In re: Lontok

43 Phil. 293

FACTS:
This is a request for the disbarment of Marcelino Lontok filed by the Attorney-General
on the ground of the respondent’s conviction of the crime of bigamy.

Marcelino Lontok was convicted by the CFI of Zambales of the crime of bigamy.
Judgment was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court on appeal, during Lontok’s
unsuccessful attempt to get the case before the United States Supreme Court. A pardon
was thereafter issued to him by former Governor-General Harrison on the condition that
he shall not again be guilty of any misconduct.

The Attorney-General’s request for disbarment heavily relied on Section 21 of the Code
of Civil Procedure which provides that “…a member of the bar may be removes or
suspended from his office of lawyer by the Supreme Court by reason of his conviction of
a crime involving moral turpitude.” And since bigamy involves moral turpitude, it can be
a ground for a lawyer’s disbarment. Nonetheless, Lontok has been pardoned by the
Governor-General. On the one hand, it is contended by the Government that while the
pardon removes the legal infamy of the crime, it cannot wash out the moral stain; on the
other hand, it is contended by the respondent that the pardon reaches the offense for
which he was convicted and blots it out so that he may not be looked upon as guilty of
it.

ISSUE:
(a) Whether or not the request for Lontok’s disbarment be approved given his
pardon.

RULING:
The Supreme Court holds that the Attorney-General’s request for the disbarment of
Lontok cannot be granted.

A portion of the decision in the case of Ex parte Garland [1866], 4 Wall., 380, provides:
“A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offense and the guilt of the
offender; and when the pardon is full, it releases the punishment and blots out of
existence the guilt, so that in the eye of the law the offender is an innocent as if he had
never committed the offense. If granted before conviction, it prevents any of the
penalties and disabilities, consequent upon conviction, from attaching; if granted after
conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil
rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity.
There is only this limitation to its operation; it does not restore offices forfeited, or
property or interest vested in others in consequence of the conviction and judgement.”

Hence, since Lontok has been granted pardon by the Governor-General, it is as if he

has never committed the crime of bigamy. Thus, the request for disbarment would
appear to have no grounds. The Court further opines that if Marcelino Lontok should
again be guilty of any misconduct, the condition of his pardon would be violated, and he
would then become subject to disbarment. The request for disbarment is not granted
and proceedings are therefore dismissed.