Page 1 of 35

SUBJECT – NON- INSTITUTIONAL CORRECTIONS

Historical Background of Probation

Role of Probation in the Correctional System

PROBATION

Probation is another form of non-institutional corrections practices that gives a

sentenced convict the chance to reform and rehabilitate himself without having to
spend time in jails. Probation does not confine to prison a sentenced prisoner but
rather he will released and undergo personalized community based treatment, while
in parole, the parolee will have to serve a portion of his sentence before he is eligible
for parole.

Probation is a form of non-institutional based correctional practices that gives

a sentenced convict the chance to reform and rehabilitate himself without having to
spend time in jails. Probation does not confine to prison a sentenced prisoner but
rather released and undergo personalized community based treatment.

Probation is a disposition under which a defendant, after conviction and

sentence, is released to the supervision of a probation officer subject to conditions
imposed by the court. The probation officer shall supervise and program the
individual treatment of the probationer under his care. M any time during probation,
the court may issue a warrant for the arrest of a probationer for any serious violation
of the conditions of probation, the probationer, once arrested and detained, shall
immediately be brought before the court for a hearing of the violation charged. If
revoked, the court shall order the probationer to serve the sentence originally
imposed in prison.

The Probation and Parole Administration under the Department of Justice

supervises and controls all probation officers and promulgates rules and procedures
on probation process, subject to the approval of the Secretary of justice. The period
of probation of a defendant sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than
one (1) year shall not exceed two years, and in all other cases, said period shall not
exceed six (6) years.

When the sentence imposes a fine only and the offender is made to serve
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, the period of probation shall not be
less than nor be more than twice the total number of days of subsidiary imprisonment
Page 2 of 35

as computed at the rate established in article thirty-nine of the revised Penal

code as amended.

Pioneers and Founders of Probation

By 1878, the state of Massachusetts passed the first Probation Law

but it was only after 20 years that another state, Vermont, picked up the trail
and followed suit. By the early 20th century, however, Probation has
overcome institutional prison treatment as the prevailing mode of punishment.

In 1887, the city of Boston appointed the first government probation

officer. The lucky fellow is the former Chief of Police of Boston. Edward N.
Savage. By 1891, a law was passed in Massachusetts requiring all criminal
courts of that state to employ a probation officer. From this date on, the
trailblazing example of Massachusetts was followed by other states. By 1944,
all but six states in the United States had probation officers.

Probation, on the other hand, was first introduced in the United States
several decades earlier than parole. A certain John Augustus of Boston,
Massachusetts concerned with the plight of prisoners began bailing out
prisoners and helping them finds residence and employment around the
middle of the 19th century. In time, the Courts in his area began to recognize
his efforts. If the temporarily free offender conducted himself well, Augustus
would recommend a sentence other than incarceration to the court, and his
recommendations were usually accepted.

He eventually helped 2000 offenders, and reported only 10

absconders out of this number. His finances were eventually exhausted but
he had made his point so well that by the time he stopped his philanthropy,
others have picked up where he left off and took charge of continuing his
work. The first law authorizing a probation officer was passed in
Massachusetts in 1878. However, no other state followed this example until
1898, when Vermont authorized a probation officer for each county in the
state.
By the turn of the 20th century, however, probation and parole has
already surpassed formal incarceration in penal facilities as methods for
official punishment. And by the time that these practices were on the
ascendancy, capital punishment in turn was also experiencing a decline in
popularity. By the end of the 19th century, the total of all executions in the
United States had decreased to approximately 122 cases per year. We can
trace this trend back to 1846, when Michigan became the first government in
the world to abolish the death penalty.
Page 3 of 35

A STUDY ON INSTITUTIONAL AGENCIES IN THE PHILIPPINES

The Spanish philosopher George Santayana once wrote that those who fail to
learn from the lessons of history are condemned to repeat its mistakes.

This lack of historicity is also apparent in our corrections system. We do not have
any books or publications at all that deal with the corrections history of our country.
This problem, in fact, has already been brought out seven years ago during the
Strategic Planning Workshop on the Modernization of the Philippine Correctional
System held at St. Michael Retreat House in Antipolo, Rizal on November 13-15,
1995 on the occasion of National Correctional Consciousness Week.

One of the recommendations that came out of the said workshop is the need to
formulate a substantially complete historical account of the development of the
Correctional System in the Philippines. To highlight the importance of this, a
Committee on History was tasked to prepare the same. Indeed there is a very
embarrassing dearth of writings dealing with the history of Philippine corrections. In
fact, one of the weaknesses cited by participants in the said workshop during their
SWOT Analysis session was the lack of systematic research and inadequate data
collections

Governance and Criminal justice in this country could be claimed to have

started simultaneously with the arrival of the ten datus and their barangays in this
archipelago thousands of years ago. This contention although it cannot be backed up
by formal documents saved for Philippine history books can only be inferred from the
fact that the ten datus and their followers came to these shores because of
persecution from the authorities of the land from where they came from. In effect,
what happened to them is a de facto banishment reminiscent of the colonization
period that intensified in many countries at the height of the industrial revolution in
Europe.

Prior to the coming of the Spaniards, available evidences point to the existence
in this country of a penal system although its jurisdiction is only tribal and localized.
Some of these legal and penal systems are the codes of Datu Sumakwel, Kalantiaw,
Maragtas, Sikatuna and still many others that left scant traces however into our
history books. Among these codes, the most extensive is the Kalantiaw Code, which
is comparable to the Greek, Roman, English and Spanish Laws.

These early codes are likewise very simple, easily understandable and,
therefore, subjects of those days find it easy to comprehend and follow. Hence,
criminality does not at all pose a problem. Rather violators are looked up to as
aberrations, exceptions rather than the rule. For instance, the Kalantiaw Code, which
was the governing law in the island of what is now Panay, particularly in what is now
the province of Aklan, has been the governing law and is based on the beliefs,
customs and practices of those days. This Code also reflects the level of uprightness
and morality of the people. When we look at this code and compare with our
supposedly civilized laws of today, it becomes a shame that we who claim to be more
civilized are actually the uncivil ones while those we look down on as primitive and
uncivilized are the more advanced and more humane.
Page 4 of 35

The Code was degreed by Dam Kalantiaw about a hundred years

before the coming of the Spanish slavers and colonizers. It continued to be
the governing law long after the death of Kalantiaw and ceased to exist only
when the Spaniards reached Panay and set up their government there.

The laws that exist now in our country are laws that were imposed by
the Spaniards and then the next slavers to replace them, the Americans. The
laws they imposed did not reflect the customs, beliefs and practices of the
natives but it reflects the customs, beliefs and practices of foreigners who
tailored it to fit their interests in subjugating the people of this land for their
benefits. This is now the reason why our laws have become complicated,
distorted and convoluted. It was remodeled and remodeled to find the correct
mix of what is applicable to us but to no avail. Our present laws are one of the
causes why there is so much conflict and un-peace in our country. And this
conflict and lack of peace is the cause of our backwardness and
underdevelopment. We cannot find the true rules that should govern us and
be followed by all in the pursuit of our national destiny.

The entire Code of Kalantiaw contains only eighteen articles but

enough to bring peace and harmony. Our Congress and Senate continuously
make hundreds of laws that no one seems to be following.

Here are the eighteen rules of Kalantiaw:

Rule 1 - Do not kill, steal, or harm old people. Punishment is drowning or

boiling;

Rule 2 - Pay all your debts promptly. Punishment for first offense is whipping
of 100 lashes. If the debt is large the violator’s hand will be immersed in
boiling water three times. Second offense will be death by beating;

Rule 3 - Do not be too lustful. Do not marry young girls (phaedophilia) nor
marry more than you can handle and support. First offense is swimming for
three hours. Second offense is laceration with thorns;

Rule 4 - Respect the dead, do not disturb their graves and burial places. First
offense is exposure to the ants while subsequent offense is beating to death
by means of thorns;

Rule 5 - Contracts shall be faithfully fulfilled. First offense is one hour

whipping. Subsequent offense is one-day exposure to the ants;

Rule 6 - Valuable trees and places that are holy should be respected. Fine for
violation should be equal to one month’s labor and paid in gold or honey.
Subsequent offense is the equivalent of five years labor;

Rule 7 - Cutting sacred trees, shooting arrows at old people treacherously,

entering the Chiefs’ homes without permission is punishable by death;

Rule 8 - Setting fire to another’s crops, stealing the wives of Chiefs and
owning dogs that bit the Chiefs is punishable by one year slavery;
Page 5 of 35

Rule 9 - Those who sing at night while on the road, kill the manual bird, destroy the
Chief’s records, deceive others and mock the dead will be beaten for two days;

Rule 10 - Mothers should educate their daughters secretly about sex hygiene to
prepare them for motherhood; Men should be kind to their wives and should not harm
them if they are caught in adultery. Violators will be cut to pieces or thrown to the
crocodiles;

Rule 11 - Those who escape and evade punishment, kill young children and steal the
wives of old men will be burned alive;

Rule 12 - Slaves who attack their masters or the chiefs, masturbates, or destroy their
anitos will be drowned;

Rule 13 - Those who steal from the Chiefs or old men will be exposed to the ants for
half a day;

Rule 14 - Those who refuse to marry their daughters to the sons of the chiefs will be
slaved for life;

Rule 15 - Those who kill the young of the manual birds or white monkeys will be
beaten;

Rule 16 - Those who break the idols on their altars and temples, destroy the daggers
used by the priestesses for killing sacrificial pigs or break their wine vessels will have
their fingers cut off;

Rule 17 - Those who destroy the altars and temples and urinates or defecates in
these sacred places will die; ad

Rule 18 - Chiefs who disobey any of these rules will be stoned or crushed to death
while old men who disobey will be fed to the sharks or crocodiles.

Although our own brand of justice even if adjudged as backward and primitive
contains basic characteristics that respects the old people, women and motherhood
and prohibits immoral acts such as masturbation or self-gratification that is being
lobbied hard by the international gay rights and decadent feminist movement
ethanating from the West to become an accepted practice. The Kalantiaw Code also
shows a strong respect for a God, the dead and even the environment with each rule
on the protection of valuable trees, the manual birds and white monkeys.

Our primitive laws also contain traces of Restorative Justice especially those
from the tribes of the Cordilleras in Northern Luzon, which have their own brand of
justice termed by some as the sipat. These continue to exist today in many remote
areas of the country. In fact, when Father Conrado Balweg, the priest who turned
rebel during the Martial Law years in the 1970s and 1980s surrendered to the
government and formed the Cordillera People’s Liberation Army, one of his group’s
demands is for the Philippine government to recognize the “BODONG” which is some
kind of a court to settle tribal and even individual people’s conflicts.
Page 6 of 35

From just these reasons, it can already be deduced with a

considerable degree of certainty that justice and, therefore, criminal justice
and punishments which are more humane, compassionate and more civilized
have been existing in this country since the dawn of its history long before the
coming of the Spanish colonialists.

Upon the colonization and subjugation of this country by the

Spaniards beginning in 1521, they imposed their own brand of justice and
gradually their system of laws become the law in the different parts of the
country they come to occupy. The royal decrees, orders and ordinances were
applied in the colony and from time to time the King of Spain issued additional
laws, rules and regulations. These were eventually incorporated to become
the Recopelacion de las Leyes de India,” a rough translation of which runs
like Recompilation of the Laws of the Indies.”

This Recompilation Laws were in effect until 1887 when the Spanish
Penal Code enacted seventeen years before in 1870 were decreed for
implementation in the country upon the recommendation of the Committee for
Overseas Provinces (Provincias de Ultramar) with some minor amendments
to suit local conditions. This code prepared and recommended by the
Committee for Overseas Provinces should have been in effect on September
4, 1884 or three years earlier by virtue of a Royal Decree of the Spanish
Crown but its implementation was held in abeyance owing to the opposition of
the Spanish Governor General in the Philippines. Owing to these objections,
the Spanish King issued a follow-up Royal Decree on December 17, 1886
ordering the implementation of the code. On March 13, 1887, the code finally
became enforceable in the Philippine Islands together with the “Ley
Engiciamiento Criminal” and another Royal Decree, the “Legislacion
Ultramarina.”

Prisoners were confined in jails located in the “Comandancias” which

exist in practically every province and major towns or cities where the
Spanish colonizers exercise strong control. Comandancias are the equivalent
of today’s police stations or precincts while the laws are enforced by the
“Guardia Civil” equivalent of today’s police.

The first penal institution in the country, whose scope is a national

penitentiary in nature, was established even before the effectivity of the
Spanish Penal Code and while the Recompilation Laws were still the existing
law of the islands. This prison facility is the Bilibid Prison, which was
constructed sometime in the year 1847 in the Bilibid district of the city of
Manila from where it derived its name. This is located at the back of what is
today, the Central Market along Quezon Boulevard.

But while the Bilibid Prison was already in operation since 1847., it
was only recognized and formally designated as an insular penitentiary
through a Royal Decree issued some eighteen years later in 1865.
Page 7 of 35

The physical lay-out of the Bilibid Prison was constructed in conformity with the
dominant concept of criminology existing in Europe during those times; custody,
security and confinement of prisoners. As such, the cells were constructed in a radial
shape similar to the spoke of a wheel. A central, commanding tower was erected at
the center of the spokes for easy control of prisoners especially in times of tumult or
disturbances such as riots. In this tower, the Officer of the Day exercises command
and supervision of the facility.

The buildings, which were referred to, as “Brigadas” are made of very strong
adobe stones. Incidentally, the term brigada continue to be used in prisons even until
today. These brigades are so sturdy that they have withstood the ravages of time and
even the bombings perpetrated by the Americans during their reoccupation of the
Philippines from the Japanese Imperial Forces. Incidentally, the bombings done by
the Americans on Manila was second only to Warsaw, Poland in the entire world in
the extent of its devastation. Yet, the Bilibid Prison continued to exist to this day in full
defiance of the earthshaking brutal conflicts it has undergone. In fact, this historical
landmark is still being used as jail by the City of Manila.

Twenty-two years after the establishment of the Bilibid Insular Penitentiary, the
San Ramon Prison and Penal Farm followed in 1869. This prison and penal farm was
constructed near the southern tip of Zamboanga peninsula nearby what is now
Zamboanga City and originally intended for the confinement of convicted Moro
“insurrectos” fighting subjugation by the Spanish “conquistadors.” The Zamboanga
peninsula was also a banishment site for political non-conformists coming from
Luzon and the Visayas. This is the reason why our own national hero, Dr. Jose P.
Rizal who fought for reforms, which the island colonial authorities found objectionable
and subversive to their tastes, was exiled in Dapitan.

In those days, insurgents who were not killed by the Spanish forces were either
exiled to Guam or the Marianas Islands in the middle of the Pacific Ocean which
happened to be Spanish colonies too, or in Zamboanga peninsula. However, Moro
insurgents, whose lives were spared by the Spanish authorities for some reason or
another, cannot be incarcerated here considering the proximity of the place to their
homeland. So they were either sent to Guam or the Marianas.

But rather than banishing them to these far-flung Spanish colonies in the middle
of the Pacific Ocean, where sea transportation is rare and hard and highly vulnerable
to Moro marauding attacks, not to mention the rough seas, the Spanish authorities
eventually found it more advisable and convenient to construct a penal facility nearby
and confine these Moro rebels there. As a countervailing measure to the presence of
Moro insurgents in the vicinities, they simply strengthened security.

San Ramon Prison and Penal Farm was named in memory of its founder, Ramon
Blanco, a Spanish captain in the Royal Army. It was closed during the Spanish-
American War of 1898 but reopened in 1904 after the victorious Americans grabbed
possession of the Philippines from Spain and the Americans have established control
over this new colony of theirs. This penal prison and farm has an aggregate area of
1,524.6 hectares and was made productive through the blood, sweat and tears of
Page 8 of 35

confined prisoners who passed the portals of this penal institution in the
course of our country’s march in history.

Today, the principal product of the San Ramon Prison is copra. which
is one of the biggest sources of income of the Bureau of Prisons. It also
raises rice, corn, coffee, cattle and livestock. Presently, it houses maximum,
medium and minimum-security prisoners. It now also accepts convicts who
were directly committed by the courts in the area to this prison but are later
sent to the Reception and Diagnostic Center in the Central Office in Camp
Sampaguita in Muntinlupa City for study and diagnosis.

The founder of the Kagalanggalangang Kataastaasang Katipunan ng

mga Anak ng Bayan or Katipunan, Andres Bonifacio, elected Don Severino
de las Alas as the country’s first Minister of Justice during the convening of
the Magdiwang government at Naic, Cavite. When Philippine Independence
was proclaimed at the balcony of Emilio Aguinaldo’s residence in Kawit,
Cavite on September 26, 1898, his first acts was to issue a decree
reorganizing the government. Gregorio Araneta was appointed as the new
Secretary of Justice following this reorganization.

The department underwent numerous changes. In 1899, the American

occupation forces renamed it as the Office of the Attorney of the Supreme
Court. Then another reorganization by the Americans followed in 1901 and it
was renamed Office of the Attorney General under the reorganized
Department of Finance and Justice. In 1903, the American Army created the
Bureau of Prisons under the Department of Commerce and Police. In 1916, it
was- again reestablished as Department of Justice and assigned to exercise
administrative supervision over all courts in the country inferior to the
Supreme Court, continuing to function as such when the 1935 Philippine
Constitution went into force under the Philippine Commonwealth.

In 1924, Commonwealth Act No. 3203 established the Reformatory for

Boys and Girls.

When the Japanese Imperial Forces came to wrest control of the

country from American occupation hands, they transformed the Justice
Department into a Commission. They remade the Commission into a Ministry.

The Department of Justice was again reestablished in 1947 persisting

until 1973 when the Marcos Martial Law regime adopting the parliamentary
system of government turned it into a ministry. But aside from a change of
name from a department to a ministry, Marcos also divested it of its
supervisory function over the lower courts transferring such function to the
Supreme Court.

When the Filipino people of the 1987 Constitution restored the

Presidential form of government upon the ratification, the ministry was again
reverted to a Department. But while this agency of government under whose
wings the Bureau of Prisons operate, the changes did not all considerably
affect corrections in the country.
Page 9 of 35

The Department of Justice today has nine agencies of which three are involved
in corrections work both institutional and community-based. These agencies are: the
Bureau of Corrections or BuCor, the Board of Pardons and Parole and the Probation
and Parole Administration.

In 1904, another penal colony was established in Iwahig, Palawan on the

orders of Governor Forbes, then the incumbent Secretary of Commerce and Police.
The establishment of this penal facility was made on the suggestion of Governor
Luke E. Wright who felt the need for an institution designed for incorrigible offenders.
An American construction foreman left Bilibid on November 16, 1904 with sixteen
prisoners and sailed for Palawan to start building the colony thereat. However, this
contingent turned against their custodians, hogtied their Superintendent and the
short-lived revolt was quelled with the timely arrival of Philippine Scout
reinforcements from Puerto Princesa, the provincial capital.

In November 1, 1905 Reorganization Act 1407 was passed into law

mandating the Philippine Commission to create the Bureau of Prisons under the
Department of Commerce and Police. Later, jurisdiction was assigned to the
Department of Public Instruction, the predecessor of the Department of Education.
Finally it nestled under the wings of the Department of Justice to which it belongs till
the present time.

One of the first acts of the Bureau upon its creation is to reverse the status of
Iwahig Penal Colony as a destination for maximum-security incorrigible prisoners.
Instead, convicts who were well behaved and pliable were assigned to this Facility.
The reason of the authorities then is to convert 38,611 hectares of fertile virgin lands
into production areas for revenue and as a means to prisoner rehabilitation.

By the Act of 1905 the Bureau of Prison was created under the Department of
Commerce and Police. Later, it was transferred under the Department of Public
Instruction and finally under the Department of Justice.

Today, this penal institution is considered as one of the most open penal
institutions in the world. It was from this facility that the term “Prison Without Walls”
had its beginnings. Iwahig is divided into four sub-colonies for a more practical
consideration of easier administration and management. These sub-colonies are
Santa Lucia, Inagawan, Montible and Central. Each sub-colony operates as an
autonomous institution under the management of a penal supervisor.

Iwahig Penal Colony, owing to its vast landholdings allocated 1,000 hectares,
which was distributed to release inmates who no longer had any desire to return to
their original homes and who instead want to settle for good in Palawan. This is the
Tagumpay Settlement, which infers a successful rehabilitation and return of prisoners
to the mainstream society. Each released prisoner awardee is given a six- hectare
farm lots as homestead.
Page 10 of 35

On November 27, 1929, Republic Act 3579 was passed into lawn
establishing the Correctional Institution for Women. This penal institution for
women was constructed on an I8-hectare piece of land in what is now
Mandaluyong City. Before the establishment of this institution, women
prisoners were confined in portion of the Bilibid Prison, in 1934, the position of
Female Superintendent was created to superintend the operations of this
penal facility. Today, the institute is run entirely by female personnel with the
exception of the perimeter guards who are male,

Another prison facility was established in 1941 in what is now

Muntinlupa City at the outskirt of Metro Manila in its boundary with the
province of Laguna. This prison establishment was constructed by virtue of
Proclamation 414 in 1931 as an enabling order to Commonwealth Act No.
3732. These official edicts were also the official basis for the opening of the
Davao Penal Colony in the island of Mindanao.

The prison authorities at the time were compelled to move away from
the Old Bilibid site because of the inevitable development of the area for
commercial purposes. Bilibid was in the immediate vicinity of Quiapo and
Santa Cruz districts, which were the principal trading and commercial center
of the country in those days. Economic growth and construction activities
rendered the Bilibid Prison to be fast becoming out of place in its present site
and in its role as the national penitentiary.

In addition, the Bilibid Prison in Manila has become overcrowded due

to the considerable increase in prison population happening continuously.

The place where the Bilibid Prison was relocated is a 552 hectare
Muntinlupa estate owned by the City of Manila. This site was previously
acquired by the city to become the site for its Boys Training School. But
because the site is far from Manila, the city gladly exchanged their Muntinlupa
property to the Bilibid facilities when the Bilibid Prisons was looking for a
relocation site. This was in 1936 and construction started immediately
thereafter.

The actual transfer of the prison was effected in 1941. It became the
New Bilibid Prison (NBP) while the one left behind in Manila was renamed the
Old Bilibid Prison to avoid confusion and became the site of the Manila City
Jail until this day. Shortly before the outbreak of World War II in the
Philippines, all the prisoners at the Old Bilibid were transferred to the NBP on
the recommendation of the cabinet. Prison labor was the main work force in
the construction of the facility.

During the war, the Japanese imperial forces used the NBP to confine
suspected guerillas and anti-Japanese Filipinos as well as American
prisoners of war. The Japanese forces also installed anti-aircraft battery
positions atop the hills OF the prison reservation. Probably, the Japanese
military thinking is that the United States warplanes will not retaliate at these
Page 11 of 35

positions because of the presence of American prisoners of war confined in

this facility.

When Manila was reoccupied by Filipino and American troops, the victors
continued to use the facilities of the NBP to camp freed American prisoners of war to
recuperate from their injuries and illnesses.. NBP also used by the American forces
as confinement facility for Japanese war collaborators. Then at the height of the Huk
rebellion after the war that intensified because of the American government refusal to
give the promised back pays to the partisans of the HUKBALAHAPs.

The Americans took the advised of the Filipino elite who also own vast
landholdings not to recognize the Huks because they were fighting for agrarian
reform which is detrimental to the vested interests of the elite “balimbings” who were
pro-Japanese and anti-Americans now became anti-Japanese and pro-Americans
when the US returned to the country.

Naturally, the Huks who were the most active guerilla units who fought the
Japanese Imperial Forces during the war did not take this lying down. They were
furious at such betrayal and non-compliance of the US on their promise to pay back
wages so they resumed their resistance. With this development, NBP was used as
incarceration facility for arrested Huks. At this point in time, the NBP became the
place of confinements for both anti-American, pro-Japanese collaborators as well as
anti- American, anti-Japanese Huk partisans.

The NBP compound houses maximum-security convicts including the death

row, the electric chair chamber when it was still in use and now the lethal injection
chamber. It is considered as one of the biggest prisons in the world in terms of the
number of inmate population. The central offices of the Bureau of Corrections are
also housed here. Eventually, it became the National Penitentiary.

The NBP, therefore, can be seen from a historical perspective that it played a
sensitive role in every ebb and flow of the country’s historical tide. It is here where
partisans in the changing political fortunes, both heroes and heels were imprisoned.
Pro-Americans were imprisoned during the Japanese times. Then, pro-Japanese
Filipinos came their turn when the Americans returned. Then the next wave of
political prisoners was the Anti-American Huks. NBPs history is truly colorful and
fascinating.

Outside the compound and within the reservation, three other satellite prisons
are situated. These are the minimum-security camp called Camp Bukang Liwayway,
the name implying the coming release of prisoners destined here. The second camp
is Camp Sampaguita, which houses medium security prisoners. The Youth
Rehabilitation Center for juvenile offenders is also situated here. And the third facility
is the Reception and Diagnostic Center that receives newly committed prisoners
coming mainly from the jails nationwide except those committed by courts within the
jurisdiction of the two Zamboanga provinces, Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi.
Sentenced prisoners coming from these provinces are directly committed to the San
Ramon Prison and Penal Farm. A skeletal! Reception and Diagnostic Office is
Page 12 of 35

available in this penal facility for the formulation of the treatment program of
committed prisoners.

The Davao Penal Colony was established at almost the same time
and under the same authority that the New Bilibid Prison was established in
January 21, 1932 by virtue of Republic Act No. 3732 and Proclamation No.
414, series of k93 1. Retired General Paulino Santos, the incumbent Prisons
Director at the time led the first contingent of prisoners that opened the colony
that covers an area of about 18,000 hectares.

During World War II, the Japanese Imperial Forces as internment and
concentration camp used the colony for captured American prisoners of war.
The Japanese transferred the prisoners who were destined here to the
inagawan sub-colony of Iwahig Penal Colony. Before the Japanese left the
facility due to the return of the Americans, they destroyed all its buildings,
machineries and industries. By August 1946, however, the colony was able to
re-establish its pre-war status.

At present, the Davao Penal Colony houses medium and minimum-

security prisoners. They work in the open fields escorted by the colony
custodial force. It has become the largest source of revenue for the Bureau of
Prisons producing abaca, banana, rice, kenaf, copra, cattle and other farm
products. It is now the biggest abaca plantation in the country. But aside from
abaca, it is also a major banana producer having secured a joint venture
agreement with Tagum Development Company in a 3,000-hectare banana
plantation. These banana products are exported to Japan, Saudi Arabia,
Egypt and many other countries. If fully utilized, its landholdings can meet the
needs of the whole inmate population of the Bureau of Corrections.

Davao Penal Colony has two sub-colonies; the Panabo sub-colony

and the Kapalong sub-colony with each under a penal supervisor. Like Iwahig
Penal Colony, Davao has also a settlement site for released prisoners who no
longer wish to return to their homes but choose to remain in Davao as
homesteaders. This settlement area is called Tanglaw Settlement.

The next penal facility to be constructed is the Reception and

Diagnostic Center, which was established in 1953 by virtue of Administrative
Order No. ii issued by the Secretary of Justice. The center was established to
enable the Bureau of Corrections to conduct a more effective rehabilitation of
prisoners committed to the Bureau’s care through a more scientific study and
diagnoses of each and every prisoner committed to the Bureau.

A year later, on September 27, 1954, the President of the Philippines

issued Proclamation No. 72 allocating 16,000 hectares of land in Sablayan,
Occidental Mindoro for the setting up of another penal colony. The Sablayan
Penal Colony and Farm was established to met the increasing population of
prisoners that is already causing serious congestion. In those times, the New
Bilibid Prison that was supposed to confine only 3,000 had a population more
than twice that capacity.
Page 13 of 35

The first contingent of prison personnel and prisoners were drawn from the
Iwahig Penal Colony. The penal colony is designed for minimum-security prisoners
and after conducting the surveys; the actual area of the land allocated by the
President has become 16,408.5 hectares. The principal activity here as in any penal
colony of the country is agriculture and rice is the main product that is not only used
by the inmate of the colony but also supplying some of the rice needs of the New
Bilibid Prison.

Another unique facility to be built by the Bureau is the Manila Office, which
was originally a holding facility for prisoners working as orderlies in the different
offices of the Department of Justice at Padre Faura, Manila. It was converted to a
regular penal institution following the riots in the New Bilibid Prison in 1958. The
hardwood shop of the Prison Industries Office was pinpointed as the source of
deadly weapons used by the rioting prisoners. As a consequence, the hardwood
shop was transferred to the Manila Office to cut the source of weapons in the New
Bilibid.

The last penal facility to be built by the Bureau of Prisons is the Leyte Regional
Prison in Abuyog, Leyte. This was established in January 16, 1973 on the orders
issued under Martial Law by President Ferdinand E. Marcos.

On the other hand, the Provincial Jail System was first established in 1910
under the American regime. Each province of the country has been mandated by the
American colonizers to establish their own provincial jails to be under their own
supervision and control.

The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology was created pursuant to

Republic Act 6975 signed on December 13, 1990 and became known as the DILG
Act of 1990.

Another landmark legislation regarding corrections is the one pertaining to

youth offenders. On December 10, 1974, Presidential Decree No. 603 otherwise
known as the Child and Youth Welfare Code of 1974 was promulgated. This code
became the Magna Carta for Children and was the first in the entire ASEAN region.

Before P.D. 603 went into effect, however, there is already a long existing law
covering the probationary treatment of juveniles in conflict with the law. This is
Commonwealth Act No. 3203 that went into effect’ on December 3, 1924. This is the
first youth offender’s law of the land. This law established the Welfare Institutions,
which took responsibility of taking charge of all government child-caring institutions,
Home for the Aged and Infirm as well as the Philippine Training School for Boys.
They were put under the supervision of the Office of Public Welfare Commission.

All these facilities were centralized and located at what was known as
Welfareville in Mandaluyong, which was still then part of the province of Rizal.
Welfareville was a fifty-hectare land with forty- (40) buildings. Five of the
buildings were for orphanages of different types of orphaned children, homes
for the homeless, neglected, displaced and abandoned boys picked up by the
police, the Philippine Training School for Boys and the Philippine Training
Page 14 of 35

School for Girls which serve for confinement institution for youths in conflict
with the laws; and a home for the aged and infirm.

In 1948, the United Nations International Children’s Educational Fund

or UNICEF conducted a study on the institutions at Welfareville and
concluded that the facilities were inadequate, insufficient and equipment poor
and the cause over-centralization. The study recommended the
decentralization of the institution and transfer to another site.

On November 29, 1969 the Philippine Training School for Boys was
transferred to Sampaloc, Tanay, Rizal where it continues to stay to this day. It
was named Vicente Madrigal Rehabilitation Center (VMRC) in honor of the
one who donated the land. Eventually, however, it returned to its old official
name, the National Training School for Boys.

On the other hand, the Philippine Training School for Girls transferred
to Alabang, which became the Marillao Hills up to this day. However, in view
of the increased incidence of child abuse and exploitation, Marillao Hills now
only has a cottage for youthful offenders.

Another agency that has a role to play in Corrections is the Public

Attorney’s Office (PAO). A brief history of the PAO is lifted from its 30th
Anniversary Program.

Benefits and Advantages of Probation

Advantages of Probation

Probation is more advantageous than imprisonment. In Probation, the

person is spared the degrading, embittering and disabling experience of
imprisonment, which might only confirm them in criminal ways. On the other
hand, the offender continue to work in his place of employment. Family ties
remain intact, thus preventing many broken home. Also, Probation is less
expensive which is only one tenth as costly as imprisonment. To the extent
that probation is being used today about 60% of convicted offenders are
given probation this type of sentencing therefore, will greatly relieve prison
congestion.

Who are disqualified for Probation?

1. Those sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more then six

(6) years;
2. Those convicted of subversion or any crime against National Security or the
Public Order;
3. Those who have previously been convicted by final judgment of an offense
punished by imprisonment of not less than one month and one day and/or
fine of not less than Two Hundred Pesos (P200.00);
Page 15 of 35

4. Those who have been once on probation under the provisions of this Decree;
and
5. Those who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive
provisions of the Probation law became applicable.

Linkages of Probation with Agencies of the Criminal Justice System

THE PUBLIC ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (PAO)

A BRIEF HISTORY

The PAO came into being in response to the challenge for a government
agency for the advancement and protection of legal rights of the less privileged
sector of our society as enshrined in the Philippine Constitution.

The seed, as it were, of the PAO was planted on August 20, 1954, when
Republic Act No. 1199 created the Agricultural Tenancy Commission, which was
later, renamed as Tenancy Mediation Commission (TMC). With the passage on
August 8, 1963 of R.A. No. 3844, otherwise known as the “Agricultural Land Reform
Code”, TMC was further strengthened and renamed as the Office of the Agrarian
Counsel (OTAC).

However, the economic and social changes that occurred since then as well
as the demands of the time, invariably blew the winds of public clamor for a more
accessible legal service to our people, thus necessitating an expansion of agrarian
related assistance provided by OTAC to include civil, criminal, administrative, and
labor cases. This paved the way for the creation of Citizen’s Legal Assistance Office.
(CLAO) under P.D. No. 1 and Implementation Order No. 4, dated October 23, 1972.
The CLAO started out with a work force of 94 lawyers and an organizational set-up,
which had 10 regional and 26 district offices.

With the advent of the Administrative Code of 1987 (E.O. 292) on July 25,
1987, the CLAO was renamed Public Attorney’s Office (PAO). The change being
merely nominal, the mandate remained the same, that is to extend legal assistance
free of charge to indigent persons in civil, criminal, administrative, and labor cases.

Since its creation, the growth of the PAO was quiet and steady with 16
regional offices, 251 district offices, and 5 sub-district offices in existence at the end
of the year 2001. There is also a rapid increase in the number of civil and criminal
cases handled annually by the PAO, from approximately 169,205 in 1992 to over
408,145 in 2001. It was able to serve a total of 5,400,637 clients for the whole year of
2001, through its rendition of free legal services which include judicial and non-
judicial services, mediation and counseling, jail visitation, inquest assistance,
documentation, legal advice and on-air counseling. This swelling workload
underscores the fact that there is a demand for free legal services from the indigent
sector of the Philippines that must be met if we would safeguard our kind of society.
Keeping pace with this daunting task is an actual work force of 940 lawyers and 760
support staff nationwide.
Page 16 of 35

From January 2001 to September 2002, the PAO field lawyers have
won 2,694 cases before the lower courts and other quasi-judicial and
administrative bodies by way of acquittals and favorable judgment] decision in
civil cases. The Special and Appealed Cases Division (SACD), PAO-Central
Office, was able to obtain 107 reduction of penalty from death to life from
January 2001 to July 2002. It was also able to obtain 14 acquittals in the
appealed cases of those accused who were sentenced to death by the lower
courts.

No less than the UNICEF and the British Embassy have recognized
the vital role the PAO plays in the justice system that they have
magnanimously shared their resources to finance seminars/workshops to
further hone the skills of its lawyers. The World Bank and UNDP, has already
signified its willingness to support trainings and seminars for PAO lawyers
and possible assistance and donation of equipment.

The Supreme Court, PHILJA and MCLE Committee, in recognition of

its mandate of providing free legal services to poor Filipinos, accredited the
PAO as a Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) provider as of
August 5, 2002, thereby allowing the PAO to conduct its own trainings and
seminars for its lawyers.

Truly, the PAO has become more accessible to the indigent Filipino
masses who are in dire need of legal assistance arid services. It has become
an institution on its own when it comes to providing free legal assistance to
the whole nation.

The PAO past leadership who all contributed to its growth and
expansion since its creation thirty (30) years ago, were as follows: Attys.
Oscar M. Ontimare (CLAO), Reynold S. Fajardo, Josefina G Bacal and
Carina J. Demaisip.

Today, the Chief Public Attorney is Hon. Persida V. Rueda-Acosta,

who is in the forefront of continuing its mandate of providing free legal
services to the poor. She catapulted the PAO to greater heights in the
delivery of its legal services through several assigned high-profile and
celebrated cases such as: the May 1, 2001 Rebellion Case, the former
Philippine President Estrada Case, and the latest is the “Angelica” Rape
Case.

MISSION

In order to focus its functions, the PAO set its sight on this Mission: to
provide the indigent litigants free access to courts, judicial and quasi-judicial,
by rendering legal assistance. This is in consonance with the Philippine
Constitution, which mandates that “free access to courts shall not be denied
to any person by reason of poverty (Sec. 11, Art. 3, 1987 Philippine
Constitution.)
Page 17 of 35

VISION

Its Vision is to be God-centered and be a dynamic organization that is

responsive to the ever-growing legal needs of the indigents led by highly competent,
world-class, development oriented and nationalistic leaders.

In support of its Mission and Vision, the PAO adheres to the following
objectives and thrust:

To provide the indigent clients with free legal services;

To provide the low-income and indigent sector access to counsel at the time of need;
and

To implement the constitutional guarantee of free access to courts, due process and
equal protection of the law and rights of a person under investigation for the
commission of an offense.

SERVICES AND SPECIAL PROJECTS OFFERED

1. Representation of indigents in judicial and quasi-judicial cases. The following are

considered indigent:

Those residing in Metro Manila, whose family income doesnot exceed P14, 000 a
month;

Those residing in other cities whose family income does not exceed P13, 000 a
month; and

Those residing in other places whose family income do not exceed P12, 000 a
month.

2. Rendition of non-judicial services like mediation, conciliation, counseling,

administration of oaths and documentation services to meet the legal aid needs of
indigent persons.

3. Conduct of legal outreach activities such as:

a) Custodial Interrogation and Inquest Investigation. Lawyers are assigned to specific

major police precincts to provide suspects access to counsel if they do not have a
lawyer of their own choice.

b) Jail Visitation. Every District Public Attorney should ensure that jails within their
territorial jurisdiction are visited at least once a month.

c) Barangay Outreach Program. The main thrust of this program is to provide a more
accessible free legal to the poverty-stricken Filipinos residing in barangays
nationwide.

d) Media Linkage- information dissemination campaigns in coordination with the print

and broadcast media for legal counseling on the air and to improve the legal literacy
of the citizenry.
Page 18 of 35

e) KALAHI Program - The PAO sends Public Attorneys and staff to

provide legal assistance in the depressed areas in Metro Manila and other
places nationwide together with other departments/agencies of the
government. This is the Arroyo Administration’s main thrust in helping the
poor of the country.

Legal assistance is extended by virtue of agreements entered into with

other government offices, directives from the Department of Justice, and
special laws. The following are qualified for services of the

PAO:

1. Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) lawyers against whom criminal and

administrative complaints have been filed for acts committed in connection
with the performance of their duties;

2. Farmer-beneficiaries of the Agrarian Reform Law:

a. in agrarian-related civil or criminal cases pending before the courts,

and

b. in cases pending before the court or the DARAB against fellow

beneficiaries where one of the parties is already represented by a
lawyer from the Department of Agrarian Reform;

3. Indigent laborers in meritorious labor cases;

4. Indigent aliens;

5. Qualified overseas contract workers in all cases within the original and
exclusive jurisdiction of the POEA;

6. Barangay health workers; and

7. The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) in the filing of

petitions for the declaration that a child is abandoned or neglected.

Republic Act 4864, otherwise known as the Police Act of 1966 mandated
the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) to formulate a National Crime
Prevention Program. In compliance with this mandate, the NAPOLCOM created
an Inter-Disciplinary Committee on Crime Prevention (IDCCP) in 1974 to draft the
National Crime Prevention Program. The IDCCP in turn, utilized for the first time,
the five-pillar approach in crime prevention. On July 22-24, 1976, the First
National Conference on a Strategy to Reduce Crime was held. Eventually, the
IDCCP evolved into the Technical Committee on Crime Prevention and Criminal
Justice and this was entrenched in the law with the enactment of Republic Act
6975 otherwise known as the Philippine National Police Act which underscored
the pivotal role of the NAPOLCOM in coming up with an annual crime prevention
program within sixty (60) days of every calendar year to be submitted to the
President and both houses of Congress through the Secretary of the DILG
Page 19 of 35

One of the priority action programs of the First National Conference on a

Strategy to Reduce Crime in 1976 was the establishment of Criminal Justice System
Coordinating Council. This Council, in turn, evolved at the local level to become the
Peace and Order Councils (POC), which was formalized on September 10, 1976
under Executive Order No. 727. This Peace and Order Council has its origin in the
Police Advisory Council of Bacolod City in the mid-sixties. The POC is the
embodiment of the five pillars of the Criminal Justice System at the local level. In
November 1987, the POC was reorganized under Executive Order No. 309 and
undergone two amendments a year later under Executive Orders 317 and 320 and
then again in 1992 under Executive Orders No. 3 and 20. All these amendments
were being done to meet the highly changing conditions and worsening crime
problem.

As a way to strengthen the community pillar of the criminal justice system, the
government issued Presidential Decree 1508 in 1978 establishing the Barangay
Court System or Katarungan Pambarangay. This system is but a return to the pre-
Spanish, traditional method of compulsory arbitration, mediation and reconciliation by
the community to conflicting parties.

Another, mechanism adapted by the government in its quest to quell the

worsening problem of criminality is the creation of the Law Enforcement Coordinating
Council (LECC), which was created in 1982 under Executive Order No. 829. Ten
years later in 1992, the LECC was reorganized with a view to strengthening it under
Executive Order No.41.

The seeds of the probation system in the country came in August 1971 when the
Philippine Government requested the services of Dr.Torsten Eriksson, UN
Interregional Adviser on Social Defense to make a study of the social defense plans
and programs in the Philippines. Among the recommendations forwarded by Dr.
Eriksson is the strengthening of the criminal justice system and adoption of the
probation system in dealing with convicted offenders

Probation for adult offenders in the Philippines started in 1976 through

Presidential Decree 968. Adult probation can be availed of only once, and usually by
first time offenders, for penalties of imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years except
political crimes such as rebellion, subversion, sedition and others. Probation is
considered a privilege, not a right. Thus, an offender has to apply for it before the
court upon his conviction and it would depend on the discretion of the Judge is such
privilege will be granted to the probation applicant.

Probation was first implemented in the country during the Commonwealth

period when the Philippine Assembly enacted Act No. 4221 otherwise known as the
Probation Act. It is extended to first time offenders 18 years old and above. After only
about two years of operation, however, the law was abolished for having been
classified as class legislation and declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
What was been seen by the highest court of the land as unlawful is the provision that
probation shall be operable only in cities and municipalities which are given
appropriation for said purpose by Congress.
Page 20 of 35

The Board of Pardons and Parole was established in 1933 in

compliance with Act No. 4103, otherwise known as the Indeterminate
Sentence Law, which provided among others, the creation of a Board of
Indeterminate Sentence. It was later renamed as Board of Pardons in 1937
by virtue of Executive Order No. §, series of 1937, which tasked the Board to
become the adviser of the President on matters pertaining to the course or
courses of actions to take on petitions for executive clemency. Then the
Board was again renamed to the Board of Pardons and Parole on October 4,
1947 under Executive Order No. 94, otherwise known as the Reorganization
Law of 1947. Again on June 19, 1965, Act No. 4103 was amended by R.A.
4203, which provided the qualification, term of office, composition and
compensation of members of the Board.

The Adult Probation Law and Other Probation Laws

Presidential Decree No. 968, As Amended
Goal and Purposes of Probation

PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 968

ESTABLISHING A PROBATION SYSTEM,

APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

WHEREAS, one of the major goals of the government is to establish a

more enlightened and humane correctional system that will promote the
reformation of offenders and thereby reduce the incidence of recidivism.

WHEREAS, the confinement of all offenders in prisons and other

institutions with rehabilitation programs constitutes a onerous drain on the
financial resources of the country; and

WHEREAS, there is need to provide a less costly alternative to the

imprisonment of offenders who are likely to respond to individualized,
community-based treatment programs;

Purpose. - This decree shall be interpreted so as to:

a) promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing him with

individualized] treatment;
b) provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent offender which might
be less probable if he were to serve a prison sentence; and prevent the
commission of offenses.
Page 21 of 35

Meaning of Terms. - As used in this decree; the following shall, unless the
context otherwise requires, be construed thus:

a) “Probation” is a disposition, under which a defendant, after conviction and

sentence, is released subject to condition imposed by the court and to
supervision of a probation officer,
b) “Probationer” means a person placed on probation,
c) “Probation Officer” means one, who investigates for the court a referral for
probation or supervises a probationer or both,

Grant of Probation. - Subject to the provisions of this Decree, the trial court
may, after it shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant, and upon application
by said defendant within the period for perfecting an appeal, suspend the execution
of the sentence and place the defendant on probation for such period and upon such
terms and conditions as it may deem best; provided, That, no application for
probation shall be entertained or granted if the dependant has perfected an appeal
from the judgment of conviction.

Probation may be granted whether the sentence imposes a term of imprisonment

or a fine only. An application for probation shall be deemed a waiver of the right to
appeal able.

An order granting or denying probation shall not be appeal

Post-Sentence Investigation. - no person shall be placed on probation except

upon prior investigation by the probation officer and a determination by the court that
the ends of justice and the best interest of the public as well as that of the defendant
will be served thereby.

Form of Investigation Report. – the Investigation report to be submitted by the

probation officer under Section 5 hereof shall be in the form prescribed by the
Probation Administrator and approved by the Secretary of Justice.

Period for Submission of Investigation Report. - The probation officer shall

submit to the court the investigation report on a defendant not later than sixty days
from receipt of the order of said court to conduct the investigation. The court shall
resolve the application fir probation not later than fifteen days after receipt if said
report.
Page 22 of 35

Pending submission of the investigation and the resolution of petition, the

defendant may be allowed on temporary liberty under his bailed filed in the
criminal case; Provided, that in case where no bail filed in the criminal case;
Provided, That, in case where no bail was filed or that the defendant is incapable
of filing one, the court may allow the release of the defendant on recognizance to
the custody of a responsible member of the community who shall guarantee his
appearance whenever required by the court.

Criteria for Placing an Offender on Probation. - In determining whether

an offender may be placed on probation, the courts shall consider all information
relative to the character antecedents, environment, mental and physical condition
of the offender and available institutional and community resources. Probation
shall be denied if the court finds that:

a) the offender is in need of correctional treatment that can be provided most

effectively by his commitment to an institution;
b) there is an undue risk that during the period of probation, the offender will
commit another crime; or
c) probation will depreciate the seriousness of the offense committed.

Disqualified Offenders. - The benefits of this Decree shall not be extended

to those:

(a) sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six (6)
years;
(b) convicted of subversion or any crime against national security or the public
order;
(c) who have previously been convicted by final judgment of an offense
punished by imprisonment of not less than one month and one day and/or
fine of not less than Two Hundred Pesos (P200.00);
(d) who have been once on probation under the provisions of this Decree; and
(e) who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive provisions of
this Decree became applicable pursuant to Sec. 33 hereof.

Conditions of Probation. - Every probation order issued by the court shall

contain conditions requiring that the probationer shall;
Page 23 of 35

(a) present himself to the probation officer designated to undertake his

supervision at such place as may be specified in the order within seventy
two (72) hours from receipt of said order;
(b) report to the probation officer at least once a month at such time and place
as specified by said officer.
The court may also require the probationer to:

(a) cooperate with a program of supervision;

(b) meet his family responsibilities;
(c) devote himself to specific employment and not to change said employment
without the prior written approval of the probation officer;
(d) undergo medical, psychological or psychiatric examination and treatment
and enter and remain in a specified institution, when required for that
purpose;
(e) pursue a prescribed secular study or vocational training;
(f) attend or reside in a facility established for instruction, recreation or
residence of persons on probation;
(g) refrain from visiting houses of ill-repute;
(h) abstain from drinking intoxicating beverages to excess;
(i) permit the probation officer or an authorized social worker to visit his home
and place of work;
(j) reside at premises approved by it and not to change his residence without
its prior written approval; or
(k) satisfy any other conditions related to the rehabilitation of the defendant and
not unduly restrictive of his liberty or incompatible with his freedom of
conscience.

Effectivity of Probation Order. - a probation order shall take effect upon

its issuance, at which time the court shall inform the offender of the consequence
thereat and explain that upon his failure to comply with any of the conditions
prescribed in the said order or his commission of another offense, he shall serve
the penalty imposed for the offense under which he was placed on probation.
Modification of Conditions of Probation. - During the period of probation,
the court may, upon application of either the probationer or the probation officer,
revise or modify the conditions or period of probation. The court shall notify either
the probationer or the probation officer of the filing of such an application so as to
give both parties an opportunity to be heard thereon.
Page 24 of 35

The court shall inform in writing the probation officer and the probationer of
any change in the period or conditions of probation
Control and Supervision of Probationer. - The probationer and his
probation program shall be under the control of the court that placed him on
probation subject to actual supervision and visitation by a probation officer.
Whenever a probationer is permitted to reside in a place under the
jurisdiction of another court, control over him shall be transferred to the
Executive Judge of the Court of First Instance of that place, in such a case, a
copy of the probation order, the investigation report and other pertinent
records shall be furnished said Executive Judge. Thereafter, the Executive
Judge to whom jurisdiction over the probationer is transferred shall have the
power with respect to him that was previously possessed by the court, ,which
granted the probation.

Violation of Probation Conditions and Arrest of Probationer

Arrest of Probationers: Subsequent

Disposition. - At any time during probation, the court may issue a warrant
for the arrest of a probationer for any serious violation of the conditions of
probation, the probationer, once arrested and detained, shall immediately be
brought before the court for a hearing of the violation charged. The defendant
may be admitted to bail pending such hearing. In such case, the provisions
regarding release on bail of persons charged with a crime shall be applicable to
probationers arrested under this provision.

In the hearing, which shall be summary in nature, the probationer shall have
the right to be informed of the violation charged and to adduce evidence in his
favor. The court shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence but may inform
itself of all the facts, which are material and relevant to ascertain the veracity of
the charge. A prosecuting officer in any contested hearing shall represent the
State. If the violation is established, the court may revoke or continue his
probation and modify the conditions thereof. If revoked, the court shall order the
probationer to serve the sentence originally imposed. An order revoking the grant
of probation or modifying the terms and conditions thereof shall not be appeal
able.

Termination of Probation. - After the period of probation and upon

consideration of the report and recommendation of the probation officer, the court
Page 25 of 35

may order the final discharge of the probationer upon finding that he has fulfilled
terms and conditions of his probation and thereupon, the case is deemed
terminated.

The final discharge of the probationer shall operate to restore to him all civil
rights lost or suspended as a result of his conviction and to fully discharge his
liability for any fine imposed as to the offense for which probation was granted.

The probationer and the probation officer shall each be furnished with a
copy of such order.

Confidentiality of Records. -The Investigation Reports and the supervision history

of a probationer obtained under this Decree shall be privileged and shall not be
disclosed directly and indirectly to anyone other than the Probation Administration or
the court concerned, except that the court, in its discretion, may permit the
probationer or his attorney to inspect the aforementioned documents or parts thereof
whenever he best interest of the probationer makes such disclosure desirable or
helpful; Provided, further, That, any government office or agency engaged in the
correction or rehabilitation of offenders may, if necessary, obtain copies of said
documents for its official use from the proper court or the Administration.

The Probation Administration. - There is hereby created under the Department of

Justice an agency to be known as the Probation Administration herein referred to as
the Administration, which shall exercise general supervision over all probationers.

The Administration shall have such staff, operating units and personnel as
may be necessary for the proper execution of its functions.

Probation Administrator. - The Administration shall be headed by the Probation

Administrator, hereinafter referred to as the Administrator, who shall be appointed by
the President of the Philippines. He shall hold office having good behavior and shall
not be removed except for cause.

Powers and duties shall be to:

a) act as the executive officer of the administration;

b) exercise supervision and control over all probation officers;
Page 26 of 35

c) make annual reports to the Secretary of Justice in such form as the latter
may prescribe, concerning the probation, administration and improvement
of the probation system;
d) promulgate subject to the approval of the Secretary of Justice, the
necessary rules relative to the methods and procedures of the probation
process;
e) recommend to the Secretary of Justice the appointment of the
subordinate personnel of his administration and other offices established
in this decree; and
f) generally, perform such duties and exercise such power as may be
necessary or incidental to achieve the objectives of this Decree.

Assistant Probation Administrator. - There shall be an Assistant

Probation Administrator who shall assist the Administrator and perform such
duties as may be assigned to him by the latter and as may be provided by
law, In the absence of the Administrator, he shall act as head of the
Administration.
He shall be appointed by the President of the Philippines.

PARDON

Pardon is a form of executive clemency which is exercised by the

Chief Executive. It is an act of grace and the recipient of pardon is not entitled
to it as a matter of right. The exercise of pardon is vested in the Chief
Executive, and as such is discretionary and is not subject to review by the
courts. Neither does the Legislative Branch of the Government have the right
to establish conditions nor provide procedures for the exercise of clemency.

History of Pardon.

The exercise of pardoning power has always been vested in the

hands of the executive branch of the government, whether King, Queen,
President or Governor. Pardon dates back to the pre-Christian era. In fact the
Bible contains an allusion where a criminal was released and pardoned by the
King at the time Christ was crucified.

In England, pardon developed out of the conflict between the King and
the Nobles who threatened his powers. Pardon was applied to members of
the Royal family who committed crimes, and occasionally to those convicted
of offenses against the royal power. It was the general view that the
pardoning power was the exclusive prerogative of the King. In England today
the power to extend pardon is vested in the Queen upon advise of the
Minister of the Interior.
Page 27 of 35

In the United States, pardon among the early American colonies was a carry-
over of the England practice. The pardoning power was exercised by the Royal
governor through the power delegated by the King. After the declaration of
independence, the federal and state constitutions vested the pardoning power on the
President of the United States and the Governors in federal and state cases,
respectively.

In the Philippines, the pardoning power is vested in the President by Article

VII, Sec. 10, Par. (b) of the Philippine Constitution which states:

“The President shall have the power to grant reprieves, commutations, and
pardons, and remit forfeitures, after conviction for all offenses, except in cases of
impeachment, upon such conditions and with such restrictions and limitations as he
may deem proper to impose. He shall have the power to grant amnesty with the
concurrence of the National Assembly.”

Kinds of Pardon.

As practiced in the Philippines, there are two kinds of pardons, namely the
absolute and conditional pardon.

Absolute Pardon

Absolute pardon is one which is given without any condition attached to it.
The purpose of this kind of pardon are:

a. To do away with the miscarriage of justice

i. Under the present method of judicial procedure justice is not

guaranteed. It is possible to convict innocent persons as it is
possible for criminals to escape the hands of justice. When an
innocent convict has no more recourse through courts, then
the remedy is absolute pardon. The power of the President to
pardon offenders on the grounds of innocence is rarely
exercised because the criminal procedures are liberal in
granting a new trial in the case of an offender who can
establish his innocence after he has been found guilty. Only
when the offender has no more legal remedy will pardon of this
nature be given. If so exercised absolute pardon is granted
after an exhaustive investigation is conducted and upon
recommendation of the Secretary of Justice.

b. To keep abreast with the current philosophy, concept or practice of

criminal justice administration.

ii. A criminal act, because of the changing scheme of social

values, may become non-criminal at a later date. Therefore,
persons serving imprisonment at the repeal of the law
abolishing the crime may be extended absolute pardon. For
example, a person serving imprisonment for the black-
marketing of gasoline when this commodity was rationed, may
Page 28 of 35

after the repeal of the law on black-marketing be extended

absolute pardon.

c. To restore full political and civil rights of persons who have already
served their sentence and have waited the prescribed period.

iii. The greatest number of applications for absolute pardon come

from ex-prisoners who desire to be restored their political and
civil rights. In the Philippines, the Office of the President laid
down the policy to grant absolute pardon to ex-prisoners ten
years from the date of their release from prison. Recently, the
policy was released, thereby shortening the waiting period to
five years. The waiting period is required to give the offender
an opportunity to demonstrate that he has established a new
pattern of conduct.

Effects of Absolute Pardon.

Absolute pardon does not work to restore the right to hold public office
or the right of suffrage, unless such rights are expressly restored by the terms
of the pardon. A pardon does not exempt the offender from the payment of
civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence. Absolute pardon totally
extinguishes the criminal liability but not the right of the offended party to
enforce the civil liability against the offender.2

In Cristobal vs. Labrador, et al., 71 Phil. 34, the Supreme Court laid
down the doctrine that absolute pardon removed all that is left of the
consequences of conviction, and that is absolute insofar as it restores the
pardonee to full civil and political rights.

In another case, the Supreme Court reiterated the doctrine laid down
in the Cristobal vs. Labrador case and elucidated further that “an absolute
pardon not only blots out the crime but removes all disabilities resulting from
the conviction; and that when granted after the term of imprisonment has
expired, absolute pardon removes all that is left of the consequences of
conviction.” (Pelobello vs. Palatino, 72 Phil. 441).

Differences Between Amnesty and Pardon.

Pardon includes any crime and is exercised individually by the

Chief Executive, while amnesty is a blanket pardon granted to a group of
prisoners, generally political prisoners.

Pardon is exercised when the person is already convicted while

amnesty may be given before trial or investigation is held.

In Barrio Quinto, et al. vs. Fernandez, O.G. 303, the Supreme Court
distinguished pardon from amnesty in that “pardon is granted by the Chief
Executive and as such it is private which must be pleaded and proved by the
person pardoned, because the courts take no notice thereof; while amnesty is
by proclamation with concurrence of Congress, and it is a public act which the
Page 29 of 35

courts should take judicial notice. Pardon is granted to one after conviction,
while amnesty is granted to classes of persons who may be guilty of political
offenses, generally before or after the institution of criminal prosecution and
sometimes after conviction.”

Limitations of the Pardoning Power.

The power of the Chief Executive to grant pardon is limited to the following:

a. Pardon cannot be extended in case of impeachment. (Art. VII, Sec. 10, Par.
2, Constitution of the Philippines)

b. No pardon, parole or suspension of sentence for the violation of any election

law, may be granted without favorable recommendation of the Commission
on Elections. (Art. X, Sec. 2, Par. 2, Constitution of the Philippines).

c. Pardon is exercised only after conviction.

It is an elementary principle in political law that pardon can only be given after
final conviction. Cases pending trial or on appeal are still within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Courts, hence, pursuant to the theory of separation of
powers, the Chief Executive has no jurisdiction over the accused.

Conditional Pardon.

Conditional pardon serves the purpose of releasing, through executive

clemency, a prisoner who is already reformed or rehabilitated but who cannot be
paroled because the parole law does not apply to him. Thus, a prisoner serving a
determinate sentence or life imprisonment is excluded from the benefits of the parole
law. However, when this prisoner has already been reformed, he may be released on
conditional pardon.

Nature of Conditional Pardon.

Conditional pardon is in the nature of a contract; it must first be accepted by

the recipient before it takes effect. The pardonee is under obligation to comply strictly
with the conditions imposed therein; otherwise, his non-compliance will result in the
revocation of the pardon (Art. 95, RPC). If the pardonee violates any- of the
conditions of his pardon, he will be prosecuted criminally as a pardon violator. Upon
conviction, the accused will be sentenced to serve an imprisonment at a prison
correctional. However, if the penalty remitted by the granting of such pardon is higher
than six years, the pardonee will be made to serve the unexpired portion of his
original sentence. (Art. 159, RPC).

How Conditional Pardon is Given.

Conditional pardon may be commenced by a petition filed by the prisoner, his

family or relative, or upon the recommendation of the prison authorities. The
petition or request processed by the Board of Pardons and Parole. The Board
shall determine if the prisoner has served a sufficient portion of his sentence;
if his release is not inimical to the interest of the community; and if there is no
Page 30 of 35

likelihood that the offender will not become a public charge and will not
recidivate in crime. If all these factors are favorable, then the Board will
endorse the petition favorably to the President. If the case is premature, the
petitioner is so informed.

Some Guides in Pardon Selection.

In determining the fitness of a prisoner for release on conditional

pardon, the following points shall be considered as guides.

a) The political, organization or religious affiliation of the prisoner

should be disregarded.

b) Due (but not undue) regard should be given the attitude of the
people in the community from which he was sentenced.

c) The judicial history of the case should be carefully

investigated.

d) The background of the prisoner before he was committed to

prison — social, economic, psychological and emotional
backgrounds — should be carefully investigated.

Conditional Pardon Distinguished from Parole.

The purpose of conditional pardon and parole is the same — the

release of a prisoner who is already reformed in order that he can continue to
serve his sentence outside of the institution, thus giving him the opportunity to
gradually assume the responsibilities of a free man. Both releases are subject
to the same set of conditions, a violation of any of such conditions will subject
the parolee or pardonee to be recommitted to prison. The only difference
between the two is the granting authority. In parole, the granting authority is
the Board of Pardons and Parole, while in conditional pardon, the granting
authority is the President.

Conditions of Pardon.

In the Philippines, the pardonee is given the same set of rules or

conditions as the parollee. Among the conditions usually imposed on
pardonees and parolees are the following:

a. That he shall live in his parole residence and shall not change his
residence during the period of his parole without first obtaining the
consent of the Board of Pardons and Parole.

If the parolee or pardonee leaves the parole jurisdiction

temporarily, he need not get the permission of the board, although he
may so inform his parole officer (municipal judge) of his whereabouts.

b. That he shall report to the Municipal Judge (of the area where he will
reside) or to such officers as may be designated by the Executive
Officer of the Board of Pardons and Parole during the first years once
Page 31 of 35

a month and, thereafter, once every two months or as often as he may

be required to by the said officer.

c. That he shall not indulge in any injurious or vicious habits, and shall
avoid places or persons of disreputable or harmful character.

d. That he shall permit the Provincial Commander, Philippine

Constabulary or any officer designated by the Executive Officer of the
Board to visit him at reasonable times at his place of abode or
elsewhere and shall truthfully answer any reasonable inquiries
concerning his conduct or condition.

e. That he shall not commit any crime and shall conduct himself in an
orderly manner.

f. That he shall pay not less than P50.00 a month to the cashier of the
Department of Justice in payment of the indemnity imposed upon him.
This condition is not strictly adhered to unless the pardonee is
regularly employed.

g. That he shall comply with such orders as the Board or its Executive

Officer may from time to time make.

Abuse of the Pardon Power and Its Safeguards.

The power vested on the President by the Constitution to grant pardon is very
broad and exclusive. It is not subject to review by the Courts. Neither does Congress
have the right to establish conditions nor provide procedure for the exercise of
pardon. Under these circumstances, it is therefore possible that this power can be
abused by unscrupulous Chief Executives. In fact, in nearly every presidential
election, the alleged abuse of the pardoning power has come up as a campaign
issue against the incumbent President. The truth of the charge has never been
investigated, but the fact that the alleged anomaly is aired publicly is an indication
that the power to grant pardon may be abused.

There are certain safeguards, however, against the abuse of the pardoning
power.

First is the constitutional provision that the President may be impeached for a willful
violation of the constitution. This is enough deterrent for the Chief Executive to abuse
this power. Second, is the policy of the Officer of the Chief Executive, ever since the
time of the American Governor Generals, to approve pardon cases which are
favorably recommended by the Board of Pardons and Parole. Although this policy
does not wholly bind the President, seldom, if ever, has it been disregarded.

Is Pardon Necessary in Our Penal System?

Judges are human and are therefore apt to commit errors. It is possible for an
innocent person to get convicted as it is possible for a criminal to escape the
Page 32 of 35

hands of justice to prove his innocence, or he may not have the money to hire a
good counsel. Many of our penal laws are outmoded and have not kept abreast
with the current trends of criminal justice administration. Judges are limited by
laws as to the use of discretion they may exercise in any given case. Under any
of the above circumstances, an injustice may result, which can only be remedied
by the exercise of pardon.

Ideally, all releases should be by parole. Society can only be sufficiently

protected against the ex-prisoner if the latter is released through parole or
conditional pardon. Unfortunately, not all sentences are indeterminate so that
some prisoners are deprived of the privilege of parole. Therefore, pardon is
necessary for the prisoners who do not fall under the parole law.

Other forms of Executive Clemency: Amnesty.

Amnesty is a general pardon extended to groups of persons and is

generally exercised by executive clemency with the concurrence of Congress.
Usually the recipients of amnesty are the political offenders, although there
are some exceptions. For example, President Truman issued two
proclamations granting amnesty to unnamed persons, one at the end of
World War II in 1945 and another at the end of the Korean conflict in 1952. In
these cases, the persons have been convicted of crimes against the United
States but were pardoned by the terms of a proclamation for having served in
the armed forces for at least a year during the conflict. Those who did so
received pardons without having to apply for them.

The Supreme Court, in the case of People vs. Santos, et al., 47 O.G.
6168, stated that the “purpose of amnesty is to bring about the return of
dissidents and recalcitrant elements of our population to their homes and to
ensure the resumption of their lawful pursuits, or occupations, as loyal and
law-abiding citizens, to accelerate the rehabilitation of the war-devastated
country, restore peach and order, and secure the welfare and happiness of
the communities.”

Amnesty looks backward and abolishes or puts into oblivion the

offense with which a person is charged such that the person released by
amnesty stands before the law as though he had committed no offense.

Amnesty is extended to the convicted as well as to persons who have

not yet been tried by the court.

Some of the proclamations of amnesty are as follows:

1. Proclamation No. 51 — This proclamation was issued by the late

President Manuel Roxas on January 28, 1948, granting amnesty to
those who collaborated with the enemy during World Ward IL

2. Proclamation No, 76 — This was issued by President Elpidio Quirino

on June 21, 1948, extending amnesty to leaders of the Hukbalahap
and Pambansang Kaisahan ng mga Magbubukid (PKM). The amnesty
Page 33 of 35

applied to crimes of rebellion, sedition, illegal associations, assault,

resistance and disobedience to persons in authority and the illegal
possession of firearms.

3. Proclamation No. 51was issued in order to attain the following

objectives:

a. To pardon those who committed crimes against the security of the

state who have changed their attitude towards the government and
have voluntarily surrendered with their arms and ammunitions

b. To get the dissidents back into the fold of law-abiding citizens

c. To gather the loose firearms

Commutation.

Commutation is an act of clemency by which an executive act

changes a heavier sentence to a less serious one or a longer term to a
shorter term. It may alter death or life sentence to a term of years.
Commutation does not forgive the offender but merely reduces the penalty
pronounced by the court. In almost all instances commutation has been used
to substitute a death penalty or life sentence for a term of years.

Purposes of Commutation.

Some of the common uses of commutation are the following:

a. To break the rigidity of the law

Some penal laws are rigid and unusually

cruel; for example, a law making qualified theft, the stealing of young
coconuts from the trees, or fish from the fishpond, or sugar cane from the
sugar cane field. Qualified theft imposes an unusually heavy penalty on the
culprit which is greatly disproportionate to the value of the article stolen. Even
if the judge would want to impose a light penalty, he could not do so because
his hands are tied by the provision of the law. The sentence in this cast may
be reduced by commutation of sentence.

b. To extend parole in cases where the parole law do not apply Commutation
enables the recipient to be released on parole when his sentence does not
allow him parole, like, for example, when the sentence is determinate or is a
life sentence, or when the prisoner is serving two or more sentences. The
sentence maybe changed to an indeterminate sentence by commutation to
sentence.

c. To save the life of a person sentenced to death

This is one of the most common uses of commutation of sentence. In the

Philippines, 95% of death penalty cases are commuted to life imprisonment.
Page 34 of 35

Procedures in Commutation.

When the sentence of Death Penalty is confirmed by the Supreme

Court, the condemned man or the head of the prison system (Director of
Prisons) may file a petition for commutation. The prisoner is subjected to a
social, psychological and psychiatric examination by the Staff of the
Reception Center. The inquiry will include the sociological history of the
prisoner, his criminal history, mental and psychological capacities, work
history, etc., the purpose of which is to determine the degree of involvement
in the crime the prisoner has been found guilty of and to determine if he
deserves to be given a new lease in life. The petition is then forwarded to the
Board of Pardons and Parole, together with the reports of examination of the
Reception and Diagnostic Center and the recommendation of the Director of
Prisons on the petition.

The Board of Pardons and Parole processes the petition and will
deliberate on the recommendation after a careful study of the papers,
including the reports of the Reception and Diagnostic Center. It will then
forward the petition, including its recommendation, to the President. The
President will then act on the petition. In giving or denying commutation, the
President may or may not follow the recommendation of the Board of Pardons
and Parole.

Reprieve.

Reprieve is a temporary stay of the execution of sentence. As in

pardon, reprieve can only be exercised by the President when the sentence
has become final. Generally, reprieve is extended to death penalty prisoners.
The date of the execution of sentence is set back several days to enable the
Chief Executive to study the petition of the condemned man for the
commutation of sentence or pardon.

Good-Conduct-Time Allowance.

Conditional release is the statutory shortening of the maximum

sentence the prisoner serves because of good behavior while in prison. This
called “good-conduct-time” and is given by law as motivation for good
behavior while serving sentence in prison.

Good-conduct-time allowance is automatically applied to reduce the

sentence but may be taken away from the prisoner if he fails to obey the rules
and regulations of the prison. However, good-conduct-time allowance may be
remitted as a reward for exceptional services the prisoner may render to the
prison administration, or after the lapse of some time when the prisoner has
sufficiently demonstrated that he has reformed.

If the prisoner does not forfeit his statutory good-conduct-time

allowance through misbehavior, he is released at the expiration of his
sentence less the period of good-conduct-time earned. He is released under
supervision as if on parole and subjected to all parole conditions which, if
Page 35 of 35

violated, will result in the issuance of a warrant, revocation of his release, and
the requirement that he return to prison to serve the maximum term.

In the Philippines, the prisoner who is released from prison after serving his
sentence less the good-conduct-time allowance, is released without any condition
and is considered to have served his sentence in full.

Act No. 2489, otherwise known as the Industrial Good Time Law, pries that
when a prisoner has classified as trusty or penal colonist, he is given an additional 5
days time allowance for every month of service. A prisoner serving lifetime sentence
as his sentence automatically reduced to 30 years of imprisonment upon attaining
the classification of trusty or penal colonist.

Rule of Probation in the Correctional System

Probation is a part of the correctional system. It cannot be properly

considered as an independent subject. It is only a phase of penology, and therefore,
it must be viewed in its relation to other aspects of the enforcement of the criminal
laws and its proper perspective. It is only a part of an entire structure and only a
single feature of a well-grounded system.

Probation is a form of treatment of the convicted offenders. It is not clemency,

pity, or leniency to the offender, but rather a substitute for imprisonment. There are
some offenders who must go to prison for their own good and for the good of society
because their presence in the community constitutes a threat to law and order.
Others less inured to crime can remain in the community after conviction where they
are given a chance to conform with the demands of society Probation is compared to
an out-patient. The out-patient does not need to be hospitalized because his
sickness is not serious. However, the patient must remain under the care and
supervision of his family physician in order that his sickness will not become more
serious. Similarly, the probationer does not need to go to prison, but he should
remain under the supervision and guidance of his probation officer in order that he
will not become a more serious offender.

Probation is given in cases in which the ends of justice do not require that the
offender go to prison. This is so when all the following circumstances exist: that there
is a strong likelihood that the defendant will reform; that there is little danger of his
seriously injuring or harming members of society by further crimes, as for instance,
his case is not a violent crime and that he has no previous record of conviction; and
that the deterrent effect of imprisonment on other criminals is not required.