Effects of Presidential Pardon

VICENTE GARCIA, petitioner,

vs.

THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON AUDIT, THE HONORABLE MINISTER, LAND TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS, THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, TELECOM REGIONAL OFFICE NO. IV, respondents.

G.R. No. 75025 September 14, 1993

Facts: 

Herein petitioner Vicente Garcia was employed as a Supervising lineman at the Bureau of Telecommunications. He was accused of stealing some materials in their company. Thus, public respondents filed a criminal case against him for qualified theft before a court and on the same ground respondents also filed an administrative case in which petitioner was found guilty and was later dismissed from the service. With respect to the criminal offense, petitioner was acquitted by the court due to insufficiency of evidence. Petitioner was then reinstated from his work and is now claiming before the COA for his back salaries from the time of his dismissal up to present. But COA on the other hand reluctantly denied his pleadings. Meanwhile, petitioner was extended an executive clemency (absolute pardon) by the President. Still, respondent COA strongly refused to give due course to petitioners claim.

Issue: 

Whether or not respondent is entitled to the payment of back wages after having been reinstated pursuant to the grant of executive clemency.

Holding: 

The Court ruled initially by explaining the mandate of Sec 19 Article VII of the Constitution and further articulates that the bestowal of executive clemency on petitioner in effect completely obliterated the adverse effects of the administrative decision which found him guilty of dishonesty and ordered his separation from the service. This can be inferred from the executive clemency itself exculpating petitioner from the administrative charge and thereby directing his reinstatement, which is rendered automatic by the grant of the pardon. This signifies that petitioner need no longer apply to be reinstated to his former employment; he is restored to his office ipso facto upon the issuance of the clemency.

Legal Ethics: Good Moral Character

CARMEN E. BACARRO, Complainant,
vs.
RUBEN M. PINATACAN, Respondent.

Adm. Case No. 559-SBC January 31, 1984

SUPREME COURT

Manila

Legal Ethics: Good Moral Character

Facts: 
This is an administrative case filed against respondent with moral turpitude and immorality. Complainant gave birth to a baby girl named Maria Rochie Bacarro Pinatacan; that because of respondent's betrayal, her family suffered shame, disrepute, moral distress and anxiety; and, that these acts of respondent render him unfit to become a member of the Bar. On the other hand, respondent maintains that even admitting the truth of complainant's allegations, the circumstances of their relationship with each other, does not justify him for disqualification to the practice of law.

Issue: 
WON respondent is entitled to take the lawyers oath despite having a case involving his good moral character

Holding:
Yes, the court allowed Ruben to take the lawyers oath. considering that respondent has legally recognized and acknowledged complainant's child Maria Rochie Bacarro Pinatacan as his own, and has undertaken to give financial support to the said child, We hold that he has realized the wrongfulness of his past conduct and is now prepared to turn over a new leaf. But he must be admonished that his admission to and continued membership in the Bar are dependent, among others, on his compliance with his moral and legal obligations as the father of Maria Rochie Bacarro Pinatacan. 

Ratio:
One of the indispensable requisites for admission to the Philippine Bar is that the applicant must be of good moral character. This requirement aims to maintain and uphold the high moral standards and the dignity of the legal profession, and one of the ways of achieving this end is to admit to the practice of this noble profession only those persons who are known to be honest and to possess good moral character. "As a man of law, (a lawyer) is necessary a leader of the community, looked up to as a model citizen" He sets an example to his fellow citizens not only for his respect for the law, but also for his clean living. Thus, becoming a lawyer is more than just going through a law course and passing the Bar examinations.