A Beg your Pardon!

The President sometimes does the same that Pontius Pilate once did. He pardons a convict, following the lines of the Roman governor in Judea, known from the Bible, who condemned Jesus Christ and at the same time pardoned a robber.

Today, on his last full day with Presidential power, Donald Trump is expected to sign a significant amount of pardons, mostly for people who are either related to him or have worked for -or under him. Will he even dare to pardon himself and his children?

Up until the early 20th century, emperors and kings claimed the right of pardon for themselves. They were able to prove their lofty position, their resemblance to God. Grace is considered something that a person does not deserve, but that can be awarded to him by a higher power. Dictators, too, demonstrated their abundance of power by showing grace. Hitler, for example, granted requests for clemency. One of the better-known ones -the request for clemency for the parents of the Scholl siblings.

The first amnesty is attributed to Thrasybulus in ancient Greece (403 BC) but fifteen centuries earlier the Babylonian kings would declare a misharum, involving a general discharge from legal bonds of both a civil and a penal character. The Romans had a number of forms of clemency, and these influenced subsequent developments in European law. Thumbs up, thumbs down!

In medieval Europe, the power to grant pardon was held by various bodies, including the Roman Catholic Church and certain local rulers, but by the sixteenth century, it usually was concentrated in the hands of the monarch.

During the eighteenth century, the power to grant pardons in individual cases came under attack, notably by Cesare Beccaria in his famous essay On Crimes and Punishments. The uncontrolled use of pardons was seen as a source not only of uncertainty but also of corruption and abuse. Perhaps the pardon in the hand of only one person is too much power?

In today’s pardons, in contrast to Pontius Pilate and the Roman Empire, the people have no influence on the decision. Nevertheless, the decision is similar to the biblical act of grace. The President also decides independently of a law, and does not have to justify his decision.

Roman empire, the Greek Empire, and way before then, pardons are as old as mankind and pardons have been abused before. Richard Nixon shouldn’t have been pardoned by Gerald Ford, and Bill Clinton shouldn’t have pardoned his brother-in-law. Dirty business, so openly shown.

The Roman empire, the Greek Empire, and way before then, pardons are as old as mankind and pardons have been abused before. Richard Nixon shouldn’t have been pardoned by Gerald Ford, and Bill Clinton shouldn’t have pardoned his brother-in-law. Dirty business, so openly shown.

If I would have the power to pardon just for one day? Who would I pardon?

First of all, I would look at it like a magic wand or the nuclear button. I hope it would make me feel small and little. I hope, I would feel humble. I can imagine I would be scared to abuse this kind of mercy because that’s what I think a pardon actually is -or should be. Mercy given to the ones who are on death row with no way out. Mercy given to a person in prison who was rightfully convicted, but got an unbelievable harsh punishment. A pardon is for the guilty, an act of grace shown by the highest in power. A king, a President, a chancellor, all of them should use it carefully.

Pontius Pilate, as it is said in the Gospel of Matthew, was in the habit of pardoning a prisoner on feast days. In the Jesus trial for the Jewish Passover festival, however, he left the people to choose who should come free. The bystanders could choose between Barabbas, whose first name was also Jesus, and Jesus, who is said to be the Christ. The people chose Barabbas, the guilty robber, the other Jesus’s guilt was too small to be considered a crime, too small to be considered for a pardon.

In the English and British tradition, the royal prerogative of mercy is one of the historic royal prerogatives of the British monarch, by which he or she can grant a royal pardon to convicted persons.

The origins of the pardon power in the United States Constitution can be found in English history, known previously as the “prerogative of mercy.” It first appeared during the reign of King Ine of Wessex in the seventh century. Although abuses of the pardon power increased over time, leading to limitations on it, the pardon power persisted through the American colonial period. Alexander Hamilton introduced the concept of a pardon power at the Constitutional Convention. There was debate about whether Congress should have a role in the pardon power, with the Senate approving presidential pardons. Delegates also debated whether treason should be excluded from pardonable offenses. However, the final result was an expansive power for the president in Article II, the strongest example of constitutional executive unilateralism.

There are many different types of clemency that fall under the president’s power. They include: pardon, amnesty, commutation, and reprieve. A pardon releases a person from punishment and restores all civil liberties. Amnesty is the same as the pardon but is extended to an entire class of individuals. Commutation reduces the sentence imposed by a federal court. A reprieve delays the imposition of a sentence or punishment. (Source WhiteHouse.org)

Call me naïve, but a leader pardoning his children, his family, or the people who worked with him, means he acknowledges the fact that crimes have been committed.

A pardon should never be used as a ‘Jail-free’ card?