What are the nature and effects of a conditional pardon?

A conditional pardon is in the nature of a contract between the sovereign power or the Chief Executive and the convicted criminal 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. By the pardonee's consent to the terms stipulated in this contract, the pardonee has thereby placed himself under the supervision of the Chief Executive or his delegate who is duty-bound to see to it that the pardonee complies with the terms and conditions of the pardon. (In Re: Petition for Habeas Corpus of Wilfredo S. Torres, G.R. No. 122338, December 29, 1995)


What are the two remedies available to the Executive Department if conditions of pardon are violated?

In proceeding against a convict who has been conditionally pardoned and who is alleged to have breached the conditions of his pardon, the Executive Department has two options:

(i) to proceed against him under Section 64 (i) of the Revised Administrative Code (administrative remedy); or

(ii) to proceed against him under Article 159 of the Revised Penal Code (judicial remedy). (Torres v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 76872, July 23, 1987)

Read: Torres v. Gonzales Case Digest


Is the exercise of this prerogative by the President subject to judicial scrutiny?

No. The choice is an exercise of the President's executive prerogative and is not subject to judicial scrutiny. (Torres v. Gonzales)
Is a final judicial pronouncement as to the guilt of a pardonee a requirement for the President to determine whether or not there has been a breach of the terms of a conditional pardon?

No. Where a conditional pardonee has allegedly breached a condition of a pardon, the President who opts to proceed against him under Section 64 (i) of the Revised Administrative Code need not wait for a judicial pronouncement of guilt of a subsequent crime or for his conviction therefor by final judgment, in order to effectuate the recommitment of the pardonee to prison. The grant of pardon, the determination of the terms and conditions of the pardon, the determination of the occurrence of the breach thereof, and the proper sanctions for such breach, are purely executive acts and, thus, are not subject to judicial scrutiny.

A conditional pardon is in the nature of a contract between the sovereign power or the Chief Executive and the convicted criminal 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. By the pardonee's consent to the terms stipulated in this contract, the pardonee has thereby placed himself under the supervision of the Chief Executive or his delegate who is duty-bound to see to it that the pardonee complies with the terms and conditions of the pardon.

The determination of the violation of the conditional pardon rests exclusively in the sound judgment of the Chief Executive, and the pardonee, having consented to place his liberty on conditional pardon upon the judgment of the power that has granted it, cannot invoke the aid of the courts, however erroneous the findings may be upon which his recommitment was ordered. (In Re: Petition for Habeas Corpus of Wilfredo S. Torres)

[Note: Offender must have been found guilty of the subsequent offense before he can be prosecuted under Article 159 of the RPC. But if under Sec. 64(i) of the Revised Administrative Code, no conviction necessary. President has power to arrest, reincarnate offender without trial.]


May a person incarcerated for violation of the terms of conditional pardon avail of the remedy of a petition for writ of habeas corpus?

No. Habeas corpus lies only where the restraint of a person's liberty has been judicially adjudged as illegal or unlawful. In the instant petition, the incarceration of Torres remains legal considering that, were it not for the grant of conditional pardon which had been revoked because of a breach thereof, the determination of which is beyond judicial scrutiny, he would have served his final sentence for his first conviction until November 2, 2000. 

Ultimately, solely vested in the Chief Executive, who in the first place was the exclusive author of the conditional pardon and of its revocation, is the corrollary prerogative to reinstate the pardon if in his own judgment, the acquittal of the pardonee from the subsequent charges filed against him, warrants the same. Courts have no authority to interefer with the grant by the President of a pardon to a convicted criminal. (In Re: Petition for Habeas Corpus of Wilfredo S. Torres)



Does the grant of conditional pardon extinguishes the civil liability arising from the crime?

No. A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence. (Art. 36, RPC) 

Civil liability arising from crime is governed by the Revised Penal Code. It subsists notwithstanding service of sentence, or for any reason the sentence is not served by pardon, amnesty or commutation of sentence. Petitioner's civil liability may only be extinguished by the same causes recognized in the Civil Code, namely: payment, loss of the thing due, remission of the debt, merger of the rights of creditor and debtor, compensation and novation. (Monsanto vs. Factoran, G.R. No. 78239 February 9, 1989)