Republic of the Philippines

Department of the Interior and Local Government

BUREAU OF JAIL MANAGEMENT AND PENOLOGY
REGIONAL OFFICE VI
3rd Floor, Angeles Arcade Building, Mabini Street, Iloilo City
Tel No. (033) 503-4018
Email Address: rbjmp6@gmail.com

January 13, 2020

ATTY. MA. GEOBELYN LOPEZ BERAYE

Public Attorney 1
Public Attorney’s Office
2nd Floor Barotac Viejo Trade Center
Barotac Viejo, Iloilo

Greetings:

This pertains to your letter that was received by this office on December 17, 2019,
purposely to request for the computation of the Credit for Preventive Imprisonment (CPI)
and the Republic Act 10592 or the Good Conduct Time Allowance Law of 2013 of your
client in the persons of PDL JAFFIE DIETA Y GAYATAO who is serving sentence by virtue
of judgement on Plea Bargaining for violation of Sec. 12, RA No. 9165 rendered by the
Regional Trial court (RTC) Branch ____ in Criminal Cases No. 18-83099 and No. 18-
83100.

As per examination of the records of your client, PDL DIETA, it was found out that prior
to his Plea Bargaining he was charged of Violation of Sec. 5 of R.A. 9165. The provisions
of RA 10592, particularly section 1 states that,

"Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period equal

to the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he may
be sentenced and his case is not yet terminated, he shall be released immediately
without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on
appeal, if the same is under review. Computation of preventive imprisonment for
purposes of immediate release under this paragraph shall be the actual period of
detention with good conduct time allowance: Provided, however, That if the
accused is absent without justifiable cause at any stage of the trial, the court may
motu proprio order the rearrests of the accused: Provided, finally, That
recidivists, habitual delinquents, escapees and persons charged with
heinous crimes are excluded from the coverage of this Act. In case the
maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be
released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment."

Anent to the above premises, heinous crimes provided in Republic Act 7659 or the Death
Penalty law is the controlling law on the determination of heinous crimes stated in section
1 of RA 10592. It is provided under section of RA 7659 thatSale, Administration, Delivery,
Distribution and Transportation of Prohibited Drugsis considered a heinous crime. Mr.
Sarabi was charged of Section 5 of RA No. 9165, particularly acts of Sale,
Administration, Delivery, Distribution and Transportation of Prohibited Drugs.

Though, even if the previous Implementing Rules and Regulation (IRR) was silent on the
disqualification of heinous crimes in RA 10592, such disqualification is present in the
provision of the law itself. Hence, only those who were charged by heinous crimes before
2013, the year when RA no. 10592 took effect can avail the allowances under the law.

Further, Section 3 of RA 10592 clearly provides that in order to avail good conduct
allowance, a person detained must be qualified for the credit of his preventive suspension.

“Changing Lives, Building a Safer Nations”

 "ART. 97. Allowance for good conduct. – The good conduct of any offender
qualified for credit for preventive imprisonment pursuant to Article 29 of
this Code, or of any convicted prisoner in any penal institution, rehabilitation or
detention center or any other local jail shall entitle him to the following deductions
from the period of his sentence:xxxx

Furthermore, Section 1, Rule IV, GCTA During Preventive Imprisonment: The

good conduct of a detained PDL qualified for credit for preventive imprisonment shall
entitle him to the deductions, except of those that are considered;
a. Recidivist; b. An accused who has been convicted previously twice or more
times of many crimes; c.an accused who, upon being summoned for the
execution of his sentence has failed; d. Habitual Delinquents; and f. PDL
Charged of Heinous Crime.

Your client is absolutely disqualified for good conduct allowance during the period of his
actual preventive imprisonment because the charge against him falls within the province
of charges disqualified by law, particularly, RA no. 10592. However, it would appear that
because your client was convicted of a crime not considered heinous crime as provided
by RA no. 7659, he may be validly entitled of the good conduct allowance during the
period of his actual service of sentence as a convicted prisoner, as provided by the new
Implementing Rules and Regulation (IRR) of RA. No. 10592.

Hence, in order to validly and properly effectuate the provisions of the RA. No. 10592,
we will have to wait for the issuance of the new Implementing Rules and Regulation (IRR)
of RA. No. 10592. The new Implementing Rules and Regulation (IRR) will settle the issue
regarding the computation of good conduct time allowance to qualified PDLs on both
periods of preventive imprisonment for detainees and actual service of sentence of
convicted prisoners.

We assure you that upon the issuance of the new Implementing Rules and Regulation
(IRR), all persons deprived of liberty (PDL) and concerned parties will be notified and
informed.

Thank you very much and more power to you!

Truly yours,

MARY CHANETTE E. ESPARTERO

Jail Superintendent
District Jail Warden

“Changing Lives, Building a Safer Nations”