1
INTRODUCTION
Most correctional authorities believed that probation is one of the most effective and
economical tools which society now has available for the care, treatment and rehabilitation of
certain adult and juvenile offenders against the law. Probation is a procedure wherein a sentence
of offender is temporarily suspended and he is permitted to remain in the community, subject to
the control of the court and under the supervision and guidance of a probation officer. It is a
privilege granted by the court to a person convicted of a crime or criminal offense to remain with
the community instead of actually going to prison.
Presidential Decree No. 968 otherwise known as the Probation Law of 1976 recognizes
such trend. However, the Decree separates adult probation from juvenile probation for it
expressly excludes those entitled to the benefits under the provisions of Presidential Decree No.
603, known as the Child and Youth Welfare Code, and similar laws.
Statements of the principles, goals and objectives of the Probation Law are found in its
Preamble. The Preamble indicates six essential goals, to wit:
1. An enlightened and humane correctional system;
2. The reformation of offenders;
3. The reduction of the incidence of recidivism;
4. To extend to offenders individualized and community-based treatment programs
instead of imprisonment;
5. It is limited only to offenders who are likely to respond to probation favorably; and
6. It is economical or less costly than confinement to prisons and other institutions with
rehabilitation programs.
To provide a less costly alternative to the imprisonment of first-time offenders, then
President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued on July 24, 1976 Presidential Decree No. 968 known as the
Probation Law of 1976. Under PD 968, the court may, after it shall have convicted and sentenced
an accused and upon application of said accused, suspend the execution of said sentence and
place the accused on probation for such period and upon such terms and conditions as it may
deem best. First-time offenders were given a second chance to maintain their place in society
through a process of reformation, which is better achieved when he is not mixed with hardened
criminals within prison walls.
Not all convicted offenders have to serve their sentence behind bars. Some are allowed
to stay in the community, subject to conditions imposed by the government. They are either
granted Probation, Parole, Conditional Pardon or Recognizance. Non-institutional corrections
refer to that method of correcting sentenced offenders without having to go to prison.
Advantages of community-based corrections are:
1. Family members need not be victims also for the imprisonment of a member because
the convict can still continue to support his family, not to be far away from his children;

2
2. Rehabilitation will be more effective as the convict will not be exposed to hardened
criminals in prisons who will only influence him to a life of crime;
3. Rehabilitation can be monitored by the community, thus corrections can be made
and be more effective; and
4. Cost of incarceration will be eliminated which is extremely beneficial especially to a
cash-strapped government.
PROBATION DEFINE
The word probation is from the Latin word “probatio” which means testing. the word
probation is also said to be originated from the Latin verb “probare” which means to prove.
In criminal law it is a period of supervision over an offender, ordered by a court instead
of serving time in prison.
In the case of Frad v. Kelly, "Probation is a system of tutelage under the supervision and
control of the court which has jurisdiction over the convicted defendant, has the record of his
conviction and sentence, the records and reports as to his compliance with the conditions of his
probation, and the aid of the local probation officer, under whose supervision the defendant is
placed." It consists of the conditional suspension of punishment while the offender is placed
under personal supervision and is given individual guidance or treatment.
The Philippine Probation Law of 1976, as enacted by Presidential Decree No. 968, defines
probation as, "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." This decree will take effect on January 2, 1978.
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
WHAT IS CORRECTION?
Correction is the branch of the administration of Criminal Justice System charged with the
responsibility for the custody, supervision and rehabilitation of convicted offenders. It is also
define as the STUDY OF JAIL OR PRISON MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION as well
as the rehabilitation and reformation of criminals.
Further, it is define as a GENERIC TERM that includes all government agencies, facilities,
programs, procedures, personnel, and techniques concerned with the investigation, intake,
custody, confinement, supervision, or treatment of alleged offenders.

3
DUAL PURPOSE OF CORRECTIONS
1. To punish and
2. To rehabilitate the offender.
THE CORRECTIONS AS A COMPONENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
Correction is the fourth pillar of the PCJS, and identified as the weakest pillar. As
a field of criminal justice administration, it utilizes the body of knowledge and practices
of the government and the society in general involving the process of handling
individuals who have been convicted of offenses for purposes of crime prevention and
control.
Among the five pillars of the criminal justice system, corrections are the least heard,
known or understood society seems to have some reluctance to look at it although its role in
the reformation and rehabilitation of offenders cannot be overemphasized. Furthermore,
jail administration and control in our country is distributed to at least, four agencies:
1. The BUREAU OF CONNECTIONS (BUCOR), under the DOJ; which has supervision over the
national penitentiary and its penal farms;
2. The BUREAU OF JAIL MANAGEMENT ANDPENOLOGY (BJMP), under the DILG; which
has the exclusive control over all city, municipal and district Jails nationwide;
3. The PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS, under DILG; which supervise and control their
respective provincial and sub-provincial Jails; and
4. the DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE ANDDEVELOPMENT (DSWD), which takes
care of, among others, youthful offenders entered in detention centers for juveniles,
aside from thesce,
Other agencies under this pillar are the:(Community Based Correction)
1. The Parole and Probation Administration (PPA)under the Department of Justice (DOJ);
and
2. The Board of Pardons and Parole also under the Department of Justice.
Generally, corrections, as a component of the system are responsible for:
1. The MAINTENANCE of institution such as prisons, jails, halfway houses, and others.
2. The PROTECTION of law-abiding members of society by keeping convicted offenders
from preying on society.

4
3. The REFORMATION and rehabilitation of offenders in preparation for their eventual
reintegration to the mainstream of society and helping them lead a normal life
after release.
4. The DETERRENCE of crimes, experience in prison and the fear of isolation and denial
of liberty will influence inmates and potential offenders to lead a life not in conflict or
afoul with the law.
OTHER ASPECTS OF CORRECTIONS
1. Parole - It is the process of suspending the sentence of a convict after having
serve the minimum of his sentence without granting him pardon, and the prescribing
term upon which the sentence shall be suspended.
2. Executive Clemency - It shall refer to Absolute Pardon, Conditional Pardon with or
without Parole conditions and Commutation of Sentence as maybe granted by the
President of the Philippines upon the recommendation of the Board of Pardon and Parole.
a. Pardon - It is a form of executive clemency granted by the President of
the Philippines as a privilege to a convict as a discretionary act of grace. It is an act
of grace is extended to prisoners as a matter of right, vested to the Chief Executive
(The President) as a matter of power. Neither the legislative nor the judiciary branch of
the government has the power to set conditions or establish procedures for the exercise
of this Presidential prerogative. The following are the two types of pardon:
I. Absolute Pardon-It refers to the total extinction of the criminal liability
of the individual to whom it is granted without any condition whatsoever and
restores to the individual his civil rights and remits the penalty imposed for the
particular offense of which he was convicted.
Purpose:
a. To right a wrong
b. To normalize a tumultuous political situation.
Absolute Pardon - is also granted by a President to an imprisoned president
the incumbent has deposed. Absolute Pardon is granted in order to restore full
political and civil rights to convicted persons who have already served their
sentenced and have reached the prescribed period for the grant of
Absolute Pardon.

5
II. Conditional Pardon- It refers to the exemption of an individual, within
certain limits or conditions; from the punishment that the law inflicts for the
offense he has committed resulting in the partial extinction of his criminal
liability. It is also granted by the President of the Philippines to release an inmate
who has been reformed but is not eligible to be released on parole.
b. Amnesty - A general pardon extended to a group of persons, such a political
offender purposely to bring about the return of dissidents to their home and to restore
peace and order in the community.
c. Commutation of Sentence - An act of the president changing/ reducing a
heavier sentence to a lighter one or a longer term into a shorter term. It may alter
death sentence to life sentence or life sentence to a term of years. It does not
forgive the offender but merely to reduce the penalty pronounce by the court.
d. Reprieve - A temporary stay of the execution of sentence especially the
execution of the death sentence. Generally, Reprieve is extended to prisoners
sentenced to death.
The date of execution of sentenced is set back several days to enable the
Chief to study the petition of the condemned man for commutation of sentenced or pardon.
APPROACHES OF PHILIPPINE CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM
The Philippine Correctional System has two approaches, and these are, the
Community based and institution-based systems.
1. The Institution-Based Approach-The rehabilitation of offenders in jail or prison. The
institution-based approaches have three levels and are manned by three different
government agencies responsible for the supervision and control of the numerous
institutional facilities nationwide which provide safekeeping and rehabilitation of
inmates, namely:
a) The national prison’s and penal farms under the Department of justice;
b) The provincial and sub-provincial jails under the provincial government; and
c) The City, Municipal and District Jails under the Department of Interior and
Local Government.
The Bureau of corrections, headed by a non-uniformed director, under the
department of Justice, supervises and controls the national prisons and penal farms.
2. Non-Institutional Correction or Community-Based Approach- It refers to correctional
activities that may take place within the community or the method of correcting
sentenced offenders without having to go to prison.

6
Not all convicted offenders have to serve their sentence behind bars. Some of
them are allowed to stay in the community, subject to the conditions imposed by the
court. They are either granted probation, parole, conditional pardon or recognizance.
The parole and probation Administration under the Department of Justice is the
government agency that supervises the activities of the probationer, parolee and pardonee and
monitors his compliance with conditions imposed.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN INSTITUTIONAL AND NON-INSTITUTIONAL CORRECTION
INSTITUTIONAL NON-INSTITUTIONAL
That aspect of the correctional enterprise that
involves the incarceration and rehabilitation of
adults and juveniles convicted of offenses
against the law, and the confinement of
persons suspected of a crime awaiting trial and
adjudication.
That aspect of the correctional enterprise
that includes pardon, probation, and parole
activities, correctional administration not
directly connectable to institutions, and
miscellaneous (activity)not directly related
to institutional care.
1. Probation
One of the most common forms of community correction is probation. Probation can
be thought of as a type of post-trial diversion from incarceration. A term coined by John
Augustus, from the Latin verb “probare”- to prove, to test. It is a disposition under which
a defendant after conviction of an offense, the penalty of which does not exceed 6 years
of imprisonment, is released subject to the conditions imposed by the releasing court and
under the supervision of a probation officer.
Furthermore, it is define as a sentence in which the offender, rather than being
incarcerated, is retained in the community under the supervision of a probation agency and
required to abide by certain rules and conditions to avoid incarceration.
2. Diversion
For juvenile offender or CICL.
3. Restitution
In recent years it has become increasingly common for jurisdictions to include
restitution orders as part of probation.
Money paid or services provided to victims, their survivors, or to the community by
a convicted offender to make up for the injury inflicted.

7
4. Halfway Houses
Community-based residential facilities that are less secure and restrictive than prison or
jail but provide a more controlled environment than other community correctional
programs.
Goal of Halfway House: The goal of halfway houses is to provide offenders with a
temporary period of highly structured and supportive living so that they will be better
prepared to function independently in the community upon discharge.
What is home Confinement? It is a program that requires offenders to remain in their
homes except for approved periods of absence; commonly used in combination with electronic
monitoring. Home confinement is also known as home incarceration, home detention, and
house arrest.
TERMS TO PONDER
As used in Section 3 of PD 968 and Section 4 of Parole and probation administration
omnibus rules on probation methods and procedure. The following shall, unless the context
otherwise requires, be construed thus:
1. Amicus Curiae – Means friend of the court
2. Absconding Petitioner- a convicted accused whose application for probation has been given
due course by the court but fails to report to the parole and probation office or cannot be located
within a reasonable period of time.
3. Absconding Probationer- an accused whose probation was granted but failed to report for
supervision within the period ordered by the court or a probationer who fails to
continue reporting for supervision and/or whose whereabouts are unknown for a reasonable
period of time.
4. Defense Counsel/Counsel- lawyer of the petitioner
5. Petition- application for probation.
6. Petitioner - a convicted defendant who files an application for probation.
7. Probationer - means a person placed on probation.
8. 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.
9. Probation Investigation - The process of selection, diagnoses and planning with the client.

8
10. Probation Supervision- The continuous process of helping the client to follow through with
the plans, reevaluation and working with the client in the process of planning his life to meet
dynamic situation.
11. Probation Officer - public officer like the Chief Probation and Parole Officer (CPPO),
Supervising Probation and Parole Officer (SPPO), Senior Probation and Parole Officer (SrPPO),
Parole and Probation Officer II (PPOII), or Parole and Probation Officer I (PPOI), who investigates
for the Trial Court a referral for probation or supervises a probationer or does both functions and
performs other necessary and related duties and functions as directed.
12. Probation Office - refers either to the Provincial or City Probation Office directed
to conduct investigation or supervision referrals as the case may be;
13. Probation Order - order of the trial court granting probation
14. Prosecutor- lawyer of the victim.
15. Trial Court - refers to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of the Province or City/Municipal Court
which has jurisdiction over the case.
16. Volunteerism - is a strategy by which the parole and probation administration may be able
to generate maximum citizen participation or community involvement in the overall process of
client rehabilitation.
CONCEPT AND PHILOSOPHY OF PROBATION
A. CONCEPT OF PROBATION - P.D 968 as amended, otherwise known as the probation law of
1976 defines probation. The court convicts and sentences the defendant but the execution
of the sentence, whether it imposes a fine only or a term of imprisonment is suspended and
the defendant is released on probation. Probation implies that during the period of time fixed
by the court, the defendant is provided with individualized community based treatment
including conditions he is required by the court to fulfill his correction and rehabilitation
which might be less probable if he were to serve a prison sentence, and for this purpose, he
is placed under the actual supervision and visitation of a probation officer.
If the defendant violates any of the conditions of his probation, the court may revoke his
probation and order him to serve the sentence originally imposed. On the other hand, if he fulfills
with the terms and conditions of his probation, he shall be discharge by the court after the period
of probation, where upon the case against him shall be deemed terminated. His final discharged
shall operate to restore to him all civil rights lost or suspended as result of his conviction and to
fully discharge his liability for any fine imposed as to the offense for which probation was granted.
However, he shall continue to be obliged to satisfy liability resulting from the crime committed
by him.
The basic legal conceptions of probation in the Decree are twofold: First, it as a
conditional suspension of the execution of sentence - It denotes that the court assumes a primary

9
role because a grant of probation is judicially dispensed and controlled. Second it is a personal
care or treatment and supervision over the probationer - It indicates the administrative aspect
of probation through the supervision of a probation officer and from the point of view of social
workers, a social case work treatment.
PROBATION IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS
Once the court has granted probation to an offender and has duly imposed the terms and
conditions of the probation, the probation officer has the bounden duty to see to it that the
probationer observes all terms and conditions imposed by the court. Probation supervision is
then a primarily an administrative process.
The primary purposes of probation supervision are:
(a) To carry out the conditions set forth in the probation order;
(b) To ascertain whether the probationer is following said conditions; and
(c) To bring about the rehabilitation of the probationer and his reintegration into the
community.
To carry out these purposes the Probation Law upon its approval carried with
it the establishment of a Probation Administration an agency under the Department of
Justice, which shall exercise general supervision over all probationers. The Administration shall
have regional offices organized in accordance with the field service area pattern established
under the Integrated Reorganization Plan. 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.
At this juncture, it is to be emphasized that in spite of the fact that the Probation
Administration is an executive agency, control of the courts over the probationer is not lost. The
basis for such is the first paragraph of Section 13 of the Decree which provides that "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."
ELEMENTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF PROBATION
A. ELEMENTS OF PROBATION
I. FOUR (4) ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF PROBATION
1. A post sentence investigation report which will serve as the informational for the
court’s decision to grant or deny probation.
2. The conditional suspension of execution of sentence by the court.

10
3. Condition of probation imposed by the court to protect public safety
and to faster the rehabilitation and reformation of the probationer.
4. Supervision, guidance and assistance of the offender by a probation officer.
II. ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROBATION SYSTEM UNDER PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO.
968
The following are the essential elements of the probation system under Presidential Decree No.
968:
1. Probation is a single or one-time" affair.
2. Probation system is highly selective.
3. Persons under probation retain their civil rights, like the right to vote, or practice one's
profession, or exercise parental or marital authority.
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF PROBATION
1. More enlightened and humane correctional treatment.
2. It aims to promote the reformation of the offenders.
3. It reduces the incidence of recidivism.
4. It extends to offenders individualized and community based treatment programs instead
of imprisoning them.
5. It is limited to offenders who are likely to respond favorably there to.
6. It is less costly than the confinement of all offenders in prisons.
OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE OF PROBATION
A. OBJECTIVES OF PROBATION
The following are the fundamental objectives of a Probation Agency
1. Assist the court in matters pertaining to sentencing.
2. Promote community protection by supervising and monitoring the activities of persons
on probation.
3. Promote the betterment of offenders by ensuring that they receive appropriate
rehabilitation services.
B. THE PURPOSE OF THE PROBATION LAW
The purpose of the Probation Law as stated in Section 2 thereof reiterates the above-
mentioned characteristics and vests in them the mandate of law. It provides that the purpose of
the Decree is to:
1. Promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing him with
individualized treatment;

11
2. provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent offender which might be less
probable if he were to serve a prison sentence; and
3. Prevent the commission of offenses.
EVALUATION OF THE CASE
In the Probation Law, the court assumes a dual role. First, when it acts in accordance with
the jurisdiction it acquires over the accused and proceeds to determine his guilt. Assuming an
affirmative finding of the offender's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the court would convict and
sentence said offender. Second, when the court determines whether or not to grant probation
upon application of the offender. Sections 3(a) and 4 of the Decree clearly shows this dichotomy.
The Decree defines probation in Section 3 as "a disposition under which the defendant,
after conviction and sentence, is released subject to the conditions imposed by the court and to
the supervision of a probation officer. It is evident from this provision that an offender will be
released on probation only after conviction and sentence.
Furthermore, Section 4 underlines the necessity of filing an application with the trial court
before the suspension of the execution of the court's judgment. The petition for probation may
be filed by a petitioner directly with the trial court which exercises jurisdiction over his case. If
the court finds that the petition is in due form and that the petitioner is not disqualified from the
grant of probation it shall refer the same to the Provincial or City Probation Officer within its
jurisdiction as the case may be. The court shall order the Provincial or City Probation Office to
conduct a post-sentence investigation of the petitioner. Only upon the filing of an application for
probation after conviction and sentence and a determination that the offender does not fall
under any of the disqualifications set forth in the Decree may the court suspend the execution of
sentence.
The Post-Sentence Investigation is an indispensable requisite to a grant of probation. The
Probation Law provides: "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.”
The scope of the investigation must be consistent with the purposes of probation. In
general, it is a fact finding inquiry into all information relative to the character, antecedents,
environment, mental and physical condition of the offender, and available institutional and
community resources.
Upon the termination of the Post-Sentence Investigation, 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 purpose of the report is to assist the
court in determining whether or not the ends of justice and the best interest of the public as well
as that of the defendant will be served thereby.

12
The recommendation contained in the report is merely persuasive and is in no way
binding upon the court. Considering the foregoing and compliance therewith, the court will
promulgate a probation order. Probation is a privilege and, as such, its grant rests solely upon
the discretion of the court. The grant of probation results in the release of the petitioner subject
to the terms and conditions imposed by the court, and to the supervision of the Probation
Office.33 As to the conditions to be imposed by the court, they are enumerated in Section 10 of
the Presidential Decree No. 968.
The jurisdiction and control of the court which arises from an imposed sentence, remains
with the court even after a grant of probation. This is evident in Sections 32 and 40 of the Rules
On Probation Methods and Procedures. Section 32 provides: "During the period of probation the
court, motu proprio, or on motion of the probation officer or of the probationer, may revise or
modify the conditions or terms of the probation order." In case of violation of the terms and
conditions imposed by the court, Section 40 provides "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 and shall commit the
probationer." This power of the court underlines the non-punitive and non-repressive aspect of
probation. Such constitutes a sufficient threat to the probationer to fulfill all terms and conditions
imposed by the court.
Probation is the most common form of criminal sentencing in the Philippines. It is
primarily defined as the court ordered disposition that is alternative through the adjudicated
offender that is placed under control, supervision and the care of the probation staff member in
the lieu of imprisonment. It is estimated that over three million people are under probation, and
fifty-eight percent of these are adults. Despite the wide application of probation in the United
States, it has been a subject of criticism over the years. According to the advocates, probation
represents crimes as a soft punishment to the public.
More offenders who are sentenced to probation have been growing fast, due to the
positive outcome that has been justified by the recent studies compared to jail. Coextensive with
the high increase in probation has come with the use of probation programs. The fact that
probation prevents recidivism has made it among the successful ways of punishing criminals as
they have over the years responded positively.
The probation recidivism is substantially below compared to that of prison system.
Although the low rate of recidivism may result from favorable social grounds and delinquency
histories. The rescued rate of probationers who complete the treatment may also be accounted
for the high rate of recidivism in the program failures on the ground of high risks. Thus, once an
individual has undergone the complete process of probation, there are high chances that this
individual will stay out of the criminal offense. On the other hand, individuals who undergo
incarceration have over and over been arrested for the similar offense questioning the credibility
of the criminal justice process.

13
This case study reviewed covers on how extensively probation should be used, the
contribution of casework to probation success, the use of prescriptive probation supervision, the
use of presentence work, guiding probation decisions, and new developments in probation
manpower.
This study expanded probation programs that shows that the result in an overall decrease
in institutionalization and corrections costs without increasing the rate of probation revocation.
While some research suggests that improved casework services are responsible for increased
probation success, several other studies have shown that the type of probationer more than the
nature of casework has the greatest effect on probation outcome.
The time probation officers spend on various functions shows that the preparation of
presentence investigation reports exceeds the time spent on probation supervision, which has
led some offices to report success in assigning different persons to presentence investigations
and probation supervision. Research has also indicated that when probation officers and services
are matched to client needs, probation outcomes are improved. Research has also been helpful
in identifying factors associated with the client which relate to the probability of probation
success. The newest development in probation personnel involves the increased use of citizen
volunteers and ex-offenders to work with professional staff. Initial research indicates this
development is improving probation effectiveness.
PROBLEM AREAS OF THE PROBATION LAW
1. Presidential Decree No. 968 will cover civilians tried and convicted by military tribunals.
Section 1 provides: "it shall apply to all offenders except those entitled to the benefits under
the provisions of Presidential Decree No. 603 and similar laws." Section 9 on disqualified
offenders does not include those convicted by military tribunals.
What are the "similar laws" referred to in Section 1? Two can readily be mentioned-The
Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 and the Articles of War.
2. The cut-off point at six years’ imprisonment for extending the benefits of probation refers
to the sentence actually imposed, not that prescribed by law for the offense committed.
3. The probation law does not disqualify one who has been convicted of an offense penalized
by DESTIERRO, such as that of killing or inflicting serious physical injuries under the
exceptional circumstances in Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code or concubinage insofar as
the concubine is concerned in Article 334, of the same. Unlike Section 9(a), Section 9(c) has
reference to the penalty imposed by law.
Under Section 9(d), one who has been on probation only under the Juvenile Delinquency Act
of 1924, Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code, or the Child and Youth Welfare Code will not
be disqualified.

14
Under disqualification (e), those who will serve sentence after the substantive provisions of
the Decree shall become operative will be permitted to do so, according to one view. The
reason given is that otherwise it would have been unnecessary for the law to specify the
time at which the offender concerned should be serving his sentence. Another view,
however, points to the principle of separation of powers.
4. Probation, it is argued, as laid out by the Decree is primarily a judicial function, while the
service or execution of sentence is an executive one. When the convict is delivered to the
hands of the prison authorities, to subsequently allow the judiciary to reach him by
suspending the further service of his sentence and placing him on probation would constitute
an intrusion into the prerogatives of the executive to whom belongs the exclusive power to
grant reprieves, commutations and pardons and remit fines and forfeitures.
Therefore, according to this view, offenders who are already serving sentence, no matter
when they start or may be found to be serving sentence, are NOT qualified for the benefits
of the Decree.
5. It cannot be made at any time after conviction and sentence, but rather extends only up to
the actual commitment of the defendant to prison for the service of his sentence, and not
thereafter. The defendant may apply for probation in case of appeal from a judgment of
conviction. He may apply for probation as long as he has not begun serving his sentence, and
obviously this does not happen if the sentence has not become final and executory, such as
during the pendency of an appeal.
6. The rule of automatic withdrawal of pending appeal applies in case the application for
probation is made when the appellate court has already rendered its decision, there being no
indication in the probation law to the contrary, and the operation of such rule being in
accordance with the maxim that laws should be liberally construed in favor of the accused.
7. The application for probation may be in any form, whether written or oral. While Section 4
of the Decree states that the application shall be filed with the court, this does not necessarily
mean that it should be in writing, even if a written form would definitely be more convenient
to the court. A liberal construction of the law beneficial to the accused would not consider
the use of the term 'filed' by the law, as impliedly requiring a written form.
8. Defendant is not entitled as a matter of right to the assistance of counsel in the investigation.
The probation law does not have a provision guaranteeing the right to counsel in such
investigation. The constitutional guarantee that in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall
enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel and that any person under investigation
for the commission of an offense shall have the right to counsel would not seem to apply
because the investigation by the probation officer is neither prosecutory nor accusatory in
character. It is merely a fact-finding inquiry.

15
9. Neither is the constitutional guarantee against self-incrimination that no person shall be
compelled to be a witness against himself, available in the investigation. The said guarantee
does not depend upon the nature of the proceedings in which it is invoked, of course, and it
may be availed of as long as the questions objected to would incriminate the person who 'is
asked to answer the same. But it is an established doctrine that where the answer to a
question, however self-incriminating, may not be used as evidence of criminal liability of the
respondent because there is a law prohibiting its use for that purpose, then the privilege
against self-incrimination may not be validly invoked to justify refusal to answer the question.
Section 17 of the Probation Law provides that the investigation report and the
supervision history of the probationer obtained under this decree shall be privileged, i.e.,
it may not legally be used as· evidence of liability.
We raise one question, though. The same Section 17 itself provides that "the investigation
report and the supervision history shall be privileged and shall not be disclosed directly or
indirectly to anyone other than the Probation Administration or the court concerned." If the
defendant cannot invoke the privilege against self-incrimination during the investigation,
would not the incriminating answers given prejudice the court in deciding whether it will
grant probation or not?
10. Pending submission of the investigation report and the resolution of the petition for
probation, the defendant may be allowed on temporary liberty under his bail filed in the
criminal case, or on recognizance.
11. While the grant or denial of probation is not appealable, certiorari will lie, under the general
law on certiorari. This is not appeal for he does not question the findings of fact of the trial
court but only the reasonableness of the order based thereon and adequate remedy in the
ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper,
court alleging the facts with certainty and praying that judgment be rendered
annulling or modifying the proceeding as the law requires of such tribunal, board or officer.
The petition shall be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment or order subject
thereof, together with copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto.
12. The grant of probation does not erase, modify of otherwise affect the offender's CIVIL
LIABILITY. Probation is a substitute for imprisonment and other criminal penalties, not a mode
of discharging the civil liability, which is owed not to the State but to the offended party. The
sentence, which is suspended from execution, means only the imposition of the criminal
penalties, not the civil liability. If it were otherwise, the offended party would have to file a
separate civil action there by creating multiplicity of suits, contrary to public policy. In fact,
civil indemnification might be imposed as a condition for probation under Section 10 (k) of
the Probation Law. Indeed, under Article 112 in relation to Article 113, of the Revised Penal

16
Code, except in case of extinction of his civil liability in accordance with the provisions of the
civil law, the offender shall continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability resulting from
the crime committed by him, even if he has served his sentence consisting of deprivation of
liberty or other rights, or has not been required to serve the same by reason of amnesty,
pardon, commutation of service, or any other reason.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS/CHANGES
The implementation of the Probation Law will confer not only to our society in general
but more soon the part of the offender and the government. Specifically, the following are the
proposed resolution and the advantages of probation:
1. Probation prevents crime by offering freedom and aid only to those who are not likely
to assault society again.
2. It protects the society by placing under close supervision non-dangerous offenders
while undergoing treatment and rehabilitation in the community.
3. It conforms the modern humanistic trends in Penology.
4. It prevents youthful of first time offenders from turning into hardened criminals.
5. It is a measure of cutting enormous expends in maintaining jails.
6. It reduces recidivism and overcrowding of jails and prisons.
7. It reduces the burden of police forces and institution in feeding and guarding
detainees.
8. It gives the first and light offenders a second chance in life.
9. It makes the offender productive or taxpayers instead of tax eaters.
10. It restores to successful probationers his civil rights which was previously lost or
suspended as a result of conviction.
11. It has been proven effective in developing countries that have adopted it.
12. It is advocated by the United Nations in its various congresses in crime prevention and
treatment of offenders
Once we follow this proposed resolutions, we can see changes that results in the
following:
1. It protects society
a. from the excessive cost of detention
b. from the high rate of recidivism of detained offender
2. It protects the victim
a. it provides restitution
b. it preserves justice
3. It protects the family
a. it does not deprive the wife and children of husband and father
b. it maintains the unity of a home

17
4. It assists the government
a. it reduces the population of prisons and jail
b. it lessens the clogging of courts
c. it lightens the load of prosecutors
5. It helps the offender
a. it maintains his earning power
b. it provides rehabilitation in the community
c. it restores his dignity
6. It justifies the philosophy of men
a. that life is sacred
b. that all men deserve a second chance
c. that and individual can changed. that society has the moral obligation to lift the fallen
References
Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (n.d.). Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences (4th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Albonetti, C., & Hepburn, J. (1997). Probation Revocation: A Proportional Hazards Model of the
Conditioning Effects of Social Disadvantage. Social Problems, 44(1), 124-128.
Andrews, D. ., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. (2006). The Recent Past and Near Future of Risk and/or
Need Assessment. Crime Delinquency, 52(7), 7-27.
Anspach, D., & Monsen, H. (1989). Determinate Sentencing, Formal Rationality, and Khadi
Justice in Maine: An Application of Weber’s Typology. Journal of Criminal Justice, 17,471-485.
Austin, J., & Krisberg, B. (1981). Wider, Stronger, and Different Nets-The Dialectics of
Criminal Justice Reform. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 18(1), 165–196.
Mercedes A. Foronda (2007). Correctional Administration (Non-Institutional Corrections).
Quezon City: Wiseman’s Books Trading.
Revised Rules and Regulation of Board of Pardon and Parole
Board of Pardons and Parole Resolution No. 24-4-10
http:probation.gov.ph
Presidential Decree No. 968
Republic Act No. 9344
[1] Mercedes A. Foronda (2007). Correctional Administration (Non-Institutional Corrections).
Quezon City: Wiseman’s Books Trading.
[2] Retrieved on July 11, 2017 from
http://www.authorstream.com/Presentation/corpuzrhemrick-2126541-correctional-
administration/
[3] Retrieved on July 11, 2017 from http://pastlifevintage.com/products/john-augustus-first-
probation-officer-1939-hardcover

18
[4] Retrieved on July 11, 2017 from
http://www.authorstream.com/Presentation/corpuzrhemrick-2126541-correctional-
administration/
RECOMMENDATIONS
As a society, one is faced with many daily challenges. As 650,000 offenders are being
released from prison this year, the success of their reintegration is dependent on a number of
factors. The responsibility of Probation Officers is to provide the supervision of offenders as they
re-enter into population. The supervision of the offender is the Probation officer’s basis for
treatment in the rehabilitation of that offender.
First, In Community Corrections the attempt to protect society of the government to help
offenders re-enter their place in the community and monitor their behavior allowing for the
protection of society make sure they abide by the law at the same time. Most non-violent
offenders who have been convicted of a crime and served a very small portion of their sentence
will be of the eligible inmates ready to release into society from what was once an incentive
based system. In theory, monitoring and assisting offenders while in the community protects
society from criminal predation without taxpayers having to shoulder the financial cost of
incarcerating all its offenders.
Second, Analyzing demographics, income, race, criminal history, traits, we see a
complicated pattern of recidivism that falls beyond the officer’s control. The cases of re-
incarceration stem from prison overcrowding and a new corporate prison system in some state
which brings an easy stream of offenders in, however, a more precarious system for inmates to
complete their sentence. Since outdated laws found their genesis in their war against drugs in
the late 80’s, it resulted in a prison boom and overpopulation. Careful study shows that once an
inmate was introduced to the system it was extremely tough to get out of due because once put
on parole, the fees, fines and charges will have served.
Third, the correction officer’s ability to focus on the offenders cause of the current
situation as opposed to the effects in executing sentences, fines, and other obligations in a timely
fashion puts less pressure on the system overall. This is due to the fact offenders are released
back into their particular demographic without the weight of any stipulations due to their offense
which leads the offender to have some leeway if accused of another crime.
Fourth, as discussed, there are limitations to this case study that could be addressed in
future studies to gather more knowledge on how probation may serve as a contributor or
diversion to incarceration. There are a variety of different variables that may potentially effect a
probationer’s ability to successfully complete probation. I was not able to include some of these
variables. Accounting for the number of crimes previously committed, the number of conditions,
and socioeconomic variables such as educational attainment, income, and employment would
be useful to include in future research. Future research could also utilize a mixed methods

19
approach, in order to provide in depth interviews with probation officers. This would help to
provide a greater understanding of the probation programs in the county, including the specific
practices and philosophy of the probation department. It would be useful to gain an insight as to
if probation programs are tailored towards being rehabilitative practices, or if the emphasis aligns
the ‘new penology ‘model of criminal justice focusing on surveillance and management.
And finally, in order to provide more generalized results, future research could do a
comparative study to understand the relationship between probation, revocations, and
incarceration for probation revocations across different geographical locations. Again, this case
study was limited in that it only produced results findings on one county. With such a high
population of offenders serving sentences in jails and state and federal prisons, it is important to
look to alternatives for low-risk offenders, for whom prison is not necessary, to reduce prison
overcrowding, and the high associated costs. Probation is a viable alternative, and it is necessary
to understand how probation can be usefully practice in order to divert offenders from
incarceration. I hope this case study will help and contributes to the surprisingly understudied
area of probation, and encourages future research and studies.