What is good conduct time allowance?

Good conduct time allowance or GCTA is a sentence reduction provision afforded

prisoners who show good behavior.

It has been in existence since 1906. Act 1533 provided for the “diminution of
sentences imposed upon prisoners” in consideration of good conduct and diligence.

Citing a 1908 decision, the SC said the law served a double purpose: to “encourage
the convict in an effort to reform” and “induce...habits of industry and good conduct”
in the person beyond one’s sentence, and “aid to discipline” various jails and
penitentiaries.

Twenty-four years later, the RPC, a legal code governing crimes and their
punishment, was signed into law, incorporating good conduct time allowances for
“any prisoner in any penal situation.”

What is RA 10592 and how does it work?

In May 2013, then President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III signed RA 10592,
amending Articles 29, 94, 97, 98, and 99 of the RPC, which sought to:

 expand the application of the GCTA to those under preventive imprisonment

or those detained prior and during criminal trial, who are deemed too
dangerous for release;

 increase the number of days that may be credited for GCTA;

 allow an additional sentence deduction of 15 days for each month of study,

teaching, or mentoring service; and

 expand the special time allowance for loyalty and make it applicable to those
under preventive imprisonment.

In cases of "special circumstances," such as calamities, prisoners who, after evading

preventive imprisonment or the service of their sentence, give themselves up to
authorities within 48 hours after the "circumstance" had passed, will get a "loyalty"
deduction of one-fifth of their sentence.

This means, prisoners who have evaded service due to fire, earthquake, explosion,
or other catastrophes must surrender within two days from authorities’ declaration
that such events are no longer present to qualify for the loyalty deduction.

Section 5 of the law says the BuCor director, the Bureau of Jail Management and
Penology chief, and/or the warden of a provincial, district, municipal or city jail “shall
grant allowances for good conduct.”

1|Page
Last June, the SC granted the petition filed by New Bilibid Prison inmates, voiding
Sec. 4, Rule 1 of RA 10592 Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR), which states
that the grant of time allowance of prisoners for good conduct, study, teaching, and
mentoring service, and loyalty “shall be prospective in application.”

The High Court ruled that the law should be applied retroactively, meaning those
detained or convicted before RA 10592 was passed should also be covered by, and,
therefore, potentially benefit from, the law.

The ruling is in accordance with Article 22 of the RPC, which states that penal laws
“shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of the felony,
who is not a habitual criminal.”

Who can benefit from the law?

Inmates who display "good behavior and [have] no record of breach of discipline or
violation of prison rules and regulations" may be eligible for GCTA, according to the
BuCor operating manual, as cited in the SC decision.

The IRR of RA 10592 defines good behavior as:

"the conspicuous and satisfactory behavior of a detention or convicted prisoner

consisting of active involvement in rehabilitation programs, productive participation in
authorized work activities or accomplishment of exemplary deeds coupled with
faithful obedience to all prison/jail rules and regulations”

Over the past years, Sanchez was found to have violated jail policies, according to
reports from Philstar.com, Rappler, and CNN Philippines.

In 2006, a complaint was filed against Sanchez for allegedly possessing shabu and
marijuana.

In 2010, a kilo of shabu worth P1.5 million was discovered in one of the Blessed
Virgin Mary statues inside his cell. Five years later, an air-conditioner, flat-screen
television, and refrigerator were seized from his cell.

Sanchez also tested positive for illegal drug use, according to a BuCor report.

Who are excluded from the law?

Recidivists or those who “have been convicted previously twice or more times of any
crime,” habitual delinquents, escapees and persons charged with heinous crimes are
excluded from its coverage, according to section 1 of RA 10592.

2|Page
The law, as well as RPC, however, does not define what constitutes a “heinous
crime.”

Under RA 7659 or the Death Penalty Act, heinous crimes are:

“grievous, odious and hateful offenses and which, by reason of their inherent or
manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity and perversity are repugnant and
outrageous to the common standards and norms of decency and morality in a just,
civilized and ordered society.”

The Death Penalty Act, which was repealed in 2006, classified murder and rape as
“heinous crimes” that may be punishable by death.

In 1995, Sanchez and six others were sentenced to seven terms of reclusion
perpetua, for the brutal rape and murder of University of the Philippines Los Baños
student Eileen Sarmenta and for the torture and murder of Allan Gomez, another
student, two years prior.

Under the RPC, the maximum detention period is 40 years, regardless of the number
of terms that one must serve. This means Sanchez will serve only 40 years in prison
at most, even if he was sentenced to seven terms of life imprisonment.

In 1996, the court convicted Sanchez and three others of double murder of father
and son Nelson and Rickson Peñalosa. Sanchez was already in jail then for the
rape-slay of Sarmenta and the killing of Gomez, according
to Inquirer.net, Philstar.com, and ABS-CBN News.

In 1999, the SC affirmed the lower courts’ rulings against Sanchez for the Sarmenta-
Gomez rape-slay and the Peñalosas slay cases.

3|Page
What is inside the revised 2019 IRR of the GCTA Law
The new IRR says heinous crime convicts after the law became effective in 2013
shall not be entitled to any type of good conduct time allowance

MANILA, Philippines – The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of the
Interior and Local Government (DILG) have revised the Implementing Rules and
Regulations (IRR) of the Good Conduct Time Allowance law (GCTA law), responding
to public outcry over the near-release of high-profile convict Antonio Sanchez.

The new IRR of Republic Act 10592 or the GCTA law now categorically excludes
heinous crime convicts like Sanchez from the benefits of the GCTA Law.

Here are the salient amendments in the new IRR:

1. Recidivists, habitual delinquents, escapees, those charged with heinous crimes

and an accused who, upon being summoned for the execution of his sentence has
failed to surrender voluntarily before a court of law, are excluded from good conduct
time allowance under RA 10592 (Section 2, Rule IV)

2. Prisoners disqualified under RA 10592, such as heinous crime convicts, but who
were convicted before the law became effective in 2013 shall be entitled to good
conduct time allowance under the Revised Penal Code (2nd paragraph, Section 1,
Rule XIII)

3. Prisoners disqualified under RA 10592, such as heinous crime convicts, and who
were convicted after the law became effective in 2013, shall not be entitled to any
type of good conduct time allowance (3rd paragraph, Section 1, Rule XIII)

4. Heinous crimes are the same heinous crimes defined under Republic Act 7659 or
the now-repealed death penalty law. It is the DOJ's view that RA 7659 was repealed
only insofar as imposing the death penalty, but not the definition of heinous crimes
(Section 1n, Rule II)

5. To increase transparency, the Management, Screening and Evaluation Committee

(MSEC) shall publish the list of prisoners who may be qualified for release on 3
conspicuous places within the jail premises and/or uploaded in their respective
websites subject to the Data Privacy Act (Section 3c, Rule VIII)

6. The MSEC shall invite representatives from accredited civil society organizations
to appear as observers during deliberations (Section 4, Rule VIII)

7. To encourage sustained good behavior, the new IRR says accrued time
allowances shall be granted at the end of the prisoners' 2nd year, 5th year, 10th
year, 11th year and every year thereafter (Section 2, Rule IX)

In the new rule, GCTAs accrue monthly to follow the law, but are granted at the end
of the 2nd year, 5th year, 10th year, 11th year, and beyond.

4|Page
"So therefore if a particular prisoner for example commits an offense, a grave
offense, within a 2-year period, then in the operational guidelines you may have a
basis to say that that particular prisoner, by virtue of his commission of an offense,
forfeits the entire accrued time allowance," Justice Undersecretary Markk Perete
said in a news conference on Friday September 20.

8. The grant of time allowances to a disqualified prisoner, whether under the

previous or present Rules, shall not extinguish criminal liability (Section 1, Rule X)

5|Page
 Fifteenth Congress
Third Regular Session

Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-third day of July, two
thousand twelve.

REPUBLIC ACT No. 10592

AN ACT AMENDING ARTICLES 29, 94, 97, 98 AND 99 OF ACT NO. 3815, AS
AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in

Congress assembled:

Section 1. Article 29 of Act No. 3815, as amended, otherwise known as the Revised
Penal Code, is hereby further amended to read as follows:

"ART. 29. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of

imprisonment. – Offenders or accused who have undergone preventive
imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of
deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which they have undergone
preventive imprisonment if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing
after being informed of the effects thereof and with the assistance of counsel
to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners,
except in the following cases:

"1. When they are recidivists, or have been convicted previously twice
or more times of any crime; and

"2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence
they have failed to surrender voluntarily.

"If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary
rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall do so in writing with the
assistance of a counsel and shall be credited in the service of his sentence
with four-fifths of the time during which he has undergone preventive
imprisonment.

"Credit for preventive imprisonment for the penalty of reclusion perpetua shall
be deducted from thirty (30) years.1âwphi1

"Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period

equal to the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which
he may be sentenced and his case is not yet terminated, he shall be released
immediately without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the
proceeding on appeal, if the same is under review. Computation of preventive
imprisonment for purposes of immediate release under this paragraph shall
be the actual period of detention with good conduct time allowance: Provided,
however, That if the accused is absent without justifiable cause at any stage
of the trial, the court may motu proprio order the rearrest of the

6|Page
 accused: Provided, finally, That recidivists, habitual delinquents, escapees
and persons charged with heinous crimes are excluded from the coverage of
this Act. In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may be
sentenced is lestierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days of preventive
imprisonment."

Section 2. Article 94 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:

"ART. 94. Partial extinction of criminal liability. – Criminal liability is

extinguished partially:

"1. By conditional pardon;

"2. By commutation of the sentence; and

"3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is
undergoing preventive imprisonment or serving his sentence."

Section 3. Article 97 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:

"ART. 97. Allowance for good conduct. – The good conduct of any offender
qualified for credit for preventive imprisonment pursuant to Article 29 of this
Code, or of any convicted prisoner in any penal institution, rehabilitation or
detention center or any other local jail shall entitle him to the following
deductions from the period of his sentence:

"1. During the first two years of imprisonment, he shall be allowed a

deduction of twenty days for each month of good behavior during
detention;

"2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he
shall be allowed a reduction of twenty-three days for each month of
good behavior during detention;

"3. During the following years until the tenth year, inclusive, of his
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of twenty-five days for
each month of good behavior during detention;

"4. During the eleventh and successive years of his imprisonment, he

shall be allowed a deduction of thirty days for each month of good
behavior during detention; and

"5. At any time during the period of imprisonment, he shall be allowed

another deduction of fifteen days, in addition to numbers one to four
hereof, for each month of study, teaching or mentoring service time
rendered.

"An appeal by the accused shall not deprive him of entitlement to the above
allowances for good conduct."

7|Page
Section 4. Article 98 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:

"ART. 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. – A deduction of one fifth of the
period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded
his preventive imprisonment or the service of his sentence under the
circumstances mentioned in Article 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the
authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation
announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe referred to in
said article. A deduction of two-fifths of the period of his sentence shall be
granted in case said prisoner chose to stay in the place of his confinement
notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or catastrophe enumerated in
Article 158 of this Code.

"This Article shall apply to any prisoner whether undergoing preventive

imprisonment or serving sentence."

Section 5. Article 99 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:"

"ART. 99. Who grants time allowances. – Whenever lawfully justified, the
Director of the Bureau of Corrections, the Chief of the Bureau of Jail
Management and Penology and/or the Warden of a provincial, district,
municipal or city jail shall grant allowances for good conduct. Such allowances
once granted shall not be revoked."

Section 6. Penal Clause. – Faithful compliance with the provisions of this Act is
hereby mandated. As such, the penalty of one (1) year imprisonment, a fine of One
hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00) and perpetual disqualification to hold office
shall be imposed against any public officer or employee who violates the provisions
of this Act.

Section 7. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – The Secretary of the Department

of Justice (DOJ) and the Secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local
Government (DILG) shall within sixty (60) days from the approval of this Act,
promulgate rules and regulations on the classification system for good conduct and
time allowances, as may be necessary, to implement the provisions of this Act.

Section 8. Separability Clause. – If any part hereof is held invalid or unconstitutional,

the remainder of the provisions not otherwise affected shall remain valid and
subsisting.

Section 9. Repealing Clause. – Any law, presidential decree or issuance, executive

order, letter of instruction, administrative order, rule or regulation contrary to or
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act is hereby repealed, modified or amended
accordingly.

Section 10. Effectivity Clause. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days from its
publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) new papers of general
circulation.

Approved,

8|Page
 (Sgd.) JUAN PONCE ENRILE (Sgd.) FELICIANO BELMONTE JR.
President of the Senate Speaker of the House of
Representatives

This Act which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 3064 and House Bill No. 417 was
finally passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on November 5,
2012 and January 28, 2013, respectively.

(Sgd.) EDWIN B. BELLEN (Sgd.) MARILYN B. BARUA-YAP

Acting Senate Secretary Secretary General
House of Representatives

Approved: MAY 29 2013

(Sgd.) BENIGNO S. AQUINO III

President of the Philippines

9|Page
The GCTA law and the controversy it has stirred

The debate now focuses on whether or not people convicted of heinous crimes
should benefit from the Good Conduct Time Allowance law. What are the arguments
for amendment now?

The Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law has been at the center of
controversy after initial news about the possible early release of convicted murderer-
rapist Antonio Sanchez broke.

As government officials backtracked on cutting short the prison term of Sanchez, the
debate has now focused on whether or not those convicted of heinous crimes should
benefit from the GCTA.

But how did the law come to be? What are the arguments for amendments?

December 1930

The Revised Penal Code is signed into law. Chapter 2 lays out the specifics of
"partial extinction of criminal liability," including conditional pardon, commutation of
sentence, and good conduct allowances.

November 5, 2012

The Senate passes Senate Bill No. 3064 which amends several articles of the
Revised Penal Code.

January 18, 2013

The House of Representatives passes House Bill 417 which amends Article 29 of the
Revised Penal Code.

May 29, 2013

Then-president Benigno Aquino III signs Republic Act No. 10592 or the Good
Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law, which amended several articles under the
Revised Penal Code, including Article 97, which lays out the allowance for good
conduct for persons deprived of liberty (PDLs).

The GCTA law allows for a reduction of sentences of PDLs, depending on how well
they abide by rules and regulations inside “any penal institution, rehabilitation, or
detention center or any other local jail.”

March 26, 2014

The law’s Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) document is released. Penned
by then-justice secretary Leila de Lima and interior secretary Mar Roxas, the IRR

10 | P a g e
provides for a prospective application of the GCTA law.

Prospective application is seen in Section 4 of the IRR, which provides “for new
procedures and standards of behavior for the grant of good conduct time allowance"
and requires "the creation of a Management, Screening and Evaluation Committee.”

The IRR takes effect on April 18 of the same year.

June 18, 2014

At least 13 Bilibid inmates, represented by lawyer Michael Evangelista, file a petition

for certiorari and prohibition against Roxas and De Lima, contesting the prospective
application of the GCTA Law.

The inmates include Venancio Roxas, Saturnino Paras, Edgardo Manuel, Heminildo
Cruz, Allan Tejada, Roberto Marquez, Julito Mondejar, Armando Cabuang, Jonathan
Crisanto, Edgar Echenique, Janmark Saracho, Josenel Alvaran, and Crisencio Neri
Jr.

July 14, 2014

Lawyer Rene Saguisag files a petition-in-intervention, saying that RA 10592’s

legislative history shows no intent of being prospective in character. The High Court
grants the leave to intervene.

October 21, 2014

Three NBP inmates file another petition-in-intervention against the provision.

Inmates William Montinola, Fortunato Visto, and Arsenio Cabanilla are represented
by the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG).

The provision, FLAG said at the time, “discriminates, without any reasonable basis,
against those who would have been benefited from the retroactive application of the
law.”

October 24, 2014

Ten inmates at the NBP’s Maximum Security Compound file a petition for certiorari
and prohibition against the prospective application of the law, saying that the IRR
was “issued with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction.”

June 25, 2019

Voting unanimously, the Supreme Court grants the petition and makes the GCTA
law retroactive.

11 | P a g e
In his concurring opinion, SC Associate Justice Marvic Leonen says that the
prospective provision of the 2014 IRR “implies that all inmates detained or convicted
prior to its effectivity can no longer be rehabilitated for a successful reintegration into
society, effectively trampling upon their dignity as human beings.”

August 20, 2019

Reporters receive unverified information that convicted rapist and murderer Antonio
Sanchez might soon be walking free. (READ: TIMELINE: DOJ backtracks on
possible early release of Antonio Sanchez)

Sanchez was convicted in 1995 for the rape and murder of Eileen Sarmenta and
murder of Allan Gomez – both University of the Philippines-Los Baños students –
and in 1999, for the double murder of Nelson and Rickson Peñalosa. He has been in
Bilibid prison for 25 years.

Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra tells reporters that Sanchez "may actually be
released," and, in another instance, "is very likely for release.”

"That benefits lahat ng mga nakakulong na preso ngayon kaya isa sa mga magbe-
benefit doon ay si Mayor Sanchez... pati siya mae-entitle duon sa computation ng
Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA),” he says in a telephone conference.

(That benefits all the inmates, so one of the beneficiaries will be Mayor Sanchez.
Even he will be entitled to the computation of the Good Conduct Time Allowance.)

August 22, 2019

Senate President Vicente Sotto III files Senate Resolution No. 107 which seeks a
review of RA 10592 with a view of amending it. Senator Panfilo Lacson supports the
plan to amend the law. (READ: Amid Sanchez news, senators split on amending
reduced prison term law)

Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon, the justice secretary at the time Sanchez
was convicted, dismisses the need for amendments, saying the law is already
“good." He pins the blame on the Supreme Court which decided that a certain
provision was unconstitutional.

After a massive public backlash, Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) Director General

Nicanor Faeldon says that while Sanchez is qualified to avail of the GCTA, he might
still have to stay in Bilibid for several more years because of misdemeanors he
reportedly committed. (LISTEN: [PODCAST] Ang batas na puwedeng magpalaya sa
rapist-murderer na si Antonio Sanchez)

August 23, 2019

Guevarra explains that the wording of Section 1 and Section 3 of the law makes only
the inmates eligible for credit of preventive imprisonment (CPI, or the period of

12 | P a g e
imprisonment prior to conviction) also eligible for GCTA (applicable only to post-
conviction imprisonment).

To Guevarra, because those charged with heinous crimes are not eligible for CPI,
then they are also not supposed to benefit from the GCTA. “It’s been a tough
process of interpreting the wordings of a law that has certain ambiguities in its
provisions. In the end, however, it is the spirit and the intention of the law that guided
us in taking a position,” Guevarra says.

Presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo echoes Guevarra in a press conference,

saying that “the inevitable conclusion is that all those convicted of a heinous crime,
including Mr Antonio Sanchez, would be ineligible and disqualified from availing the
benefits of the GCTA.”

In a Rappler column, human rights lawyer and former SC spokesperson Ted Te says
that there is a need for more objective criteria to determine good conduct.
(READ: [OPINION | Deep Dive] What the GCTA law is and what it needs)

He writes that “while the GCTA is a good idea, the question of determining whether
conduct falls under ‘good conduct’ to merit the GCTA may be arbitrary sans any
objective standards to measure, assess, and rate such.

Raymund Narag, an expert on criminal justice, writes in his column that “there are
sufficient legal and procedural remedies to make sure that the law will not be abused
by the rich and powerful.” (READ: [OPINION] Media sensationalism, bureaucratic
ineptitude, the common tao's quest for justice)

August 24, 2019

Guevarra says the DOJ is “considering seriously” the need to suspend the
processing of the GCTA of convicts pending a review of guidelines for the early
release of inmates.

Those who are deserving to be freed early, he adds, “really have to wait a
little.” (READ: Beyond Sanchez: How to improve the Good Conduct Time Allowance
law)

August 25, 2019

Guevarra says the DOJ hopes the Supreme Court or Congress will be able to clarify
whether or not inmates who are convicted of heinous crimes can benefit from the
GCTA law.

“The DOJ will be glad to have this issue resolved with clarity and finality either by a
congressional amendment of its own act or by an interpretation rendered by the
Supreme Court in a proper case brought before it,” he says.

August 26, 2019

13 | P a g e
Guevarra reiterates that the processing of early release of inmates under the good
conduct time allowance (GCTA) law is briefly suspended.

"Very temporary lang, na i-suspend ang pag-process ng GCTAs para mabigyan ng

pagkakataon ang DOJ, BuCor, ang BJMP (Bureau of Jail Management and
Penology) na ma-review 'yung mga existing guidelines sa pagbibigay ng GCTAs,
pati mga internal procedures," Guevarra tells DZBB.

(It will be a very temporary suspension of the processing of GCTAs to give a chance
to the DOJ, BuCor, and BJMP to review existing guidelines for granting GCTAs,
including internal procedures.)

Drilon calls the suspension a "welcome development."

August 27, 2019

AKO Bicol Representative Alfredo Garbin Jr files House Resolution No. 260 which
seeks a congressional investigation to help clarify whether or not inmates who are
convicted of heinous crimes should benefit from the GCTA law.

In his resolution, Garbin says that the law “is a good law” but that “there is a need to
determine whether the criterion used in the implementing rules of the law is
consistent with the very law it seeks to implement.” – with reports from Lian
Buan/Rappler.com

14 | P a g e
References:

https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/240335-things-to-know-about-revised-irr-gcta-
law-2019

https://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10592_2013.html

https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/238647-timeline-gcta-law-controversy-stirred

Supreme Court, G.R. No. 212719/G.R. No. 214637, June 25, 2019

Official Gazette, Republic Act 10592

Lawphil.net, Act 1533

Chan Robles Virtual Law Library, Act 1533

Official Gazette, Republic Act 3815

Bureau of Corrections, Operating Manual

15 | P a g e