DOCUMENT WHICH CHANGES ITS MEANING

Requisites:

a) That there be an alteration or intercalation (insertion) on a document b) That it was made on a genuine document c) That the alteration and intercalation has

changed the meaning of the document d) That the change made the document

speak something false

 The change must affect the integrity of the document. It must make the document speak something false so that alterations to make it speak the truth cannot be falsification.

 Examples

1.Changing the grades in one‘s Transcript

In document BASES DE LICITACIÓN CONCESIÓN RUTA 160 TRAMO TRES PINOS ACCESO NORTE A CORONEL (página 28-34)