Activity on GCTA Law

Submitted By:

Mary Gold Brocales

 1. The Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) and how the law came to be
December 1930
The Revised Penal Code is signed into law. Chapter 2 lays out the specifics of "partial
extinction of criminal liability," including conditional pardon, commutation of sentence, and
good conduct allowances.
November 5, 2012
The Senate passes Senate Bill No. 3064 which amends several articles of the Revised
Penal Code.
January 18, 2013
The House of Representatives passes House Bill 417 which amends Article 29 of the
Revised Penal Code.
May 29, 2013
Then-president Benigno Aquino III signs Republic Act No. 10592 or the Good Conduct
Time Allowance (GCTA) law, which amended several articles under the Revised Penal Code,
including Article 97, which lays out the allowance for good conduct for persons deprived of
liberty (PDLs).
The GCTA law allows for a reduction of sentences of PDLs, depending on how well they abide
by rules and regulations inside “any penal institution, rehabilitation, or detention center or any
other local jail.”
March 26, 2014
The law’s Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) document is released. Penned by
then-justice secretary Leila de Lima and interior secretary Mar Roxas, the IRR provides for a
prospective application of the GCTA law.
Prospective application is seen in Section 4 of the IRR, which provides “for new procedures and
standards of behavior for the grant of good conduct time allowance" and requires "the creation of
a Management, Screening and Evaluation Committee.”
The IRR takes effect on April 18 of the same year.
August 20, 2019
Reporters receive unverified information that convicted rapist and murderer Antonio
Sanchez might soon be walking free.
Sanchez was convicted in 1995 for the rape and murder of Eileen Sarmenta and murder of Allan
Gomez – both University of the Philippines-Los Baños students – and in 1999, for the double
murder of Nelson and Rickson Peñalosa. He has been in Bilibid prison for 25 years.
Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra tells reporters that Sanchez "may actually be released," and,
in another instance, "is very likely for release.”

2. Basis of GCTA- Restorative Justice

Restorative Justice is a process through which remorseful offenders accept responsibility for
their misconduct, particularly to their victims and to the community. It creates obligation to make
things right through proactive involvement of victims, ownership of the offender of the crime
and the community in search for solutions which promote repair, reconciliation and reassurance.
Thus, the restorative justice process is actively participated in by the victim, the offender, and/or
any individual or community member affected by the crime to resolve conflicts resulting from
the criminal offense, often with the help of a fair and impartial third party. Examples of
restorative process include mediation, conferencing, sentencing/support circle and the like. The
restorative outcome is the agreement obtained as a product of a restorative justice process.
Examples of restorative outcomes include restitution, community work service and any other
program or response designed to accomplish reparation of the victim, and the reintegration of the
victims and/or offenders. – probation.gov.ph

Bill of right Section 1 - No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

3. Section/s deemed problematic:

Section 1 and Section 3 of the law makes only the inmates eligible for credit of
preventive imprisonment (CPI, or the period of imprisonment prior to conviction) also eligible
for GCTA (applicable only to post-conviction imprisonment). Those charged with heinous
crimes are not eligible for CPI, then they are also not supposed to benefit from the GCTA.
In a press conference, Presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo says that “the inevitable
conclusion is that all those convicted of a heinous crime, including Mr Antonio Sanchez, would
be ineligible and disqualified from availing the benefits of the GCTA.”
In a Rappler column, human rights lawyer and former SC spokesperson Ted Te says that there is
a need for more objective criteria to determine good conduct.
He writes that “while the GCTA is a good idea, the question of determining whether conduct
falls under ‘good conduct’ to merit the GCTA may be arbitrary sans any objective standards to
measure, assess, and rate such.
Raymund Narag, an expert on criminal justice, writes in his column that “there are
sufficient legal and procedural remedies to make sure that the law will not be abused by the rich
and powerful.” - rappler.com

4. The Department of Justice thru Sec. Menardo Guevarra and the Department of Interior
and Local Government (DILG) thru Sec. Eduardo M. Ano have released the revised
implementing rules and regulations of Republic Act 10592 or the expanded good conduct
time allowance (GTCA), which took effect in 2013.The law now permanently excludes
all recidivists, escapees, habitual delinquents and convicts of heinous crimes. One of
the important revisions made in the IRR is the specification of prisoners excluded from
early release of R.A. 10592, the benefits of which include credit for preventive
imprisonment, GCTA, time allowance for loyalty and study, teaching, and mentoring.
The IRR also defined heinous crimes based on jurisprudence and as enumerated in
Republic Act No. 7659 which imposed the death penalty on certain heinous crimes such
as murder, rape, destructive arson, parricide, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, and
drug-related offenses.

5. No. Congress should not amend the GCTA Law because the law itself is already good.
However, Steps on making the IRR consistent with the law should be taken. It’s IRR
should be tailored according to the provision of the law that it seeks to implement. The
very purpose of the IRR is to implement, clarify, supply the details and fill in the gaps of
the law. With the amendment of the IRR making a clear specification that those
convicted of heinous crime are exempted from this law erases the ambiguity in section 1
and section 3 of the law which became the very center of the controversy - that is whether
or not Mayor Sanchez- a convict of heinous crime- should be released under this law.