P. 1
Answers to Phil Bar Exams 1987-2006 Political Law

Answers to Phil Bar Exams 1987-2006 Political Law

|Views: 164|Likes:
Published by Hanna Mapandi

More info:

Published by: Hanna Mapandi on Mar 14, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

12/10/2012

pdf

text

original

No IV - C. A City Assistant Treasurer was
convicted of Estafa through falsification of
public document. While serving sentence, he
was granted absolute pardon by the President.

1. Assuming that the position of Assistant City
Treasurer has remained vacant, would he
be entitled to a reinstatement without the
need of a new appointment? Explain. (2%)

2. If later the same position becomes vacant,
could he reapply and be reappointed?
Explain. (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

C. 1.) As held in Monsanto v. Factoran,
170 SCRA 190, pardon merely frees the
individual from all the penalties and legal
disabilities imposed upon him because of his
conviction. It does not restore him to the public
office relinquished by reason of the conviction.

FIRST ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

2.) The Assistant City Treasurer can
reapply and be appointed to the position, since
the pardon removed the disqualification to hold
public office.

SECOND ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:

2.) The Assistant City Treasurer cannot
reapply and be appointed to the position, Under
Article 36 of the Revised Penal Code, a pardon
does not restore the right to hold public office
unless such right be expressly restored by the
pardon;

Discipline; Preventive Suspension &
Appeal; entitlement to salary pendente
(2001)

No XV - Alfonso Beit, a supply officer in the
Department of Science and Technology
(DOST), was charged administratively. Pending
investigation, he was preventively suspended
for 90 days. The DOST Secretary found him
guilty and meted him the penalty of removal
from office. He appealed to the Civil Service
Commission (CSC). In the meantime, the
decision was executed pending appeal. The
CSC rendered a decision which modified the
appealed decision by imposing only a penalty of
reprimand, and which decision became final.

a) Can Alfonso Belt claim salary for the period
that his case was pending investigation? Why?
(3%)

b) Can he claim salary for the period that his
case was pending appeal? Why? (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER;

a) Alfonso Beit cannot claim any
salary for the period of his preventive
suspension during the pendency of the
investigation. As held in Gloria vs. Court of
Appeals, 306 SCRA 287 (1997), under Section
52 of the Civil Service Law, the provision for
payment of salaries during the period of
preventive suspension during the pendency of
the investigation has been deleted. The
preventive suspension was not a penalty. Its
imposition was lawful, since it was authorized
by law.

b) If the penalty was modified
because Alfonso Beit was exonerated of the
charge that was the basis for the decision
ordering his dismissal, he is entitled to back
wages, otherwise, this would be tantamount to
punishing him after exoneration from the charge
which caused his dismissal. [Gloria vs. Court of
Appeals, 3O6 SCRA 287 (1997)]. If he was
reprimanded for the same charge which was
the basis of the decision ordering his dismissal,
Alfonso Belt is not entitled to back wages,
because he was found guilty, and the penalty
was merely commuted. (Dela Cruz vs. Court of
Appeals, 305 SCRA 303 (1998)].

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->