Lawyer Defends Validity of Senate Witness Affidavit Despite Notarization Issues

Attorney Wilfredo Garrido maintained that the affidavit of Senate witness Orly Guteza remains valid despite concerns over improper notarization, explaining that any defect was rectified when Guteza affirmed the statement under oath before the Senate.

Garrido's remarks followed lawyer Petchie Rose Espera’s denial of notarizing Guteza’s affidavit, claiming that her signature and notarization details were "falsified and unauthorized."

Orly Guteza, introduced unexpectedly by Senator Rodante Marcoleta, identified himself as a former security aide to Ako Bicol Representative Elizadly “Zaldy” Co. He alleged that ACT-CIS party-list Representative Eric Yap delivered suitcases filled with cash to Co’s residence. Guteza further claimed that he and other aides transported these funds to the home of then-Speaker Martin Romualdez.

Despite the notarization controversy, Garrido argued that a defective notarization does not automatically invalidate a document. He cited jurisprudence that such defects merely remove the document’s public document status, making the evidence subject to evaluation based on the preponderance of proof.

"In this case, the defect of the notarization of Guteza’s affidavit was cured when he swore to its contents anew before the Senate hearing," Garrido noted.

He also attributed responsibility for the flawed notarization to Senator Marcoleta but cautioned against dismissing the testimony outright.

"It is the job of the inquisitor to cross-examine him and, if his testimony stands up, then you would have it give him credence," he explained.

Garrido further stated that being presented as a witness by Marcoleta does not imply that Guteza is not telling the truth.

"In this investigation of government corruption, there is no DDS, Iglesia, dilawan or loyalist. There is only the truth," he concluded.