PARDON

Concept and Purpose of Pardon

Pardon is defined as an act of grace given by those charged with the power and
authority to execute laws exempting the individual subject of pardon from the
punishment the law inflict for a crime he has committed. The grant of pardon is an
executive clemency that rests exclusively within the sound discretion of the
President,and is exercised with the objective of preventing a miscarriage of justice or
correcting a manifest injustice.

Pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution
of the laws, which exempts an individual,on whom it is bestowed, from the
punishment the law inflicts for a crime t has committed. It is the private though
official act of the executive magistrate, delivered to the individual for whose benefit
it is intended,and not communicated officially to the court. (De Leon vs.Director of
Prisons,31 Phil.64)

Pardon is a form of executive clemency granted by the President of the Philippines

as a privilege extended to a convict as discretionary act of grace. Neither the
legislative nor the judiciary branch of government has the power to set conditions or
establish procedures for the exercise of this Presidential prerogative. It is highly
political in nature and is usually granted in response to popular clamour or to aid in
the return to normalcy of a political situation that might affect the country if not
addressed.

Pardon is given by the Chief Executive and as such it is a private act which must be
pleaded and proved by the person pardoned because the courts take notice thereof.
Pardon looks forward and relieves the offender from the consequences of an offense
of which he has been convicted. It abolishes or terminates the punishment. And for
that reason does not work the restoration of the right to hold public office, or the
rights of suffrage,unless such rights are expressly restored by the terms of the
pardon,and it.in no case,exempts the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity
imposed upon him by the sentence.

A pardon is a deed,to the validity of which delivery is essential,and delivery is not

complete without acceptance. The purpose of pardon is to afford relief from undue
harshness or evident mistake in the operation and enforcement of criminal law.
(Domondon, Primus, 2009 Wrap-up Reviewer Notes in Criminal Law, Citing Monsanto
Vs. Factoran,Jr, G.R.No. 78239, February 9,1989)

The Proclamation of July 4,1902,with respect to those offenses which have arisen
out of internal political feuds and dissensions among the Filipinos themselves, such
as the ordinary crimes of murder, robbery, arson, etc.,must be regarded in the nature
or pardon.(Moreno,Phil Law Dictionary, 3rd ed., p.675, citing Villa vs. Allen,
2Phil.440)

A pardon may be general, applying to all persons falling within a certain category,
or it may be conceded to a single individual for an ordinary crime,in which later case
it is a special pardon, and is evidenced by a writing, the acceptance of which is
necessary in order that it may become effectual. (Moreno,Ibid,p.675)

Different Kinds of Pardon

 1. ABSOLUTE PARDON -refers to the total extinction of the criminal liability of the
individual to whom it is granted without any condition. It restores to the individual
his civil and political rights and remits the penalty imposed for the particular offense
of which he was convicted.
The President also grants absolute pardon to the imprisoned President he has
deposed. This has happened in many countries around the world. In·our jurisdiction,
former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo granted absolute pardon to former
President Joseph Estrada who was convicted by the Sandiganbayan for the crime of
plunder.

Absolute pardon is granted to restore full political and civil rights to convicted
persons who have already serve their sentence and have reached the prescribe
period for the grant of absolute pardon.

The Purposes of Absolute Pardon are:

a. To right a wrong. Nothing in this world is perfect. Even the administration of
justice can escape this phenomenon.
b. To normalize a tumultuous political situation. Those in power brand critics and
oppositions against an incumbent regime as criminals and subversives.

2. CONDITIONAL PARDON-refers to the exemption of an individual, within certain

limits or condition, from the punishment the law inflicts for the offense he has
committed resulting.in the partial extinction of the criminal liability. A conditional
pardon is in the nature of the contract between the Chief Executive and the convict
to the effect that the former will release the latter subject to the condition that if he
does not comply with the terms of the pardon, he will be recommitted to prison to
serve the unexpired portion of the sentence or an additional one.(Alvarez vs. Dir. of
Prison, 80 Phil.50)

Conditional pardon is a contract between the Chief Executive ( President of the

Republic) and the convicted criminal, the convict's consent to the terms stipulated in
the delegate who is duty bound to see to it that the convict complies with the
conditions of the pardons.(Domondon, supra)

Conditional pardon is applicable to inmates who were slapped a fixed or

determinate sentence or a life imprisonment who are, otherwise, not eligible for
parole. It has the nature of a contract, in which the pardonee agrees to comply
strictly with the conditioned imposed by the pardon, otherwise, violations of the
conditions will revoke the contract of conditional pardon and the pardonee will be
criminally prosecuted as a violator.

In a conditional pardon, the condition may be less acceptable to the condemned

than the original punishment, and may in fact be more onerous. In this respect it
differs from the a commutation, which is a mere reduction of the penalty, or from a
pardon which is its total remission. (Moreno, Phil. Law Dictionary,3rd ed., p.675)

Ways of Extending Conditional Pardon to the Convict:

a. Through the operation of the Indeterminate Sentence Law;
b. Through the grant of probation under the Probation Law; and
c. Through the exercise of the President, motu proprio, of the power under the
Constitution.

Similarities of Absolute and Conditional Pardon:

A pardon, whether absolute or conditional, is in the nature of a deed, for the

validity of which delivery is an indispensable requisite. Until accepted, all benefits to
the grantee may be cancelled. But once accepted by the grantee, the pardon already
delivered cannot be revoked by the authority which granted it.

3. GENERAL PARDON - is a pardon which applies to all persons falling within a

certain category. (Villa vs. Allen, 2 Phil. 440)

4. SPECIAL PARDON-is a pardon which is conceded to a single individual for an

ordinary crime. (Villa vs. Allen, 2 Phil. 440)

When is Pardon Granted?

Pardon is granted only after final conviction. As provided under Section 19 of

Article VII the Constitution: “Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise
provided in this Constitution, the President may grant reprieves, commutations, or
pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment”.

A pardon granted after conviction frees the individual from al the penalties and
legal disabilities and restore him to all his civil rights. But unless expressly grounded
on the person's innocence, it cannot bring back lost reputation for honesty, integrity,
and fair dealings. (Monsanto vs. Factoran, Jr.,supra)

What Agency Recommends to the President the Grant of Pardon?

Pardon may be granted by the President of the Philippines upon the

recommendation of the Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP). The BPP is the agency in
charge with the release of sentenced prisoners based on modes specified by law. Its
actions and proceedings are governed by the provisions of Section 4 of Act No.4103,
otherwise known as Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended and Executive Order
No.292, series of 1987, otherwise known as The Administrative Code of 1987.
The policy objectives of the BPP as enunciated in Section 1 of the Rules
andRegulations of the Board of Pardons and Parole state:“Conformably with the
basic precepts of justice and mercy, it shall be the policy of the BPP to uplift and
redeem valuable human material to economic usefulness and to prevent
unnecessary and excessive deprivation of personal liberty."

What is the Effect of Pardon by the Chief Executive?

1. An absolute pardon extinguishes the criminal liability of the offender. (Article 89(3)
Revised Penal Code)
2. It does not exempt the offender from payment of the civil indemnity imposed in
the sentence. (Article 36, Revised Penal Code)
3. It does not restore the right to hold public office or the right of suffrage unless
such rights are expressly restored by the terms of the pardon. (Article 36, Revised
Penal Code)

Does the Grant of Pardon Work to Restore a Convicted Felon the Right to Hold
Public Offiсe?

The effect of pardon is provided under Article 36 of the Revised Penal Code, which
provides that:

“Art. 36.Pardon;its effect-A pardon shall not work the restoration of the right to
hold public office,or the right of suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored by
the terms of the pardon.

A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil
indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence."

Civil liability arising from crime is governed by the Revised Penal Code. It subsists
notwithstanding service of sentence, or for any sentence is not served by the pardon,
amnesty or commutation of sentence. Civil liability may be extinguished only by the
same caused recognised in the Civil Code, namely: payment, loss of the thing due,
remission of the debt, merger of the rights of the creditor and debtor, compensation
and novation. (Monsanto vs.Factoran, Jr., supra)

A pardon does not ipso facto restore a convicted felon to public office necessarily
relinquished or forfeited by the reason of the conviction although such pardon
undoubtedly restores his eligibility for appointment to that office. The rationale is
plainly evident. Pubic offices are intended primarily for collective protection, safety
and benefit of the common good. They cannot be compromised to favour private
interests.(ibid)

What is the Requirement before the Board of Pardon and Parole may recommend
to thePresident the Grant of Conditional Pardon?

The Board may nonetheless review and/or recommend to the President the grant
of executive clemency to an inmate provided the inmate meets the following
minimum requirements of imprisonment. For Conditional Pardon, an inmate should
have served at least one-half(1/2) of the maximum of the original indeterminate
and/or definite prison term.”(Section 4, as amended, Amended Guidelines for
Recommending Executive Clemency)

What are the Remedies of the State if Conditions of Pardon are violated?

Under Section 64(i) of the Revised Administrative Code, the Chief Executive is
authorized to order “the arrest and re-incarceration of any such person who, in his
judgment,shall fail to comply with the condition, or conditions of his pardon, parole,
or suspension of sentence.” (Torres vs. Dir. Of Bureau of Corrections, G.R. No.122338,
December 29,1995)

Upon determination that a prisoner granted conditional pardon has violated the
conditions thereof, the Board shall recommend his arrest or recommitment to the
President. (Sec.26, Amended Guidelines for Recommending Executive Clemency)

Thus, when the conditions are violated, the offender is considered in evasion of
the service of his sentence and shall be:

1. Rearrested and re-incarcerated by order of the President under the Revised

Administrative Code;
2. Prosecuted under Article 159 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). When the penalty
remitted is 6 years and below, there will be an additional penalty; over 6 years, the
remaining sentence shall be served without additional penalty for the evasion.

What is the felony committed by the pardonee when he violated the condition of
his pardon?

Article 159 of the Revised Penal Code provides for the proper felony to be charged
against the convicted felon who was granted and violated the conditions of his
pardon:

"Art. 159. Other cases of evasion of service of sentence.-The penalty of prison

correctional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon the convict who, having
been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive, shall violate any of the
conditions of such pardon. However, if the penalty remitted by the granting of such
pardon be higher than six years, the convict shall then suffer the unexpired portion of
his original sentence."

Violation of Conditional Pardon is an infringement of the terms stipulated in a

contract between the sovereign power or the Chief Executive and the criminal, to the
effect that the former will release the later subject to the condition that if he does
not comply with the term, he will be recommitted to prison to serve the unexpired
portion of the sentence or an additional one. (Alvarez vs. Director of Prison, 80 Phi.
50)

Distinguish Amnesty and Absolute Pardon

1. In amnesty the effects of a crime are erased or wiped out. Consequently, the
convict is deemed innocent as if no crime was committed at all: in absolute pardon,
the convict is excused from serving the sentence but does not erase the effects of
conviction (unless the pardon was granted when the convict had already served the
sentence).

2. Amnesty may be granted even if the offender has not yet been convicted by
virtue of a final judgment, it may be given before or after final judgment on the other
hand, for absolute pardon to be valid, there must already be a final and executory
sentence.

3. Amnesty is a public act that requires the concurrence of Congress (the House of
Representatives and the Senate); while absolute pardon is a private act of the Chief
Executive.

4. Amnesty is given to a class or group of offenders: while absolute pardon is given

to an individual convict.

5. Amnesty is extended only to offenders of political crimes, while absolute pardon

may be granted whether the crime is political or non-political.

Distinguish Conditional Pardon and Parole

1. The Chief Executive gives conditional pardon after conviction under the provisions
of the Revised Administrative Code: the Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP)gives a
prisoner who has served the minimum of an indeterminate sentence parole.

2. For violation of the conditional pardon, the offender may either be re-arrested to
serve the remitted penalty or prosecuted under Article 159 of the Revised Penal
Code (RPC); for violation of parole, the convict is re-arrested to serve the unexpired
portion of the penalty.

Distinguish Suspension of Sentence from Pardon

The power to suspend sentence and the power to grant to reprieves and pardons
are totally distinct and different in their origin and nature:

1. Suspension of sentence is always a part of the judicial power, while pardon is

always a part of the executive power.

2. The suspension of sentence simply postpones the judgment of the court

temporarily or indefinitely, but the conviction and liability following it, and all civil
disabilities, remain and become operative when judgment is rendered. A pardon
reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offense and the guilt of the
offender. It releases the punishment and blots out of existence the guilt, so that in
the eyes of the law the offender is a innocent as if he had never committed the
offense. It removes the penalties and disabilities, and restores to him all his civil
rights. It makes him as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity.
(Director of Prison vs. Judge of First Instance, 29 Phil.294)

Distinguish Violation of Conditional Pardon from Evasion of Service of Sentence by

Escaping

Violation of conditional pardon does not cause harm or injury to the right of
other persons nor does it disturb the public order; it is merely an infringement of the
terms stipulated in the contract between the Chief Executive and the Criminal.

Evasion of the service of the sentence is an attempt, at least, to evade the

penalty inflicted by the courts upon criminals and thus defeat the purpose of the law
of either reforming or punishing them for having disturbed the public order. (Alvarez
vs. Director of Prison, 80 Phil. 50)

Effect of Appeal from Conviction by the Trial Court

Where an accused appealed his conviction by the .trial court to the Court of
Appeals(CA), his application for pardon therefore, if one is made, should not be acted
upon or the process towards its grant should not be begun unless the appeal is
withdrawn. Hence, before an appellant may be validly granted pardon, he must first
ask for the withdrawal of his appeal, e., the appealed conviction must first be
brought to finality.

It was held in the case of People vs. Crisola, 128 SCRA1, March 2, 1984, that
clemency terminates the appeal. However, said ruling was corrected in the case of
People vs.Sale,Jr., GR. No. 103567, December 4,1995, which provides that, since
pardon can be extended only to one whose conviction is final.

It cannot absolve the convict of civl liability. In People vs. Nacional, G.R. 11294,
September 7, 1995, the court said that the grant of conditional pardon and the
subsequent dismissal of the appeal did not relieved the accused of civil lability.

Effect of the Death of Prisoner under Supervision

If a prisoner granted conditional pardon dies during the period of supervision, the
Probation and Parole Officer shall immediately transmit a certified true copy of the
prisoner's death certificate to the Board recommending the closing of the case.
However, in the absence of death certificate, an affidavit narrating the circumstances
of the fact of death from the barangay chairman or any authorized officer or any
immediate relative where the prisoner resided shall suffice. (Sec.31, Amended
Guidelines for Recommending Executive Clemency)
Pardon by the Offended Party

Pardon by the offended party in the prosecution of the crimes of adultery,

concubinage, seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness is provided under
Article 344 of the RevisedPenal Code(RPC), which provides that:

“Art. 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery,concubinage, seduction,

abduction, and acts of lasciviousness.-The crimes of adultery, and concubinage shall
not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended spouse.
The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without including both
the guilty parties if they are both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have consented of
pardoned the offenders.

The offenses of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction, and acts of

lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended
party of her parents, grandparents, or guardian, nor in any case, if the offender has
been expressly pardoned by the above-named persons, as the case may be.

In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness, and rape, the marriage

of the offender with the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action of remit
the penalty already imposed upon him. The provisions of this paragraph shall be also
be applicable to the co-principals, accomplices and accessories after the fact of the
above-mentioned crimes."

Pardon in Crimes against Chastity

By express provision of the law in Article 344, par.2 of the Revised Penal Code,
pardon either express of implied by the offended party to the offender is a bar to
prosecution of adultery or concubinage.

Pardon in seduction, adultery and concubinage must come before the institution
of the criminal action and both offenders must be pardoned by the offended party if
said pardon is to be effective. So, where the offended husband had pardoned the
adulterous act of his wife, such pardon precluded him from prosecuting for adultery,
not only of his wife but also of her paramour. (Reyes, Revised Penal Code, 15th Ed.
2001 citing People vs. Infante, 57 Phil. 138 and People vs.Mendez, et al.,C.A.,51
0.G>1909)

What·is the effect of the Affidavit of the Husband in which he pardoned his Wife
after the case was already instituted and under Trial?

In-one case the Supreme Court held that, in view of the requirements of Article
344 of the Revised Penal Code that the pardon must come before the institution of
criminal prosecution; and both the offenders must be pardoned by the offended
party; the motion to dismiss filed on behalf of the defendant wife alone based on an
affidavit executed by the offended husband in which he pardoned her for her
infidelity cannot prosper. (People vs.Infante, 57 Phil.138)

Can the Parent, Grandparents or Guardian grant Pardon to the Offender without
the Express Pardon of the Offended Girl?

Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code provides that offenses of seduction,
abduction, rape, act of lasciviousness shall not be prosecuted in any case, if the
offender has been expressly pardoned by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents, or guardian, as the case may be.

However, the mother, of the offended girl, 11 years of age, cannot validly grant
pardon, because the pardon must be granted directly by the offended party, and it is
only when the girls dead or otherwise incapacitated to grant it that her parents,
grandparents or guardian may do so for her. Pardon by the parent must be
accompanied by the express pardon of the girt herself. (Reyes, RPC, supra, p.902
[emphasis supplied])

Pardon by the offended party who is a minor must have the concurrence of
parents because the minor in her tender age and lack of sufficient knowledge, would
hardly know the full impact and consequences of her acts. An exception is when the
offended girl has no parents who could concur in the pardon, she can validly extend a
pardon even if she is a minor, as when the offender is her father and her mother is
already dead. (People vs. Lacson, Jr, C.A, 56 O.G.9460)

Prosecution of Rape may be made upon Complaint by any Person

By virtue of Republic Act No.8353, otherwise known as “The Anti-Rape Law of

1997”which took effect on October 22,1997, rape has been reclassified as a crime
against persons and, thus, may be prosecuted even without a complaint filed by the
offended party. Prior to the enactment of the said law, rape is classified as a crime
against chastity under Title Eleven of the Revised Penal Code. Now, the crime of rape
is punishable under Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code and may be prosecuted
even without complaint of Offended Party. Hence, it can now be instituted by any
person.

Effect of Marriage between the Offended Party and the Accused

A valid marriage between the offender and the offended party prior to or even
after the institution of the criminal action or conviction will extinguish the criminal
action or remit the penalty already imposed against the offender, his co-principals,
accomplices and accessories. This rule is applicable only to crimes of seduction,
abduction, adultery, and concubinage but not to rape because rape is now a crime
against persons.

Effect of Marriage between the Offended Party and the Principal Accused in Rape
Cases

As provided in Art.266-C of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 2 of

R.A.No.8353, the subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended
party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed. In case it is the
legal husband who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the
offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or penalty. Provided, that the
crime shall not extinguish or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab
initio (from the beginning).(Art. 266-C, as amended by R.A.No.8353, Revised Penal
Code)

The above provision is not applicable in rape where there are two or more
principals involved and in case of multiple rape. Only the criminal liability of the
accused who marries the victim will be extinguished. In other words, if there are
two or more crimes cf rape committed by several persons as principals by direct
participation, the rule is not applicable because each carnal knowledge amounts to a
separate and independent crime of rape.

In rape cases where the offended party married the principal accused while
serving his sentence at the national penitentiary, what is now the remedy of the
latter to secure his proper and most expeditious release from the National
Penitentiary?

To secure the proper and most expeditious release of the principal accused who is
now married to the offended party from the national penitentiary, his counsel should
file (a) a petition for habeas corpus for immediate release of the convict,or (b) a
motion in the court which convicted him, to nullify the execution of his sentence or
the order of his commitment on the ground that a supervening development had
despite the finality of the judgment occurred. (Melo vs. People, 85 Phil. 766 [1950])

What is the Effect of an Affidavit of Retraction or Desistance of the Victim in Rape

Cases? Does it Constitute Acquittal?

In the case of Echegaray, the affidavit of desistance which the victim herself
intended to disregard must have no bearing on the criminal prosecution against the
accused particularly on the trial court's jurisdiction over the case. (People vs.
Echegaray, G.R. No.117472, February 7, 1997)

Distinction of Pardon by the Chief Executive from the Pardon by the Offended Party

1. Pardon by the Chief Executive can extend to any crime, unless otherwise
provided by or subject to conditions in the Constitution or the laws. Whereas pardon
by the offended party applies only to crimes against chastity under Revised Penal
Code.

2. Pardon by the Chief Executive extinguishes the criminal liability of the offender,
such is not the case when the pardon is given by the offended party.

3. The former cannot affect the civil liability ex delicto (from or out of a criminal act)
of the offender whereas in the latter, the offended party can waive the civil liability.

4. Pardon by the Chief Executive is granted only after conviction and may be
extended to any of the offender, while in cases where the laws allows pardon by the
offended party, the pardon should be given before the institution of criminal
prosecution and must be extended to both offenders.
 AMNESTY

Definition and Nature of Amnesty

Amnesty, derived from the Greek word amnasthia, has retained the original
general concept of oblivion, although it has evolved into distinct technical concepts
in criminal law, constitutional law and international law. A sovereign act of
forgiveness for past acts, granted by a government to all persons (or to certain
classes of persons) who have been guilty of crime or delict, generally political
offenses- treason, sedition, rebellion, draft evasion- and often conditioned upon their
return to obedience and duty within a prescribed time.

An amnesty is an act of grace by the Chief Executive, proceedings from the power
entrusted with the execution of the laws and concurred by the legislature, usually
extended to groups of persons who committed political offenses, and which puts into
oblivion the offense itself. (Defined by the Presidential Communications
Development and Strategic Planning Office)

Amnesty is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or a general pardon for
a past offense, and is rarely, if ever, exercised in favour of a single individual, and is
usually exercised in behalf of a certain class of persons, who are subject to trial but
have not yet been convicted. (Brown vs. Walker, 161 U.S.602)

In one case, the Supreme Court, said amnesty “commonly denotes the general
pardon to rebels for their treason and other high political offenses, or the forgiveness
which one sovereign grant to the subject of another, who have offended by some
breach of the law of nations. "The term “amnesty” belongs to international law, and
is applied to rebellions which by their magnitude are properly within international
law,but has no technical meaning in the common law. It is a synonym of pardon.
(Villa vs.Allen, 2Phil.436,439[190.3])

Amnesty is a Proclamation of the Chief of Executive with concurrence of congress,

and its a public act of which the courts should take judicial notice. Amnesty looks
backward and abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense itself, it so overlooks and
obliterates the offenses with which he is charged that the person released by
amnesty stands before the law precisely as though he had committed no offense.
(People vs. Casido, G.R. No. 116512, March 7,1997).

Father Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J. defines amnesty basically as a general pardon and
submits that what distinguish the two forms of executive clemency (pardon and
amnesty)are simply the "number of recipients of the acts of clemency and the nature
of the offense which is their subject. "In fact, he opines that what the President may
rot grant by amnesty because of the non-concurrence of Congress, he may grant by
individual pardon.

In essence, amnesty is viewed in municipal law, whether in constitutional law or

criminal law, as an act of mercy by the sovereign partaking of the nature of the
executive clemency.

Purpose of Amnesty

The purpose of amnesty is to hasten a country's return to political normalcy by

putting behind it the animosities of the past through a pardon that will open the
door to living normal lives for groups of people targeted by the amnesty. These
groups were once involved in political activities during certain troubled times like war
or rebellion and by making a gesture of the state forgetting past destructive activities
of political dissidents or rebels allowing them to lead normal.ives, the country in turn
will ensure its return to normalcy.

Amnesty Completely Extinguishes the Penalty and its Effects

Amnesty looks backward and abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense itself, it
so overlooks and obliterates the offense with which he is charged; that the person
released by amnesty stand before the law precisely as though he had committed
no offense. In one case decided by the Supreme Court, it was held that to avail of the
benefits of an amnesty proclamation, one must admit his guilt of the offense covered
by the proclamation. (Vera vS. People of the Philiрpines, 7 SCRA 152)

Amnesty is a public act of which the court should take judicial notice. Thus, the
right to the benefits of amnesty,once established by the evidence presented, either
by the complainant or prosecution or by the defense, cannot be waived, because it is
of public interest that a person who is regarded by the Amnesty Proclamation, which
has the force of law, not only as innocent, for he stands in the еyes of the law as if he
had never committed any punishable offense because of the amnesty, but as a
patriot or hero, and not be punished as a criminal.(Herrera,Remedial Law IV,2007
'ed., p.659 citing Barrioguinto, et al. vs. Fernandez, et al.,82 Phil.642[1949])

In one case decided by the Supreme Court, it was held that the person released
under an amnesty proclamation stands before the law precisely as though he had
committed no offense. Par. 3, Art.89, Revised Penal Code, provides that criminal
liability is totally extinguished by amnesty, the penalty and all its effects are thus
extinguished.(People v. Patriarca, G.R. No.135457, September 29,2000)

Limitations on the Exercise of Granting Amnesty.

1. It cannot be granted in cases of impeachment [Sec.19, Ant VII of the Constitution]

2. It cannot be granted in cases of violation of election laws without the favorable
recommendation of the Commission on Election (Sec. 5, Art. IX-C);
3. A grant of amnesty must be with the concurrence of a majority of all members of
congress.

Distinguish Amnesty under Philippine laws and American laws

 Basically, amnesty as it has been utilized and understood in Philippine history, is
taken as having the same nature and effect as its American counterpart. The only
difference is in the source of the power to grant amnesty; in the Philippines, amnesty
is granted by the Chief Executive with the concurrence of Congress, while amnesty in
the United States (U.S.) is deemed included in the pardoning power of the President.

Under American constitutional law, amnesty is defined as “an exercise of the

sovereign power by which immunity to prosecution is granted by wiping out the
offense supposed to have been committed by a group or class of persons prior to
their being brought to trial." By express provision, grant of amnesty takes the form of
a general pardon by virtue of presidential proclamations without the concurrence of
Congress.

As practiced in the U.S., an amnesty in favour of a class or classes of person

accused or certain offenses against the State is deemed to constitute an act of
oblivion, obliterating not just the penalty but also the offense itself. This was the
effect of the amnesty proclamation issued in1863 by US President Abraham Lincoln
following the Civil War in the US, and during the Vietnam conflict in the 1970s to
favor those guilty of violating the Military Selective Service Act amidst strong
opposition from different sectors.

In the 1987 Philippine Constitution particularly Section 19, paragraph 2, the power
to grant amnesty is expressly provided and granted to the President subject to the
concurrence of a majority of the members of the Congress. Philippine Presidents
have used amnesty to restore unity and harmony in society after divisive issues
polarized Philippine society.

Throughout Philippine constitutional history, except the period of American

military occupation of the islands, the power to grant amnesty has always been
expressly provided for as a power shared by both: the executive and the legislative
branches of government.

Amnesty during the Spanish Regine

Studies of the Philippine history have mentioned amnesty proclamation made in

the nature of general pardons during the Spanish regime granted by Governor-
Generals to include Legazpi (to Rajah Soliman and other chiefs in the 1570s),
Polavieja (January.11,1897), Fajardo, Corcuera and Manrique de Lara, particularly
those granted to Filipino and Chinese insurgents.

Amnesty during the American Regime

The first amnesty proclamation in the country took effect in the 20th century and
was issued by US President Roosevelt on July 4,1902. It granted full and complete
pardon and amnesty in favour of persons who committed treason, sedition, and all
other crimes of political character in the course of the "insurrection" of the Filipinos
against the Spaniards, as well as those who gave aid or comfort to said persons. The
proclamation also covered offenses, which grew out of internal political feuds and
dissensions between Filipinos and Spaniards or with the Spanish authorities or
among the Filipinos themselves. The only condition set forth in the terms of the
proclamation was the taking of an oath of allegiance to the United States of America.
The proclamation, deemed as a "wise and humane” acts "conductive to peace,.order
and loyalty," excluded the following from its coverage:

1. Persons committing crimes since May 1,1902 in any province,where the civil
government is already established; and

2. Those convicted of murder, rape, arson, or robbery by any military or civil, tribunal
organized by the Spanish or American authorities, unless they have applied for and
were granted pardon.

In spite of these exclusions, it is still, in essence, the only general amnesty which
took effect in the Philippines so far because the grant covered not only those
offenses which arose from the revolution against Spain but also those which grew
out of internal dissensions. Furthermore, the amnesty applied to all areas that came
under the jurisdiction of the American government. This power to grant pardon and
reprieve was later extended to the Governor General of the Philippine Islands under
the Jones Law in 1916.
The 1935 Constitution, after the draft by a Constitutional Convention received the
approval of the President of the United States and the ratification of the Filipino
electorate, established the Philippines as a Republican State and provided that: The
President shall have the power to grant the amnesty with the concurrence of the
National Assembly.

List of Amnesty Proclamations, Presidential Decrees and Issuances by

PhiippinePresidents after the Japanese Invasion

1. Proclamation No.8 - President Manuel Roxas granted amnesty to guerilla and

resistance fighters on September 7,1946. The amnesty sough to recognize such
persons not as criminals but as patriots and heroes who have rendered invaluable
service to the nation. A Guerilla Amnesty Commission was formed by virtue of
Administrative Order No.11(October 21,1946) to which those who sought to avail of
the amnesty must apply. Six additional commissions known as the Philippine Army
Amnesty Commissions, which were to take cognizance of the cases of persons
subject to military law and falling within the terms of the proclamation, were created
later through Administrative Order No.47(November 15, 1946).

2. Proclamation No. 51 -dated January 28,.1948 President Roxas issued a

proclamation that granted amnesty to those who collaborated with the enemy
during World War II

3. Proclamation No.76-issued by President Elpidio Quirino on June 21, 1948

granted conditional amnesty limited to leaders and members of the groups Hukbong
Bayan Laban sa Hapon (HUKBALAHAP) and Pambansang Kaisahang mga
Magbubukid(PKM).

4. Proclamation No. 81 and 86-were thereafter issued (15 and 31 July 1948,
respectively extending the original period up to August 15,1948.

5. Proclamation No. 164-issued on January 4,1950 by President Quirino granting

conditional and limited amnesty to Francisco Medrano (a supporter of Pres. Laurel
and other participants to the uprising, whom the President regarded as motivated by
a "mistaken belief“ that they are just grievances against the duly constituted
authorities which could be redressed by armed resistance. The proclamation covered
the crimes of rebellion, sedition, and disloyalty committed by the said persons
subject to their surrender to the provincial authorities and the laying down of arms
and ammunitions.

6. Republic Act No.810-gives authority to the Guerilla Amnesty Commission to hear

amnesty applications, issued on June 22,1952.
 7. Proclamation No. 95- declares amnesty to persons penalized because of their
political or religious belief issued on January 11,1973.

8. Proclamation Decree No,206- are guidelines covering the jurisdiction of military

tribunals and civil courts, issued on June 6,1973.

9. Proclamation Decree No.497-grants amnesty to all Filipino Muslims penalized for

their resistance to authorities issued on June 28,1974.

10. Proclamation No.571-was issued on November 1,1974 granting amnesty in

favour of officers and ranking leaders of the CPP, PKP, HUKs (which became the
Hukbong Mapagpalayang Bayan [HMB], Malayang Samahan ng Magsasaka
(MAKASA), MalayangPagkakaisang Kabataang Pilipino (MPKP) and Samahang
Pambansang Kababaihan sa Pilipinas (SPKP) who indicated their desire to return to
the folds of the law and cooperate with the program of the New Society.

11. Proclamation Decree No.571A- issued on November 2, 1974, granting amnesty

to political expatriates.
12. The Tripoli Agreement-pursuant to this Agreement signed in Tripoli, Libya on
December 23, 1976, a limited and conditional amnesty was granted in favour of the
leaders, members and/or sympathizers of the MNLF and the Bangsa Moro Army on
February 2, 1977 with a view of attaining the objectives of the peace-making efforts
of the government and encouraging dissidents to return to the folds of the law.

13. Presidential Decree No.1429-issued by President Marcos on June 10, 1978,

which granted conditional amnesty to persons arrested and/or charged, or although
not arrested and/or charged who may have committed acts which made them liable
for, rebellion, sedition, subversion, illegal possession of firearms and other crimes
committed in furtherance thereof.

14. Proclamation Decree No.1727A-prohibits the grants of permits for holding

public rallies, etc. To persons found guilty of rebellion, etc., issued on October
08,1980.

15. Presidential Decree No. 1745-in view of the many cases of simple illegal
possession of firearms and ammunitions filed in court, President Marcos issued this
decree on November 20, 1980 granting amnesty to persons who were under arrest
and/or investigated for, charged with, or convicted of, the said crime and who
applied there for in writing to the proper authorities within three months from the
date of the decree.

16. Proclamation No.80-the amnesty issued by President Corazon Aquino to

persons who, in furtherance of their political beliefs, committed acts penalized by
existing laws issued on February 28,1987. The proclamation granted amnesty to
persons who may have committed crimes in furtherance of political beliefs but it
covered only those "not being in the custody of or changed by, or undergoing
investigation by the constituted authorities.”

17. Memorandum Circular 105-issued on September 26,1989 as clarificatory

guidelines for processing of amnesty manifestation forms of rebel returnees.

18. Executive Order No.350-guidelines governing processing of amnesty

manifestation forms of rebel returnees, issued on March 13, 1988

19. Proclamation No. 10- issued on July 27, 1992 by President Fidel V.Ramos
granting amnesty to persons who have filed or will still file applications for "Cory
grants amnesty to rebels," which was published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on
March 1,1987.

20. Proclamation No. 10-A-was issued to cover a total of 4,485 returnees whose
applications were not acted upon under the Aquino Administration.lt also
established the National Unification Commission (NUC), which was an advisory body
tasked to hold consultations with the people, including all rebel groups, as well as the
Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National Police (PNP), and to recommend
to the President a viable general amnesty program and process which will lead to a
just, comprehensive, and lasting peace.

21. Proclamation No. 347-by its express terms, seeks to hasten the peace process
and to reintegrate, as soon as possible, all rebels and insurgents into the mainstream
of society including those who had been charged or convicted.

22. Proclamation No.348-issued on March 25, 1994, granting amnesty to certain

AFP and PNP Personnel who committed acts in connection with counter insurgency
options. By virtue of this proclamation is the creation of the National Amnesty
Commission (NAC)., a body tasked with determining who among the applicants are
qualified for amnesty.
23. Proclamation No.723-issued on May 17, 1996, granting amnesty to members
and supporters of the Rebolusonaryong Alyansang Makabansa-Soldiers of the
Filipino People-Young Officers' Union (RAM-SFP-YOU).

24. Presidential Proclamation No. 724 - the Proclamation that amended

PresidentialProclamation 347. The following are crimes covered by the Grant of
Amnesty under Presidential Proclamation No.724:
a. Rebellion or Insurrection
b. Coup d'etat
c. Conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion, insurrection or coup d'etat
d. Disloyalty of public officers or employees
e. Inciting to rebellion or insurrection
f. Sedition
g. Conspiracy to commit sedition
h. Inciting to sedition
i. Illegal assembly
j. Illegal association
k. Direct Assault
l. Indirect Assault
m. Resistance and disobedience to a person in authority or agents of such
persons
n. Tumults and other disturbances of public order
o. Unlawful use of means of publication and unlawful utterances
p. Alarms and scandals
q. Illegal possession of firearms, ammunition, and explosives, committed in
furtherance of, incident to, or in connection with the crimes of rebellion and
insurrection
r. Violation of Articles of Wars:
a) Art 59 (Desertion)
b) Art.62 (Absence without Leave)
c) Art.67 (Mutiny or Sedition)
d) Art.68 (Failure to Suppress Mutiny or Sedition)
e) Art.94 (Various Crimes)
f) Art.96 (Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman)
g) Art 97 (General Article)

25. Executive Order No.299-this was issued on May 17, 1996 for the National
Amnesty Commission to verify, process, and determine RAM-SFP-You members to be
granted amnesty.

26. Proclamation No.21-issued on September 23, 1998 amending Proclamation

No.347 (s.1994) re:grant of amnesty to rebel, insurgents etc.

27. Proclamation No.390-issued on September 29, 2000, granting amnesty to MILF

members who committed crimes in furtherance of their political beliefs.

28. Proclamation No.405-Granting amnesty to rebels who committed crimes in

furtherance of their political beliefs issued on October 26, 2000.

29. Proclamation No.137-grant of amnesty to members of the CPPNPA NDF and

other communist rebel groups issued on September 6,2007.

30. Proclamation No.50-was issued on October 11, 2010 by President Benigno S.

Aquino lII granting amnesty to certain active and former personnel of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines(AFP) and their supporters, who have or may have
committed acts or omissions punishable under the Revised Penal Code. The Articles
of War or other special laws in connection with, in relation or incident to the July 27,
2003 Oakwood Mutiny, the February 2006 Marines Stand-Off and/or the November
29,2007 Manila Pen Incident and related incidents.

Congress, by a majority of each chamber, will now deliberate on whether to pass a

Concurrent Resolution. The amnesty is effective on the date of signing; what
Congress is essentially deciding is if it will revoke the amnesty or not.Passage of a
Concurrent Resolutionis essentially affirmation of the amnesty by each chamber of
the. legislature.

Under the amnesty in Proclamation No.50, the concerned AFP personnel and their
supporters may apply for amnesty under the Proclamation with the Department of a
National Defense (DND), which will receive and process the applications and
determine whether the applicants are covered. Decisions can be appealed to the
Office of the President. The amnesty covers the period of ninety (90) days following
the date of the publication of the Proclamation in two (2) newspapers of general
circulation.

Effects of the Amnesty Proclamation No.50 issued by President Benigno S. Aquino

III

1. To extinguish any criminal liability for acts committed in relation to, in connection
with or incident to the July 27, 2004 Oakwood Mutiny, the February 2006 Marines
Stand-Off and the November 29, 2007 Manila Pen Incident without prejudice to the
grantee's civil liability for injuries or damages caused to private persons.

2. To effect the restoration of civil and political rights or entitlement that may have
been suspended, lost, or adversely affected by virtue of any executive action and/or
administrative criminal action or proceedings lodged against the grantee in
connection with the subject incidents, including criminal conviction or any form,if
any.

3. All enlisted personnel of the Armed Forces of the Philippines whose applications
for amnesty existing laws and regulations. Officers of the AFP on the other hand shall
not be entitled to reintegration or reinstatement into the service.

4. The amnesty shall reinstate the right of AFP personnel to retirement and
separation benefits, if so qualified under existing laws and regulations at the time of
the commission of the acts for which the amnesty is extended.

Express Amnesty and Implied Amnesty

An express amnesty is one granted in direct terms such as a Presidential

Proclamation or a law enacted by the legislature granting amnesty. An implied
amnesty on the other hand, takes place in international law when a treaty of peace is
made between contending parties; in domestic or municipal law, it results from the
inhibition of the State from prosecuting or punishing persons who committed
political offenses, or when the law punishing a certain crime is repealed with
retroactive effect resulting in the decriminalization of the act and the release of
those charged or convicted for the same. Congress recent repeal of Republic Act
1700, known as the Anti-Subversion Law,is an implied amnesty.

General Amnesty and Limited Amnesty

A general amnesty is granted to whole class of persons within the territorial
domain or under the effective jurisdiction of the sovereign issuing the decree, while a
selected or limited amnesty covers a segment of a particular class only or the
portion of the sovereign's territorial jurisdiction, or specific acts committed within a
limited or specified time frame.
A grant of general amnesty therefore, usually takes effect within the whole
country with respect to all political dissenters who had performed acts for which the
amnesty is granted, subject to the conditions imposed by the grant, if any. The sole
criterion is the commission of the act alone as specified in the decree. A limited
amnesty, on the other hand, qualifies the grant with the respect to persons/groups
to be favoured, places where the amnesty is to be effective and/or the time frame to
which the decree Was limited.

Conditional Amnesty and Unconditional Amnesty

There is a sight variance in international law, where a general amnesty is general

in the sense that it provides immunity for all wrongful acts done by the belligerents
themselves, the members of their forces and their subjects during the War, and a
limited amnesty provides immunity only for such offenses and/or persons provided
within the terms of the decree. When the grant of amnesty is subject to the
fulfilment of certain requisites, such as the filing of an application, the laying down of
arms, and the taking of an oath of allegiance, that amnesty is deemed conditional,ie,
that the amnesty will only be granted if the applicants comply with certain
requirements and procedures, as compared to a grant which is expressed in broad
terms and does not law down specific requirements and procedures. Amnesties
belonging to the latter category are deemed unconditional.

Difference between Amnesty and Pardon

1. A special form of pardon exercised by the President of the Republic is amnesty.

Amnesty is a general pardon extended to a certain class of people who are usually
political offenders. Although pardon is likewise issued by the President and is also
political in nature, it is an exclusive act of the President where the court and
Congress has no say whatsoever.

2. Amnesty operates objectively with respect to the crime, and by virtue thereof
the latter should be regarded as wipe out, pardoned and forgotten. It is in this
respect that an amnesty is distinguished from an ordinary pardon, which is more of a
subjective character and solely affects the person pardoned, and is granted upon the
supposition of the actual existence of the crime.

3. A pardon is very different in its character and effect from an amnesty, which is
much more favorable in every respect to those benefited thereby. The effects and
legal consequences of an amnesty are entirely distinct from and cannot be legally
confused with those of a pardon.(Villa vs. Allen, 2 Phil.440)

Other Suggested Answer:

The difference between pardon and amnesty are:

In Pardon:

The convict is excused from serving the sentence but the effects of conviction
remain in less expressly remitted by the pardon; hence, for pardon to be valid there
must be a sentence already final and executor at the time the same granted.
Moreover, the grant is in favour of individual convicted offenders, not to a class of
convicted offenders; and the crimes subject to the grant may be common crimes or
political crimes. Finally, the grant is a private act of the Chief Executive which does
not require the concurrence of any other public officer or office.

In Amnesty:

The criminal complex of act constituting the crime ts erased, as though such act
was innocent when committed; hence, the effects of the conviction are obliterated.
Amnesty is granted favor of a class of convicted offenders, not to individual convicted
offenders; and the crimes involved are generally political offenses, not common
crimes. Amnesty is a public act that requires the conformity or concurrence of the
Philippine State.(U.P. Law Center Suggested AnSwer for the 2006 Bar Examination
Question No.IV, 2008 ed, pp. 16 and 17)

The National Amnesty Commission (NAC)

The National Commission (NAC) is the primary agency tasked to receive and
process applications for amnesty, and determine whether the applicants are entitled
to amnesty under any proclamation by the President granting amnesty. Pursuant to is
functions, it has the power to promulgate rules and regulations subject to the
approval of the President. Final decisions determinations of the NAC are appealable
to the Court of Appeals(CA).

The National Amnesty Commission(NAC), was created by virtue of Proclamation

No.347, dated 25 March 1994, to receive and process former rebels applications for
amnesty and determine whether the applicants are entitled for the grant of amnesty
under said Proclamation. The commission, to date, has received almost 25,000
amnesty applicants and granted amnesty to more than 20,000 former rebels.

The Abolition of the National Amnesty Commission (NAC)

By virtue of Executive Order No.415 issued by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo

on March 22, 2005, the National Amnesty Commission (NAC) is thereby abolished.
As provided therein, the term of the NAC, created under Proclamation No.347,
thereby deemed expired view of the completion of its assigned task provided by
Section 4 thereof. All assets, liabilities, choses in action, equipment, facilities, funds,
records and other properties of the NAC are hereby transferred to the Office of the
Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (“OPAPP").(Sections 1 and 2 of E.O. No.
415).