SEC 19: Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution,
the President may grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and remit fines and
forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment.
He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all
the Members of the Congress.
● Executive clemency (all offenses, but not to civil contempt, since that is a private
matter between a court and a party, not an offense against the State) has
traditionally belonged to the head of state. In the Philippines, this is textually
assigned to the President alone (for pardon).
● The power is treated as almost unlimited: courts cannot review the wisdom of a
pardon, and the President's discretion is considered final, except where the
Constitution itself sets limits.
“President may grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons”
Reprieves
● Postponement of a death sentence to a specific date (distinct from
suspension of sentence, which postpones for an indefinite time).
Commutations
● Reduction of the penalty to a lighter one (e.g., death to life imprisonment)
● Can be granted even without the convict's consent.
Pardon
● Lifts penalties and disabilities and restores full civil and political rights.
● Does not erase civil liability owed to the offended party, the President
cannot forgive a private wrong.
● Does not automatically restore public office, property, or third-party rights
lost because of the conviction, unless the pardon expressly says so (this
also covers the right to hold office or to vote).
Limits on the pardoning power
1. Cannot be used in impeachment cases.
2. Only available after final conviction, not before or during trial.
3. Cannot cover civil contempt.
4. For election-law violations, clemency requires a recommendation from the
COMELEC.
“and remit fines and forfeitures”
● Cancels the collection of a fine or the forfeiture of property. This power belongs
solely to the President for fines/forfeitures not yet vested in someone else or paid
into the treasury (Congress can authorize department/bureau heads to remit
purely administrative fines).
“power to grant amnesty”
● Once granted, the person stands "as if" the offense never happened.
Landmark Cases related to this section:
1. In the case of Monsanto vs. Factoran, the accused was convicted of
malversation thru falsification of official documents. She was granted absolute
pardon. She demanded reinstatement and back salaries. The SC held that
pardon may mean forgiveness but not forgetfulness. What was remitted is the
penalty and not the fact of one’s guilt. In the eyes of law, she was still a convict.
2. Llamas v. Orbos clarified that executive clemency covers not just criminal but
also administrative cases, since the Constitution does not distinguish between
the two and a milder administrative penalty should logically also be within the
President's clemency power.
3. People v. Salle, Jr. under the 1987 Constitution's "conviction by final judgment"
wording, a pardon cannot be granted while the case is still on appeal — unlike
under the 1935 Constitution, which allowed clemency even pending appeal.
4. Risos-Vidal v. COMELEC explained that the pardon granted to former President
Joseph Estrada was absolute and unconditional; since it did not expressly
withhold his political rights, it restored his right to vote and run for public office
despite his plunder conviction.
5. People v. Vera early case distinguishing a reprieve (postponement of sentence to
a set date) from a commutation (reduction of the penalty itself).
SEC 20: The President may contract or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the
Republic of the Philippines with the prior concurrence of the Monetary Board, and
subject to such limitations as may be provided by law. The Monetary Board shall, within
thirty days from the end of every quarter of the calendar year, submit to the Congress a
complete report of its decision on applications for loans to be contracted or guaranteed
by the Government or government-owned and controlled corporations which would
have the effect of increasing the foreign debt, and containing other matters as may be
provided by law.
Key annotations
● This is an exclusive executive function — no prior congressional approval is
needed to negotiate or contract the loan itself, since the President is considered
best positioned.
● However, the power is not absolute: the Monetary Board (now under the Bangko
Sentral ng Pilipinas) must concur beforehand, since it is the custodian of the
country's foreign reserves and has the technical expertise to judge whether a
loan is within the country's repayment capacity.
● Why no prior congressional approval is required:
(1) urgently needed loans may disappear while Congress deliberates,
(2) a Congress acting for political reasons could obstruct necessary borrowing.
● Congressional checks that still exist: Congress may pass laws limiting this power,
conduct investigations in aid of legislation, determine the Monetary Board's
composition, and — crucially — must still pass an appropriations law before any
foreign loan can actually be paid out of the treasury.
● This provision covers foreign loans only; for domestic loans, Monetary Board
concurrence is not required unless a separate law says so. It also flags that large
uncontrolled foreign borrowing under a past administration is part of the historical
reason this safeguard exists.
Landmark Cases related to this section:
6. Spouses Constantino v. Cuisia upheld the government's 1992 debt-relief
"buyback" and "bond-conversion" schemes as valid exercises of the President's
power to contract/guarantee foreign loans; the Court read Section 20 broadly,
and confirmed the President may validly delegate the implementation of this
power to designated financial officials even though the authority itself is
constitutionally lodged in the President.
SEC 21: No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless
concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.
No treaty or international agreement is valid and effective unless concurred in by at
least two-thirds of all members of the Senate.
“Treaty"
● A treaty is a compact between two or more states (including international
organizations) meant to create binding rights and obligations — it may be
bilateral or multilateral, and is also called a pact, convention, or charter.
● The phrase "or international agreement" was added to remove any doubt, since
"treaty" in international law technically means only an agreement between states.
Treaties vs. executive agreements
● Executive agreements are a separate, long-recognized category that the
President may enter into without needing Senate concurrence.
● Philippine practice has long allowed amendments to major bilateral
arrangements (the book cites the U.S.–Philippine Military Bases Agreement) to
be carried out through executive agreements, and Philippine courts have upheld
the President's authority to do this.
The two steps in treaty-making
1. Negotiation — belongs solely to the President. The annotation explains this is
because secrecy, dispatch, and privileged access to sensitive information are
essential to successful negotiations; premature disclosure could embarrass the
government or derail the deal.
2. Approval/ratification — as a rule, no treaty or international agreement takes
effect unless at least two-thirds of all Senate members concur, since treaties
become part of the law of the land and affect the country's international relations,
which the book likens to a binding contract between parties.
Landmark Cases related to this section:
7. Bayan v. Zamora (G.R. No. 138570, Oct. 10, 2000) — On the Visiting Forces
Agreement (VFA); held that Senate concurrence by at least two-thirds of all
Senators (not just those present) satisfies both Sec. 21, Art. VII and the more
specific Sec. 25, Art. XVIII on foreign troops/bases.
8. Saguisag v. Ochoa (G.R. No. 212426, Jan. 12, 2016) — On the Enhanced
Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA); ruled that EDCA was a valid executive
agreement (not a treaty) because it merely implemented the existing Mutual
Defense Treaty and VFA, both already Senate-concurred, and therefore did not
itself need separate Senate concurrence — a key case for distinguishing treaties
from executive agreements.
SEC 22: The President shall submit to the Congress, within thirty days from the opening
of every regular session as the basis of the general appropriations bill, a budget of
expenditures and sources of financing, including receipts from existing and proposed
revenue measures.
● The President prepares this budget covering both existing and proposed revenue
measures (e.g., new loans) and submits it to Congress within 30 days of the
opening of each regular session (cross-referenced to Art. VI, Sec. 15 on the
opening of sessions).
● This submitted budget becomes the basis for the general appropriations act
(GAA) that Congress will pass for the following year.
Landmark Cases related to this section:
9. Araullo v. Aquino III (G.R. No. 209287, July 1, 2014) — The Disbursement
Acceleration Program (DAP) case. While centered on Article VI's
appropriation/augmentation rules, it reinforces the Sec. 22 principle that the
President's submitted budget and Congress's enacted appropriations — not ad
hoc executive reallocation — are what should drive public spending; several DAP
mechanisms for pooling and using "savings" were struck down as
unconstitutional.
10.Belgica v. Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 208566, Nov. 19, 2013) — The PDAF
("pork barrel") case. Though primarily a Sec. 25/29, Art. VI case, it is frequently
read together with Sec. 22 in reviewers because it reinforces that post-enactment
identification of projects by individual legislators violates the separation of powers
over the budget process.
SEC 23: The President shall address the Congress at the opening of its regular
session. He may also appear before it at any other time.
● This gives the President a standing opportunity, at the start of each regular
session (linked to Art. VI, Sec. 15 on when sessions open), to report on the
current state of the nation and recommend legislative measures for the coming
fiscal year (SONA).
● Any measures raised in the address are mere proposals — they carry no binding
effect unless and until Congress actually enacts them into law.
● Beyond the mandatory opening address, the President may choose to appear
before Congress at any other time during the session.
● Historical/practice note: this yearly opening address is popularly known as the
State of the Nation Address (SONA). It was first delivered on June 16, 1936 by
President Manuel L. Quezon, following the Commonwealth government's
inauguration — a practice carried over from the U.S. Constitution. None of the
1935, 1973, or 1987 Constitutions actually prescribe what the address must
contain, but by tradition the President delivers it before a joint session of the
Senate and House, in the presence of the judiciary, government officials, the
diplomatic corps, and other invited guests.