MANILA, Philippines — Moving away from its initial argument that Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV failed to apply for amnesty, Malacañang is now claiming that former President Benigno Aquino III did not properly grant the amnesty to the senator.

President Rodrigo Duterte earlier claimed that the previous administration committed "usurpation of authority" in granting amnesty to Trillanes, a staunch critic of the president.

Expounding Duterte's argument, presidential spokesperson Harry Roque said the chief executive believes that amnesty must be personally granted by a president.

"It cannot be further delegated to other officials. It is a presidential prerogative so the position of the president is that only the president should have signed the order of amnesty," Roque said in a press briefing Monday.

While it is true that it was former Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin who signed the certificate of amnesty issued to Trillanes, it was released pursuant to provisions of Proclamation 75.

The certificate reads:

"This is to certify that Senator Antonio F. Trillanes IV was granted on January 21, 2011 for his participation/involvement in the July 27, 2003 Oakwood Mutiny and November 29, 2007 Peninsula Manila Hotel Siege in Makati City, pursuant to the provisions of Presidential Proclamation No. 75 issued on November 24, 2010 by His Excellency, President Benigno S. Aquino III."

< >

Gazmin was acting upon the directive of Aquino's Proclamation 75, which granted amnesty to active and former personnel of the police and the military who were involved in the 2003 Oakwood mutiny, 2006 Marines stand-off and 2007 Manila Peninsula siege.

Aquino's proclamation, which had Congress concurrence, authorized the Department of National Defense to screen approve applicants for amnesty in 2011.

A portion of the proclamation specifically said that, "Now, THEREFORE, I, BENIGNO S. AQUINO III, President of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by Section 19, Article VII of the Philippine Constitution, do hereby DECLARE and PROCLAIM — Section 1. Grant of Amnesty."

Section 2 of Proclamation 75 stated that the DND "is hereby tasked with receiving and processing applications – including oppositions thereto, if any – for amnesty pursuant to this proclamation and determining whether the applicants are entitled to amnesty pursuant to this proclamation."

"The final decisions or determination of the DND shall be appealable to the Office of the President by any party to the application. The decision, however, shall be immediately executory even if appealed," it added.

The Duterte's administration's new argument that Aquino did not properly grant the amnesty was also not cited in the president's Proclamation 572, which claimed that Trillanes failed to comply with the minimum requirements for the grant.

Trillanes was able to contradict Malacañang's initial rhetoric by showing a video of him filing the application form and producing DND documents proving that he submitted the application.

Responding to Malacañang's new claim, Aquino said all those given the same amnesty, including those appointed by Duterte, should also be arrested if the amnesty granted to Trillanes was flawed.

Asked about whether the individuals who were granted the same amnesty would suffer the same fate as Trillanes, Roque said the declaration that the grant was void ab initio only applies to the senator.

"That could be the case but, of course, there has to be a declaration that it is null and void ab initio. Without that declaration then I suppose it remains valid," Roque said, adding that such decision would fall under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.