PP vs. Nacional, GR Nos.

111294-95, September 7, 1995

Facts:

Few days before February 21, 1985, the organization of the six accused, who were
members of CPP-NPA, had a pulong-pulong at Barangay Lacag, Daraga, Albay for the
purpose of identifying suspected informers, Quirino and Joel Lagason, of the military
whom they perceive as posing a threat to the NPAs's operation within the vicinity. On
February 21, 1985, Quirino was shot by Walter Nacional and Joel was shot by Absalon
Millamina. Walter Nacional, Zacarias Militante and Efren Musa claimed that the
charges against them were “political in nature " committed while they were members of
the New People's Army (NPA). As political prisoners, they applied for and were
recommended by then Secretary of Justice Franklin M. Drilon for conditional pardon by
the President of the Philippines. On February 1, 1995, Rudy Luces also moved to
withdraw his appeal for becoming moot and academic.  He claimed that he had been
granted conditional pardon by the President of the Philippines and had been released
from prison per instruction.

Issue:

Does the conditional pardon and consequent dismissal of the appeals of the accused
exempt them from payment of the civil indemnity?

Ruling:

No. The court ruled that the grant of conditional pardon and the consequent dismissal of
the appeals of Walter Nacional, Zacarias Militante, Efren Musa and Rudy Luces does
not exempt them from payment of the civil indemnity. A conditional pardon, when
granted, does not extinguish the civil liability arising from the crime.

Torres v. Director, Bureau of Corrections, GR No. 122338, December 29, 1995

FACTS:

Wilfredo Torres was convicted of two counts of estafa and sentenced to serve a prison
term up to November 02, 2000. He was granted pardon on the condition that he will “not
again violate any of the penal laws of the Philippines." Such pardon was later cancelled
on the recommendation of the Board of Pardons and Parole after he was charged of
multiple counts of estafa.

ISSUE:
Whether or not a convict who breached his conditional pardon may avail of the writ of
habeas corpus.

HELD:

NO. Habeas corpus lies only where the restraint of a person’s liberty has been judicially
adjudged as illegal or unlawful. 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that, were it not for the grant of conditional pardon which had been revoked because of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 final conviction until November 02, 2000. Petition for
habeas corpus is DISMISSED for lack of merit.

People vs. Patriarca, GR No. 13457, September 29, 2000

Facts:

Patriarca was charged with the crime of murder for the death of Alfredo Arevalo. He was
also charged with murder for the killing of one Rudy de Borja and a certain Elmer. The
RTC found him and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. 
Patriarca applied for amnesty under Proclamation No. 724. His application was
favorably granted by the National Amnesty Board concluding that his activities were
done in pursuit of his political beliefs.

Issue:

Whether or not grant of amnesty upon accused-appellant Jose N. Patriarca, Jr. is

binding and effective.

HELD:

Yes. The Court takes judicial notice of the grant of amnesty upon accused-appellant
Jose N. Patriarca, Jr. Once granted, it is binding and effective.  Amnesty commonly
denotes a general pardon to rebels for their treason or other high political offenses, or
the forgiveness which one sovereign grants to the subjects of another, who have
offended, by some breach, the law of nations. Paragraph 3 of Article 89 of the Revised
Penal Code provides that criminal liability is totally extinguished by amnesty, which
completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects.