Scribd
Upload
185 views2 pages

Cristobal Vs Labrador 71 Phil 34

This case involves Teofilo Santos, who was convicted of estafa in 1930 but continued to be a registered voter. The 1938 Election Code disqualified those convicted of crimes against property from voting. Santos applied for and received a presidential pardon restoring his civil and political rights, except for certain public offices. Petitioner Miguel Cristobal argued Santos should be removed from the voter rolls due to the Election Code disqualification. The court held that the presidential pardon power is limited only by the constitution, and a pardon removes all legal consequences of a conviction, including disqualifications from voting. Therefore, the pardon restored Santos' right to vote.

Uploaded by

Louise Bolivar Dadivas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
185 views2 pages

Cristobal Vs Labrador 71 Phil 34

This case involves Teofilo Santos, who was convicted of estafa in 1930 but continued to be a registered voter. The 1938 Election Code disqualified those convicted of crimes against property from voting. Santos applied for and received a presidential pardon restoring his civil and political rights, except for certain public offices. Petitioner Miguel Cristobal argued Santos should be removed from the voter rolls due to the Election Code disqualification. The court held that the presidential pardon power is limited only by the constitution, and a pardon removes all legal consequences of a conviction, including disqualifications from voting. Therefore, the pardon restored Santos' right to vote.

Uploaded by

Louise Bolivar Dadivas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Cristobal v.

Labrador

Summary Cases:

Cristobal vs. Labrador 71 Phil 34

Subject: Presidential pardon, Restoration of civil and political rights

Facts:

This is a petition on certiorari to review the decision of the CFI of Rizal sustaining the right of Teofilo
Santos to remain in the list of registered voters in Malabon, Rizal. In 1930, the court found Santos guilty
of the crime of estafa with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. Accordingly, he was confined
in the provincial jail of Pasig, Rizal. Notwithstanding his conviction, Santos continued to be a registered
elector, and seated as the municipal president of said municipality.

In 1938, the Election Code was approved which disqualified Santos from voting for having been
declared by final judgment guilty of any crime against property. In view of this provision, Santos applied
to the President for an absolute pardon. The pardonwas granted restoring Santos to his full civil and
political rights, except that with respect to the right to hold public office or employment, he will be eligible
for appointment only to positions which are clerical or manual in nature and involving no money or
property responsibility. In 1940, petitioner Miguel Cristobal filed a petition for the exclusion of Santos
from the list of voters on the ground that the latter is disqualified under the Election Code. The lower
court however ruled that the pardon granted to Santos had the effect of removing the disqualification. In
the present petition, Critobal raises the argument that the pardoning power of the Chief Executive does
not apply to legislative prohibitions.

Held:

The Constitutional limitations on the pardoning power

1. Article VII of our Constitution provides two limitations upon the exercise of this constitutional
prerogative by the Chief Executive, namely: (a) that the power be exercised after conviction; and (b) that
such power does not extend cases of impeachment.

2. Subject to the limitations imposed by the Constitution, the pardoning power cannot be restricted or
controlled by legislative action. The pardon extended in favor of Santos had the effect of excluding the
him from the disqualification created by the New Election Code.
| Page 1 of 2
Effects of pardon

3. Imprisonment is not the only punishment which the law imposes. There are accessory and resultant
disabilities, and the pardoning power likewise extends to such disabilities.

4. When granted after the term of imprisonment has expired, absolute pardon removes all that is left of
the consequences of conviction. It is absolute insofar as it restores the respondent to full civil and
political rights.

5. The suggestion that the disqualification in the New Election Code does not fall within the purview of
the pardoning power of the Chief Executive, would lead to the impairment of the pardoning power of the
President, not contemplated in the Constitution.

| Page 2 of 2

You might also like