Blog Lecture No. 39: Verification
Let's get straight to the point, shall we?
When is something verified?
According to Section 4, Rule 7 of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure:
When is it not?
When there is only what they call a Jurat. You know that. It goes a little bit like this:
Which is common in notarized affidavits.
A verification (though also in affidavit form but separate and distinct from the main body or complaint) should look like this:
then followed by the Jurat.
What about this thing called a "virtual acknowledgement" where being a lawyer makes anything he executes such?
"Virtual" does not mean "actual" so the answer is "virtually wrong..." or he is "virtually dreaming."
When is something verified?
According to Section 4, Rule 7 of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure:
A pleading is verified by an affidavit that the affiant has read the pleading and that the allegations therein are true and correct of his knowledge and belief.
A pleading required to be verified which contains a verification based on "information and belief," or upon "knowledge, information and belief," or lacks a proper verification, shall be treated as an unsigned pleading.
When is it not?
When there is only what they call a Jurat. You know that. It goes a little bit like this:
"Subscribed and sworn to before me on _________, affiant showing to me his Community Tax Certificate No. ________, issued at ________ on __________."
Which is common in notarized affidavits.
A verification (though also in affidavit form but separate and distinct from the main body or complaint) should look like this:
"I, ___________, of legal age, Filipino and residing at ___________, after being duly sworn to according to law, hereby depose and say:
1. I have read this Impeachment Complaint and/or caused it to be prepared.
2. The facts therein are true and correct to my own knowledge and belief."
then followed by the Jurat.
What about this thing called a "virtual acknowledgement" where being a lawyer makes anything he executes such?
"Virtual" does not mean "actual" so the answer is "virtually wrong..." or he is "virtually dreaming."
transcription by Punzi @ 6:32 AM
2 Objection(s):
At the hearing, Lagman again said this about the issue of a verified complaint:
The complainant is a lawyer. There is an opinion that says if the omplainant is a lawyer, verification is not necessary anymore, his signature under his lawyer's oath is sufficient.
Is this valid or yet another case of legal fiction?
As my former boss, Congressman RBZ said, "Where did he get his law?"
It's better in Filipino: "Saan ba nya napulot and batas nya?"
Ninoy, Roxas, and the Escoda trio are mighty convincing. To hell with reasoning, principles and conscience...
Post a Comment
<< Home