G.R. No.

211269

RUBEN E. TIU, Petitioner,
vs.
HON. NATIVIDAD G. DIZON, Acting Chairperson of the Board of Pardons and
Parole, HON. FRANKLIN JESUS BUCAYU, Director of the Bureau of Corrections,
HON. SECRETARY LEILA M. DE LIMA of the Department of Justice, HON.

PAQUITO N. OCHOA JR., the Executive Secretary, Respondents.  

Tiu was detained at the Sablayan Prison and Penal Farm in Sablayan,
Occidental Mindoro, having been found guilty of drug trafficking (shabu) in 2000.
His conviction became final in 2004. On March 24, 2009, the Board of Pardons and
Parole issued a resolution recommending the grant of executive clemency to petitioner.
On June 3, 2010, acting on said recommendation, then President Gloria Macapagal-
Arroyo (PGMA) granted him conditional pardon without parole conditions but was,
nonetheless, still subject to the conditions indicated in the individual pardon papers. No
such papers were issued in petitioner’s favor. Petitioner requested for issuance of
pardon certificate in his favor but denied.

It turned out that PGMA did not sign his Pardon certificate, and that the related
documents were returned to BPP, andthe latter decided to defer actions pertaining to
the pardon pending compliance with all the basic requirements for executive clemency.
During the regime of President Aquino, RA No. 10592 was passed which would
substantially increase the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) of qualified inmates.
Petitioner’s contention Pursuant to RA No. 10592, he is entitled to 19 years and 7
months of GCTA, which when tacked with his actual time served of 14 years and
9 months would add up to 34 years and 4 months. Such more than his allegedly
reduced sentence of 30 years. RA No. 10592 shall be applied retroactively to being
favorable to him. Section 5 thereof provides that time allowances for good conduct once
granted shall not be revoked. His claim that his sentence was automatically reduced to
30 years upon being granted a colonist status pursuant to Section 7(b), Chapter 3, Part
II, Book I of the Bureau of Corrections Operating Manual (BuCor-OM). And that such
status does not require executive approval pursuant to Sections 5 and 7 of the
same Manual. Should a writ of habeas corpus be granted to the petitioner?
No. The object of the writ of habeas corpus is to inquire into the legality of
the detention, and, if the detention is found to be illegal, to require the release of the
detainee. In the present case, there is no showing that his detention has become
unlawful.
  The grant of executive clemency to him is incomplete and ineffective given that
no individual pardon papers were issued in petitioner's favor. Pardon is an act of grace,
proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the laws, which exempts the
individual, on whom it is bestowed, from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime he
has committed. It is the private, though official act of the executive magistrate, delivered
to the individual for whose benefit.