Consistent with the supreme Courts Aesoivtion in GR. NG. 24194 ptilied “Ges. Antonio “Renny” F, my Extender ©, Trias resches gccasioned fy Proclamation Mig, STE, Series proclamation is the basis forthe prosecution's "Mery Linpeat Omnibus Monon for fhe Miseed of Hoe Departs Onder (HOO) and Alas Warrant of Arrest”, i z Ba In his pleadings, ‘Trilanes assaiis the legality and vof Proclamtion Mo. 572 on the following grounds: (1) Proclenation No. S72 constitutes usurpation of judicial power rei, gmony others, presidential Proclamations, wasted qachuiney and solely in the Supreme Court and other courts created by lav, when it declares ag full and oid the subsisting and/or fully implemented Amnesty Proclamation No. 75, Series of 2010, (2) Proclenation No, S72 tredyresses he constitutional design of shamed power Between the President and Congress to grav: amnesty when ft declared vold No. 7 wethcut tne requisite concurrence of+ (3) Proclamation No, ‘572 stolates the due process clause and Chi dacchabhne authority of the courts bo bgud warrats of arrest when it directed the arrest of Trilanes. (4) Proclamation No, S72 also violates the constitutional Proscriptions on ex post facto laws and bilis of attainder Ingofer as R abrogated an amnesty grant and re- ciminalizes what hes been decriminalized, and insofar as ES, Puan ier ee: eho ew Denial ot a tral. (3) Proclamation No, 572 vislabid thé égudl Brokection clawed insofar as It singles out and targets Trilanes, even ag there are chhars wht are and muy De clmilarty sibapsed The Court it not convinced. Wwittingly or uneittingly, Proclamation Mc. S72 is dearly miscocatrued or misread as declaring null and wold Proclamation No. 75, ‘There is, however, nothing In Proclamation Mo. S72 that vokds @irectly or indinectly Proclamation Na. 75. Prodamation No, 572 Gectares void the greek of amnesty fo Trillanes inasmuch as he allegedly failed to file en application for amnesty and refused or failed bo adres guilt for hig participation in the Oakwood Mutiny, among others, nro requirements or conditions for the grant of amnesty under Prockwmetion We. 75, [fis captioned ae a revocation of OND Ad Hot Committee Resolution No, 2 (#2) cated January 31, 2011 insofar as It granted senneity te former LTSG Antone F, Tritanes FV. Gehereite aut, it ii the imptiirebetation and the application of Proclamation Mo, 7S as i Tiillanes, and noe Proclamation No. 75 Itself, which is the subject of Procksenation No, S72. Gives that Proclamation No. S72 does not decare os vold Proclamation Wo. 75, the atsertion that Proclamation Mo. S72 wiolabes courts, th at leit misplaced, if not inrelevant. Procamation Mo. S72 dota nat pretend to revieer the validity of Proclamation Na, 7; only its implementation a9 bo Trilanes, For the same token, i cannot be sald that Proclamation Mo. 572 tnecaigresses the shared power between the President and Congress to grant ameesty, when It nuilifled Proclamation No. 75 without Congressional concurrence. Trilanes argues that since the President can grant ameesty only with the concurrence of Congress, then it follows that he can withdraw @ grant of aennesty only with the concurrence of Congress. While the argument may be walid if the revocation/rallification contemplated under Proclamation Mo. 572 is directed at Proclamation No. 75, It is again mésplaced and irrelevant herein, considering that as sorter stated, Proclamation Wo, 572 does not wold Prociametion No. 75, but only the grant of amnesty to Trillanes due to his alleged failure to comply with the buskc requirements to qualify for such amnesty.The issuance of Proclamations it pact of the Ordinance Power ensure that the laws be faithfully executed, In the consolidated cases of Birigogo rs. The Phi, Truth Commission et.al, GG. Nos, 192835 & 195036, December 7, 2010 the Supreme Court held: erroneous one of those qualified for ainnsty despite his non-compiance with tha asic requirements fer the grant thors, The Department of National Defense (OND) is part of the executive branch of government, which ip under the administrative supervision and control of the President, Proclamation No, 572 is 5 legitimate axerciae of the pier of “contrat, Tt is pureiy an executive act, which does not meed the concurence of Congress, andor otherwise ingot? as the proclamation Gperabts as a warreet of derest which only courts can heave, Section 2 of Proclamation No. S72 reads: “Section 2, EMtects, and sdministrativg In relation Lo Live Cieicwoend Mutiny andi the Main 2, The Armed Forces of the Philpaines and the Philipgine Mational Poca are endired io employ al lif means 2 apprehend former LTEG Amani Trilares 30 that he can be cecomeriited to the detention facility where he had been incarcerated for him a stand trial for the efirrens he ii cheeged with ~ ‘The Girective under Proclamation No. 572 is clear: to puruoe eriningl and Bdministrative cases filed against Tritanes i polakion the Qakeood Mutiny and the Maclay Peningula incident, mot to ignore Choke Caeee; bo employ all lewiul means fo apprehend him, mom te 8 ge