This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2015-01-21 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Thus, as matters stand, the third Whereas clause stands in the same footing and should be characterized in the same manner that the two other clauses are characterized: singly or collectively, they are simply declarations of what the grantor recognized as facts at the time the pardon was granted. In the manner the Court spoke of preambles in the case of Kuwait Airways Corporation v. Philippine Airlines, Inc.,[68] the Whereas clauses merely manifest considerations that cannot be the origin of rights and obligations[69] and cannot make the Erap pardon conditional. | |||||