PROBATION
by:
ALAN JEFFREY C. CARALE, Ph.D.
Instructor
Cluster/Subject/Competency Weight
1. Historical Background of Probation 1%
1.1 Trace the history of probation since its .25%
th
beginning in the 19 century
1.2 Explain the basic concepts, principles .25%
and philosophy of the probation system
1.3 Discuss the effectiveness of probation .25%
as compared with imprisonment
1.4 Analyze the relationship of Probation .25%
with other agencies in the Criminal
Justice System
Cluster/Subject/Competency Weight
2. Probation Law and Other Forms 2%
of Probation in the Philippines
2.1 Demonstrate understanding of the .25%
provisions of P.D. No. 968 otherwise
known as “The Adult Probation Law
in the Philippines”
2.2 Discuss the requirements for the .20%
grant of denial of probation
2.3 Describe the procedure in the conduct .25%
of Post-Sentence Investigation (PSI)
2.4 Analyze the different forms of .15%
investigation report and related reports
2.5 Describe probation investigation and .20%
supervision
Cluster/Subject/Competency Weight
2.6 Identify rights and duties of a .20%
probationer
2.7 Explain the participation of .15%
Volunteer Probation Aides
2.8 Discuss the organizational .30%
structure, powers and functions
of the Probation and Parole
Administration
2.9 Explain other forms of probation .30%
in the Philippines
Historical Background of Probation
The concept of probation stems from faith in man’s capacity
to change for the better and in the ultimate good that will
redound to society by rebuilding rather than destroying those
who have offended it. The origin of probation can be traced
to English criminal law of the Middle Ages. Harsh
punishments were imposed on adults and children alike for
offenses that were not always of a serious nature. Sentences
such as branding, flogging, mutilation, and execution were
common. During the time of King Henry VIII, for instance,
no less than 200 crimes were punishable by death, many of
which were minor offenses.
Thus, as early as the thirteenth century, efforts were made to
mitigate the harshness of penal laws through more enlightened and
rehabilitative approaches in the treatment and correction of
offenders. These included the release of accused members of the
clergy to ecclesiastical authorities, judicial reprieve or temporary
suspension of sentence or execution, deportation, and release on
recognizance wherein a misdemeanant bound himself before the
court to “keep the peace and be on good behavior.” These practices
in early English Courts became the forerunners of probation which
was later established in England and the United States.
In the United States particularly in Boston, Massachusetts, John
Augustus, a cobbler stood bail for a drunkard in [Link] drunkard,
while under Augustus’ supervision was taught the art of shoe
making and started to show signs of reform. This prompted
Augustus to extend the project. In fact, he supervised close to 2,000
persons during the following years of his life. In the course of his
dealings with the offenders, he developed several features some of
which, as will be seen later, became standard practice of probation.
These features included selectivity of screening, supervision of the
activities of the offenders, use of community resources, the provision of
a place for the offenders’ dependents, submission of progress reports to
the court, and the maintenance of the record filing system. Augustus’
work was carried on by Rufus R. Cook, Chaplain of the County Jail and
Representative of the Boston Children’s Aid Society and Matthew
David XIV of Birmingham, England. The same procedure as developed
by Augustus was used. However, investigations were scanty, probation
periods short, and plans of treatment and supervision were not much in
evidence. Probation became firmly established during the second half of
the 19th century when in 1878, the State of Massachusetts started the
first paid probation officer for the courts of Criminal Jurisdiction in the
City of Boston. On March 4, 1925, through the efforts of Charles Lionel
Chute, the First Federal Probation Act of the United States was
approved.
Historical Background of Probation in the Philippines
In the Philippines, provisions for juvenile probation have been
embodied in Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code since its enactment in
1932. Thus, 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 amended on
December 10, 1974 by Presidential Decree No. 603, known as the Child
and Youth Welfare Code, and by Presidential Decree No. 1179 which
set the age of minority to below 18 years of age at the time of the
commission of the offense. Likewise, Republic Act No. 6425 or the
Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 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.
The move to integrate adult probation in the Philippine criminal
justice system began early in the twentieth century when the
Philippine Legislature approved Act No. 4221 on August 7, 1935.
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. Unfortunately, there were
defects in the law’s procedural framework so that, on November 16,
1937, the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional in the case of
People of the Philippines vs. Vera on the grounds of “undue
delegation of legislative power” and violation of the “equal
protection of the law” clause.
Section 11, the fatal provision of the Act, provided that “This Act shall apply only
in those provinces in which the respective provincial boards have provided for the
salary of a probation officer….” The Court held that the Probation Act did not, by
the force of any of its provinces, fix and impose upon the provincial boards any
standard or guide in the exercise of their discretionary power. What was granted
was a “roving commission” which enabled the provincial boards to exercise
arbitrary discretion. By Section 11 of the Act, the legislature did seemingly on its
own authority extend the benefits of the Act to the provinces but in reality, left the
entire matter for the various provincial boards to determine for themselves
whether the Probation Law should apply to their provinces or not at all. The
applicability and application of the Act was entirely placed in the hands of the
provincial boards. If a provincial board did not wish to have the Act applied in its
province, all it had to do was to decline to appropriate the needed amount for the
salary of a probation officer without even stating the reason therefore. The plain
language of Section 11 was not susceptible of any other interpretation. This was a
virtual surrender of legislative power to the provincial boards.
A second attempt was made when then Congressmen Teodulo C.
Natividad and Ramon D. Bagatsing introduced House Bill No. 393
during their last months in Congress. Passed in the Lower House,
this was pending in the Senate when Martial Law was proclaimed
in 1972. The agitations for the adoption of an adult probation law
continued. In 1973, the technical staff of the Bacolod City Police
Advisory Council, headed by Lt. Col. Arcadio S. Lozada and
assisted by US Peace Corps Volunteer Alvin L. Koenig, prepared a
proposed Probation Decree which incorporated pertinent provisions
of the Natividad and Laurel Bills.
This was submitted to the Secretary of Justice and the National Police
Commission after a thorough perusal by a study committee of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines and subsequent indorsement by its
national Board of Directors. Late in 1975 the National Police
Commission, sitting en banc and headed by Defense Secretary Juan
Ponce Enrile who was the concurrent Chairman of NAPOLCOM, heard
the report “Meeting the Challenge of Crime” of the Philippine
delegation to the 5th United Nations Congress held in Geneva,
Switzerland in September 1975. At that time, the Philippines was
among the few participating countries without an adult probation
system. Citing the role of probation in an integrated approach to crime
prevention, the delegation urged priority action on the establishment of
the system. This was the turning point that led to the passage of the law.
The Inter-Disciplinary Committee on Crime Prevention created in 1974 by
Secretary Enrile and chaired by Commissioner Teodulo Natividad, then pursued
the preparation of the probation decree. Eighteen technical hearings were
conducted, attended by 60 resource persons, after which the draft decree was
presented at the Seminar on the Probation System sponsored by the
NAPOLCOM, Philippine Constabulary and Integrated National Police, and the
University of the Philippines Law Center on April 24, 1976. This was studied and
overwhelmingly endorsed by 369 participants representing various sectors of
society. A final draft of the decree was subsequently prepared, then reviewed and
endorsed to the President of the Philippines by the Minister of Justice, Minister of
National Defense, and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Thus, the law was
born on July 24, 1976. It was during the closing ceremonies of the First National
Conference on a Strategy to Reduce Crime held at Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon
City, that President Ferdinand E. Marcos signed Presidential Decree (P.D.) No.
968, otherwise known as the Probation Law of 1976, in the presence of nearly
800 representatives of the country’s criminal justice system.
Under Executive Order No. 292, “The Administrative Code of
1987” which was promulgated on November 23, 1989, the
Probation Administration was renamed “Parole and Probation
Administration” and given the added function of supervising
prisoners who, after serving part of their sentence in jails are
released on parole pardon with parole conditions. Moreover, the
investigation and supervision of First Time Minor Drug Offenders
(FTMDO) placed under suspended sentence became another added
function of the Administration pursuant to Sections 66 – 70 of
Republic Act 9165, “The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002” and by virtue of the Memorandum of Agreement between
the Dangerous Drugs Board and Administration dated 17 August
2005.
Likewise, pursuant to Section 57 of Republic Act 9165, the
Administration was designated as the authorized representative of
the Dangerous Drugs Board under the Voluntary Submission
Program. The Agency was placed in the forefront in relation to
crime prevention, treatment of offenders in the community-based
setting, and in the overall administration of criminal justice by
mandating the revitalization of the Volunteer Probation Aide (VPA)
Program pursuant to Executive Order 468 dated October 11, 2005.
Under Republic Act No. 10389, “Recognizance Act of 2012”, the
Administration was directed to monitor and evaluate the activities
of the person on release on recognizance.
Essential Elements of the Probation System under Presidential Decree No. 968
Note: Probation came from the Latin verb “probare” – to prove, to
test. A term coined by John Augustus.
The probation system established in the Philippines has at least
three important features that make it different from the systems in
other parts of the world. First, it is a “single or one-time” affair,
meaning that a convicted person can only take advantage of
probation once in his lifetime. Secondly, our probation system is
highly selective. Probation is made available only to those
convicted of certain crimes. Lastly, persons under probation retain
their civil rights, like the right to vote, or practice one’s profession,
or exercise parental or marital authority.
PAROLE AND PROBATION ADMINISTRATION
The Probation Administration was created by virtue of Presidential
Decree No. 968, “The Probation Law of 1976”, to administer the
probation system. Under Executive Order No. 292, “The
Administrative Code of 1987”, which was promulgated on
November 23, 1989, the Probation Administration was renamed
“Parole and Probation Administration” and given the added
function of supervising prisoners who, after serving part of their
sentence in jails are released on parole or are granted pardon with
parole conditions.
Mandate: The Parole and Probation Administration is mandated to
conserve and/or redeem convicted offenders and prisoners who are
under the probation or parole system.
Vision: A model component of the Philippine Correctional System
that shall enhance the quality of life of its clients through multi-
disciplinary programs and resources, an efficient organization, and
a highly professional and committed workforce in order to promote
social justice and development.
Mission: To rehabilitate probationers, parolees and pardonees, and
promote their development as integral persons by utilizing
innovative interventions and techniques which respect the dignity of
man and recognize his divine destiny.
Goals: The Administration’s program sets to achieve the following
goals: (a) promote the reformation of criminal offenders and reduce
the incidence of recidivism; and (b) provide a cheaper alternative to
the institutional confinement of first-time offenders who are likely
to respond to individualized, community-based treatment programs.
Functions: The Agency, through its network of 15 regional and 204
field parole and probation offices performs the following functions:
1. to administer the parole and probation system;
2. to exercise supervision over parolees, pardonees and probationers;
and
3. to promote the correction and rehabilitation of criminal offenders.
Major Events in the
Developments of Probation and
Parole in the US
YEAR AND EVENTS
1791 – Passage of the Bill of Rights
1817 – New York passes first good time salute
1824 – New York House of Refuge is founded
1830 – Judge Oxenbridge Thatcher in Boston
introduces release on one’s own
recognizance
1836 – Massachusetts passes first
recognizance with monetary sureties law
1841 – John Augustus introduce probation in
the US in Boston
1863 – Gaylord Hubbell, Warden of the State
Correctional facility at Ossining, N.Y. visits Ireland
and is influenced by Walter Crofton’s ticket of
leave or mark system; later led to good time
credits earned by prisoners for early release.
1869 – Elmira Reformatory established in NY where
early release dates were set by the board of
managers.
1870 – National Prison Association established
(later the American Correctional Association),
emphasizing indeterminate sentencing and early
release.
1876 – Zebulon Brockway releases inmates on
parole from Elmira Reformatory
1878 – Massachusetts passes first probation law.
1899 – Illinois passes first juvenile court act,
creating special juvenile courts.
1906 – Work release originates in Vermont through
informal sheriff action.
1913 – Huber law, or first release statute, originates
in Wisconsin.
1916 – US Supreme Court declares that courts
could not indefinitely suspend sentences;
rather this was a legislative right.
1918 – Furlough program begun in Mississippi
1925 – Federal government formally
implements probation
1932 – Forty – four states have parole
mechanism
1954 – All states and the federal government
have probation and parole system
1965 – Prisoner Rehabilitation Act passed by
Congress, applicable to federal
prisoners.
1976 – Maine abolished parole.
PD 968 – The Adult
Probation Law of 1976
Two types of Probation:
1. Juvenile probation covering
ages 9 and under 18;
2. Adult probation covering 18
and above.
Probation became law in Massachusetts,
U.S.A. on April 26, 1878
- The first probation in 1837 was declared
unconstitutional because it covers only
provinces that can financially afford to
adopt the law.
- Under Sec. 32, RA 6425 (Dangerous Drug
Act of 1972) Probation is granted – to Drug
Addicts
- P.D. 603 as Amended by P.D. 1179 (Child
and Youth Welfare Code) was passed to
Avail Probation – to Minor Offender.
- P.D. 968 was approved on July 24, 1976
- The Probation system became
operational on January 3, 1978.
- Sentences offenders, 18 years and above can
apply probation before serving sentence.
P.D. 1257 – participation of the prosecutor in the
determination of the application for probation.
P.D. 76 – the period of punishment, which is
probationable, is extended from 6 years and 1 day.
P.D. 1990 – the period of punishment, probationable,
is lowered again from 6 years and 1 day to 6 years or
less.
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 968
(As Amended by PD 1990 & PD 1257)
ESTABLISHING
A PROBATION SYSTEM,
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Section 2. Purpose
(a) promote the correction and
rehabilitation of an offender by providing
him with individualized treatment;
(b) provide an opportunity for the
reformation of a penitent offender which
might be less probable if he were to serve
a prison sentence; and
(c) prevent the commission of offenses.
Section 3. Meaning of Terms
(a) “Probation” is a disposition under which a
defendant, after conviction and sentence, is
released subject to conditions imposed by the
court and to the supervision of a probation
officer.
(b) “Probationer” means a person placed on
probation.
(c) “Probation Officer” means one who
investigates for the court a referral for probation
or supervises a probationer or both.
Probation may be granted whether the
sentence imposes a term of imprisonment or
a fine only. An application for probation shall
be filed with the trial court. The filing of the
application shall be deemed a waver of the
right to appeal, or the automatic withdrawal
of a pending appeal.
An order granting or denying probation shall
not be appealable. (As amended by PD
1990.)
Section 5. Post-sentence
Investigation (PSIR)
No person shall be placed on
probation except upon prior
investigation by the probation
officer and a determination by the
court that the ends of justice and
the best interest of the public as well
as that of the defendant will be
served thereby.
Section 6. Form of
Investigation Report.
The investigation report to be
submitted by the probation officer
under Section 5 hereof (PSIR) shall
be in the form prescribed by the
Probation Administrator and
approved by the Secretary of
Justice.
Section 7. Period for
Submission of Investigation
Report.
The probation officer shall submit to the
court the investigation report on a
defendant not later than SIXTY DAYS from
receipt of the order of said court to
conduct the investigation. The court shall
resolve the application for probation not
later than FIFTEEN DAYS after receipt of
said report. (As amended by PD 1990.)
Pending submission of the investigation report
and the resolution of the petition, the
defendant may be allowed on temporary
liberty under his bail filed in the criminal case;
Provided, That, in case where no bail was filed
or that the defendant is incapable of filing
one, the court may allow the release of the
defendant on recognize the custody of a
responsible member of the community who
shall guarantee his appearance whenever
required by the court.
The Procedures in
Applying for
Probation
1. The offender or his counsel files a petition with the
convicting court;
2. The court determines convict qualifications and
notifies the prosecutor of the filing of the petition;
3. The prosecutor submits his comments on such
application within 10 days from receipt of the
notification;
4. If petitioner is qualified, his application is referred to
the probation officer for post-sentence investigation;
5. The post-sentence investigation report is submitted by
the PO to the court within 60 days;
6. The court grants or denies the petition for probation
within 15 days upon the receipt of the PSIR.
Section 8. Criteria for Placing
an Offender on Probation.
In determining whether an offender may be
placed on probation, the court shall consider
all information relative, TO THE:
CHARACTER,
ANTECEDENTS,
ENVIRONMENT,
MENTAL AND PHYSICAL CONDITION OF THE
OFFENDER,
AND AVAILABLE INSTITUTIONAL AND
COMMUNITY RESOURCES.
Probation shall be denied if the court finds that:
(a) the offender is in need of correctional
treatment that can be provided most
effectively by his commitment to an
institution; or
(b) there is undue risk that during the period of
probation the offender will commit another
crime; or
(c) probation will depreciate the seriousness
of the offense committed.
Section 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 (6) years;
(b) convicted of subversion or any offense 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. (As amended by PD 1990.)
Section 10. Conditions of
Probation.
Every probation order issued by the court shall
contain conditions requiring that the
probationer shall:
(a) present himself to the probation officer
designated to undertake his supervision at
such place as may be specified in the order
within SEVENTY-TWO HOURS from receipt of
said order;
(b) report to the probation officer at least
once a month at such time and place as
specified by said officer.
The court may also require the probationer to:
(a) cooperate with a program of supervision;
(b) meet his family responsibilities;
(c) devote himself to a specific employment
and not to change said employment without
the prior written approval of the probation
officer;
(d) undergo medical, psychological or
psychiatric examination and treatment and
enter and remain in a specified institution,
when required for that purpose;
(e) pursue a prescribed secular study or
vocational training;
(f) attend or reside in a facility established for
instruction, recreation or residence of persons on
probation;
(g) refrain from visiting houses of ill-repute;
(h) abstain from drinking intoxicating beverages to
excess;
(i) permit to probation officer or an authorized
social worker to visit his home and place or work;
(j) reside at premises approved by it and not to
change his residence without its prior written
approval; or
(k) satisfy any other condition related to the
rehabilitation of the defendant and not unduly
restrictive of his liberty or incompatible with his
freedom of conscience.
Section 11. Effectivity of
Probation Order
A probation order shall take effect UPON
ITS ISSUANCE, at which time the court shall
inform the offender of the consequences
thereof and explain that upon his failure to
comply with any of the conditions
prescribed in the said order or his
commission of another offense, he shall
serve the penalty imposed for the offense
under which he was placed on probation.
Section 12. Modification of
Condition of Probation
During the period of probation, the court
may, upon application of either the
probationer or the probation officer, revise or
modify the conditions or period of probation.
The court shall notify either the probationer or
the probation officer of the filing such an
application so as to give both parties an
opportunity to be heard thereon.
The court shall inform in writing the probation
officer and the probationer of any change in
the period or conditions of probation.
Section 13. Control and
Supervision of Probationer
The probationer and his probation
program shall be under the control
of the court who placed him on
probation subject to actual
supervision and visitation by a
probation officer.
Section 14. Period of
Probation.
(a) The period of probation of a defendant sentenced to
a term of imprisonment of not more than one year shall
not exceed two years, and in all other cases, said
period shall not exceed six years.
(b) When the sentence imposes a fine only and the
offender is made to serve subsidiary imprisonment in
case of insolvency, the period of probation shall not be
less than nor to be more than twice the total number of
days of subsidiary imprisonment as computed at the
rate established, in Article thirty-nine of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended.
Section 15. Arrest of
Probationer; Subsequent
Disposition.
At any time during probation, the court may issue
a warrant for the arrest of a probationer for
violation of any serious violation of the conditions
of probation. The probationer, once arrested and
detained, shall immediately be brought before the
court for a hearing for the violation charged. The
defendant may be admitted to bail pending such
hearing. In such a case, the provisions regarding
release on bail of persons charged with a crime
shall be applicable to probationers arrested under
these provisions.
In the hearing, which shall be summary in nature, the
probationer shall have the right to be informed of the
violation charged and to adduce evidence in his
favor. The court shall not be bound by the technical rules
of evidence but may inform itself of all the facts which are
material and relevant to ascertain the veracity of the
charge. The State shall be represented by a prosecuting
officer in any contested hearing. If the violation is
established, the court may revoke or continue his probation
and modify the conditions thereof. If revoked, the court
shall order the probationer to serve the sentence originally
imposed. An order revoking the grant of probation or
modifying the terms and conditions thereof shall not be
appealable. (As amended by PD 1257, December 1, 1977.)
Section 16. Termination of
Probation
After the period of probation and upon
consideration of the report and
recommendation of the probation officer,
the court may order the final discharge of
the probationer upon finding that he has
fulfilled the terms and conditions of his
probation and thereupon the case is
deemed terminated.
The final discharge of the probationer
shall operate to restore to him all civil
rights lost or suspend as a result of his
conviction and to fully discharge his
liability for any fine imposed as to the
offense for which probation was granted.
The probationer and the probation officer
shall each be furnished with a copy of
such order.
Section 17. Confidentiality of
Records
The investigation report and the supervision history of a
probationer obtained under this Decree shall be
privileged and shall not be disclosed directly or
indirectly to anyone other than the Probation
Administration or the court concerned, except that the
court, in its discretion, may permit the probationer of his
attorney to inspect the aforementioned documents or
parts thereof whenever the best interest of the
probationer make such disclosure desirable or helpful:
Provided, Further, That, any government office or
agency engaged in the correction or rehabilitation of
offenders may, if necessary, obtain copies of said
documents for its official use from the proper court or the
Administration.
Section 18. The Probation
Administration
There is hereby created under the
Department of Justice an agency to be
known as the Probation Administration herein
referred to as the Administration, which shall
exercise general supervision over all
probationers.
The Administration shall have such staff,
operating units and personnel as may be
necessary for the proper execution of its
functions.
Section 19. Probation Administration.
The Administration shall be headed by
the Probation Administrator, hereinafter
referred to as the Administrator, who shall
be appointed by the President of the
Philippines. He shall hold office during good
behavior and shall not be removed except
for cause.
TheAdministrator shall receive an annual
salary of at least forty thousand pesos. His
powers and duties shall be to:
(a) act as the executive officer of the Administration;
(b) exercise supervision and control over all probation officers;
(c) make annual reports to the Secretary of Justice, in such
form as the latter may prescribe, concerning the operation,
administration and improvement of the probation system;
(d) promulgate, subject to the approval of the Secretary of
Justice, the necessary rules relative to the methods and
procedures of the probation process;
(e) recommend to the Secretary of Justice the appointment of
the subordinate personnel of his Administration and other
offices established in this Decree; and
(f) generally, perform such duties and exercise such powers as
may be necessary or incidental to achieve the objectives of
this Decree.
Section 20. Assistant Probation Administrator.
There shall be an Assistant Probation
Administrator who shall assist the Administrator
perform such duties as may be assigned to him
by the latter and as may be provided by law. In
the absence of the Administrator, he shall act as
head of the Administration.
He shall be appointed by the President of the
Philippines and shall receive an annual salary
of at least thirty-six thousand pesos.
Section 21. Qualifications of the Administrator and
Assistant Probation Administrator.
To be eligible for Appointment as Administrator or
Assistant Probation Administrator, a person must be:
at least thirty-five years of age,
holder of a master’s degree or its equivalent in
either criminology, social work, corrections,
penology, psychology, sociology, public
administration, law, police science, police
administration, or related fields,
and should have at least five years of supervisory
experience, or be a member of the Philippine Bar
with at least seven years of supervisory
experience.
Section 22. Regional Office; Regional Probation
Officer.
The Administration shall have regional offices
organized in accordance with the field
service area patterns established under the
Integrated Reorganization Plan.
Such regional offices shall be headed by a
Regional Probation Officer who shall be
appointed by President of the Philippines in
accordance with the Integrated
Reorganization Plan and upon the
recommendation of the Secretary of Justice.
The Regional Probation Officer shall exercise
supervision and control over all probation
officer within his jurisdiction and such duties
as may assigned to him by the Administrator.
He shall have an annual salary of at least
twenty-four thousand pesos.
He shall, whenever necessary, be assisted by
an Assistant Regional Probation Officer who
shall also be appointed by the President of
the Philippines, upon recommendation of the
Secretary of Justice, with an annual salary of
at least twenty thousand pesos.
Section 23. Provincial and City Probation
Officers.
There shall be at least one probation officer in
each province and city who shall be
appointed by the Secretary of Justice upon
recommendation of the Administrator and in
accordance with civil service law and rules.
The Provincial or City Probation Officer shall
receive an annual salary of at least eighteen
thousand four hundred pesos.
His duties shall be to:
(a) investigate all persons referred to him for
investigation by the proper court or the Administrator;
(b) instruct all probationers under his supervision of that
of the probation aide on the terms and conditions of
their probations;
(c) keep himself informed of the conduct and
condition of probationers under his charge and use all
suitable methods to bring about an improvement in
their conduct and conditions;
(d) maintain a detailed record of his work and submit
such written reports as may be required by the
Administration or the court having jurisdiction over the
probationer under his supervision;
(e) prepare a list of qualified residents of the
province or city where he is assigned who are
willing to act as probation aides;
(f) supervise the training of probation aides
and oversee the latter’s supervision of
probationers;
(g) exercise supervision and control over all
field assistants, probation aides and other
personnel; and
(h) perform such duties as may be assigned
by the court or the Administration.
Section 24. Miscellaneous Powers of Provincial
and City Probation Officers.
Provincial or City Probation Officers shall have
the authority within their territorial jurisdiction
to administer oaths and acknowledgments
and to take depositions in connection with
their duties and functions under this Decree.
They shall also have, with respect to
probationers under their care, the powers of
police officer.
Section 25. Qualifications of Regional, Assistant Regional,
Provincial, and City Probation Officers.
No person shall be appointed Regional or Assistant
Regional or Provincial or City Probation Officer unless he
possesses at least a:
1. Bachelor’s Degree with a major in social work,
sociology, psychology, criminology, penology, corrections,
police science, administration, or related fields and
2. Has at least three years of experience in work
requiring any of the abovementioned disciplines, or
3. is a member of the Philippine Bar with at least
three years of supervisory experience.
Whenever practicable, the Provincial or City Probation
Officer shall be appointed from among qualified residents
of the province or city where he will be assigned to work.
Section 26. Organization.
Within twelve months from the approval of this
Decree, the Secretary of Justice shall organize
the administrative structure of the
Administration and the other agencies
created herein. During said period, he shall
also determine the staffing patterns of the
regional, provincial and city probation offices
with the end in view of achieving maximum
efficiency and economy in the operations of
the probation system.
Section 27. Field Assistants, Subordinate
Personnel, Provincial or City Probation
Officers shall be assisted by such field
assistants and subordinate personnel as
may be necessary to enable them to carry
out their duties effectively.
Section 28. Probation Aides.
To assist the Provincial or City Probation Officers in
the supervision of probationers, the Probation
Administrator may appoint citizens of good repute
and probity to act as probation aides.
Probation Aides shall not receive any regular
compensation for services except for reasonable
travel allowance. They shall hold office for such
period as may be determined by the Probation
Administrator. Their qualifications and maximum
case loads shall be provided in the rules
promulgated pursuant to this Decree.
Section 29. Violation of Confidential Nature
of Probation Records.
The penalty of imprisonment ranging from
six months and one day to six years and a
fine ranging from hundred to six thousand
pesos shall be imposed upon any person
who violates Section 17 (confidentiality of
records).
References:
Abadinsky, Howard. (1994). Probation and Parole: Theory and Practice.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall Career and Technology.
Champion, Dean J. (1996). Probation, Parole and Community
[Link] Jersey: Prentice Hall Career and Technology.
Foronda, Mercedes A. (2009). Correctional Administration (Non-
Institutional Corrections). Wiseman’s Books Trading
[Link]
corrections
Presidential Decree No. 968
San Diego et. al (2012) Compendium on Criminal Justice Education: A
textbook on Philippine Criminology, Wiseman Books Trading, Inc., Quezon
City.
