VETERAN election lawyer Romulo Macalintal yesterday flagged the “suspicious” notary in the sworn statement that the Liga ng mga Barangay sa Pilipinas (LBP) submitted, which challenges the former’s petition in the Supreme Court questioning the constitutionality of the postponement of the Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan election (BSKE).
In a nine-page very urgent manifestation of grave concern, Macalintal asked the SC to require the LBP and 51 barangay chairpersons who signed the petition to explain the circumstances surrounding the notarization of their sworn statements.
Macalintal said the sworn statements submitted to the High Court by the LBP and the barangay chairpersons as intervenors in the BSKE case, supposedly from various places around the country, were notarized on a single day by the same lawyer, Petchie Rose G. Espera.
Espera’s name hogged the headlines recently after her signature appeared in the affidavit of retired Marine Sgt. Orly Regala Guteza, the witness who tagged former House Speaker Martin Romualdez and former Ako Bikol partylist representative Zaldy Co in the allegedly anomalous flood control projects, as the one who notarized the document.
However, Espera denied having notarized or prepared the affidavit of Guteza, calling it “falsified and unauthorized.”
“With due respect, petitioner finds it highly suspect how all these punong barangays in different parts of the Philippines could be gathered to prepare, explain, and adopt various resolutions, which share extremely similar wordings, and verification and certification of non-forum shopping in just one day by the same notary public,” Macalintal said.
“The foregoing circumstances and matters of records should be taken more seriously in light of recent news that involved the notarization purportedly exercised by a certain “Atty. Petchie Rose G. Espera, who appeared to have the same name and signature as the notary public employed by some of the intervenors and their lead counsel, Atty. Alberto C. Agra ” Macalintal added.
Macalintal said there is a need for the SC to require the intervenors and their counsels to explain the circumstances surrounding the notarization of their sworn statements and clarify whether they personally subscribed and attested to their respective documents before Espera.
“This motion is warranted by prevailing judicial policy that emphasizes the legal import and value attached to the notarization of documents,” he added.
The LBP last August asked the High Court to allow it to intervene and oppose the petition questioning the postponement of the BSKE from December this year to November 2026.
At the same time, it also asked that Macalintal’s petition challenging the constitutionality of Republic Act 12232, which postponed the holding of the BSKE polls this year, be thrown out for lack of merit.
RA 12232 was signed into law by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on August 13, moving the BSKE election from December 1 this year to November 2, 2026.
Macalintal said postponing the BSKE is tantamount to a violation of the people’s right to suffrage and information.
He cited the 2023 SC ruling in his plea against the postponement of the BSKE election, which, he added, held that Congress has no authority to postpone the conduct of elections if there is no valid reason to do so.
