Reaction Paper: AMNESTY

Amnesty is the forgiveness granted to persons which overlooks and obliterates the
offense they are charged. It is the President, with the concurrence of a majority of the
Congress, who is bestowed with the power to grant amnesty to any deserving citizen. This is
clearly stated in the 1987 Constitution.
In 2010, then President Benigno S. Aquino III granted Trillanes and several other
members of the armed forces amnesty for their involvement in the 2003 Oakwood Mutiny,
the 2006 Fort Bonifacio Marine Standoff and the 2007 Manila Peninsula siege. The three coups
aimed but failed to oust Aquino’s predecessor, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Trillanes, a junior
military official faced coup d’etat charges and was subsequently jailed.
Through Proclamation no. 75, Aquino declared, with the concurrence of Congress, that
the crimes Trillanes and his co-accused committed related to the failed coups were effectively
extinguished.
However, through the Proclamation no. 572, which was signed in August 31, 2018 by
the present administration of Duterte and published in September 4, 2018, declared the
amnesty granted to Trillanes to be void ab initio or invalid from the beginning. The
proclamation claimed that Trillanes did not file an official amnesty application form and never
expressed his guilt for the Oakwood and Manila Peninsula Corps.
The said proclamation also ordered the armed forces and the police to employ all
lawful means to apprehend Trillanes so the Senator can be recommitted to the detention
facility where he had been incarcerated. As of writing, the proclamation only covers him, but
others who are similarly situated with respect to their amnesty applications are also being
reviewed.
Despite all these, what concerns everybody about the controversial proclamation of
President Duterte is the lack of concurrence of the Congress for it to be legal. It can be
remembered that the Proclamation no. 75 which granted amnesty to the Senator in 2010 was
concurred in by Congress.
It is clearly provided in the Constitution that an amnesty proclamation required the
concurrence of both Houses of Congress and therefore the said revocation requires the same
concurrence which makes it not immediately executory. Hence, the absence of such
concurrence of Congress makes any arrest illegal.
Taking all these together, these seems to be a problem in the governmental structure
in the country, particularly on the three co-equal branches who are supposed to respect the
principle of separation powers and the equal treatment demanded from one another. This
could be seen from the fact that the records of the executive branch were used as a means to
overturn final dismissal of criminal charges by our courts.
This is a clear case of political question against one of the administrations toughest
critics. Duterte’s revocation of Trillanes amnesty shows the depth of his desperation in dealing
with the senator.