Scribd
Upload
34 views1 page

Court's Duty on Unpunishable Acts

The document discusses the duty of the court in two situations: 1. When the court is aware of an act that should be punished but is not currently covered by law, the court must render an appropriate decision and report the reasons the act should be made subject to legislation to the Chief Executive through the Department of Justice. 2. When a literal application of the law would result in an excessive penalty given the degree of harm caused, the court must submit a statement to the Chief Executive through the Department of Justice without suspending the execution of the sentence. The court does not have the authority to prevent the grant of pardon to a convict, as that power lies solely with the President subject to constitutional limitations.

Uploaded by

Anarchy
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
34 views1 page

Court's Duty on Unpunishable Acts

The document discusses the duty of the court in two situations: 1. When the court is aware of an act that should be punished but is not currently covered by law, the court must render an appropriate decision and report the reasons the act should be made subject to legislation to the Chief Executive through the Department of Justice. 2. When a literal application of the law would result in an excessive penalty given the degree of harm caused, the court must submit a statement to the Chief Executive through the Department of Justice without suspending the execution of the sentence. The court does not have the authority to prevent the grant of pardon to a convict, as that power lies solely with the President subject to constitutional limitations.

Uploaded by

Anarchy
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Article 5.

Duty of the court

Article 5. “Duty of the court in connection with acts which should be repressed but which are not covered by the law, and in cases of excessive
penalties. - Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which it may deem proper to repress and which is not punishable by law, it shall render the
proper decision and shall report to the Chief Executive, through the Department of Justice, the reasons which induce the court to believe that said
act should be made the subject of penal legislation.

In the same way the court shall submit to the Chief Executive, through the Department of Justice, such statement as may be deemed proper,
without suspending the execution of the sentence, when a strict enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result in the imposition of a
clearly excessive penalty, taking into consideration the degree of malice and the injury caused by the offense.”

What is the “proper decision” that the court should render if it tried a case for an act which is not yet punishable by law?
The court should render a decision of acquittal or order the dismissal of the case because Article 21 prohibits the imposition of a penalty not prescribed by law
prior to the commission of a felony; Article 22 prohibits retroactively of penal laws; and the Constitution proscribes an ex post facto application of a law.

The present law prohibits and punishes only drunk driving. There is no law banning a drunken person from riding a public vehicle, or the latter’s driver from
allowing one who appears to be drunk to board a public conveyance. A drunken passenger or one under influence of liquor or drug poses a veritable peril to the
other passengers. He is prone to react irrationally and violently due to lack or diminution of self-control. Senseless loss of lives and physical harm can be
avoided, and the riding public duly protected, if the potential danger posed by drunken passengers can be addressed properly.

It is the duty of the court, whenever it has knowledge of any act which it may deem proper to repress and which is not punishable by law, to report to the Chief
Executive, through the DOJ, the reasons which lead the court to believe that said act should be made the subject of legislation.

What is the duty of the court when the penalty prescribed for a felony is excessive?
The court should call the attention of the President on the matter.

May the court prevent the grant of pardon to a convict when it feels that the crime committed is so reprehensible?
No. The trial court, so revolted by the perversity of OO’s incestuous rape that it was moved to include this proposal in the dispositive portion of its decision:
“upon automatic review by the Honorable Supreme Court, that the penalty of Death is not imposed but that of Reclusion Perpetua, this Court recommends
that accused should not be granted pardon within the period of thirty years.” The recommendation is improper. It is the President’s prerogative whether or not
to grant a pardon subject to the limitations imposed by the Constituti

You might also like