Practice question
A successor President attempts unilaterally to revoke an earlier valid amnesty grant merely because the successor disagrees with it. No legislative concurrence or required process is supplied. Which reflects Trillanes?
- The President’s change of preference alone is enough
- Amnesty is never revocable even for legitimate unmet conditions
- Revocation requires legitimate legal grounds, constitutional process and legislative concurrence; unilateral preference does not suffice
- A press release substitutes for every safeguard
- Only the grantee’s political opponent decides
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.