Pardon and its legal consequences
33. Monsanto vs. Factoran, 170 SCRA 190 (1989)
Student: G-one T. Paisones
Professor: Atty. Cisco Franz S. Maclang
Facts:
On
March 25, 1983, the Sandiganbayan convicted petitioner Salvacion A. Monsanto
(then assistant treasurer of Calbayog City) and three other accused, of the
complex crime of estafa thru falsification of public documents and sentenced
them to imprisonment and to pay a fine of P3,500.
On December 21, 1984 she was granted an absolute
pardon by Pres. Marcos. By reason of said pardon, petitioner wrote the Calbayog
City treasurer requesting that she be restored to her former post as assistant
city treasurer since the same was still vacant.
Deputy Executive Secretary Fulgencio S. Factoran
contended that the petitioner must pay the civil indemnification; quoting
Revised Penal Code expressly provides that ‘a pardon shall in no case exempt
the culprit from payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the
sentence.’ (Sec. 36, par. 2).
Issue:
WON the
appellant the civil liability is not extinguished despite being
pardoned by the President.
Held:
Yes
Ratio:
A
pardon looks to the future. It is not retrospective.[19] It makes no amends for
the past. 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. Henceforth, petitioner may apply for reappointment
to the Office which was forfeited by reason of her conviction.
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento