Case No.

6
G.R. No. L-30364 July 28, 1969
ANGEL C. BAKING and SIMEON G. RODRIGUEZ, petitioners, vs.
THE DIRECTOR OF PRISONS, respondent.

Facts:
Petitioners concededly had been under detention for more than eighteen (18) years under the
charge of respondent Director of Prisons for the crime of rebellion. They were sentenced to ten
(10) years' imprisonment. They claimed that they had been denied the right to a speedy trial.
Thus, petitioners filed a petition for habeas corpus and for their immediate release because
they have already served the ten (10) year sentences meted out to them.

Petitioner’s Argument
Petitioners argued that they can claim the 18 years that they have been detained during the
pending of their case, stressing the word “any prisoner” in the English text of the said article.

Respondent’s Argument
The respondent opposed the petitioner’s claim and that Article 97 is applicable to convicts by
final judgment and does not apply to detention prisoners.

Issue:
Whether or not Article 97 of the Revised Penal Code is applicable.

Provision:
Article 97 of the RPC

Ruling:
The court held that the petition to set petitioners at liberty are hereby denied.

While Article 97 talks of "any prisoner" in the English text, it speaks, however, of that prisoner
as being entitled to deductions for good conduct allowances "from the period of his sentence"
("del tiempo de su condena"). An accurate reading, therefore, of the provision yields the plain
implication that the prisoner concerned is one who already has a sentence clamped upon him,
i.e., a definite sentence by final judgment. The term "any prisoner" should thus be limited to
those convicted by final judgment. This is the import of the law as written.

It must be stated that inasmuch as the Revised Penal Code was originally approved and enacted
in Spanish, the Spanish text governs. The term "any prisoner" in the Spanish text is "el penado."
Who is a convict or a person already sentenced by final judgment. There is thus no doubt that
Article 97 does not embrace detention prisoners. The allowance for good conduct then
unquestionably refers to good behavior of a prisoner while he is serving his term as a convict
and not otherwise.
Petitioners, as detention prisoners, cannot by any stretch of the imagination, be said to be
serving sentence during the period of their preventive imprisonment.