EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS )
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
First Regular Session )

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

“Introduced by Representative Rufus B. Rodriguez

House Bill No. 3742

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Jails and prisons are primarily designed to promote justice, public order and safety by
the humane safekeeping anddevelopment and rehabilitation of those accused of crimes and
convicted offenders, respectively. The unabated increase of jail population, however, has
caused an appalling environment of jail and prison congestion that spawned human rights
violations, corruption, inmate illness and deaths, perennial escape of inmates and other
adverse jail incidents aggravated by the incessant insufficiency of resources especially
manpower that ironically undermine public safety and national security.

Currently, the congestion rate at BUMP jails is 442%. For the National Capital
Region, the congestion rate is at 608%. This is a big loss to the economy on two terms; one,
by the loss of valuable human resource or labour that could be more wisely used to meet the
demands of the growing national economy or meet the much needed social services
required by the citizenry, and second, by the huge amount of funds appropriated for the
basic provisions of the inmates, construction of facilities and equipment on top of the
compensation and other benefits of prison and jail personnel. To address just the current
congestion and maintain the ideal capacity of 4.7 square meters per inmate, BJMP
estimates a budget of at least Php 5 Billion for Metro Manila alone. This amount could be
reduced substantially by reducing the number of detainees and prisoners by equally effective
means of restraint and rehabilitation that require less resource but provide more meaningful
and effective treatment of criminals. In sum, the proposedmeasure will reduce government
expenditure but will provide a better restraint of those accused of crimes and a more
rationalized system of rehabilitative punishment of criminals resulting to a higher degree of
reintegration and ultimately healing and restoration between and among the offenders and
the community bringing about justice that leads to peace

At the outset, imprisonment is not the only plausible means or a panacea cure to
protect public safety or carry out the ends of justice. Aside from being extremely costly, it
creates stigma or public labelling that makes it more difficult to facilitate the reintegration of
inmates whether convicted or not, into the mainstream of society. Worse, victims are not
compensated merely because offenders are not able to work gainfully once detained, hence,
the latter is unable to produce money to compensate the former. Imprisonment thus
becomes an excuse to the offender from being accountable to the victims of their
indiscretion. Too, substantial amount of government resource is unduly wasted yet unable to
effectively resolve crime, by our inclination, unbridled overuseor almost exclusive use of
imprisonment as an instrument of justice. On the other hand, there are other available
instruments or tools to attain the same ends of justice with the least economic burden to the
government and the smallest amount of socio-economic cost to the offenders and the
community. Prison and jails should be reserved only to those who are violent and
recalcitrant

Hence, passage of this bill is most respectfully sought,

ffs
RU ROD) jUEZ


EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS )
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
First Regular Session )

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

» Rufus

|. Rodriguez _

"Introduced by Representati

House Bill No, 3742

AN ACT
ADOPTING COMMUNITY SERVICE, RESTITUTION, REPARATION OR
INDEMNIFICATION, FINE, DESTIERRO, HOUSE ARREST AND OTHER RESTORATIVE
JUSTICE MEASURES AND PROCESSES INCLUDING COMPLIANCE TO ATTACHED
CONDITIONS SUCH AS COUNSELLING, INSTITUTIONAL OR NON-INSTITUTIONAL
REHABILITATION, AS ALTERNATIVES TO IMPRISONMENT.

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

SECTION 1. This Act shall be known as the “Alternative Modes to Imprisonment Act’.

SECTION 2. The duty and discretion of the courts of justice to determine the most
appropriate penalty or imprisonment which may be imposed based on the felony or offense
committed under the Revised Penal Code or other laws, based on their responsiveness to
the needs of all stakeholders and the maintenance of public safety is recognized and

expanded

SECTION 3. In making its decision, the Courts, taking into consideration the rehabilitative
needs of the offender, the protection of society and the interests of the victim, who should be
consulted whenever appropriate, are hereby allowed to impose, in lieu of penalties of up to
six (6) years imprisonment, any of the following sanctions as alternatives to imprisonment

‘Admonition, reprimand and waming, verbal or written;
Conditional discharge, suspended or deferred sentence;
Community service order;

Work or education order

Confiscation or an expropriation order;

Restitution to the victim or compensation order,

Referral to an attendance centre;

Fine;

House arrest;

Destierro;

Other restorative justice measure/s or any other mode of non-
institutional treatment and some combination of the measures listed
above.

sa7ea0cm

SECTION 4. Any of the alternatives to imprisonment or combination thereof may be imposed
as an equivalent penalty with the same duration or less, as deemed applicable and at the
discretion of the court, if imprisonment would have been imposed for the felony or offense
committed. The courts may also impose in combination with a reduced sentence of
imprisonment, at the discretion of the court, any or a combination of the foregoing sanctions
where the penalty that may be imposed for an offense is higher than six (6) years.


SECTION 5. Before the imposition of any of the altematives to imprisonment
aforementioned, the courts may refer a case for thorough study by a psychologist or
psychiatrist and for investigation to a probation officer, to determine with greater certainty the
appropriateness of the altemative sanction/s to be imposed.

SECTION 6. Where appropriate, the police, the prosecution service and/or other agencies
dealing with criminal cases are hereby 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. For the purpose
of deciding upon the appropriateness of discharge or determination of proceedings, a set of
established criteria shall be crafted jointly by the Department of Justice and the Department
of the Interior and Local Government. For cases where the imposable penalty does not
exceed six years, the prosecutor may recommend suitable non-custodial measures or that
bail shall not be necessary.

SECTION 7. The Department of Social Welfare and Development, the Department of Interior
and Local Government, particularly, the Philippine National Police and the Bureau of Jail
Management and Penology, and the Department of Justice, particularly, the Bureau of
Corrections, Board of Pardons and Parole, the Parole and Probations Administration, and
the National Bureau of Investigation shall be tasked to assist the court in the implementation
of its order imposing any or a combination of the alternatives to imprisonment. For this
purpose, the agencies concerned shall submit a report of their compliance to the court order.

SECTION 8. If any provision of this Act is rendered invalid or unconstitutional, the other
provisions which are not declared unconstitutional shall remain valid and subsisting.

SECTION 9. Any law or executive issuance inconsistent with this Act shall be repealed,
modified or amended accordingly

SECTION 10. This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its publication in the
Official Gazette.

Approved,