Scribd
Upload
45 views

Mid Ca2 Lesson 12

The document discusses the historical accounts of pardon from ancient times to present. It describes how the power of pardon originated from monarchs and was gradually vested in the executive branch of governments. In medieval Europe, the power of pardon was held by various entities including the Catholic Church and local rulers. By the 18th century, philosophers like Beccaria criticized the sovereign's unchecked power to pardon as it could undermine the law. The document also outlines how pardon developed in England, the US, and the Philippines, with the power being constitutionally vested in presidents and governors. It concludes by listing the limitations on the Philippine president's pardon power according to the constitution.

Uploaded by

kiyoihira2003
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
45 views

Mid Ca2 Lesson 12

The document discusses the historical accounts of pardon from ancient times to present. It describes how the power of pardon originated from monarchs and was gradually vested in the executive branch of governments. In medieval Europe, the power of pardon was held by various entities including the Catholic Church and local rulers. By the 18th century, philosophers like Beccaria criticized the sovereign's unchecked power to pardon as it could undermine the law. The document also outlines how pardon developed in England, the US, and the Philippines, with the power being constitutionally vested in presidents and governors. It concludes by listing the limitations on the Philippine president's pardon power according to the constitution.

Uploaded by

kiyoihira2003
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

NON-INSTITUTIONAL

CORRECTION
By Harry L. Caisip, RCrim
Lesson Title: Historical accounts of Pardon

Lesson Targets:
At the end of this discussion, you should be able to
1. Discuss the historical accounts of Pardon.
2. identify the limitations of the pardoning power of the
President.
History of Pardon
- The exercise of pardoning power has always been
vested in the hands of the executive branch of the
government, whether King, Queen, President or
Governor. Pardon dates back to the pre-Christian era. In
fact, the Bible contains an allusion where a criminal was
released and pardoned by the King at the time Christ
was crucified.
In Medieval Europe
- the power to grant pardon was held by various bodies,
including the Roman Catholic Church and certain local rulers,
but by the sixteenth century it usually was concentrated in the
hands of the monarch. In post-Reformation England, the royal
prerogative of "mercy" was used for three main purposes: (1) as
a precursor to the as-yet-unrecognized defenses of self-defense,
insanity, and minority; (2) to develop new methods of dealing
with offenders unrecognized by legislation, such as
transportation or military conscription; and (3) for the removal
of disqualifications attaching to criminal convictions.
The eighteenth century: pardons and the classical school.
During the eighteenth century the sovereign's power to grant pardons in
individual cases came under attack, notably by Cesare Beccaria in his
famous essay On Crimes and Punishments. Permitting the sovereign to
interfere with the implementation of the laws was perceived as a threat to
the concept of the separation of powers in derogation of the autonomy of
both legislature and judiciary—although Montesquieu, with whom the
concept of the separation of powers is associated, did not oppose the
pardoning power. Such interventions were also seen as detrimental to the
deterrent powers of the law, which were predicated on the inexorability of
its implementation. Finally, the rampant use of pardons (particularly with
respect to accomplices to crimes who informed the principal perpetrators)
was seen as a source not only of uncertainties but also of corruption and
abuse.
In England, pardon developed out of the conflict between the
King and the Nobles who threatened his powers. Pardon was
applied to members of the Royal family who committed crimes,
and occasionally to those convicted of offenses against the royal
power. It was the general view that the pardoning power was
the exclusive prerogative of the King. In England today the
power to extend pardon is vested in the Queen upon advice of
the Minister of the Interior.
In the United States, pardon among the early American
colonies was a carry-over of the England practice. The
pardoning power was exercised by the Royal governor
through the power delegated by the King. After the
declaration of independence, the federal and state
constitutions vested the pardoning power on the President of
the United States and the Governors in federal and state
cases, respectively.
In the Philippines, the pardoning power is vested in the
President by Article VII, Sec. 19, of the Philippine
Constitution which states: “The President shall have the
power to grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and
remit forfeitures, after conviction for all offenses, except in
cases of impeachment, upon such conditions and with
such restrictions and limitations as he may deem proper to
impose. He shall have the power to grant amnesty with the
concurrence of the National Assembly.”
Limitations of the Pardoning power of the President
● It may not be exercised for offenses in impeachment cases
(Art. VII, Sec. 10, Par. 2, Constitution of the Philippines.
● It may be exercised only after conviction by final judgment;
● It may not be exercised over civil contempt (as for refusing
to answer a proper question as a witness in a case);
● In case of violation of election law or rules and regulations,
no pardon, parole, or suspension of sentence may be granted
(Art. IX, Sec. 5, Par. C, The Commission on Election).
● It cannot be exercised to violate tax laws.
Thank you for listening Future
criminologist!
ACTIVITY 2
TRUE OR FALSE. (USE CAPITAL LETTERS ANY KIND OF ERASURES MEANS
WRONG)

1. Pardon is granted by the Board of Pardons and parole.


2. Pardoning power of the President can be exercised to violation of tax
laws.
3. Pardoning power is vested in the President by Article VII, Sec. 29, of the
Philippine Constitution.
4. In case of violation of election law or rules and regulations, no pardon,
parole, or suspension of sentence may be granted (Art. IX, Sec. 10, Par. C,
The Commission on Election).
5. The President shall have the power to grant pardon with the
concurrence of the National Assembly.
6. Pardoning power of the President may be exercised only before conviction
by final judgment.
7. Pardoning power of the President may not be exercised for offenses in
impeachment cases (Art. VII, Sec. 10, Par. 2, Constitution of the Philippines).
8. In the history of Pardon, the exercise of pardoning power has always been
vested in the hands of the judicial branch of the government, whether King,
Queen, President or Governor.
9. In the United States, pardon developed out of the conflict between the
King and the Nobles who threatened his powers. Pardon was applied to
members of the Royal family who committed crimes, and occasionally to
those convicted of offenses against the royal power.
10. During the nineteenth century the sovereign's power to grant pardons in
individual cases came under attack, notably by Cesare Beccaria in his famous
essay On Crimes and Punishments.

You might also like