UNIVERSITY OF MINDANAO

College of Criminal Justice Education

Bachelor of Science in Criminology

Physically Distanced but Academically Engaged

Self-Instructional Manual (SIM) for Self-Directed

Learning (SDL)

Course/Subject: CRI 412- Non-Institutional Correction

Name of Teacher: Ivy Quinones-Malibiran, MSCrim.

THIS SIM/SDL MANUAL IS A DRAFT VERSION ONLY; NOT

FOR REPRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OUTSIDE OF
ITS INTENDED USE. THIS IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE
USE OF THE STUDENTS WHO ARE OFFICIALLY
ENROLLED IN THE COURSE/SUBJECT.
EXPECT REVISIONS OF THE MANUAL.

Page 1 of 32
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Course Outline 3
Course Outline Policy 4
Course Information 7
Facilitator’s Voice 7
Course Outcome 8

(Week 1-2) Big Picture in Focus: ULO a

Metalanguage 8
Essential Knowledge 9
Self-help 31
Let’s Check 31
Let’s Do This 33
In a Nutshell 35
Key Words Index 37

(Week 3-4) Big Picture in Focus: ULO b

Metalanguage 38
Essential Knowledge 39
Self-help 43
Let’s Check 44
Let’s Do This 46
In a Nutshell 47
Keywords Index 48

(Week 5-6) Big Picture in Focus: ULO c

Metalanguage 49
Essential Knowledge 50
Self-help 81
Let’s Check 82
Let’s Do This 83
In a Nutshell 84
Key Words Index 85

(Week 7-8) Big Picture in Focus: ULO d

Metalanguage 86
Essential Knowledge 87
Self-help 112
Let’s Check 113
Let’s Do This 115
In a Nutshell 117
Key Words Index 118

Final Written Exam 118

Page 2 of 32
Course Schedule 119

COURSE OUTLINE:
CRI 421 NON-INSTITUTIONAL CORRECTION

Course Coordinator Jenny C. Malnegro, MSCJ

Email [email protected]

Student Consultation Done online (LMS) or traditional contact

(calls, texts, emails)

Mobile Number 0930-856-2617

Effectivity Date July 2020

Mode of Delivery Online Blended Delivery

Time Frame 54 Hours

Requisites CRI 313

Student Workload Expected Self-Directed Learning

Credit 3 Lecture

Attendance Requirements For online sessions: minimum of 95%

attendance; for 2-days on-
campus/onsite final exam: 100%
attendance

Page 3 of 32
 Self-Instructional Materials Policy

Areas of Concern Details

This 3-unit course self-instructional manual is designed

for blended learning mode of instructional delivery with
scheduled face to face or virtual sessions. The
expected number of hours will be 108 hours. This
Contact and Non-contact
includes the face to face or virtual sessions. The face
Hours
to face sessions shall include the summative
assessment tasks (exams) since this course is crucial
in the licensure examination for criminologists.

Submission of assessment tasks shall be on 3rd, 5th,

7th and 9th week of the term. The assessment paper
shall be attached with a cover page indicating the title
of the assessment task (if the task is performance), the
name of the course coordinator, date of submission
and name of the student. The document should be
Assessment Task
emailed to the course coordinator. It is also expected
Submission
that you already paid your tuition and other fees before
the submission of the assessment task. If the
assessment task is done in real time through the
features in the Blackboard Learning Management
System, the schedule shall be arranged ahead of time
by the course coordinator.
Since this course is included in the licensure
examination for criminologists, you will be required to
take the Multiple-Choice Question exam inside the
University. This should be scheduled ahead of time by
Turnitin Submission (if your course coordinator. This is non-negotiable for all
necessary) licensure-based programs.
To ensure honesty and authenticity, all assessment
tasks are required to be submitted through Turnitin
with a maximum similarity index of 30% allowed. This
means that if your paper goes beyond 30%, the
students will either opt to redo her/his paper or explain

Page 4 of 32
 in writing addressed to the course coordinator the
reasons for the similarity. In addition, if the paper
has reached more than 30% similarity index, the
student may be called for a disciplinary action in
accordance with the University’s OPM on Intellectual
and Academic Honesty.

Please note that academic dishonesty such as cheating

and commissioning other students or people to complete
the task for you have severe punishments (reprimand,
warning, and expulsion).

The score for an assessment item submitted after the

designated time on the due date, without an approved
extension of time, will be reduced by 5% of the possible
maximum score for that assessment item for each day
Penalties for Late or part day that the assessment item is late.
Assignments/Assessments
However, if the late submission of assessment paper
has a valid reason, a letter of explanation should be
submitted and approved by the course coordinator.
If necessary, you will also be required
to present/attach evidences.

Assessment tasks will be returned to you two (2) weeks

after the submission. This will be returned by email or
via Blackboard portal.
Return of Assignments/
For group assessment tasks, the course coordinator
Assessments will require some or few of the students for online or
virtual sessions to ask clarificatory questions to validate
the originality of the assessment task submitted and to
ensure that all the group members are involved.

You should request in writing addressed to the course

coordinator his/her intention to resubmit an assessment
task. The resubmission is premised on the student’s
Assignment Resubmission failure to comply with the similarity index and other
reasonable grounds such as academic literacy standards
or other reasonable circumstances e.g. illness, accidents
financial constraints

Page 5 of 32
 You should request in writing addressed to the program
coordinator your intention to appeal or contest the
score given to an assessment task. The letter should
Re-marking of Assessment explicitly explain the reasons/points to contest the
Papers and Appeal grade. The program coordinator shall communicate
with the students on the approval and disapproval of
the request.

If disapproved by the course coordinator, you can

elevate your case to the program head or the dean with
the original letter of request. The final decision will come
from the dean of the college.
All culled from BlackBoard sessions and traditional
contact
Course discussions/exercises – 30%
1st formative assessment – 10%
2nd formative assessment – 10%
3rd formative assessment – 10%
Grading System
All culled from on-campus/onsite sessions (TBA):
Final exam – 40%

Submission of the final grades shall follow the usual

University system and procedures.

All outputs in this course which requires the indication of

Preferred Referencing Style references shall follow the general practice of the APA
6th Edition.

You are required to create a umindanao email

account which is a requirement to access the
BlackBoard portal. Then, the course coordinator shall
enroll the students to have access to the materials and
resources of the course. All communication formats:
chat, submission of assessment tasks, requests etc.
Student Communication shall be through the portal and other university
recognized platforms.

You can also meet the course coordinator in

person through the scheduled face to face
sessions to raise your issues and concerns.

For students who have not created their student email,

please contact the course coordinator or program head

Page 6 of 32
 Dr. Carmelita B. Chavez
Contact Details of the Dean Email: [email protected]
Phone (082)300-5456

Dr. Roberto R. Magbojos

Contact Details of the Program Head Email: [email protected]
Phone (082)300-5456
Students with special nee the course
coordinator about the nature of his or herds shall
communicate with special needs. Depending on
the nature of the need, the course coordinator
with the approval of the program coordinator
Students with Special Needs may provide alternative assessment tasks or
extension of the deadline of submission of
assessment tasks. However, the alternative
assessment tasks should still be in the service
of achieving the desired course learning
outcomes.
You are required to undergo a tutorial on this
course. Upon enrolment and the registration of
your name to Blackboard LMS, the Course
Online Tutorial Registration
Coordinator will contact you on the specific
schedule of the tutorial which shall be
connducted within the 1st week of the class.

Help Desk Contact [email protected]

Brigida E. Bacani
Library Contact Head- LIC
[email protected]
09513766681

Well-being Welfare Support Help 09504665431/ 09058924090

COURSE INFORMATION
The course focuses on Presidential Decree 968, otherwise known as the
“Probation Law of 1976”, establishing a probation system of the Philippines, its
historical background, philosophy, concepts and operation as a new correctional
system, investigation, selection and condition of probation, distinction between
incarceration, parole, probation and other forms of executive clemency, total
involvement of probation in the administration of Criminal Justice System.

Page 7 of 32
CC’s Voice: Hello prospective Criminologist! Welcome to this course, CRI 412: Non
Institutional Correction. By now, I am confident that you really wanted to
become a criminologist and that you have visualized yourself already
being in the field performing a duty in relation to this course.

CO : At the end of this course, you are expected to have a deep understanding
of the following topics: Discover the historical background of probation,
understand the old probation law and other probation laws, know the role
of probation and parole administration and distinguish the different forms
of executive clemency.

Let us begin!

Big Picture

UNIT I. Week 1-3: Unit Learning Outcomes (ULO): At the end of this unit, you are
expected to:
a. Explain the Community Base Treatment, Rehabilitation Programs and
Activity of the Parole and Probation Administration extended to their clients .

b. Discuss the different types of executive clemency extended to serving

convicted offender

c. Explicate the main objective and purpose of the Probation system

d. Analyze Parole and Indeterminate Sentence Law.

Page 8 of 32
 Big Picture in Focus: ULOa.
Explain the Community Base Treatment, Rehabilitation Programs and Activity
of the Parole and Probation Administration extended to their clients

Metalanguage
The essential terms relevant to the study of this course and to demonstrate ULOa
are operationally defined to establish a common frame of reference as to how the texts
work in the course. You will encounter these terms as we go through the study of
course. Hence, to be able to fully appreciate the topics presented in this course,
unlocking the meaning of these terms is crucial.
● CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM - is essentially the system or process in the
community by which crimes are investigate.

● BANISHMENT– refers to a punishment of being sent away from a country or

other place.

● REPRIEVE- A temporary delay of punishment or a suspension of sentence and

it is usually resumed at some point in the future.

● RECOGNIZANCE- is a conditional obligation undertaken by a person before a

court of securing the release of any person in custody or detention for the
commission of an offense who is unable to post bail due to unfortunate poverty.

● BAIL- is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law,
furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court
as required under the conditions hereinafter specified. Bail may be given in the
form of corporate surety, property bond, cash deposit, or recognizance.

Essential Knowledge
To perform the aforesaid big picture (unit learning outcomes) for the first three (3) weeks of
the course, you need to fully understand the following essential knowledge that will be
laid down in the succeeding pages. The topics presented in this section are taken from
the approved textbook of the course. Please note that you are not limited to exclusively
refer to the resources. Thus, you are expected to utilize other books, research articles
and other resources that are available in the university's library e.g. ebrary,

Overview of the Correction Institution as part of 5 Pillar of Criminal Justice

System

Page 9 of 32
The Criminal Justice System of the Philippines and its Components

The criminal justice system of the Philippines (PCJS) is essentially the system
or process in the community by which crimes are investigated. Persons suspected for
an offense therefore are taken into custody, prosecuted in court, and punished if found
guilty of the crime committed. Provisions are made for their treatment and
rehabilitation and reformation purposes.

The system has five distinct but coordinated components; namely: Law
Enforcement, Prosecution, Court, Correction and the Community. It is distinct because
each component has its own respective functions to perform as an institution or as an
integral part of another system aside from the criminal justice system (CJS).

It is coordinated because these components operate in a manner being

interdependent and supportive of one another in order to achieve the very purpose of
the system. These established five components are also known as the five pillars of
the CJS; unfortunately at this point of time there are tendencies for each pillar to act
independently from each other, and the worst is one component blames another
component for the failure of the system to effectively deal with offenders already
introduced into it.

Functions of the Five Components in the Criminal Justice System

Law Enforcement - Its function is to conduct investigation on the alleged crime

committed by a person, to arrest or detain violator of the penal law or an ordinance, to
effect the warrant issued by the court and to assist the complainant to file a case.

Prosecution - Its function is to evaluate the findings of the police submitted to

their office, to conduct preliminary investigation, to receive the complaint filed by the
victim and to be responsible to file information to the court and to act as a legal
prosecutor of the offended party.

Court - 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.

Correction - is considered as the weakest components of the CJS. 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

Page 10 of 32
offender through rehabilitation program such as giving an opportunity to every
convicted offender to continue his study by way of Vocational training program.

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.

Non Institutional based Correction - Is a community based programs such as

probation, suspended sentence for first time minor offender, parole, and conditional
pardon and this is one of the best example of the positive school of thought.

EARLY FORMS OF PUNISHMENT IN PRIMITIVE TIME

We cannot negate the truth that 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 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

Page 11 of 32
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.

Every society has various methods of social control ranging from public
disapproval to death that hold individuals to expected standard forms of behavior.

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 to his family and friends; as a result of this system, blood feuds developed.

Lex Taliones – It is important to remember that these formulations were codes,

not laws. Functionally; the system of social control was quite simple. On a practical
basis, personal retribution by the victim was still the dominant methods of control. In
fact the Law of Retaliation (Lex Taliones) against the offender is reflected in the code
of Hammurabi.
The Medieval Punishment – Like ancient forerunners medieval Europeans
were very brutal in the exercise of punishment such as: Knives, Axes, Whip,
Barnacles, Collars and Cuffs were commonly used to inflict punishment along with
confinement in cold, dark, damp, vermin – infested dungeons. The three brutal and
ruthless medieval forms of punishment are:

Page 12 of 32
 1. Iron Maiden - is a box -like device
with the front half hinged like a door so that a
person could be placed inside; when the door
was shut, protruding spikes both back and
front entered the body of the victim.

2. The rack - a kind

of a device that drags
apart the joints in the
feet and hands.

3. The Tower of London – originally built as a fortress for defense of the City.
This is a famous symbol for such a cruel punishment. It was there that an
even more torturous contraption was developed. Where the rack stretched
its victims, this machine compressed the body of the victims; it is more
dreadful and more complex than the rack …. The whole body is bent that
some blood exudes from the tips of the hands and feet.

4. Banishment and Exile – Serious offenders were transported to banishment

or exile. Banishment was considered an appropriate response to

Page 13 of 32
 misbehavior even in modified form, for small children. E.g cutting of all
communication to his parents (Fox, 1998).

History of Probation: Origins and Evolution

The concept of probation, from the Latin word probatio - has historical roots in
the practice of judicial reprieve--in English Common Law the Courts could temporarily
suspensed the execution of a sentence to allow the defendant to appeal to the Crown
for a pardon.

Benefit of the Clergy

Historically speaking giving privilege of an offender to be free from a harsh

punishment is out of the topic in the ancient practice and there is no other form of
giving punishment except death.
Aside from these practices the earliest device for softening brutal punishment
seems to have been the “ Benefit of the Clergy” dating back to the reign of Henry II in
the 13th century, it originated in a compromise with the Church with had maintained
that a member of the clergy brought to trial in a kings court might be claimed from that
jurisdiction by the bishop or chaplain representing him on the ground that he; the
prisoner was the subject to the authority of the ecclesiastical courts only. The benefit
resulting from this compromise which maintained jurisdiction in the King’s Court was
greater leniency in sentencing, and particular escape from death penalty.( Mallare et,al
1998 ).
Judicial Reprieve
Judicial reprieve are another type of practice before which modifying the
severity of the law , and it was a temporary withholding of sentence much used by
early English judges and described by Blackstone
“A reprieve from a word of “reprendre” which means to make back, is the
withdrawing of a sentence for an interval of time, whereby the execution is suspended;
either before or after judgment ; as where the judge is not satisfied with the verdict or
the evidence is suspicious , and or the indictment is insufficient or he is a doubtful
whether the offense be within clergy or sometimes if it be a small felony, or any

Page 14 of 32
favorable circumstances appear in the criminal character in order to give room to apply
to the Crown for either an absolute or conditional pardon.
Recognizance
An even older method of suspending or deferring judgment, the direct ancestor
of probation was recognizance or binding over for good behavior. This was based on
ancient practice developed in England in the 14th century . this method of assuring
good behavior was extended at early date to person charged with convicted of
misdemeanor and was used in addition to or in substitutions for other punishment; this
practiced was applied by the English Criminal Law Consolidation Act of 1861 to
persons convicted of any felony but not capital.
Transportation
Any description of the treatment of crime in England must include the system
of transportation to her colonies which grew from the ancient practice of banishment
and flourished for more than 200 years as a principal method of disposing of offenders.
At first it was chiefly a way of ridding the country of criminals later it was developed as
a plan supplying new colonies with cheap labor. Offenders who were granted a
reprieved were permitted to accept transportation and were handed over to contractors
who engage to convey them to America and later to Australia.
PROBATION EMERGE
Rudimentary ideas of individual social treatment began to appear especially in
cases of children and youthful first offenders. Early in the 19 th century the English
magistrate initiated experiments to save young and inexperienced offenders from th
stigma of prisons. They made use of the latitude allowed them under the common law
to bind over the defendants who would be brought back for sentence if the conditions
of release were violated. The need for supervision and assistance to those so released
was met by assigning the young offender to the care and guardianship of his parents
or his employer with an occasional check on his progress by the police.

Matthew Davenport Hill considered as a ‘Father of Probation in England”

Page 15 of 32
 Beginning early in the year 1841, he had
thus acted with the regard to juvenile
offenders, when there was ground for
believing that the individual was not
wholly corrupt – when there was
reasonable hope persons to act as
guardians kind enough to take charge of
the young convict (which, at first sight,
would appear to present, a great difficulty
but which in practice furnished ;little
impediment to the plan), he had left
himself justified in at once handing over
the young offender to their care, in the
belief that there would be better hope of amendment under such guardians than in the
goal of the country. At unexpected periods a confidential officer visits the guardian,
makes inquiries, and registers the fact of which he is thus informed, in an account
which has been regularly kept”.

John Augustus (originator of Probation)

Probation first developed in the United States when John Augustus, a Boston
boot maker, persuaded a judge in the Boston Police Court in 1841 to give him cu
stody of a convicted offender, a "drunkard," for a brief period and then helped the man
to appear rehabilitated by the time of sentencing. Even before John Augustus, the
practice of suspended sentence was used as early as 1830, in Boston,
Massachusetts and became widespread in U.S. Courts, although there was no
statutory authorization for such a practice. At first, judges used "release on
recognizance" or bail and simply failed to take any further legal action. By the mid-
19th century, however, many Federal Courts were using a judicial reprieve to suspend

Page 16 of 32
sentence, and this posed a legal question. John Augustus emerge as the father of
probation.

In 1916, the United States Supreme

Court held that a Federal Judge (Killets) 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 Killets
Decision.

Probation becomes a law on April 26,

1878

In 1880 Gardner Tuffs, director of the Massachusetts Board of State Charities

reported in an address that result of probation in case of juvenile offenders proved so
decisively good that the legislator after 2 years the City of Boston authorize to appoint
a probation officer for adults and at the session of the appointment of a probation
officer for adult offenders in every cities and town in the state.

The first probation law was passed by the legislature of Massachusetts and
signed by Gov. Alexander H. Rice on April 126, 1878, it provides for the appointment
and prescribed the duties of a salaried probation officer for the courts of Suffolk
Country.

Massachusetts developed the first statewide probation system in 1880, and

by 1920, 21 other states had followed suit. With the passage of the National Probation
Act on March 5, 1925, signed by President Calvin Coolidge, the Federal Probation
Service was established to serve the U.S. Courts. On the state level, pursuant to the
Crime Control and Consent Act passed by Congress in 1936, a group of states entered
into agreement by which they would supervise probationers and parolees for each
other. Known as the Interstate Compact For the Supervision of Parolees and
Probationers, the agreement was originally signed by 25 states in 1937. In 1951, all

Page 17 of 32
the states in the United States of America had a working probation system and ratified
the Interstate Compact Agreement.

Probation began as a humanitarian effort to allow first-time and minor offenders

a second chance. Early probationers were expected not only to obey the law but also
to behave in a morally acceptable fashion. Officers sought to provide moral leadership
to help shape probationers' attitudes and behavior with respect to family, religion,
employment, and free time. During the 1920's through the 1950's, the major
developments in the field of psychology led probation officers to shift their emphasis
from moral leadership to therapeutic counseling. This shift brought three important
changes. First, the officer no longer primarily acted as a community supervisor
charged with enforcing a particular morality. Second, the officer became more of a
clinical social worker whose goal was to help the offender solve psychological and
social problems. Third, the offender was expected to become actively involved in the
treatment. The pursuit of rehabilitation as the primary goal of probation gave the officer
extensive discretion in defining and treating the offender's problems. Officers used
their judgment to evaluate each offender and develop a treatment approach to the
personal problems that presumably had led to crime.

During the 1960's, major social changes swept across the United States. These
changes also effected the field of community corrections. Rather than counseling
offenders, probation officers provided them with concrete social services such as
assistance with employment, housing, finances, and education. This emphasis on
reintegrating offenders and remedying the social problems they faced was consistent
with federal efforts to wage a "war on poverty." Instead of being a counselor or
therapist, the probation officer served as an advocate, dealing with private and public
institutions on the offender's behalf.

In contrast to probation, parole is the early release of inmates from correctional

institutions prior to the expiration of the sentence on the condition of good behavior
and supervision in the community. It is also referred to as supervised release,
community supervision, or after-care. The parole board is the legally designated
paroling authority. The board has the authority to release on parole adults (or
juveniles) who are committed to correctional institutions, to set conditions that must be
followed during supervision, to revoke parole and return the offender to an institution,
Page 18 of 32
and to discharge from parole. Thus, probation is a front-end decision that is made prior
to incarceration in a jail or prison, while parole is a back-end decision to release
inmates from jail or prison.

Community corrections includes traditional probation and parole as well as

other sanctions such as intensive supervision, restitution, community service,
correctional boot camps, and fines. Frequently these alternative punishments or
intermediate sanctions come under the jurisdiction of the agencies responsible for the
administration of probation .In the late 1970's the orientation of probation changed
again as the goals of rehabilitation and reintegration gave way to "risk management."
This approach, still dominant today, seeks to minimize the probability that an offender
will commit a new offense. Risk management reflects two basic goals. First, in accord
with the deserved-punishment ideal, the punishment should fit the offense, and
correctional intervention should neither raise nor lower the level of punishment.
Second, according to the community protection criterion, the amount and type of
supervision are determined according to the risk that the probationer will return to a
life out of compliance with the law.

JUVENILE PROBATION DEVELOPS

The first probation laws, enacted in 3 New England States, applied to children
and adults without distinction. It was recognized from the start that probation is a form
of treatment adapted to persons of all ages and to offenses of varying seriousness. In
1899, however, 2 Midwestern states, Minnesota and Illusive, enacted laws giving
probation service to children only.

The Minnesota law provided for the appointment of a salaried officer for each
of the 3 large countries, to be nominated by the state Board of Corrections and
Charities and approved by the district court judges. The officers were authorized to
appoint their deputies subject to judicial approval.

EARLY BEGINNINGS OF FEDERAL PROBATION

Federal probation can be considered as having germinated in the

dissatisfaction of federal judges with the harsh and severe penalties they were

Page 19 of 32
compelled to impose upon wrongdoers. The laws provided no alternatives. To
ameliorate this situation, some of the judges began to use their discretion in modifying
the prescribed penalties and gradually developing more humane methods of dealing
with law violators.

The earliest instance of the exercise of such discretion in the federal court is attributed
to Chief Justice Marshal. In 1808, and again in 1809, then sitting at a Court of United
States for the Fifth Circuit and Virginia District, the Chief Justice suspended in two
cases before him that part of the sentences calling for flogging. Court records attest to
the continued exercise of suspension powers by the federal judges in Pennsylvania
since 1860 in the Easter District of New York since 1858, since 1860 in the Eastern
District of Michigan, since 1865 in the Virginias, and subsequently in other Districts.

Under the common law of England, suspension of sentence or postponement

of sentence, together with release of the wrongdoer on good behavior, was among the
outstanding devices developed in the state courts to avoid the severity of punishment
for crime. In the federal courts, similar developments took place. A variety of practices
was devised by federal judges to mitigate punishment, regardless of the lack of
permissive or enabling legislation.

Documentary data, fortunately still available and in the possession of the

Administration Office of the United States Courts, portray a fairly clear picture of this
extra-legal era of federal probation. Not only the variety of practices followed, but also
the extent of their acceptance by federal courts, thus is recorded historically. Nor were
these informal practices merely occasional or exceptional, or restricted to but a few of
the courts.

TRUE KILLITS CASE

In the summer of 1914, an assistant cashier and head paying teller in Toledo,
Ohio bank named James J. Henehan, embezzles $4,700.00 by falsifying entries in the
bank’s book. Following indictment, the defendant entered a plea of guilty on March 5,
1915, and was sentenced by Judge Killits to 5 years imprisonment, the shortest
sentence which under the statute could application for suspension of execution of
sentence, to which the United States attorney objected. The court, nevertheless,

Page 20 of 32
ordered execution of the sentence suspended at once and the term of court kept open
for 5 years for this purpose, during the good behavior of the defendant. Judge Killits
overhauled this motion. The Government then, through the United States Attorney,
filled a “for a commitment,” which the clerk of the court refused to issue. A motio In the
capacity of amicus curiae, the New York State Probation Commission submitted a
memorandum to the Supreme Court on the issue, relating the history of probation and
the dependence upon suspension power, which had been exercised from very early
times.” Two members of the bar of the First Circuit also filled a brief in support of the
practice in the First Circuit and in behalf of Judge Killits action at the request of the
judges for this circuit.

The opinion of the Supreme Court was delivered by Mr. Chief Justice White on
December 4, 1916. This decision in the Killits case “rendered further arguments in
favor of or against the practice mere pedantry for in spite of uncertain authority, diverse
practice and legal history and mandamus in the Killits case served as a permanent
injunction against the continued imposition of suspended sentences in federal criminal
cases.” The decision applied to the indefinite suspension of both imposition and the
execution of sentence.

Edward Savage – a former chief of police in Boston who became the first Probation
Officer employed by the government.

Samuel John Barrows – began to campaign for probation law after his appointment
as a secretary of the Prison Association of NY. A Unitarian minister and editor of the
Christian Register, he became one of the founders of the Massachusetts Prison
Association in 1889 which took an active part in extending probation in NY the Fifth
state to provide for adult probation.

U.S. Chief Justice John Marshall- exercised the earliest instant use of discretion in
modifying the prescribed penalties and gradually developed more humane methods
of dealing with law violators.

Pres. Woodrow Wilson- signed a proclamation of Amnesty and Pardons on June 1,

1917, for those affected by the ruling, an extension of executive of executive clemency

Page 21 of 32
which was in accord with precedents set by earlier presidential proclamations of
amnesty.

U.S Congressman Samuel Walker McCall – introduced the probation bill for the 2nd
time on January 11, 1909.

U.S Senator Robert T. Owen of Oklahoma- introduced the probation bill in the U.S.
senate at the 61st Congress to provide for probation.

History of Philippine Probation

Probation was first introduced in the Philippines during the American colonial
period (1898 - 1945) with the enactment of Act No. 4221 of the Philippine Legislature
on August 7, 1935. This law created a Probation Office under the Department of
Justice. On November 16, 1937, after barely two years of existence, the Supreme
Court of the Philippines declared the Probation Law unconstitutional because of some
defects in the law's procedural framework.

In 1972, House Bill No. 393 was filed in Congress, which would establish a
probation system in the Philippines. This bill avoided the objectionable features of Act
4221 that struck down the 1935 law as unconstitutional. The bill was passed by the
House of Representatives, but was pending in the Senate when Martial Law was
declared and Congress was abolished.

In 1975, the National Police Commission Interdisciplinary drafted a Probation Law.

After 18 technical hearings over a period of six months, the draft decree was presented
to a selected group of 369 jurists, penologists, civic leaders and social and behavioral
scientists and practitioners. The group overwhelmingly endorse the establishment of
an Adult Probation System in the country. On July 24, 1976, Presidential Decree No.
968, also known as Adult Probation Law of 1976, was signed into Law by the President
of the Philippines.

The operationalization 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 recruited and trained, and the central agency and

Page 22 of 32
probation field offices organized throughout the country. Fifteen selected probation
officers were sent to U.S.A. for orientation and training in probation administration.
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, more field offices were opened. There are at
present 204 field offices spread all over the country, supervised by 15 regional offices.
Probation was first introduced in the Philippines during the American colonial period
(1898–1945) with the enactment of Act No. 4221 of the Philippine Legislature on
August 7, 1935. This law created a Probation Office under the Department of Justice.
On November 16, 1937, after barely two years of existence, the Supreme Court of the
Philippines declared Probation Law unconstitutional because of some defects in the
law's procedural framework.

Administrative and procedural manuals were developed; probation officers

recruited and trained, and the central agency and probation field offices organized
throughout the country. Fifteen selected probation officers were sent to United States
for orientation and training in probation administration. Upon their return, they were
assigned to train the newly recruited probation officers. he probation system started to
operate on January 3, 1978. As more probation officers were recruited and trained,
more field offices were opened. There are at present 204 field offices spread all over
the country, supervised by 15 regional offices.

Legal Basis
● Presidential Decree No. 968 (July 24, 1976), “the Probation Law of 1976”,
created the Probation Administration to administer the probation system.
● Executive Order No. 292 (July 25, 1987), the “Administrative Code of 1987”,
renamed the Probation Administration to Parole and Probation Administration
(PPA).
● Republic Act No. 9165 (June 7, 2002), or The Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002, put the investigation and supervision of First Time Minor
Drug Offenders under suspended sentence (FTMDO) as an added function of
the PPA.
● Executive Order No. 468 (October 11, 2005) revitalized the Volunteer
Probation Aide (VPA) program, placing the PPA in the forefront in relation to
crime prevention, treatment of offenders in a community-based setting, and in
the overall administration of criminal justice.

Page 23 of 32
Mandate
The Parole and Probation Administration (PPA) is mandated to conserve and/or
redeem convicted offenders and prisoners who are under the probation or parole
system.
Section 1. Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 968 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
"Sec. 4. 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
defendant has perfected the appeal from the judgment of conviction.
Sec. 2. Section 9 of Presidential Decree No. 968 is hereby amended to read as
follows:

"Sec. 9. 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 years;
(b) convicted of subversion or any crime against the 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 a fine of
not less than Two Hundred Pesos.
(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 Section 33 hereof

COMMUNITY- BASED TREATMENT FOR OFFENDERS IN THE

PHILIPPINES: OLD CONCEPTS, NEW APPROACHES, BEST
PRACTICES
INTRODUCTION

Page 24 of 32
 The reintegration of offenders into their own community and society is one of the
universally accepted goals of corrections, whether the latter is carried out in institutions
or through non-custodial measures. To ensure that offenders discharged from
detention centers, jails, penal institutions or rehabilitation centers re-claim their part
and role in society, there is a need to assist them in their reunification with their families
and reentry into the community.
Thus, it is imperative to sustain rehabilitation and achieve reintegration through
the community-based treatment of ex-offenders. Moreover, the commission of crime
is a result or consequence of the inter-play of factors and conditions in one’s self, the
immediate and bigger environment, and one’s choices and decision-making
processes. Hence, it is necessary that these human and environmental factors are
Examined closely and appropriate measures adopted to assist ex-offenders in
their reintegration efforts.
RATIONALE FOR COMMUNITYBASED TREATMENT

The international community has long recognized that the goals of a humane
criminal justice system are best served if offenders are reintegrated and rehabilitated
by means other than incarceration. In fact, it has been widely accepted that
incarceration or imprisonment should be a last resort and utilized for those who have
committed serious and heinous crimes, and that community-based treatment should
instead be promoted whenever possible and feasible to hasten an offenders’
reintegration into society. 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 o v e r c r o w d i n g ,
p r i s o n s l e a d to dehumanizing conditions, which make reintegration and
resocialization even more difficult. 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 spawn the formation of “subcultures” among prisoners that tend to harden
them. This is so because prisoners have to counteract the effects of deprivations of

Page 25 of 32
imprisonment and the conditions prevailing in jails which are often rigid and arbitrary
The implementation and evaluation of rehabilitation and reintegration plans, on the
other hand, can be monitored more closely as these are related to the offenders’ daily
living in the community. Due to this, re-planning can be easily resorted to, based on
immediate feedback.

OLD CONCEPTS AND NEW APPROACHES IN THE TREATMENTOF

OFFENDERS
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 Noncustodial measures or the Tokyo Rules In order to
appreciate fully the goals and advantages of community-based treatment in the
context of the Philippines, there is a need to revisit the old and traditional concepts of
treating offenders and those of emerging ones, specifically from a social development
framework. From this social development context, it is best to examine old concepts
related to the treatment of offenders vis-a-vis the new approaches in this field.

Correction and Rehabilitation of Penitent Offenders

Objective: To effect the rehabilitation and reintegration of probationers, parolees,

pardonees, and first-time minor drug offenders as productive, law-abiding and socially
responsible members of the community through well-planned supervision programs
for probationers, parolees, pardonees, and first-time minor drug offenders which are
aligned to national program thrusts of the government, such as, the Sariling-Sikap, Jail
Decongestion, etc.establishment of innovative and financially and technically feasible
projects for the moral, spiritual and economic upliftment of probationers, parolees,
pardonees, and first-time minor drug offenders utilizing available community
resources.

Scope and Beneficiaries: All offenders granted probation, parole,

pardon and suspended sentence.
The Administration has adopted a harmonized and integrated treatment program
for these clients to effect their rehabilitation. This harmonized and integrated program
involves (1) The Therapeutic Community Modality (2) The Restorative Justice
Principles and Concepts and (3) the Use of Volunteer Probation Aides (VPAs).

Page 26 of 32
 The Therapeutic Community Modality is a self-help social learning treatment
model used for clients with problems of drug abuse and other behavioral problems
such as alcoholism, stealing, and other anti-social tendencies. As a treatment model,
it includes four (4) categories, namely, behavior management, intellectual/spiritual
aspect, emotional and social aspects, and vocational/survival aspects.

In this regard, the Therapeutic Community Modality provides a well-defined

structure for a synchronized and focused implementation of the various intervention
strategies/activities undertaken by the Agency such as:

Individual and group counseling

This activity intends to assist the clients in trying to sort out their problems, identify
solutions, reconcile conflicts and help resolve them. This could be done either by
individual or group interaction with the officers of the Agency.

Moral, Spiritual, Values Formation

Seminars, lectures or trainings offered or arranged by the Agency comprise these

rehabilitation activities. Active NGOs, schools, civic and religious organizations are
tapped to facilitate the activities.

Work or Job Placement/Referral

Categorized as an informal program wherein a client is referred for work or job

placement through the officer’s own personal effort, contact or information.

Vocational/Livelihood and Skills Training

The program includes the setting up of seminars and skills training classes like
food preservation and processing, candle making, novelty items and handicrafts
making, etc., to help the clients earn extra income. Likewise, vocational and technical
trade classes are availed of such as refrigeration, automotive mechanic,
radio/television and electronics repairs, tailoring, dressmaking, basic computer
training, etc. through coordination with local barangays, parish centers, schools and
civic organizations.

Page 27 of 32
Health, Mental and Medical Services

To address some of the basic needs of clients and their families, medical missions
are organized to provide various forms of medical and health services including
physical examination and treatment, free medicines and vitamins, dental examination
and treatment, drug dependency test and laboratory examination.

Psychological testing and evaluation as well as psychiatric treatment are likewise

provided for by the Agency’s Clinical Services Division and if not possible by reason
of distance, referrals are made to other government accredited institutions.

Literacy and Education

In coordination with LGU programs, adult education classes are availed of to help
clients learn basic writing, reading and arithmetic. Likewise, literacy teach-ins during
any sessions conducted for clients become part of the module. This is particularly
intended for clients who are “no read, no write” to help them become functionally
literate.

Likewise, linkages with educational Foundation, other GOs and NGOs are regularly
done for free school supplies, bags and uniform for client’s children and relatives.

Community Service

This program refers to the services in the community rendered by clients for the
benefit of society. It includes tree planting, beautification drives, cleaning and greening
of surroundings, maintenance of public parks and places, garbage collection, blood
donation and similar socio-civic activities.

Client Self-Help Organization

This program takes the form of cooperatives and client associations wherein the
clients form cooperatives and associations as an economic group to venture on small-
scale projects. Similarly, client associations serve another purpose by providing some
structure to the lives of clients where they re-learn the basics of working within a group
with hierarchy, authority and responsibility much like in the bigger society.

Page 28 of 32
Payment of Civil Liability

The payment of civil liability or indemnification to victims of offenders are pursued

despite the economic status of clients. Payment of obligations to the victims instills in
the minds of the clients their responsibility and the consequences of the harm they
inflicted to others.

Environment and Ecology

To instill awareness and concern in preserving ecological balance and environmental

health, seminars/lectures are conducted wherein clients participate. These
seminars/lectures tackle anti-smoke belching campaign, organic farming, waste
management, segregation and disposal and proper care of the environment.

Sports and Physical Fitness

Activities that provide physical exertion like sports, games and group play are
conducted to enhance the physical well being of clients. Friendly competitions of
clients from the various offices of the sectors, together with the officers, provide an
enjoyable and healthful respite.

The success of the Therapeutic Community treatment model is also anchored on

the implementation of restorative justice. To highlight the principles of restorative
justice, offenders are recognized to indemnify victims and render community services
to facilitate the healing of the broken relationship caused by offending the concerned
parties. Mediation and conferencing are also utilized in special cases to mend and/or
restore clients’ relationship with their victim and the community.

Considering that it is in the community that the rehabilitation of clients takes place,
the utilization of therapeutic community treatment model coupled with the principles of
restorative justice would be further energized with the recruitment, training and
deployment of Volunteer Probation Aides (VPAs). The VPA program is a strategy to
generate maximum participation of the citizens in the community-based program of
probation and parole. Through the VPAs, the substance of restorative justice is
pursued with deeper meaning since the VPAs are residents of the same community
where the clients they supervise reside. Thus, it is practicable for the volunteers to

Page 29 of 32
solicit support for clients’ needs and assist the field officers in supervising the
probationers, parolees, and pardonees.

The Therapeutic Community treatment modality, Restorative Justice paradigm

and deployment of VPAs integrated into one rehabilitation program have yielded
tremendous outcome in the rehabilitation and reformation of probationers, parolees,
pardonees, and first-time minor drug offenders.

Furthermore, the Agency believes that the client’s family is a major part or support
in the rehabilitation process, thus the Administration adopts the Integrated Allied Social
Services program to address the needs of the children and other minor dependent of
the clients. Under the said program, interventions relative to the growth and
development of the minor dependents are done to help them become productive, law
abiding and effective individuals.

MODALITIES IN THE TREATMENT OF OFFENDERS IN THE

PHILIPPINES
Like many countries, the correctional system in the Philippines has both an institution-
based and a community-based component. It also has separate treatment systems for
youth offenders and adult offenders. The custodial care of adult offenders is handled
by the following:

The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) under the Department of
Interior and Local Government (DILG) which has supervision over all district, city and
municipal jails and detention centers. These jails house detainees awaiting judicial
disposition of their case and offenders whose sentence range from one (1) day to three
(3) years. 2. The Provincial Governments, which have supervision and control over
provincial jails. These jails house court detainees and prisoners whose prison terms
range from six (6) months and one (1) day, to three (3) years . The Bureau of
Corrections (BUCOR) under the Department of Justice (DOJ), which has control over
the national penitentiary and its penal farms, houses convicted offenders with prison
sentences ranging from three (3) years and one (1) day, to life imprisonment.

Major Rehabilitation Programs

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE (RJ) is a philosophy and a process whereby

stakeholders in a specific offense resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath

Page 30 of 32
of the offense and its implications for the future. It is a victim-centered response to
crime that provides opportunity for those directly affected by the crime - the victim, the
offender, their families and the community - to be directly involved in responding to the
harm caused by the crime. Its ultimate objective is to restore the broken relationships
among stakeholders. The Restorative Justice process provides a healing opportunity
for affected parties to facilitate the recovery of the concerned parties and allow them
to move on with their lives and victims to prevent further crimes, thereby be participants
in nation-building.

The THERAPEUTIC COMMUNITY (TC) is a self-help social learning

treatment model used in the rehabilitation of drug offenders and other clients with
behavioral problems. TC adheres to precepts of “right living” - Responsible Love and
Concern; Truth and Honesty; the Here and Now; Personal Responsibility for Destiny;
Social Responsibility (brother’s keeper); Moral Code; Work Ethics and Pride in Quality.
Therapeutic Community (TC) is an environment that helps people gets help while
helping themselves. It operates in a similar fashion to a functional family with a
hierarchical structure of older and younger members. Each member has a defined role
and responsibilities for sustaining the proper functioning of the TC. There are sets of
rules and community norms that members commit to live by and uphold upon entry.
The primary “therapist” and teacher is the community itself, consisting of peers,
staff/probation and parole officers and even

The VOLUNTEER PROBATION AIDE (VPA) PROGRAM is a strategy by

which the Parole and Probation Administration may be able to generate maximum
citizen participation or community involvement. Citizens of good standing in the
community may volunteer to assist the probation and parole officers in the supervision
of a number of probationers, parolees and conditional pardonees in their respective
communities. Since they reside in the same community as the client, they are able to
usher the reformation and rehabilitation of the clients hands-on In collaboration with
the PPO, the VPA helps pave the way for the offender, victim and community to each
heal from the harm resulting from the crime done. They can initiate a circle of support
for clients Volunteer Probation Aides (VPA), who, as role models of successful
personal change, serve as guides in the recovery process.

Page 31 of 32
Self Help

Santos-Padua, J B (2013). Parole Rules, Probatiuon Law and Executive Clemency

(Non-Institution-Based Corrections), ChapterHouse Publishing Inc., Novaliches,
Quezon City

Gahar, L., (2012). Handbook on Non-Institutional Correction. Philippines: Rex Book

Store Inc.

Guerero, BB., (2013), Non-institutional correction: community-based correction,

Makati City: KATHA Publishing Company

Manwong, R., Foronda M J., (2009). Criminal Justice System: Setting and Procedure.
Philippines: Wiseman Books Trading, Inc.

Peckley, M., Eduardo, J., (2010). Essential of Criminology (1st Ed). Philippines:
Wiseman Books Trading, Inc

Act No. 4103 as amended by RA 4221 and RA 4203 (Indeterminate Sentence Law)
Foronda M J., (2007). Correctional Administration: Non-Institutional Correction.
Philippines: Wiseman Books Trading, Inc.

Republic act 10389 (2012 https://www. Officialgazzete .gov.ph

Page 32 of 32