Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURTManilaFIRST DIVISION G.R. No. 122338 December 29, 1995IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS OF I!FREDO SUMU!ONG TORRES,"!#DIA DE!A ROSA TORRES, $%e o% $&%re'o S(m(&o)* Torre+, ,)' ',(*-.er+ RAMONA E!ISA R. TORRES ,)' MARIA CECI!IA R. TORRES/, petitioners, vs.THE DIRECTOR, 0UREAU OF CORRECTIONS, NE 0I!I0ID PRISONS, MUNTIN!UPA, MM., respondents. HERMOSISIMA, 1R. J.:e ruled consistentl!, viz., in Tesoro v. Director of Prisons, 1 Sales v. Director of Prisons 2 Espuelas v. Provincial Warden of Bohol 3 and Torres v. Gonzales, 2 that, "here a conditional pardonee has alle#edl! breached a condition of a pardon, the President "ho opts to proceed a#ainst hi$ under Section %& 'i( of the Revised )d$inistrative *ode need not "ait for a +udicial pronounce$ent of #uilt of a subse,uent cri$e or for his conviction therefor b! final +ud#$ent, in order to effectuate the reco$$it$ent of the pardonee to prison. The #rant of pardon, the deter$ination of the ter$s and conditions of the pardon, the deter$ination of the occurrence of the breach thereof, and the proper sanctions for such breach, are purel! e-ecutive acts and, thus, are not sub+ect to +udicial scrutin!. e have so ruled in the past, and "e so rule no".In this ori#inal petition for habeas corpus, the "ife and children of convicted felon ilfredo Su$ulon#Torres pra! for his i$$ediate release fro$ prison on the #round that the e-ercise of the President.s prero#ative under Section %& 'i( of the Revised )d$inistrative *ode to deter$ine the occurrence, if an!, of a breach of a condition of a pardon in violation of pardonee.s ri#ht to due process and the constitutional presu$ption of innocence, constitutes a #rave abuse of discretion a$ountin# to lac/ ore-cess of +urisdiction.Of t"o counts of estafa Torres "as convicted b! the *ourt of First Instance of Manila so$e ti$e before 0121. These convictions "ere affir$ed b! the *ourt of )ppeals. The $a-i$u$ sentence "ould e-pire on Nove$ber 3, 3444. On )pril 05, 0121, a conditional pardon "as #ranted to Torres b! the President of the Philippines on condition that petitioner "ould 6not a#ain violate an! of the penal la"s of the Philippines. 56 Petitioner accepted the conditional pardon and "as conse,uentl! released fro$ confine$ent. 3On Ma! 30, 015%, the 7oard of Pardons and Parole resolved to reco$$end to the President the cancellation of the conditional pardon #ranted to Torres because Torres had been char#ed "ith t"ent! counts of estafa before, and convicted of sedition b!, the Re#ional Trial *ourt of 8ue9on *it!.On Septe$ber 5, 015%, the President cancelled the conditional pardon of Torres. On October 04, 015%, then Minister of :ustice Neptali ). ;on9ales issued 6b! authorit! of the President6 an Order of )rrest and Reco$$it$ent 4 a#ainst petitioner. The petitioner "as accordin#l! arrested and confined in Muntinlupa to serve the une-pired portion of his sentence. Torres i$pu#ned the validit! of the Order of )rrest and Reco$$it$ent in the aforecited case of Torres v. Gonzales 8. There "e ruled that