View full case

RODOLFO D. LLAMAS v. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OSCAR ORBOS

FACTS:

Rodolfo D. Llamas assumed the governorship of Tarlac due to the suspension of the incumbent governor Mariano Ocampo. Llamas filed complaints against Ocampo for alleged violations of laws. After trial, Ocampo was found guilty and a 90-day suspension was imposed. Ocampo appealed the decision but the appeal was dismissed. Llamas assumed the governorship on March 1, 1991. However, Ocampo issued an "administrative order" stating his intention to continue exercising his functions as governor. Ocampo had a reassumption ceremony on May 21, 1991. Despite the suspension, executive clemency was granted to Ocampo, reducing his suspension to the period already served. Llamas argued that the grant of clemency was invalid and questioned the reduction of the suspension penalty. Llamas also alleged a violation of his right to due process and argued that the grant of clemency was a result of a deceptive strategy.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the exercise of executive clemency by the President constitutes a political question beyond judicial review.

  2. Whether the court has jurisdiction to review the validity and limits of the President's discretionary powers.

  3. Whether the President may grant executive clemency in administrative cases.

  4. Whether the phrase "after conviction by final judgment" in Article VII, Section 19 of the Constitution applies solely to criminal cases.

  5. Whether the President's executive clemency powers can be limited in terms of coverage.

  6. Whether the effects of pardon or executive clemency can be extended to those found guilty administratively.

  7. Whether the President has the power of control over administrative cases in the Executive branch.

  8. Whether the respondent governor's acceptance of the presidential pardon renders the subject decision final, that of the period already served.

  9. Whether the petitioner's constitutional rights to due process were violated.

RULING:

  1. The exercise of executive clemency by the President is not considered a political question beyond judicial review. While the court cannot inquire into the manner or wisdom of the President's exercise of discretionary powers, it can review the validity and limits of these powers and determine if they comply with the Constitution.

  2. The court has jurisdiction to review the validity and limits of the President's discretionary powers as conferred by the 1987 Constitution, which grants the court "expanded jurisdiction" to review the decisions of other branches and agencies of the government to ensure compliance with the Constitution.

  3. The Court holds that the President may grant executive clemency in administrative cases. The exercise of executive clemency is subject to constitutional limitations and the Court's role is to check whether the particular measure in question has been in accordance with the law. The Court will not concern itself with the reasons or motives of the President, as that is beyond the power of judicial review.

  4. The Court rules that the phrase "after conviction by final judgment" in Article VII, Section 19 of the Constitution does not apply solely to criminal cases. The term "conviction" can be used in both criminal and administrative cases. Therefore, the President's power to grant executive clemency is not limited to criminal cases and may extend to administrative cases.

  5. The President's executive clemency powers may not be limited in terms of coverage, except as already provided in the Constitution.

  6. The effects of pardon or executive clemency can be extended to those found guilty administratively.

  7. The President has the power of control over administrative cases in the Executive branch.

  8. The respondent governor's acceptance of the presidential pardon "serves to put an end" to the motion for reconsideration and renders the subject decision final, that of the period already served.

  9. The petitioner's argument that his constitutional rights to due process were violated is unmeritorious. Pardon is a 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. Notice of the subject pardon is unnecessary, and the petitioner's claim that the respondent governor has not begun to serve sentence is belied by his own factual allegations in his petition.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Discretionary powers granted by the Constitution or by statute are not subject to judicial review for manner or wisdom, but the court can review their validity and limits.

  • The court's review of the validity and limits of discretionary powers does not constitute interference with the functions of the executive, but is a necessary duty to determine the limitations placed upon all official actions.

  • The court's jurisdiction to review decisions of other branches and agencies of the government is conferred by the 1987 Constitution to ensure compliance with the Constitution.

  • The Court's role is to determine whether the government has acted within the bounds of the Constitution. It checks if the governmental branch or agency has exceeded its jurisdiction, not if it has erred or has a different view.

  • The exercise of the President's power of executive clemency is subject to constitutional limitations.

  • The Court will not concern itself with the reasons or motives of the President as it is beyond the power of judicial review.

  • The phrase "after conviction by final judgment" in Article VII, Section 19 of the Constitution does not apply solely to criminal cases.

  • The term "conviction" can be used in both criminal and administrative cases.

  • The President's power to grant executive clemency is not limited to criminal cases and may extend to administrative cases.

  • The President's power of executive clemency may not be limited in terms of coverage, except as already specified in the Constitution.

  • The President's executive clemency powers may not be limited in terms of coverage, except as provided in the Constitution.

  • The quantum of evidence required for conviction in criminal cases is proof beyond reasonable doubt, while in administrative cases it is mere substantial evidence.

  • Administrative bodies are not bound by the technical and rigid rules of admissibility prescribed in criminal cases.

  • The President has the power of control over all executive departments, bureaus, and offices and can substitute their decisions with her own.

  • The President has the power to grant executive clemency and to reverse or modify rulings issued by subordinates in the interest of the public.

  • Acceptance of a presidential pardon waives any appeal that may have been filed.

  • Pardon is defined as "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."

  • The President has the power of "control of all the executive departments, bureaus, and offices" under Article VII, Section 17 of the Constitution.

  • A Cabinet member is an alter ego of the President whose acts may be affirmed, modified or reversed by the latter in his discretion.