Practice question
A person invokes a valid amnesty covering certain acts and persons but supplies no basis showing inclusion within its scope. Explain why the grant’s public existence does not settle entitlement and address civil liability.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html — Constitution Article VII section 19: presidential amnesty and concurrence of a majority of all Members of Congress.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act1930/act_3815_1930.html — RPC Articles89(3) and113: amnesty’s penal effect and survival of civil liability.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/apr2024/gr_241494_2024.html — Trillanes v. Medialdea, G.R. 241494,256660 and256078, April 3, 2024, main decision: legal effect, coverage, legislative concurrence and due process in revocation.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1949/jan1949/gr_l-1278_1949.html — Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, G.R. L-1278, January 21, 1949, main decision: amnesty distinguished from pardon.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.