Name: Dela Cruz, Mary Julieanne D.R.

Section: JD-1D
Constitutional Law 01 | Quiz –Bar Exam Question
Case: Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice
Question:
Calvin Manalo was convicted of rape against the 9 year old daughter of his common law wife,
and was sentenced to death via electrocution. At the time of his conviction, the death penalty was
in force and punished heinous crimes under the Revised Penal Code. Prior to his execution, the
method for administering the death penalty was changed from electrocution to lethal injection
via a legislative enactment signed into law by the Chief Executive. Manalo filed a TRO with the
Supreme Court, assailing that his execution was cruel and unconstitutional, violating his right to
life under due process of law. The TRO was granted and his execution was temporarily
suspended. The Office of the Solicitor General filed a petition against the TRO, arguing that the
Supreme Court no longer had jurisdiction over Manalo as his conviction was final and executory
and the execution should not be suspended. What is your ruling on the case?
Answer:
The petition of the Office of the Solicitor General is denied. The suspension of a death sentence
is indisputably an exercise of judicial power. It is not a usurpation of the presidential power of
reprieve though its effects is the same — the temporary suspension of the execution of the death
convict. However, this does not change the fact that Manalo is still due for execution as
prescribed by law. The TRO was issued by the Court to give it reasonable time to check its
fairness in light of supervening events in Congress as alleged by petitioner. Seeing as neither
Congress nor the President wish to amend or review the laws in question, the TRO is thereby
lifted and the execution must proceed without delay, having already served its purpose.