Criminal Pardon Disqualification Criteria

Criminal Pardon Disqualification Criteria Under Philippine Law
An In-Depth Legal Article

1. Introduction

In the Philippines, the power to grant executive clemency—including pardons—resides in the President. This authority is rooted in the 1987 Philippine Constitution, statutory enactments, and regulations issued by the Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP). While the power to pardon is broad, it is not without limits. This article discusses the legal framework governing the grant of pardons in the Philippines, focusing on the criteria and circumstances that disqualify individuals from receiving a pardon.

2. Constitutional and Statutory Basis for Pardons

  1. 1987 Constitution (Article VII, Section 19)

    “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 vests in the President the power to grant executive clemency—reprieves (temporary postponement of penalties), commutations (reduction of penalties), pardons (relief from penalties), and remission of fines or forfeitures—provided there is already a final conviction.

  2. Administrative Code of 1987

    • Further outlines the President’s authority to grant executive clemency, subject to the Constitution and pertinent laws.

  3. Revised Penal Code (RPC)

    • Contains general provisions on penalties and their execution; however, it defers to constitutional and administrative guidelines on the grant of pardon.

  4. Omnibus Election Code

    • Pertinent to disqualification in cases involving election offenses. Under Section 261 and related provisions, executive clemency for election offenses requires prior recommendation or concurrence from the Commission on Elections (COMELEC).

  5. Board of Pardons and Parole (BPP) Rules

    • The BPP, under the Department of Justice (DOJ), assists the President by evaluating petitions for pardon or parole and issuing recommendations. Their rules set out who may be considered for pardon, the procedure for application, and additional conditions or limitations.

3. Types of Pardon

Understanding the nature of pardons helps to contextualize disqualification criteria:

  1. Absolute Pardon

    • This is a complete extinguishment of the criminal liability. It restores the individual’s full civil and political rights (e.g., the right to vote, to hold public office, etc.).
    • Once an absolute pardon is granted, the penalty is completely set aside, although it does not necessarily erase the fact of conviction (i.e., the conviction may still appear in records, barring further court orders such as expungement, which is not typically provided for in Philippine law).

  2. Conditional Pardon

    • This is clemency granted under certain terms or conditions imposed by the President. The individual must comply with these conditions; failure to do so may result in the reinstatement of the original penalty.

4. General Qualifications for a Pardon

Before discussing disqualifications, it is crucial to outline general qualifications for receiving a presidential pardon:

  1. Final Conviction by a Competent Court

    • The Constitution expressly states that the power to pardon applies only “after conviction by final judgment.” Thus, individuals whose cases are still on trial or on appeal ordinarily cannot be granted a pardon.

  2. Completion of a Minimum Period of Sentence

    • While not mandated by the Constitution, the Board of Pardons and Parole typically observes certain guidelines requiring an inmate to serve a requisite portion of their sentence before recommending a pardon.
    • For instance, those convicted of reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment) might need to serve a specified number of years (e.g., a minimum of 30 years, subject to good conduct time allowances) before being eligible for executive clemency consideration.

  3. Submission of Documents and Recommendation

    • The inmate must apply or be recommended for pardon (e.g., by prison authorities, or on their own initiative).
    • The BPP evaluates the inmate’s behavior, rehabilitation progress, and other factors to decide whether to recommend clemency to the President.

5. Disqualification Criteria for Pardon

A. Constitutional Disqualifications

  1. Cases of Impeachment

    • Article VII, Section 19 of the Constitution explicitly states: “Except in cases of impeachment…”
    • Individuals impeached and convicted by the Senate (e.g., impeached high-ranking officials) cannot be recipients of a presidential pardon for the impeachment conviction.

  2. No Pardon for Administrative Liabilities

    • While not strictly phrased as a “disqualification,” the President’s clemency power extends only to criminal convictions. Impeachment, which carries its own set of consequences (e.g., removal from office, disqualification from holding public office in the future), does not fall within the scope of criminal pardon.

  3. Election Offenses without Recommendation from COMELEC

    • Pursuant to the Omnibus Election Code and jurisprudential interpretations, the President cannot grant clemency for violations of election laws without the favorable recommendation of the Commission on Elections. This is effectively a constitutional and statutory constraint preventing unilateral pardon for election offenses.

B. Lack of Final Judgment

  • Individuals who have been charged but not yet convicted or whose conviction is under appeal are not yet eligible for pardon. This is a threshold requirement rather than a “disqualification” per se, but in effect, it disqualifies any person without a final conviction.

C. Ineligibility Due to Pending Cases or Other Legal Barriers

  • If an individual faces separate criminal proceedings for different offenses that have not reached final judgment, typically the BPP may defer any pardon recommendation until all cases are resolved.
  • Courts may also issue orders or interpret certain provisions that limit the application of pardon if doing so would undermine ongoing judicial proceedings.

D. Non-Compliance with BPP Guidelines

  • The Board of Pardons and Parole may impose additional conditions or guidelines to determine eligibility for a recommendation of pardon, such as:

    • Satisfactory conduct while incarcerated (e.g., good conduct time allowance record).
    • Lack of pending administrative or disciplinary cases within prison.
    • Completion of rehabilitative programs.

  • Failing to meet these internal guidelines might effectively disqualify a candidate from being recommended for pardon (though the President retains ultimate discretion).

6. Noteworthy Jurisprudential Points

  1. President’s Discretionary Power

    • The Supreme Court has consistently held that the grant of pardon is an executive prerogative. Courts will not generally inquire into the wisdom or basis of a presidential pardon, except in cases where constitutional limits are involved (e.g., impeachment).
    • This broad discretion means that aside from constitutional and statutory bars, almost all other aspects of pardon are decided on a case-by-case basis.

  2. Effect of Pardon on Guilt

    • A pardon, whether absolute or conditional, does not negate the fact of conviction. It simply frees the individual from the legal consequences of the offense (penalty, accessory penalties, or portions thereof).
    • Supreme Court rulings clarify that while an absolute pardon can restore civil and political rights, it does not automatically expunge the criminal record unless the President explicitly provides so in the terms of pardon.

  3. Distinction from Amnesty

    • Pardon should not be confused with amnesty, which is a legislative act (by Congress with the concurrence of the President) that “obliterates” the offense itself, typically for political or national security reasons. Amnesty can cover individuals who have not yet been convicted, whereas pardon requires final judgment.

7. Procedure for Pardon and BPP’s Role

  1. Application or Recommendation

    • Applications are usually filed by the convicted person or their counsel. Prison authorities may also recommend inmates for clemency.
    • The application is submitted to the Board of Pardons and Parole.

  2. Evaluation and Investigation

    • The BPP reviews the nature of the offense, the inmate’s behavior and discipline record, the time served, and any mitigating or aggravating circumstances.
    • The BPP may hold hearings, consult with relevant institutions, and gather evidence about the inmate’s conduct and character.

  3. BPP Recommendation

    • If the BPP finds merit, it issues a recommendation to the President.
    • In certain cases (especially election-related offenses), the BPP may be required to obtain COMELEC’s recommendation before submitting its findings to the President.

  4. Presidential Action

    • The President is not bound by the BPP recommendation but typically considers it heavily. The President may approve, modify, or deny the recommendation.

8. Practical Implications

  1. Rehabilitation and Reintegration

    • Pardon is often seen as a measure of mercy or a recognition of rehabilitation. Prisoners with good behavior and a lower risk of reoffending stand a stronger chance of being recommended.

  2. Civil and Political Rights

    • An absolute pardon can restore political rights (e.g., to vote or run for office). However, for certain public offices, there may be additional statutory requirements that a pardoned individual must still meet.

  3. Public Interest Considerations

    • The President typically weighs not just the prisoner’s situation but also public sentiment and the gravity of the crime. High-profile cases of murder, drug trafficking, or corruption may warrant additional scrutiny or attract media and public attention.

  4. Restrictions Post-Pardon

    • Conditional pardons often include provisions such as not committing another offense for a specified period, payment of civil liabilities, or other conditions. Violations can trigger the original sentence’s revival.

9. Conclusion

The power to grant pardons in the Philippines is broad but not absolute. The Constitution, relevant statutes, and BPP guidelines carve out specific instances in which a pardon cannot be granted—most notably, in cases of impeachment and, without COMELEC approval, for election offenses. Additionally, an individual must be convicted by final judgment before being considered for executive clemency.

While the President’s discretion remains paramount, formal procedures and recommendations from the Board of Pardons and Parole ensure a measure of consistency and fairness. Understanding these disqualification criteria helps practitioners, inmates, and the public at large grasp how and when an individual may (or may not) seek the grace of a presidential pardon. Ultimately, this legal mechanism balances the state’s interest in enforcing criminal accountability with the capacity for mercy and rehabilitation.

References

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution, Art. VII, Sec. 19
  • Administrative Code of 1987 (Executive Order No. 292)
  • Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815)
  • Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881)
  • Board of Pardons and Parole Rules and Regulations
  • Relevant Supreme Court Jurisprudence (e.g., on the nature and effects of pardon)

Disclaimer: This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific inquiries or cases, it is recommended to consult a licensed attorney or the appropriate government agency.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login