Forms of Executive Clemency | Pardoning Power | Powers of the President | EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

X. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

C. Powers of the President

6. Pardoning Power

The pardoning power is a key aspect of the executive authority vested in the President of the Philippines. This power allows the President to extend clemency to individuals convicted of crimes, mitigating the consequences of criminal liability. It is primarily provided for under Article VII, Section 19 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which states:

"Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution, the President may grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment. He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress."

This provision delineates the scope, limitations, and forms of executive clemency, which includes reprieves, commutations, pardons, remission of fines and forfeitures, and amnesty.

Forms of Executive Clemency

1. Pardon

   • Definition: A pardon is an act of grace proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of laws, which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime they have committed.

   • Types of Pardon:

     • Absolute Pardon: This fully extinguishes the criminal liability of the individual, effectively absolving them from the legal consequences of the offense and restoring their civil and political rights. However, an absolute pardon does not erase the fact of conviction.
     • Conditional Pardon: This imposes certain conditions upon the grantee, which, if violated, can result in the revocation of the pardon and restoration of the original penalty.

   • Requirements and Effects:

     • A pardon can only be granted after final conviction by a court of law.
     • A pardon does not extinguish civil liability unless expressly stipulated. Civil liabilities to private complainants may still be enforced.
     • In cases of absolute pardon, the grantee’s eligibility for reemployment in government service or for candidacy for public office is restored, provided that the pardon explicitly states so. However, the grantee must still seek judicial clearance or certification of their restored rights for specific purposes like running for office or being appointed to a government position.

2. Commutation

   • Definition: Commutation refers to the reduction or alteration of the penalty to a lesser form. It is not a forgiveness of the crime but a mitigation of the sentence.
   • Application: The President may reduce a sentence (e.g., from death to life imprisonment or from life imprisonment to a determinate number of years). This is often applied in cases where the original penalty is deemed excessively harsh or when there are compelling humanitarian reasons.
   • Effects: It alters the penalty but does not extinguish the underlying conviction or civil liability. Like pardons, it applies after final conviction.

3. Reprieve

   • Definition: A reprieve is a temporary postponement of the execution of a sentence, typically granted to allow the courts or the executive branch time to review the case for clemency or to resolve appeals.
   • Scope: This is typically applied in cases where the sentence is severe, such as the death penalty (when it was still in effect), and is used as a temporary relief, pending a review or petition for clemency.
   • Effects: A reprieve delays the execution of the penalty but does not alter or reduce the sentence. It is a temporary measure of relief.

4. Remission of Fines and Forfeitures

   • Definition: The remission of fines or forfeitures refers to the cancellation or reduction of monetary penalties or the return of property seized by the government as part of a criminal conviction.
   • Application: The President can remit fines or forfeitures wholly or partially, thereby lessening the financial burden imposed on the convict.
   • Effects: Like a reprieve, it does not extinguish the criminal liability or civil obligations stemming from the offense, unless explicitly provided.

5. Amnesty

   • Definition: Amnesty is a more extensive form of clemency than pardon, as it applies to classes or categories of individuals, typically those involved in political crimes like rebellion or sedition. It results in the obliteration of the offense and its effects, treating the act as if it never occurred.
   • Concurrence of Congress: The President cannot grant amnesty unilaterally. It requires the concurrence of a majority of all Members of Congress. This distinguishes amnesty from pardon, which is an exclusive presidential prerogative.
   • Effects: Amnesty extinguishes the crime itself and its legal consequences, including criminal and civil liabilities, as though no offense was committed.

Limitations on the Pardoning Power

1. Conviction by Final Judgment: The Constitution mandates that clemency can only be granted after conviction by final judgment, except in the case of amnesty, which can be applied to those who have not yet been convicted. This requirement is a safeguard to ensure that the judicial process has fully determined guilt before the executive intervenes.

2. Impeachment: The President’s pardoning power does not extend to cases of impeachment. Public officials impeached and convicted by the Senate cannot be pardoned by the President. This is to preserve the constitutional balance of powers and the accountability of public officials.

3. No Power to Pardon Electoral Offenses (Election Code): The Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881) prohibits the President from pardoning individuals convicted of electoral offenses, except upon the recommendation of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). This limitation underscores the importance of safeguarding the integrity of the electoral process.

Judicial Review and Pardoning Power

The Supreme Court has ruled consistently that the exercise of the pardoning power by the President is not subject to judicial review, except in cases where it can be shown that the President acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. In the landmark case of Monsanto v. Factoran (G.R. No. 78239, February 9, 1989), the Supreme Court clarified that executive clemency does not automatically erase the conviction but removes the penalty and restores civil rights in cases of absolute pardon.

Conclusion

The pardoning power of the President is a critical aspect of the Executive Department’s authority, serving as a means to temper the rigors of law with mercy. The Constitution provides clear forms of clemency, each with distinct legal consequences, from full forgiveness (absolute pardon) to temporary relief (reprieve) or the complete obliteration of criminal liability (amnesty). This power, however, is circumscribed by constitutional limits to ensure that it is exercised judiciously and in a manner consistent with public interest and justice.

Scope and Limitations | Pardoning Power | Powers of the President | EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

Pardoning Power of the President: Scope and Limitations

The pardoning power is one of the executive powers granted to the President under the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. This power is embodied in Article VII, Section 19 of the Constitution, which provides:

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

This provision provides a broad authority to the President to intervene in criminal convictions, with certain specific exceptions and limitations.

I. Scope of the Pardoning Power

1. Types of Clemency The pardoning power includes the following forms of executive clemency:

   • Pardon: This is the most commonly known form of clemency. It may be absolute (unconditional) or conditional, and it results in the full or partial remission of the legal consequences of a conviction.
     • Absolute Pardon: Fully extinguishes the criminal liability of the individual and restores his civil and political rights, although it does not restore property rights forfeited under the conviction.
     • Conditional Pardon: This pardon is subject to certain conditions, which, if violated, may result in the restoration of the original penalty.
   • Commutation of Sentence: A reduction of the length of a sentence without absolving the underlying conviction.
   • Reprieve: A temporary postponement of the execution of a sentence, typically used in death penalty cases.
   • Remission of Fines and Forfeitures: The President may remit fines and forfeitures imposed as part of a criminal conviction, essentially reducing or eliminating financial penalties.

2. After Conviction by Final Judgment The exercise of the pardoning power can only be done after conviction by final judgment. This means:

   • A pardon or other forms of clemency cannot be granted before a person is convicted by a court of law.
   • The judicial process must be completed, and the judgment must have attained finality, meaning there can no longer be any appeal or motion for reconsideration available to the convicted individual.

   Note: A pardon does not imply that the President finds the individual innocent; it is an act of grace, not a judicial act.

3. No Power to Pardon Administrative Offenses The pardoning power of the President extends only to criminal offenses. It cannot be exercised over administrative cases or penalties. This is a distinction upheld in various Supreme Court rulings, emphasizing that administrative penalties (such as those imposed on government officials) are outside the scope of the pardoning power.

4. Effect on Civil and Political Rights

   • In cases of absolute pardon, the criminal liability is fully extinguished, and the individual's civil and political rights are restored. However, the restoration of property rights is not automatic, as this would require a separate legal process.
   • A conditional pardon does not restore civil and political rights until all conditions are fulfilled.

II. Limitations of the Pardoning Power

1. Impeachment Cases The President cannot grant pardon in cases of impeachment. This is explicitly provided in the Constitution to prevent the President from using the power of pardon to protect impeached officials, including the President himself or herself, from removal from office.

   Impeachment is a political process that applies to high-ranking officials such as the President, Vice President, Justices of the Supreme Court, Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman. The prohibition aims to maintain the integrity of the impeachment process.

2. Cases of Legislative Contempt The President cannot pardon individuals found in contempt by the legislative body (Congress). The power of contempt is a necessary function of legislative investigations in aid of legislation, and allowing pardon in these cases would undermine legislative authority.

3. Effect on Private Rights A pardon does not affect the civil liability of the individual. Criminal convictions often come with both criminal and civil liability (e.g., damages to the victim). While the President can pardon the criminal aspect of the case, the pardon does not extinguish civil liabilities arising from the criminal offense, such as payment for damages to the victim or restitution.

4. Non-Retroactivity Pardon operates prospectively and does not change the facts of the case. It cannot change the status of a conviction that occurred before the pardon was granted. The pardon simply erases the continuing legal effects of the conviction.

5. Cases Involving Election Laws Under the Omnibus Election Code, the President cannot pardon an offense related to elections unless there is a favorable recommendation from the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). This safeguard ensures that the independence and integrity of the electoral process are upheld.

6. Limited to Criminal Offenses As previously mentioned, the President's pardoning power applies only to criminal offenses. It cannot be used to affect administrative sanctions, civil cases, or other non-criminal liabilities.

7. No Pardon for Future Crimes The President cannot grant pardon for crimes not yet committed. The power is exercised only after a conviction for a criminal act that has already occurred and been adjudicated.

III. Judicial Review of the Pardoning Power

The general rule is that the pardoning power is discretionary and cannot be questioned by the courts. However, the Supreme Court has occasionally reviewed the exercise of the pardoning power under specific circumstances where there is an allegation of grave abuse of discretion.

For example, if the exercise of the pardoning power is manifestly contrary to law or used in a manner that violates constitutional limits (e.g., pardoning someone for an impeachable offense), the courts may intervene through a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. However, this is an exceptional remedy and requires showing that the executive acted in a way that was capricious, arbitrary, or oppressive.

IV. Notable Case Law

1. Monsanto v. Factoran (G.R. No. 78239, February 9, 1989): In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that an absolute pardon restores civil and political rights but does not automatically reinstate property rights that were forfeited as part of the conviction. The forfeiture must be the subject of separate judicial proceedings to restore the property rights.

2. Llamas v. Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 99031, October 15, 1991): The Supreme Court emphasized that a conditional pardon requires strict compliance with the conditions set forth. If the conditions are violated, the pardon may be revoked, and the original penalty may be re-imposed.

3. Garcia v. The Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 157584, April 2, 2009): This case clarified that the pardoning power applies only after final conviction and that the President cannot intervene in the judicial process prior to a final judgment.

V. Policy Considerations

The rationale behind the pardoning power is that it serves as a check on the judiciary and provides a humanitarian safety valve in the criminal justice system. It allows the President to address situations where justice may not have been fully served due to rigid application of the law, errors in judgment, or evolving societal norms.

However, the pardoning power is also a sensitive tool that must be exercised with caution, as it could be perceived as undermining the rule of law if used excessively or for political reasons.

Conclusion

The pardoning power of the President is a significant executive function that provides a degree of flexibility within the criminal justice system. While broad, it is subject to key constitutional limitations to prevent abuses and to preserve the separation of powers among the branches of government. The scope of this power is expansive, but the President must wield it with judicious consideration of its consequences on both public order and private rights.