ESTABLISHMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OFPAROLE AND PROBATION ADMINISTRATION

EARLY BEGINNINGS

The concept of probation stems from faith in man’s capacity to change for the better and in the ultimate good that will redound to society by rebuilding rather thandestroying those who have offended it.Thus, as early as the thirteenth century, efforts were made to mitigate theharshness of penal laws through more enlightened and rehabilitative approaches in thetreatment and correction of offenders. These included the release of accused members of the clergy to ecclesiastical authorities, judicial reprieve or temporary suspension of sentence or execution, deportation, and release on recognizance wherein a misdemeanant bound himself before the court to “keep the peace and be on good behavior.” These practices in early English Courts became the forerunners of probation which was later established in England and the United States.In the Philippines, provisions for juvenile probation has been embodied in Article80 of the Revised Penal Code since its enactment in 1932. Thus, sentence was suspendedfor offenders under 16 years of age accused of a grave or less grave felony, who werethen placed in the care and custody of public or private entities. This was amended onDecember 10, 1974 by Presidential Decree No. 603, known as the Child and YouthWelfare Code, and by Presidential Decree No. 1179 which set the age of minority to below 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the offense. Likewise, RepublicAct No. 6425 or the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 provided for the suspension of sentence and probation of a first-offender under 18 years of age at the time of thecommission of the offense but not more than 21 years at the time when judgment shouldhave been promulgated.The move to integrate adult probation in the Philippine criminal justice system began early in the twentieth century when the Philippine Legislature approved Act No.4221 on August 7, 1935. This created a Probation Office under the Department of Justice, and provided probation for first offenders 18 years of age and above who wereconvicted of certain crimes. Unfortunately, there were defects in the law’s proceduralframework so that, on November 16, 1937, the Supreme Court declared itunconstitutional in the case of People of the Philippines vs. Vera on the grounds of “undue delegation of legislative power” and violation of the “equal protection of thelaw” clause.A second attempt was made when then Congressmen Teodulo C. Natividad andRamon D. Bagatsing introduced House Bill No. 393 during their last months in Congress.Passed in the Lower House, this was pending in the Senate when Martial Law was proclaimed in 1972.

The agitations for the adoption of an adult probation law continued. In 1973, thetechnical staff of the Bacolod City Police Advisory Council, headed by Lt. Col. ArcadioS. Lozada and assisted by US Peace Corps Volunteer Alvin L. Koenig, prepared a proposed Probation Decree which incorporated pertinent provisions of the Natividad andLaurel Bills. This was submitted to the Secretary of Justice and the National PoliceCommission after a thorough perusal by a study committee of the Integrated Bar of thePhilippines and subsequent indorsement by its national Board of Directors.Late in 1975 the National Police Commission, sitting en banc and headed byDefense Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile who was the concurrent Chairman of NAPOLCOM,heard the report “Meeting the Challenge of Crime” of the Philippine delegationto the 5

United Nations Congress held in Geneva, Switzerland in September 1975. Atthat time, the Philippines was among the few participating countries without an adult probation system. Citing the role of probation in an integrated approach to crime prevention, the delegation urged priority action on the establishment of the system. Thiswas the turning point that led to the passage of the law. The Inter-DisciplinaryCommittee on Crime Prevention created in 1974 by Secretary Enrile and chaired byCommissioner Teodulo Natividad, then pursued the preparation of the probation decree.Eighteen technical hearings were conducted, attended by 60 resource persons, after whichthe draft decree was presented at the Seminar on the Probation System sponsored by the NAPOLCOM, Philippine Constabulary and Integrated National Police, and theUniversity of the Philippines Law Center on April 24, 1976. This was studied andoverwhelmingly endorsed by 369 participants representing various sectors of society. Afinal draft of the decree was subsequently prepared, then reviewed and endorsed to thePresident of the Philippines by the Minister of Justice, Minister of National Defense,and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.Thus, the law was born on July 24, 1976. It was during the closing ceremonies of the First National Conference on a Strategy to Reduce Crime held at Camp Aguinaldo,Quezon City, that President Ferdinand E. Marcos signed Presidential Decree (P.D.) No.968, otherwise known as the Probation Law of 1976, in the presence of nearly 800representatives of the country’s criminal justice system.

31 YEARS AFTER

The administration of the Philippine Adult Probation System has been guided,through the 31 years of its development, by the purposes embodied in Section 2 of P. D. No. 968, as amended, namely:1. Promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing himwith individualized treatment;2. Provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent offender which might be less probable if he were to serve a prison sentence; and3. Prevent the commission of offenses.From 1978 to 2007, the investigation cases handled by the Administration grew atthe rate of 2.68% annually. This yielded a total of 303,022 convicted offenders whoapplied for probation that had been investigated by the probation and parole officersthroughout the Philippines. On the other hand, a total of 268,426 supervision cases washandled with an annual growth rate of 7.45%. Of this number, 20.83% or 188,919 probationers were successfully terminated having lived their period of probation withoutviolating the conditions for its grant. An average of 2.04% or 20,822 probationers wererevoked and subsequently imprisoned, while around 25,295 continue today, under thesupervision of probation and parole officers, to live with their families, earn their livelihood, and participate in meaningful activities outside the confines of prison and jails.With the promulgation of Executive Order No. 292 on November 23, 1989 theAdministration was given the added function of supervising prisoners who, after serving part of their sentence in jails, were released on parole or were granted pardon with paroleconditions. From 1989 to present, 50,627 parolees and 7,452 pardonees have beensupervised by the Administration with an annual growth rate of 390.86% and 44.68%,respectively. In 1990, there was a big increase (7,050.77%) in the number of paroleesfrom 65 to 4,648 due to the turnover of parole supervision cases from the municipal trialcourts to the parole and probation offices. Of the total number of parolees and pardoneessupervised, around 9.39% or 25,215 parolees and 7.74% or 3,197 pardonees were givenfinal release and discharge. On the other hand, Resolution No. 229 dated April 2, 1991,authorized the Administration to conduct pre-parole and executive clemencyinvestigation. From 1991 to 2007, 23,329 pre-parole/executive clemency investigationcases were handled. This represents an annual growth rate of 22.78%.