Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
‘Quezon City

FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
Third Regular Session

4341

House Bill No,

Introduced by Representatives
DIOSDADO MACAPAGAL ARROYO and GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO

AN ACT
DIRECTING THE ELECTRONIC RECORDING OF CUSTODIAL
INTERROGATIONS TO PREVENT THE USE OF FALSE CONFESSIONS

EXPLANATORY NOTE

False confessions have ted to the conviction of many innocent persons
Research done by the Innocence Project, an organization based in the Benjamin
N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York revealed that 25
percent of the over 220 wrongful convictions overtumed by DNA evidence in the
US have involved some form of a false confession. Researchers who studied
this phenomenon have determined that the following factors contribute to or
cause false confessions:

+ Real or perceived intimidation of the suspect by law enforcement;

* Use of force by law enforcement during the interrogation, or perceived
threat of force:

* Compromised reasoning ability of the suspect, due to exhaustion, stress,
hunger, substance use. and, in some cases, mental limitations, or limited
education;

* Devious interrogation techniques, such as untrue statements about the
presence of incriminating evidence; and


* Fear, on the part of the suspect, that failure to confess will yield a harsher
punishment

The Philippines has laws which outline the rights of the accused in
custodial investigations; however, a practical and effective means to ensure that
these rights will be upheld and protected should be established.

One such method to prevent the occurrence of “false confessions” that
would lead to wrongful convictions is to make an electronic recording of the entire
interrogation process. The Innocence Project has recommended specific
changes in the practice of suspect interrogations in the U.S., including the
mandatory electronic recording of interrogations, which has been shown to
decrease the number of false confessions and increase the reliability of
confessions as evidence. To date, approximately 500 jurisdictions in the US
have voluntarity adopted recording policies

‘An electronic recording of interrogations helps the innocent by creating a
record of the entire interrogation, including the interaction leading up to the
confession and creating a deterrent against improper or coercive techniques that
might be employed absent the presence of a recording device. On the other
hand, the recording also assists law enforcement, by preventing disputes about
how an officer conducted himself or treated a suspect, and capturing subtle
details that may be lost if unrecorded which helps law enforcement better
investigate the crime

In light of the reasons stated above, the immediate passage into law of
this proposed measure is eamestly requested

DIOSDAI 'AGAL ARROYO ARROYO
Second District/ Camarines Sur Second District, Pampanga


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

4341

House Bill No.

Introduced by Representatives
DIOSDADO MACAPAGAL ARROYO and GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO

AN ACT
DIRECTING THE ELECTRONIC RECORDING OF CUSTODIAL
INTERROGATIONS TO PREVENT THE USE OF FALSE CONFESSIONS

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

SECTION 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be known as the “Preventing
False Confessions Act of 2011."

SECTION 2. Declaration of Policy. — It is the policy of the State to protect
the rights of the accused during custodial investigations. To prevent “false
confessions” from leading to wrongful convictions, it shall establish an objective
record of what transpired during the course of the interrogation process.

SECTION 3. Definitions. — For purposes of this Act, the term:

A. ‘Place of detention” means a jail, police station, holding cell,
correctional or detention facility, or other place where persons are
questioned in connection with criminal charges or juvenile delinquency
proceedings.

B. “Custodial interrogation” means any questioning done during custodial
investigation, involving a law enforcement officer's questioning that is
reasonably likely to elicit incriminating responses and in which a
reasonable person in the subject's position would consider himsetf to be in


custody, beginning when a person should have been advised of his rights
as an accused and ending when the questioning has. completely finished

C. “Custodial investigation" is any inquiry initiated by law enforcement
officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived
of his freedom of action in any significant way. It shall include the practice
of issuing an “invitation” to a person who is investigated in connection with
an offense he is suspected to have committed, without prejudice to the
fiabifity of the “inviting” officer for any violation of taw.

D. “Electronic recording” or “electronically recorded” means an audio and
visual recording that is an authentic, accurate, unaltered record of a
custodial interrogation.

E. “Statement” means an oral, written, sign language or nonverbal
communication.

SECTION 4. Electronic Recording Procedures. —

A. Alll statements made by a person during a custodial interrogation shail
be electronically recorded.

B. If any part of the interrogation necessarily takes place outside of a
place of detention, audio recording is an acceptable alternative to audio
and visua! recording.

C. In places of detention, the camera shall be simultaneously focused
upon both the interrogator and the suspect.

SECTION 5. Presumption of inadmissibility. — Except as provided in

Section 6 of this Act, all statements made by a person during a custodial
interrogation that are not electronically recorded, and all statements made
thereafter by the person during the custodial interrogations, including but not
limited to statements that are electronically recorded, shall be inadmissible as
evidence against the person in any criminal or juvenile delinquency proceeding
brought against the person.

SECTION 6. Overcoming the Presumption of inadmissibility. — The

presumption of inadmissibility of statements provided in Section 5 of this Act may
be overcome, and statements that were not electronically recorded may be
admitted into evidence in a criminal or juvenile delinquency proceeding brought
against the person, if the court finds:

A. That the statements are admissible under applicable rules of evidence;


B. Before or during a custodial interrogation, after having consulted with
his or her lawyer, the person unambiguously declared on videotape that
he or she would only respond to the officer's questions if his or her
statements were not electronically recorded:

C. Exigent circumstances existed which prevented the making of, or
rendered it not feasible to make, an electronic recording of the custodial
interrogation.

SECTION 7. Monitoring Requirement. -

A. Compliance with the electronic recording requirement shall be
monitored by the Dept. of Justice (DOJ) through the submission of forms
developed by the DOJ to survey recorded interrogations and outcomes
and identify any pattems of noncompliance. These forms shall be
submitted by the trial judge and the prosecutor for:

1. cases in which recorded interrogations were introduced as
evidence in a criminal case;

2. cases in which interrogations were not recorded but were
nonetheless introduced as evidence in a criminal case;

3. cases in which interrogations were recorded and a plea of guilty
to felony charges was entered and accepted by the court; and

4. cases in which interrogations were not recorded and a plea of
quilty to felony charges was entered and accepted by the court.

8. Compliance with the electronic recording requirement shall be
monitored by the Philippine National Police (PNP) through the submission
of forms by the interrogating officer(s) in each case of recorded and
unrecorded interrogation. These forms shalt be developed by the PNP,
with the expectation that the reporting forms shail identify any pattems of
noncompliance.

SECTION 8. Handling and Presentation of Electronic Recordings.-

A. Every electronic recording of a custodial interrogation shall be clearly
identified and catalogued by law enforcement personnel.

B. If a criminal or juvenile delinquency proceeding is brought against a
person who was the subject of an electronically recorded custodial
interrogation, the electronic recording shall be preserved by law
enforcement personnel until all appeals, post-conviction and habeas


corpus proceedings are final and concluded, or the time within which such
proceedings must be brought has expired

C. Upon motion by the defendant, the court may order that a copy of the
recording be preserved for any period beyond the expiration of all appeals.

D. If no criminal or juvenile delinquency proceeding is brought against a
person who has been the subject of an electronically recorded custodial
interrogation, the related electronic recording shall be preserved by law
enforcement personnel until ail applicable state and federal statutes of
limitations bar prosecution of the person.

SECTION 9. Appropriation. — To carry out the provisions of this Act, such
amount as may be necessary is hereby authorized to be appropriated from the
National Treasury. Thereafter, the amount necessary for the continuous
Monitoring, handling and preservation of electronic recordings shall be included
in the annual appropriation of the DOJ and the PNP.

SECTION 10. Separability Clause. - If any provision or part hereof, is held
invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of the law or the provision not otherwise
affected shall remain valid and subsisting.

SECTION 11. Repeating Clause. - Any law, presidential decree or
issuance, executive order, letter of instruction, administrative order, cule or
regulation contrary to or is inconsistent with the provision of this Act is hereby
repealed, modified, or amended accordingly

SECTION 12. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15)
days after its publication in at east two (2) newspapers of general circulation

Approved,