CA 2: Non-Institutional Correction

CHAPTER 1

OVERVIEW OF THE PHILIPPINE

CORRECTIONS SYSTEM

Learning Objectives:
At the end of this chapter, the students will be able to:
1. Define Criminal Justice System;
2. Identify the Five Pillars of the Philippine Criminal
Justice System;
3. Identify and describe some of t
4. he early forms of Punishment;
5. Explain the salient points of Philippine Corrections System;
6. Describe the Institutional Based Correction; and
7. Identify the agencies related to Institutional Based Correction.

The Criminal Justice System of the Philippines

The Criminal Justice System refers to the system or process in the community by which crimes are
investigated, and the persons suspected thereof are taken into custody, prosecuted in court and punished,
if found guilty, provisions being made for their correction and rehabilitation it addresses the consequences
of criminal behavior in society and has the objective of protecting peoples' right to safety and the enjoyment
of human rights expresses two central ideas. The first is that criminals and victims of crime have certain
rights, while the second is that criminal conduct should be prosecuted and punished by the state following
set laws.3
The Philippine criminal justice system is composed of five parts or pillars, namely, Law Enforcement,
Prosecution, Judiciary, Penology, and the Community (Valle-Corpuz, 1998). These institutions are
responsible for preventing crimes, enforcement of laws, and apprehension and prosecution of those who
violate the law. If the courts of law find them guilty of committing a crime, they shall be confined in order for
those people to be rehabilitated and to be reintegrated into the community as law abiding citizens (Bravo,
2019). These components operate in a manner being interdependent and supportive of one another in
order to achieve the very purpose of the system.

FIVE PILLARS OF THE PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

I. Law Enforcement
The law enforcement consists of the offers and wen of the Philippine National Police (PNP), the National
Bureau of Investigation
(NBI), and other agencies. Law Enforcement effects the arrest of those people who violated the law (Bravo,
2019). When they learn of the commission of crimes or discover them, their duty is to (Valle-Corpuz, 1998):
1. Investigate the crime which may take the form of surveillance and observation of suspects, other
persons and premises; interviewing persons with knowledge of facts directly or indirectly connected
with the offense; taking photographs (surreptitiously or otherwise); arranging for entrapment;
searching premises and persons subject to constitutional and statutory safeguards; and examining
public and other available records pertaining to the persons involved and getting copies of pertinent
entries.
2. Arrest suspects by virtue of a warrant of arrest issued by a judge on the basis of evidence
submitted by them or under circumstances justifying a warrant's arrest.
3. Refer the case and the suspects to the Office of the Public Prosecutor or Municipal Trial Court for
preliminary investigation or directly to the Municipal Trial Court for trial and judgment.

II. Prosecution
The Prosecution considers the background to determine whether the person arrested for violating a law
should be prosecuted (Bravo,
2019). The investigation and prosecution of all cases involving violations of penal laws are lodged with the
Department of Justice (DOJ) through its National Prosecution Service (NPS).
The Department of Justice (DOJ is headed by the Secretary of Justice with three Undersecretaries
assisting him. It is mandated to uphold the rule of law and ensure the effective and efficient administration
of justice. It acts as the principal law agency and legal counsel of the government. Aside from being the
prosecution arm of the government, the DOJ shall have the following powers and functions (Valle-Corpuz,
1998):
1. Act as principal law agency of the government and as legal counsel and representative thereof,
whenever so required;
1. Administer the probation and correction system;
2. Extend free legal assistance/ representation to indigents and poor litigants in criminal cases and
noncommercial civil disputes;
3. Preserve the integrity of land titles through proper registration;
4. Investigate and arbitrate untitled land disputes involving small landowners and members of
indigenous cultural communities;
5. Provide immigration and naturalization regulatory services and implement the laws governing
citizenship and the admission and stay of aliens;
Provide legal services to the national government and its functionaries, including government
owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries; and
6. Perform such other functions as may be provided by law. It consists of the following constituent
units:
 Department proper;
 Office of the Government Counsel;
 National Bureau of Investigation;
 Public Attorney's Office;
 Board of Pardons and Parole;
 Parole and Probation Administration;
 Bureau of Corrections;
 Land Registration Authority;
 Bureau of Immigration; and
 Commission on the Settlement of Land Problems.

The National Prosecution Service (NPS) is mandated to assist the Secretary of Justice in the performance
of powers and functions of the Department relative to its role as the prosecution arm of the government,
particularly the investigation and prosecution of criminal offenses (DOJ, 2007). It is composed of the
Prosecution Staff in the Office of the Secretary of Justice headed by the Chief State Prosecutor, the
Regional State Prosecution Offices headed by Regional State Prosecutors, and the Provincial and City
Prosecution Offices headed by the Provincial Prosecutor and City Prosecutor, respectively (Valle-Corpuz,
1998).

The Prosecution Staff or State Prosecutors perform the following

functions (Valle-Corpuz, 1998):
1. Investigate administrative charges against prosecutors and other prosecution officers;
2. Conduct the investigation and prosecution of all crimes;
3. Prepare legal opinions on queries involving violations of the Revised Penal Code and special
penal laws; and
4. Review appeals from the resolutions of prosecutors and other prosecuting officers in connection
with criminal cases handled by them.

Regional State Prosecutors have the following functions (Valle-

Corpuz, 1998):
1. Implement policies, plans, programs, memoranda, orders, circulars and rules and regulations of
the DOJ relative to the investigation and prosecution of criminal cases in his region;
2. Exercise immediate administrative supervision over all Provincial and City Prosecutors and other
prosecuting officers of provinces and cities comprised within his region;
3. Prosecute any case arising within the region.

Provincial and City Prosecutors have the following functions

(Valle-Corpuz, 1998):
 1. Be the law officer of the province or city, as the case may be. He shall have charge of the
prosecution of all crimes, misdemeanors and violations of city or municipal ordinances in the courts
of such province or city and shall therein discharge all the duties incident to the institution of criminal
prosecutions;
2. Investigate and/or cause to be investigated all charges of crimes, misdemeanors and violations of
all perial laws ant ordinances within their respective jurisdictions and have the necessary
information or complaint prepared or made against the persons accused.
3. Investigate commissions of criminal acts and take an active part in the gathering of relevant
evidence.
4. Act aslegal adviser of the municipality, and municipal district of the provinces or the provincial or
city government and its officers or of the city.
5. Assist the Solicitor General, when so deputized in the public interest, in the performance of any
function or in the discharge of any duty incumbent upon the latter, within the territorial jurisdiction of
the former.

III. Court
The Court or Judiciary is the cornerstone of the system wherein it determines whether the person charged
with a criminal offense is guilty or not. Its function is to conduct cross examination of the witness before the
issuance of the warrant either warrant of arrest or search warrant; to conduct arraignment and to hold trial
before giving final decision of the case (Bravo, 2019).
It the preliminary investigation results in the finding that a crime has been committed and the suspect is
probably guilty thereof, the public prosecutor will file the corresponding information in the proper court; thus,
activating the judicial process (Valle-Corpuz., 1998).

The case shall then be set for arraignment which is the first stage of a criminal action. It consists of the
reading of the information or criminal complaint in court to the accused in open court. The accused is then
asked how he pleads. The accused may plead guilty or not guilty to the offense charged. If he refuses to
plead, a plea of not guilty will be entered for him. If the accused pleads guilty, the court shall sentence him
to the corresponding penalty if it is satisfied of the voluntariness of the plea, and otherwise, of the guilt of
the accused. If the accused pleads not guilty, the case is set for pre-trial and/or trial (Valle-Corpuz, 1998).

No agreement or admission during the pre-trial shall be used in evidence against the accused unless
reduced in writing and signed by him and his counsel.
After the pre-trial stage, trial follows. The prosecution commences the presentation of evidence, followed by
the accused. Prosecution may present rebuttal evidence. The parties may also present written arguments
or memoranda after which the case is deemed submitted for decision (Valle-Corpuz, 1998).

After the reception of the contending parties' pieces of evidence, the case is now submitted for decision
which the court must render within ninety days after trial. If the court acquits the accused because in its
view, he is innocent or his guilt is not proven beyond reasonable doubt, the case is definitely ended. Appeal
by the prosecution is barred by the principle of double jeopardy. On the other hand, if it convicts the
accused because in its view his guilt of the crime charged has been established beyond reasonable doubt,
the latter may move for a new trial or reconsideration (Valle-Corpuz, 1998).
The motion for reconsideration may be based on the errors of law or fact in judgment. In connection to
moving for a new trial or reconsideration or after denial of such motion, the convicted accused may appeal
to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court within the time fixed by law. If the appeal of the convicted
accused is unsuccessful and his conviction is affirmed, the case will be remanded to the court of origin for
the execution of the judgment (Valle-Corpuz, 1998).

IV. Correction
It is considered as the weakest pillar in the Philippine Criminal Justice System because they fail to reform
offenders and prevent them from returning to criminal life. Its function is to reform the convicted offender
through the rehabilitation program inside the correction. The function of the correction in our criminal justice
system is to reform the offender through rehabilitation programs such as giving an opportunity to every
convicted offender to continue his study by way of Vocational training program.

Three major government functionaries are involved in the Philippine correctional system, namely: the
Department of Justice (DOJ, Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and the
Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). The DOJ supervises the national
penitentiaries through the Bureau of Corrections, administers the parole and probation system through the
Parole and Probation Administration, and assists the President in the grant of executive clemency through
the Board of Pardons and Parole.
DILG supervises the provincial, district, city and municipal jails through the provincial governments and the
Bureau of Jail Management and Penology, respectively. DSWD supervises the regional rehabilitation
centers for youth offenders through the Bureau of Child and Youth Welfare (Baquilod Alvor, 2005).

V. Community
The function of the community pillar is to help and coordinate the program of the government specifically on
the maintenance of peace and order. After the convicts have passed through the correction component
(either unconditionally, as by full service of the term of imprisonment imposed on them; or by parole or
pardon: they go back to the community and either lead normal lives as law-abiding citizens in their
barangays, or, regrettably, commit other crimes and thus, go back through the same processes and stages
of the criminal justice system (Valle-Corpuz, 1998).
The community through the appropriate legislative agencies, public and private educational institutions,
parents and guardians, churches, religious organizations, civic associations, etc. develops and exacts
conformity with acceptable moral and ethical values, creates the environment for the development of civic-
spirited citizens, and fosters respect for and observance of the Rule of Law (Valle-Corpuz, 1998).

Early Forms of Punishment

Society is judged by how it treats its prisoners and that the methods employed in the past were harsh in
terms of treatment of its prisoners.

For those living in the twentieth century it may be difficult to envision the savage treatment of offenders in
the past. The absence of Prison and Jails or even courts and trials to hear the side of the offenders is
difficult in order to achieve fair judgment. Since everything from clothing to child-rearing has changed with
the times, so has our concept of "cruel and unusual" and along with it our correctional practices. The
torture, floggings and public humiliations that characterized "correction" of the past conflict with today's
concept of the worth of life and human dignity.

Blood Feuds
Ancient culture developed the idea of justice based on vengeance, retribution and compensation. When a
crime is committed; the victim is expected to dole out justice with his own hands. Punishment was carried
out by the victim personally, along with help provided by one's family.
The offender will seek refuge in his family and friends; as a result of this system, blood feuds developed.
Blood Feud is a continuing state of conflict between two groups within a society (typically kinship groups)
characterized by violence, usually killings and counter killings.

Lex Talionis
Lex Talionis or Law of Retaliation, is a principle developed in early Babylonian law and present in both
biblical and early Roman law that criminals should receive as punishment precisely those injuries and
damages they had inflicted upon their victims. Many early societies applied this "eye-for-an-eye" principle
literally.

Corporal Punishment
Corporal punishment is the dispensing of bodily harm in response to or as a deterring measure against
crime. Corporal punishments include flogging, beating, branding, mutilation, blinding, and the use of the
stock and pillory." From ancient times through the 18th century, corporal punishments were commonly used
in those instances that did not call for the death penalty or for exile or transportation. But the growth of
humanitarian ideals during the Enlightenment and afterward led to the gradual abandonment of corporal
punishment, and by the later 20th century it had been almost entirely replaced by imprisonment or other
nonviolent penalties.

Capital Punishment
Capital punishment, often referred to as the death penalty, has been used as a method of crime deterrence
since the earliest societies.
Historical records show that even the most ancient primitive tribes utilized methods of punishing
wrongdoers, including taking their lives, to pay for the crimes they committed. Murder most often warrants
this ultimate form of punishment. "A life for a life" has been one of the most basic concepts for dealing with
crime since the start of recorded history." Early forms of capital punishment were designed to be slow,
painful, and torturous. In some ancient cultures, law breakers were put to death by stoning, crucifixion,
being burned at the stake, and even slowly being crushed by elephants. Later societies found these
methods to be cruel and unusual forms of punishment, and sought out more humane practices (Crime
Museum, LLC., 2021).

Exile and Banishment

Exile and banishment is a punishment by prolonged absence from one's country imposed by vested
authority as a punitive measure. It most likely originated among early civilizations from the practice of
designating an offender an outcast and depriving him of the comfort and protection of his group."

Philippine Corrections System

It is composed of the institutions in the government, civil society and the business sector involved in the
confinement, correction and restoration of persons charged for and/or convicted of delinquent acts or
crimes. The public sector formulates sound policies and rules on corrections, penology and jail
management, rehabilitation and restoration. All prisons or penitentiaries, jails and detention centers are
under the direct control and supervision of the government (Baquilod Alvor, 2005).

It is important to note that The Philippines adheres to the provisions of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for
the Treatment of Prisoners and UN Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures (the Tokyo
Rules) and other international human rights instruments which define and guarantee the rights of inmates
(Baquilod Alvor, 2005).

The Philippine corrections system adopted two approaches for treatment of offenders. These are the
Institutional-based treatment program and the Community-based treatment programs (Non-Institutional).
These programs aimed towards the improvement of offender's attitudeand philosophy of life. Reformation
and rehabilitation of inmates as well as preparation for the reintegration in the community are the ultimate
goals of the programs.

Institutional Based Correction

In the Philippines, there is a distinction between a "jail" and
"prison". Jail is defined as a place of confinement for inmates under investigation or undergoing trial, or
serving short-term sentences.

This includes provincial, district, city and municipal jails managed and supervised by the Provincial
Government and the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP), respectively, which are both under
the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG). Prison on the other hand, refers to the
national prisons or penitentiaries managed and supervised by the Bureau of Corrections, an agency under
the Department of Justice (DOJ (Baquilod Alvor, 2005).

Two Categories of Inmates

According to the BJMP Comprehensive Operations Manual 2015 Edition, there are two general categories
of inmates they are's:
 Prisoner - inmate who is convicted by final judgment; and
 Detainee - inmate who is undergoing investigation/trial or awaiting final judgment.

Four Classes of Prisoners

There are four classes of prisoner (BJMP, 2015, Section 17), they are:
1. Insular or National prisoner - one who is sentenced to a prison term of three years and one day to
death;
2. Provincial Prisoner - one who is sentenced to a prison term of six months and one day to three
years;
3. City Prisoner - one who is sentenced to a prison term of one day to three years; and
4. Municipal Prisoner - one who is sentenced to a prison term of one day to six months.

Three Types of Detainees

There are three types of prisoner (BJMP, 2015, Section 18), they are:
1. Those undergoing investigation;
 2. those awaiting or undergoing trial; and
3. those awaiting final judgment.

• Institutional Framework
The treatment of offenders and individuals who are in conflict with the law is undertaken by the government
through the Department of Justice (DOJ, the Department of the Interior and Local Government
(DILG), and the Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD). Department of Justice (DOJ) The DOJ supervises the national penitentiaries through the Bureau
of Corrections, administers the parole and probation system through the Parole and Probation
Administration, and assists the President in the grant of executive clemency through the Board of Pardons
and Parole (Baquilod Alvor, 2005).

Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

The DILG, through the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology

(BJMP), supervises and controls city, municipal and district jails. The Philippine National Police (PNP), also
under the supervision of the DILG, manages the municipal jails that cannot yet be supervised by the BJMP,
including lock-up jails or precinct jails that are used as temporary detention centers for arrested individuals
under investigation. The Offices of the Provincial Governor, also under the DILG, manage the provincial
jails which, by law, keep convicted offenders with prison sentences that range from six months and one day
to three years (Herradura, 2009).

Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)

TheDSWD operates and monitorsrehabilitation centers nationwide for juveniles in conflict with the law (JIL)
whose cases are still pending in court through the Bureau of Child and Youth Welfare (Baquilod Alvor,
2005).

Bureau of Corrections (BuCor)

BuCor is an agency under the Department of Justice that is charged with custody and rehabilitation of
national offenders, that is, those sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment of more than three (3) years.
To carry out its mandate, the Bureau undertakes the following'9:
Safekeep prisoners convicted by courts three (3) years and one (1) day and above to serve sentence in
prison.
 Prevent prisoners from committing crimes.
 Provide inmates basic needs.
 Ensure rehabilitation programs are made available to the inmates for their physical, intellectual and
spiritual development.
 Develop livelihood programs to assist inmates earn a living and develop their skills while in prison.

Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP)

The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology was created on January 2, 1991 pursuant to Republic Act
6975, replacing its forerunner, the Jail Management and Penology Service of the defunct Philippine
Constabulary Integrated National Police. The BJMP exercises administrative and operational jurisdiction
over all district, city and municipal jails. It is a line bureau of the Department of the Interior and Local
Government (DILG) (BJMP, 2015, Section 1).
The functions of BJMP are (BJMP, 2015, Section 5):
1. To enhance and upgrade organizational capability on a regular basis; thus, making all BJMP
personnel updated on all advancements in law enforcement eventually resulting in greater crime
solution efficiency and decreased inmate population;
2. To implement strong security measures for the control of inmates;
3. To provide for the basic needs of inmates;
4. To conduct activities for the rehabilitation and development of inmates; and
5. To improve jail facilities and conditions.
 CHAPTER 2
NON-INSTITUTIONAL BASED CORRECTION

Learning Objectives:
At the end of this chapter, the students will be able to:
1. Define Non-Institutional based Correction;
2. Explain the Rationale for Non-Institutional Correction;
3. Identify and appreciate the Advantages of Community
Based Correction;
4. Enumerate and explain the Types of Community
Based Sanctions;
Explain the salient points on the History of Community Based Correction;
5. Identify the key points on the development of community based Correction in the Philippines;
6. Enumerate the Community based Corrections in the Philippines; and
7. Identify the important concepts in the Tokyo rules.

What is Non Institutional-based Correction?

Corrections refers to the supervision of persons arrested for, convicted of, or sentenced for criminal
offenses. Correctional populations fall into two general categories: institutional corrections and non
institutional corrections. Non-Institutional based correction or Community based correction refers to
correctional activities that may take place within the community or the method of correcting sentenced
offenders without having to go to prison."
It is the supervision of criminal offenders in the resident population, as opposed to confining offenders in
secure correctional facilities (BJS,2021). This includes all non-incarceration correctional sanctions imposed
upon an offender for the purpose of reintegrating that offender within the community such as pardon,
probation, and parole activities, correctional administration not directly connected to institutions, and
miscellaneous activity not directly related to institutional care.

RATIONALE FOR NON INSTITUTIONAL CORRECTION

Humanitarian Aspect
Imprisonment is not always advisable. Placing a person to custodial coercion is to place him in physical
jeopardy, thus drastically narrowing his access to sources of personal satisfaction and reducing his self-
esteem. Imprisonment leads to other problems related to an offender's stigmatization and desocialization.
Often, prisons thwart the offenders' potential for growth and excellence, and spawn dependence and
mistrust on their part instead. Prisons usually alienate offenders from their family, friends and
acquaintances. Due to overcrowding, prisons lead to dehumanizing conditions, which make reintegration
and resocialization even more difficult (Yangeo, 1999, p. 284)

Restorative Aspect
There are measures expected to be achieved by the offender, such as an establishment of a position in the
community in which he does not violate the laws. These measures may be directed at changing and
controlling the offender. The failure of the offender to achieve these can result in recidivism.

Recidivism refers to a person's relapse into criminal behavior, often after the person receives sanctions or
undergoes intervention for a previous crime. It is measured by criminal acts that resulted in rearrest,
reconviction or return to prison with or without a new sentence during a three-year period following the
person's release (BJS, 2021).

Community based correction helps the offenders conform to the behavioral expectations while keeping the
public safety in mind through specific deterrence. Specific deterrence will keep supervised offenders from
falling back to their old habits and behaviors by supervision, unannounced visits, and letting offenders know
in advance what the consequences will be for their actions.

Managerial Aspect
Managerial skills are of special importance because of the sharp contrast between the per capita cost of
custody and any kind of community program. It is easier to manage those undergoing community based
treatment programs than that of custodial control. The burden of , maintaining an entire prison bureaucracy
is eliminated in community based treatment. The cost of assisting and supervising offenders is
supplemented and complemented by existing community resources and infrastructures, which are
otherwise not present in institutional arrangements (Yangco, 1999, p. 284).

Advantages of Community Based Correction

1. Community based correction can ease jail and prison crowding by allowing convicted offenders the
chance to complete a drug program, boot camp, or other corrections program, and are thus another
form of cost savings.
2. Family members need not be victims also for the imprisonment of a member because the convict
can still continue to support his/her family (Yangco, 1999, p. 284).
3. Rehabilitation will be more effective as the convict will not be exposed to hardened criminals in
prisons who will only influence him to a life of crime (Yangco, 1999, p. 284).
4. Rehabilitation can be monitored by the community thus corrections can be made and be more
effective (Yangco, 1999, p. 284).
5. It is less costly on the part of the government. Cost of incarcerations will be eliminated which is
extremely beneficial on the part of the government (Alarid, 2016, p. 15).
6. Community based sanctions provide offenders opportunities p. 16).
to repay their victims and their communities (Alarid, 2016,

Types of Community Based Sanctions

Here are some of the general descriptions of potential continuum of sanctions offered in communities
(Hanser and Barton-Bellessa, 2011, p. 17):

1. Probation- it is considered as a least severe sanction, and may be used in conjunction with
suspended sentence and other options. Offenders meet with their probation officers periodically,
either in person or via call-in supervision (Hanser and Barton-Bellessa, 2011, p. 17).
2. Intensive Supervision-it is an enhanced version of probation, where offenders have increased
contact with their probation officers. Normally, the contacts begin with three to five times a week
with regular drug and alcohol screenings. Contacts are diminished as offenders demonstrate
success on this option (Hanser and Barton-Bellessa, 2011, p. 17).
3. Restitution and Fines- this option typically used in conjunction with probation or may be used as
stand alone sanctions. It is the most commonly used sanction (Hanser and Barton-Bellessa, 2011,
p. 17). Restitution is the repayment of the offender to victims who have suffered financial losses as
a result of the offender's crime."
4. Community Service-this option typically used in conjunction with probation or may be used as
standalone sanctions. It requires the offenders to voluntarily donate their time back to serving their
community (Hanser and Barton-Bellessa,
2011, p. 17).
5. Substance Abuse Treatment- referrals are often provided when the offense either includes some
substance or there is evidence during the intake process that an offender needs such referral
(Hanser and Barton-Bellessa, 2011, p. 17).
6. Day Reporting Centers- it requires the offenders to report to a centralized location on a daily
basis to receive treatment and/or education (Hanser and Barton-Bellessa, 2011, p. 17).
7. House Confinement- It is a program that requires offenders to remain in their homes except for
approved periods of absence commonly used in combination with electronic monitoring.
8. Halfway House- it is used in residential settings. Offenders are required to remain in the house at
night but are allowed to obtain employment in their respective communities. Its goalis to provide
offenders with a temporary period of highly structured and supportive living so that they will be
better prepared to function independently in the community upon discharge (Hanser and Barton-
Bellessa, 2011, p. 17).
9. Boot Camp- It incorporates rigorous military style punishments. It is designed as a short term
residential option whereby offenders are given acceptable punishment and discipline (Hanser and
Barton-Bellessa, 2011, p. 17).
10. Diversion- A process whereby an alleged offender (usually a juvenile delinquent) is "turned
away" from further movement into the justice system.

History of Community Based Correction

The historical development of community based alternatives can be traced back to the four specific
sanctions used in European countries namely: sanctuary, benefit of clergy, judicial reprieve, and
recognizance (Hanser and Barton-Bellessa, 2011, p. 4).
Early Alternative Sanctions

1. Sanctuary
Sanctuary is one of the earliest forms of leniency, and came into two forms: secular and religious. Secular
Sanctuary existed through the various cities or regions that were set aside as a form of neutral ground, safe
havens from criminal prosecution. Accused criminals could escape prosecution by fleeting to these cities
and maintaining residence there.

Religious Sanctuaries began during the 4th century and were grounded in European Christian beliefs that
appealed to the kind of mercy of the church. It consisted of a place, usually a church or monastery, where
the king's soldiers were forbidden to enter for the purpose of taking an accused criminal into custody
(Hanser, 2015, p.5).

2. Benefit of Clergy
Benefit of Clergy was initially a form of exemption from criminal punishment that was provided for clergy in
Europe during the 12th century. This alternative to typical punishment required church representatives to
be delivered to church authorities for punishment, avoiding criminal processing through the secular court
system By the 14th century it had been made available to all who were literate. Judges in secular courts
provided this option but required the offenders to demonstrate that they were indeed literate by reading out
loud Psalm 51 (Hanser, 2015)

[Link] Reprieve
During the latter part of 1700's, Judicial Reprieves were used at the full discretion of judges, in cases where
they did not believe that incarceration was proportionate to the crime or where no productive benefit was
expected. It simply suspended sentences of incarceration as an act of mercy or leniency (Hanser, 2015,
p.9). Reprieve means the temporary suspension or delay in the implementation of a criminal sentence
ordered by the court. During the time of the reprieve, the implementation of the sentence is postponed.
Nevertheless, that does not imply that the sentencing and its legal effects are no longer enforceable. Once
the reprieve expires, the criminal sentence will be executed as ordered by the court unless there are legal
circumstances that change the initial sentencing, like the result of an appeal.

4. Recognizance
Recognizance or binding over for good behavior, is a method of assuring good behavior extended at an
early date to a person charged with or convicted of misdemeanor and was used in addition to or in
substitutions for other punishment.
It involves the use of a bond or obligation entered into by a defendant, who is bound to refrain from doing,
or is bound to do, something for a stipulated period, and to appear in court on a specific date of trial or for
final disposition of the case (Hanser and Barton-Bellessa, 2011, p. 8). It is the antecedent to the
development of Probation in the United states

History of Probation
Probation is a correctional method under which the sentences of selected offenders may be conditionally
suspended upon the promise of good behavior and agreement to accept supervision and abide by specified
requirements. Probation as it is known today can be traced to the use of several judicial practices exercised
in English and later, American courts." In English Common Law, the Courts could temporarily suspend the
execution of a sentence to allow the defendant to appeal to the Crown for a pardon.

Matthew Davenport Hill

He was a lawyer in England, held the judicial post of recorder in the City of Birmingham. He was
considered as a Father of Probation in England. Hill did not refer to his work as probation. He did, however,
provide services for young offenders, using many components of today's probation work.

Hill supported the concept of supervision of certain offenders while in the community. If the crime was
minor, the juvenile was not viewed as congenitally amoral, and there was hope for rehabilitation, and needs
the supervision of a guardian. He viewed supervision as consisting not merely of law enforcement
monitoring the behavior of the offender, but also as providing social service assistance. Hill insisted that
incarceration, regardless of how well conducted, cannot permanently change the behavior of the offender.
He believed that unofficial agencies, staffed by volunteers, should serve to improve the miserable
conditions of the prisons, and secondly, after the prisoner has become a free man (Linder, 2007, p. 6-9).

John Augustus
John Augustus, the "Father of Probation," is recognized as the first true probation officer. Augustus was
born in Woburn, Massachusetts in 1785. By 1829, he was a permanent resident of Boston and the owner of
a successful boot-making business (Hanser, 2015, p.11). A good deal of his time was spent in attempting
to reform alcoholics, and he generally used the pledge to refrain from alcoholic beverages as a tool in his
efforts at rehabilitation (Linder, 2007, p. 3).

Augustus initiated his voluntary probation work in 1841 when he requested a judge to defer the sentencing
for three weeks of a man found guilty of being a common drunkard. He requested that the defendant be
placed in his custody during this time period and with the consent of the judge, Augustus bailed him out of
court. Augustus had the defendant sign the pledge of sobriety. At the end of three weeks, Augustus
accompanied the defendant back to court for sentencing, and the success of his supervision was significant
(Linder, 2007, p. 3).

Augustus did not recommend everyone for probation. He carefully screened prospective candidates
through interviews, checks of their background, and social histories. For the most part, the offenders he
sponsored were low-risk, nonviolent criminals. One of the most important components of his work was
supervision of the offender. Not content to merely bail out the offender, Augustus sought to improve his
behavior and keep him crime free. To this end, he continued his contacts with the probationer, not only to
monitor his conduct, but to bring about change by meeting his social needs (Linder, 2007, p. 4).

Killits Decision
In 1916, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a federal judge was without power to suspend a sentence
indefinitely. This famous court decision led to the passing of the National Probation Act of 1925, thereby,
allowing courts to suspend the imposition of a sentence and place an offender on probation which is known
as the Killits Decision.

Probation of Offenders Act 1907

The Probation of Offenders Act 1907 is an act of the United Kingdom Parliament, commonly referred to as
just the Probation Act.34 It established probation officers in the U.K. This act allows courts to suspend
punishment and discharge offenders if they enter into a recognizance between one and three years, one
condition of which was supervision by a person named in the probation order (Hanser, 2015, p.16).

Probation Act of 1925

The Probation Act of 1925, signed by President Calvin Coolidge, provided for a probation system in the
federal courts in the United States (except in the District of Columbia). It gave the courts the power to
suspend the imposition or execution of sentence and place defendants on probation for such period and on
such terms and conditions as they deemed best. The Act also authorized courts to appoint one or more
persons to serve as probation officers without compensation and one salaried probation officer.

HISTORY OF PHILIPPINE PROBATION

Provisions for Juvenile Probation

In the Philippines, provisions for juvenile probation have been embodied in Article 80 of the Revised Penal
Code since its enactment in 19323* It states that sentence was suspended for offenders under 16 years of
age accused of a grave or less grave felony, who were then placed in the care and custody of public or
private entities. This was later amended on December 10, 1974 by Presidential Decree No. 603, known as
the Child and Youth Welfare Codes
, and by Presidential Decree No. 117939 which set the age of minority to below 18 years of age at the time
of the commission of the offense.

Moreover, Republic Act No. 6425 or the Dangerous Drugs Act of 19724° provided for the suspension of
sentence and probation of a first-offender under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the
offense but not more than 21 years at the time when judgment should have been promulgated (RA 6425,
1972, Section 32).
Integration of Adult Probation
According to the Parole and Probation Administration (PPA), the move to integrate adult probation in the
Philippine criminal justice system began early in the 20th century when the Philippine Legislature approved
Act No. 4221 on August 7, 19354. This created a Probation Office under the Department of Justice, and
provided probation for first offenders 18 years of age and above who were convicted of certain crimes (Act
4221, 1935, Section 10). However, two years after its implementation, on November 16, 1937, the
Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional because of its constitutional and procedural defect.

In 1972, Congressman Teodulo C. Natividad and Cong. Ramon D. Bagatsing introduced House Bill No.
393 was filed in the Congress with the purpose of establishing a probation system in the country. Its
provisions removed the defects of the previous law that made it constitutionally and procedurally defective.
Despite the Congress passing the bill, HB No. 393 was halted in the Senate of the Philippines upon
declaration of Martial Law (PPA, 2018).

Congressman Teodulo C. Natividad

Cong. Natividad was a former NAPOLCOM commissioner and former Congressman of Bulacan. He is also
known as the Father of Probation in the Philippines. In 1975, he introduced another proposed probation
decree. The proposed decree was presented on April 24, 1976, at the seminar on the probation system
sponsored by the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) at the UP Law Center. It was also presented
at the First National Conference on Crime Controlon July 22-24, 1976. The bill underwent eighteen (18)
technical hearings and was submitted to a selected group of jurists, penologists, civil leaders, social and
behavioral scientists and law practitioners before it was endorsed for approval (PPA, 2018).

Institutionalization of Probation
On July 24, 1976, President Ferdinand E. Marcos signed theproposed decree known as Presidential
Decree No. 968 (PD 968) or the Adult Probation Law of 197643. With its enactment, it created the
Probation Administration (PD 968, 1976, Section 18). The late Congressman Teodulo C. Natividad,
recognized as the Father of Philippine Probation, was appointed as its first Administrator (PPA, 2018).
Through this decree probation became an added component of the Philippine Corrections System and
proved its institutional worth.
The operation of the probation system in 1976-1977 was a massive undertaking during which all judges
and prosecutors nationwide were trained in probation methods and procedures; administrative and
procedural manuals were developed; probation officers were recruited and trained; and the central office
and also the probation field offices were organized throughout the country. Fifteen probation officers were
selected from the first batch of trainees for an observation tour to the Los Angeles Training Academy, April
1, 1977. Upon their return, they were assigned to train the newly recruited probation officers. The probation
system started to operate on January 3, 1978. As more probation officers were recruited and trained as
more probation field offices were opened present there are 183 field offices spread all over the country,
supervised by 15 regions.

On November 23, 1989, with the passage of Executive Order No. 292 or The Administrative Code ot
1987s, the Probation Administration became Parole and Probation Administration (PPA). EO 292 expanded
PA's mandate to include supervised treatment of released prisoners, who after serving a part of their
sentence are released on parole or granted presidential pardon with parole conditions (EO 292, 1987,
BOOK Iv/Title III/Chapter 7, Section 23).

United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures The Philippines has been supportive
of the goals of community-based treatment and has continuously adopted measures consistent with the
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non Custodial measures or the Tokyo Rules. It provides a set
of basic principles to promote the use of non-custodial measures and sanctions, as well as minimum
safeguards for persons subject to alternatives to imprisonment.

It has three stages in dealing with offenders, they are (Tokyo Rules)

Pre trial Stage

Pre-trial Dispositions
-Where appropriate and compatible with the legal system, the police, the prosecution service or other
agencies dealing with criminal cases should be empowered to discharge the offender if they consider that it
is not necessary to proceed with the case for the protection of society, crime prevention or the promotion of
respect for the law and the rights of victims.

Avoidance of Pre-trial Detention

- Pre-trial detention shall be used as a means of last resort in criminal proceedings, with due regard for the
investigation of the alleged offense and for the protection of society and the victim.

Trial and Sentencing Stage

Social inquiry Reports
- If the possibility of social inquiry reports exists, the judicial authority may avail itself of a report prepared by
a competent, authorized official or agency. The report should contain social information on the offender that
is relevant to the person's pattern of offending and current offenses. It should also contain information and
recommendations that are relevant to the sentencing procedure. The report shall be factual, objective and
unbiased, with any expression of opinion clearly identified.

Sentencing Dispositions
The judicial authority, having at its disposal a range of non-custodial measures, should take into
consideration in making its decision the rehabilitative needs of the offender, the protection of society and
the interests of the victim, who should be consulted whenever appropriate.

Sentencing authorities may dispose of cases in the following ways:

Verbal sanctions, such as admonition, reprimand and warning;

 Conditional discharge;
 Status penalties;
 Economic sanctions and monetary penalties, such as fines and day-fines;
 Confiscation or an expropriation order;
 Restitution to the victim or a compensation order;
 Suspended or deferred sentence;
 Probation and judicial supervision;
 A community service order;
 Referral to an attendance center;
 House arrest;
 Any other mode of non-institutional treatment;
 combination of the measures listed above.

Post Sentencing Stage

The competent authority shall have at its disposal a wide range of post-sentencing alternatives in order to
avoid institutionalization and to assist offenders in their early reintegration into society.
 Post-sentencing dispositions may include:
 Furlough and half-way houses;
 Work or education release;
 Various forms of parole;
 Remission;
 Pardon

The decision on post-sentencing dispositions, except in the case of pardon, shall be subject to review by a
judicial or other competent independent authority, upon application of the offender.

Non-Institutional Correction in the Philippines

According to the Parole and Probation Administration (PPA), here are the Non Institutional/ Community
based Corrections in the Philippines (PPA, 2018).

1. Probation
It is a privilege granted by the court to a person convicted of a criminal offense to remain in the community
instead of actually going to prison / jail.
2. Parole
It is the conditional release of a prisoner from a correctional institution after serving the minimum
period of prison sentence.
 3. Executive Clemency
Under Section 19, Article VII of the Constitution, the President may grant reprieves, commutations
and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment. Executive clemency
rests exclusively within the sound discretion of the President.
4. Suspended Sentence for First-time Minor
Drug Offender (FTMDO)
It is availed only once by an accused drug dependent who is a first-time offender over fifteen (15)
years of age at the time of commission of the violation of Section 15 of RA 9165 (Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) but not more than eighteen (18) years of age at the time when
judgment should have been promulgated.
5. Major Rehabilitation Programs
It is the "meat and bone" of community -based correction. PPA employs community-based
intervention through a three-pronged approach: Restorative Justice (RJ, Therapeutic Community
(TC), and Volunteerism through Volunteer Probation Assistant (VPA).

Legal Basis of Community based Correction

The figure below shows the legal Basis of Community based Correction in the Philippines.

Presidential Decree No. 968 ( The Probation Law of 1976) Juoly 24, 1976
- The Probation Administration was created by virtue of PD 968 othewise known as “The Probation
Law of 1976” to administer the probation system
Executive Order 292 ( The Administrative Code of 1987) November 23, 1989
- The Probation Administration was renamed “Parole and Probation Administration” and given the
added function of supervising prisoners which after serving part of their sentence in jails are
released on parole or are granted pardon with parole condition

Sections 66-70 of Republic Act No. 9165 (The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) August 30,
2002
Dangerous Drugs Board Resolution No.2 July 19,2005
Memorandum of Agreement between Dangerous Drugs Board and Parole and Probation Administration
August 17, 2005
- The Parole and Probation Administration was given the duty of investigating and supervising first
time minor drugs offenders placed under suspended sentence.

Section 54 and 57 of Republic Act 9165 (The Comprehensive Act of 2002) August 30, 2002
- The Parole and Probation Administration was given the task to supervise a person who is placed on
probation or community service under the voluntary service program.

RepublicAct No. 10389 (Recognizance Act of 2012) March 26, 2014

- The Parole and Probation Administration was given the responsibility of monitoring and evaluating
the activities of the person released on recognizance.
Executive Order No. 468 (Revitalization of Volunteer Probation Aide Program) October 11, 2005
- The Parole and Probation Administration was mandated to revitalize the Volunteer Probation Aide
Program to heighten and maximize community involvement and participation in the community-
based program of the Agency in the prevention of crime, treatment of offenders, and criminal justice
administration.
Republic Act 10707 (An Act Amending Presidential Decree No. 968, otherwise known as the Probation
Law of 1976, as amended) November 26, 2015
- The amendments to PD 968 were:
o Section 4- Grant of Probation

o Section 9- Disqualified Offenders

o Section 16- Termination of Probation

o Section 24- Miscellaneous Powers of Regional, Provincial and City Probation Officers

o Field Assistants, Subordinate Personnel

o Section 28- Volunteer Probation Assistants