Practice question
A valid absolute pardon expressly restores full civil and political rights. The beneficiary claims both restored eligibility to seek office and automatic entitlement to occupy a former office. Which is the sound distinction?
- Restored rights and appointment are necessarily identical
- No civil or political right can ever be restored
- The express restoration may remove the relevant disqualification, but officeholding still requires the applicable election or appointment and other qualifications
- The pardon automatically elects the beneficiary
- The victim personally appoints the beneficiary
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html — Constitution Article VII section 19: pardon after conviction by final judgment and constitutional exceptions.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act1930/act_3815_1930.html — RPC Articles36,89(4) and113: pardon, express restoration, criminal extinction and surviving civil liability.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/feb1989/gr_78239_1989.html — Monsanto v. Factoran, G.R. 78239, February 9, 1989, main decision: no automatic reinstatement/backpay or civil discharge; historical before 1987 grant is not used to alter the current final-conviction requirement.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/jan2015/gr_206666_2015.html — Risos-Vidal v. COMELEC, G.R. 206666, January 21, 2015, main decision: scope of an absolute pardon expressly restoring civil and political rights.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.