Those justifying the conditional pardon of Manero keep on saying that he could

not have obtained it if the previous administration did not commute his
sentence. This is wrong. Commutation of sentence acquires importance and
becomes useful only in the granting of parole. There is a whale of difference
between parole and pardon.

Parole is the release from imprisonment after serving the minimum penalty
imposed under the Indeterminate Sentence Law (Act. No. 4103). It is granted by
the Board of Pardons and Parole. It does not result in full restoration of
liberty as the parolee is still in the custody of the law because he is
required to report personally to such government officials or other parole
officers appointed by the Board of Pardons and Parole for a period of
surveillance equivalent to the remaining portion of the maximum sentence
imposed upon him or until final release and discharge by the Board.

Pardon on the other hand is an act of grace of the President which exempts the
individual on whom it is bestowed from punishment which the law inflicts on the
crime committed. It can be granted at any time after final judgment of
conviction without any condition (absolute pardon) or subject to some
requirements or qualifications as the President may see fit such as: that the
grantee shall not again violate any of the penal laws, shall make periodic
reporting or shall not change residence without prior permission from the Board
or shall conduct himself in an orderly manner (conditional pardon). To be
effective the grantee must accept the conditions.

So it is very clear from these definitions that commutation of the sentence of

a convict is not necessary before he can be pardoned. Once he is convicted by
final judgment, he can be pardoned by the President regardless of the duration
of his sentence or how long he has already been jail. Only in case of parole
is commutation of sentence necessary because the law says that it can not be
granted to persons convicted of offense punished by death, life imprisonment,
or reclusion perpetua. So to be eligible for parole, any of these
sentences must first be commuted to lighter penalties, with durations that make
the grant of parole legally feasible.

Only the President can grant a pardon with or without any condition. The Board
of Pardons and Parole merely recommends the names of convicts to be pardoned
based on reports of the convict's work and conduct. The law does not impose
any requirement or condition before the President can exercise this power, it
being discretionary on his part.
But with respect to the grant of parole which is lodged by law on the Board of
Pardons and Parole, the law imposes certain requirements before the Board can
exercise it. Thus, parole can be granted only after (1) the prisoner shall
have served the minimum penalty imposed on him; (2) the prisoner is fit to be
released based on the report of his conduct and work and (3) there is a
reasonable probability that he will live and remain at liberty without
violating the law and such release will not be incompatible with the welfare of
society.

Another significant distinction between pardon and parole is that while parole
is always subject to a condition, pardon may or may not be subject to any
condition. The conditions on the grant of a parole are that the (1) parolee
should report regularly and personally to the proper government official or
parole officer during the remaining period of his maximum sentence; (2) his
residence may be limited and fixed or changed from time to time by the Board;
and (3) that he shall not violate any of the laws of the Philippines. A
conditional pardon in turn is in the nature of a contract between the chief
executive and the convicted criminal; by the pardonee's acceptance of the terms
of pardon ( or the "stipulation" of the "contract") he has placed himself under
the supervision of the chief executive or his delegate who is duty bound to see
to tit that he complies with the conditions of the pardon.

There is, however, one similarity between parole and pardon, specifically
conditional pardon. And this is in the effect of violation of any condition.
If the parolee violates the condition of his parole, he shall be re-arrested
and shall serve the remaining unexpired portion of the maximum sentence for
which he was originally committed to prison. In case of a violation of a
conditional pardon on the other hand, the President can order the arrest and
recommitment of the grantee to serve the unexpired portion of the original
sentence. The determination of the occurrence of a breach of a condition and
the proper consequences of such breach is purely an executive act and not
subject to judicial inquiry. Violation of the conditional pardon may likewise
subject the grantee to prosecution before the courts for evasion of service of
sentence under Art. 159 of the Revise Penal Code.

With the foregoing explanation, I hope I have cleared the air of the many
misconceptions, errors and misunderstandings beclouding the issues on the
disgusting pardon of a convicted heinous murderer.

What is pardon?

Pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution
of the laws, which exempts the individual, on whom it is bestowed, from the
punishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed. It is the private, though
official act of the executive magistrate, delivered to the individual for whose benefit
it is intended, and not communicated officially to the Court. A pardon is a deed, to
the validity of which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without
acceptance.
What is the effect of pardon?

While a pardon has generally been regarded as blotting out the existence of guilt so
that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as though he never committed
the offense, it does not operate for all purposes. The very essence of a pardon is
forgiveness or remission of guilt. Pardon implies guilt. It does not erase the fact of
the commission of the crime and the conviction thereof. It does not wash out the
moral stain. It involves forgiveness and not forgetfulness.
The better considered cases regard full pardon (at least one not based on the
offenders innocence) as relieving the party from all the punitive consequences of
his criminal act, including the disqualifications or disabilities based on the finding of
guilt. But it relieves him from nothing more. To say, however, that the offender is a
new man, and as innocent as if he had never committed the offense; is to ignore
the difference between the crime and the criminal. A person adjudged guilty of an
offense is a convicted criminal, though pardoned; he may be deserving of
punishment, though left unpunished; and the law may regard him as more
dangerous to society than one never found guilty of crime, though it places no
restraints upon him following his conviction.
A pardon looks to the future. It is not retrospective. It makes no amends for the
past. It affords no relief for what has been suffered by the offender. It does not
impose upon the government any obligation to make reparation for what has been
suffered. Since the offense has been established by judicial proceedings, that
which has been done or suffered while they were in force is presumed to have been
rightfully done and justly suffered, and no satisfaction for it can be required.
What is the constitutional basis of pardon?

The power to pardon, which is a form of executive clemency, is given to the

President underSection 19, Article VII of the Constitution. It reads:
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.
What are the Constitutional limitations on the grant of pardon?

The limitations provided under the Constitution are: (1) No pardon may be granted
inimpeachment cases; (2) No pardon may be granted when otherwise provided under
the Constitution, specifically Sec. 5, Article IX-C, which provides that No pardon,
amnesty, parole or suspension of sentence for violation of elections laws, rules, and
regulations shall be granted by the President without the favorable recommendation
of the [COMELEC]; and (3) It may only be granted after conviction by final
judgment.
How is pardon different from probation?
Probation and pardon are not the same. Probation is a disposition under which a
defendant, after conviction and sentence, is released subject to conditions imposed
by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer. Probation is a part of the
judicial power, while pardon is a part of the executive power. The suspension of the
sentence under probation simply postpones the judgment of the court temporarily
or indefinitely, but the conviction and liability following it, and the civil disabilities,
remain and become operative when judgment is rendered.
What is parole?

A parole is a conditional pardon. It refers to the conditional release of an offender

from a correctional institution after he serves the minimum term of his prison
sentence. It does not have the effect of extinguishing the criminal liability of the
offender.
How is pardon different from commutation and reprieve?

Commutation is a remission of a part of the punishment; a substitution of a less

penalty for the one originally imposed.
A reprieve or respite is the withholding of the sentence for an interval of time, a
postponement of execution, a temporary suspension of execution.
What are the more famous acts of pardon/executive clemency?

In 2007, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo granted pardon in favor of former

President Joseph Ejercito Estrada. In 2008, President Arroyo granted pardon to Claudio
Teehankee, Jr.
Sources: Section 3, Presidential Decree No. 968, also known as the Probation Law;
Monsanto vs. Factoran, Jr., G.R. No. 78239, 9 February 1989; People vs. Vera, G.R. No. L-
45685, 16 November 1937; Castrodes vs. Cubelo, G.R. No. L-47033, 16 June 1978; People
vs. Abesamis, G.R. No. 140985, 28 August 2007.

he Parole and Probation Administration (Filipino: Pangasiwaan ng Parol at

Probasyon), abbreviated as PPA, is an agency of the Philippine government under
the Department of Justice responsible for providing a less costly alternative to
imprisonment of first-time offenders who are likely to respond to individualized
community-based treatment programs.
Probation was first introduced in the Philippines during the American colonial period
(18981945) with the enactment of Act No. 4221 of the Philippine Legislature on
August 7, 1935. This law created a Probation Office under the Department of Justice.
On November 16, 1937, after barely two years of existence, the Supreme Court of
the Philippines declared the Probation Law unconstitutional because of some
defects in the law's procedural framework.
In 1972, House Bill No. 393 was filed in Congress, which would establish a probation
system in the Philippines. This bill avoided the objectionable features of Act 4221
that struck down the 1935 law as unconstitutional. The bill was passed by the House
of Representatives, but was pending in the Senate when Martial Law was declared
and Congress was abolished.
In 1975, the National Police Commission Interdisciplinary drafted a Probation Law.
After 18 technical hearings over a period of six months, the draft decree was
presented to a selected group of 369 jurists, penologists, civic leaders and social
and behavioral scientists and practitioners. The group overwhelmingly endorsed the
establishment of an Adult Probation System in the country.
On July 24, 1976, Presidential Decree No. 968, also known as Adult Probation Law of
1976, was signed into Law by the President of the Philippines.
The startup of the probation system in 1976-1977 was a massive undertaking
during which all judges and prosecutors nationwide were trained in probation
methods and procedures; administrative and procedural manuals were developed;
probation officers recruited and trained, and the central agency and probation field
offices organized throughout the country. Fifteen selected probation officers were
sent to United Statesfor orientation and training in probation administration. Upon
their return, they were assigned to train the newly recruited probation officers.
The probation system started to operate on January 3, 1978. As more probation
officers were recruited and trained, more field offices were opened. There are at
present 204 field offices spread all over the country, supervised by 15 regional
offices.
The Organization
The Probation Administration was created by virtue of Presidential Decree No. 968,
The Probation Law of 1976, to administer the probation system. Under Executive
Order No. 292, The Administrative Code of 1987 which was promulgated on
November 23, 1989, the Probation Administration was renamed Parole and
Probation Administration and given the added function of supervising prisoners
who, after serving part of their sentence in jails are released on parole pardon with
parole conditions
Effective August 17, 2005, by virtue of a Memorandum of Agreement with the
Dangerous Drugs Board, the Administration performs another additional function of
investigating and supervising first-time minor drug offenders who are placed on
suspended pursuant to Republic Act No. 9165.
Mission
To rehabilitate probationers, parolees and pardonees and promote their
development as integral persons by utilizing innovative interventions and
techniques which respect the dignity of man and recognize his divine destiny.
Mandate
The Parole and Probation Administration is mandated to conserve and/or redeem
convicted offenders and prisoners who are under the probation or parole system.
Goals
The Administration's programs sets to achieve the following goals:
Promote the reformation of criminal offenders and reduce the incidence of
recedivism, and
Provide a cheaper alternative to the institutional confinement of first-time offenders
who are likely to respond to individualized, community-based treatment programs.
Functions
To carry out these goals, the Agency through its network of regional and field parole
and probation offices performs the following functions:
to administer the parole and probation system
to exercise supervision over parolees, pardonees and probationers
to promote the correction and rehabilitation of criminal offenders.
Major Rehabilitation Programs
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE (RJ) is a philosophy and a process whereby stakeholders in
a specific offense resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offense
and its implications for the future. It is a victim-centered response to crime that
provides opportunity for those directly affected by the crime - the victim, the
offender, their families and the community - to be directly involved in responding to
the harm caused by the crime. Its ultimate objective is to restore the broken
relationships among stakeholders.
The Restorative Justice process provides a healing opportunity for affected parties to
facilitate the recovery of the concerned parties and allow them to move on with
their lives.
The VOLUNTEER PROBATION AIDE (VPA) PROGRAM is a strategy by which the
Parole and Probation Administration may be able to generate maximum citizen
participation or community involvement. Citizens of good standing in the
community may volunteer to assist the probation and parole officers in the
supervision of a number of probationers, parolees and conditional pardonees in their
respective communities. Since they reside in the same community as the client,
they are able to usher the reformation and rehabilitation of the clients hands-on.
In collaboration with the PPO, the VPA helps pave the way for the offender, victim
and community to each heal from the harm resulting from the crime done. They can
initiate a circle of support for clients and victims to prevent further crimes, thereby
be participants in nation-building
The THERAPEUTIC COMMUNITY (TC) is a self-help social learning treatment
model used in the rehabilitation of drug offenders and other clients with behavioral
problems. TC adheres to precepts of right living - Responsible Love and Concern;
Truth and Honesty; the Here and Now; Personal Responsibility for Destiny; Social
Responsibility (brothers keeper); Moral Code; Work Ethics and Pride in Quality.
The Therapeutic Community (TC) is an environment that helps people get help while
helping themselves. It operates in a similar fashion to a functional family with a
hierarchical structure of older and younger members. Each member has a defined
role and responsibilities for sustaining the proper functioning of the TC. There are
sets of rules and community norms that members commit to live by and uphold
upon entry. The primary therapist and teacher is the community itself, consisting
of peers, staff/probation and parole officers and even Volunteer Probation Aides
(VPA), who, as role models of successful personal change, serve as guides in the
recovery process.