Title : LEO ECHEGARAY vs SECRETARY OF JUSTICE

Citation : G.R. No. 132601

January 19, 1999
Ponente : PUNO, J.

Facts :

The Supreme Court issued a TRO On January 4, 1999, staying the execution of petitioner Leo
Echegaray scheduled on that same day.
The public respondent Justice Secretary assailed the issuance of the TRO arguing that the action
of the SC not only violated the rule on finality of judgment but also encroached on the power of the
executive to grant reprieve.

Issue:
Whether or not the court abused its discretion in granting a Temporary Restraining
Order on the execution of Echegaray despite the fact that the finality of judgment has already been
rendered .

Held:
No. The respondents cited sec 19, art VII. The provision is simply the source of power of the
President to grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons and remit fines and forfeitures after
conviction by final judgment. The provision, however, cannot be interpreted as denying the power of
courts to control the enforcement of their decisions after their finality.
The powers of the Executive, the Legislative and the Judiciary to save the life of a death convict
do not exclude each other for the simple reason that there is no higher right than the right to life.
For the public respondents therefore to contend that only the Executive can protect the right to
life of an accused after his final conviction is to violate the principle of co-equal and coordinate powers
of the three branches of our government.