Under Revised Penal Code Article 171, a public officer, employee, or notary who falsifies a document by acts such as forging a signature, making false statements in a document, altering dates, or making untruthful narrations of fact faces prision mayor and a fine up to ₱1,000,000 (adjusted by RA 10951). Under Article 172, a private individual who commits the same acts in a public, official, or commercial document, or who uses a falsified document to another's damage, faces prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine up to ₱1,000,000.
Two provisions, two categories of offender
The Revised Penal Code treats falsification differently depending on who commits it. Article 171 targets public officers, employees, notaries, or ecclesiastical ministers who falsify a document while taking advantage of their official position. Article 172 targets private individuals who commit falsification, or who knowingly use a document that someone else falsified.
The eight acts of falsification (Article 171)
Article 171 lists the specific acts that constitute falsification when committed by a public officer, employee, or notary taking advantage of their position:
- Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature, or rubric;
- Causing it to appear that persons participated in an act or proceeding when they did not;
- Attributing to persons who did participate statements other than those they actually made;
- Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
- Altering true dates;
- Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document that changes its meaning;
- Issuing an authenticated copy of a document purporting to be a copy of an original that does not exist, or including a statement contrary to the genuine original in such a copy; or
- Intercalating any instrument or note relative to its issuance in a protocol, registry, or official book.
The same penalty applies to an ecclesiastical minister who commits any of these acts with respect to a record affecting a person's civil status — relevant, for example, to falsified baptismal or marriage records.
Falsification by a private individual (Article 172)
Article 172 penalizes: (1) a private individual who commits any of the falsifications listed in Article 171, in a public or official document, or in a letter of exchange or other commercial document; and (2) any person who, to the damage of a third party or with intent to cause such damage, commits any of the same acts of falsification in a private document. It also separately penalizes anyone who knowingly introduces a falsified document into evidence in a judicial proceeding, or otherwise uses it to cause damage, with a penalty one degree lower than the falsification itself.
The current penalties, after RA 10951's 2017 adjustment
The peso amounts originally written into Articles 171 and 172 in 1930 were adjusted by Republic Act No. 10951 in 2017 to reflect present-day values:
- Article 171 (public officer/notary): prision mayor and a fine not exceeding ₱1,000,000.
- Article 172 (private individual): prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine of not more than ₱1,000,000.
Common real-world examples
- A notary public who notarizes a document knowing the signatures were forged or the signatories never personally appeared;
- An employee who alters dates on a company record or contract to misrepresent when an event occurred;
- Someone who forges another person's signature on a deed of sale, loan document, or affidavit;
- A person who submits a fabricated certificate, diploma, or government-issued document to obtain a benefit or employment; and
- Anyone who knowingly presents a falsified document in court or to a government office to support a claim.
Why intent and damage still matter
For a private document under Article 172(2), the falsification must be done “to the damage of a third party, or with intent to cause such damage” — actual or intended harm is a required element. For public and official documents under Article 172(1), by contrast, the falsification itself is punishable without requiring separate proof of resulting damage, reflecting the law's heightened concern for the integrity of public and official records.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the penalty for falsifying a public document in the Philippines? For a public officer, employee, or notary, prision mayor and a fine of up to ₱1,000,000 under RPC Article 171, as adjusted by RA 10951. For a private individual falsifying a public or commercial document, prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine of up to ₱1,000,000 under Article 172.
Is forging a signature on a private document also a crime? Yes, if done to the damage of a third party or with intent to cause such damage, under Article 172(2), which covers falsification of private documents.
Do you need proof of actual damage to be liable for falsifying a public document? Generally no. Falsification of a public or official document under Article 172(1) does not require separate proof of damage, unlike falsification of a private document under Article 172(2), which does require damage or intent to cause it.
Is using a falsified document a separate crime from creating it? Knowingly introducing a falsified document into evidence in a judicial proceeding, or otherwise using it to cause damage, is separately punishable under Article 172, at a penalty one degree lower than the falsification itself.
This commentary is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance specific to your situation, please consult a licensed attorney.
If you have questions about your rights or options under Philippine law, our firm is available to assist. You may reach us via Viber or WhatsApp, call us at 0995 433 5550, or send an email to vivasnobles@gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you.