A Simple Solution to a Perennial Problem: Why Jail Monitoring Must be Mandatory in the Philippines

The problem of prolonged pretrial detention continues to haunt our jails. Despite existing laws, repeated reforms, and numerous trainings I have conducted across the country, the situation remains unchanged: countless Persons Deprived of Liberty (PDLs) are still languishing in jails for years—on trial for non-serious offenses, unable to post bail, and yet forgotten by the justice system.

I recently visited a jail in Metro Manila. The congestion was overwhelming. What was more appalling was the number of detainees who had been in custody for over two years, even if their cases involved non-violent crimes. They were not serving a sentence—they were just waiting. Waiting for a hearing that gets postponed. Waiting for a system that moves too slowly. Waiting, simply, because they were too poor to buy their freedom.

There is a simple solution to this crisis. The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) and provincial jails must implement a jail monitoring scheme that tracks the actual length of detention for every PDL—from the date of arrest up to the present. This is not rocket science. It only requires proper documentation, monthly updates, and a willingness to act.

The idea is straightforward: compare the number of days the PDL has already served with the minimum and maximum penalties applicable to the offense. Add the credits for good conduct, for studying, for teaching and mentoring, as allowed by law. If the PDL has served the maximum penalty, release them outright. If they have served the minimum, release them under recognizance. If they’ve been detained for over three years and the case involves a serious offense, then require a marathon hearing schedule.

The law allows this. The Constitution demands it. Section 14 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution guarantees the right to a speedy trial. The Supreme Court’s own guidelines echo this right. Republic Act 10592 mandates that Good Conduct Time Allowances (GCTA) and other credits must be granted. The problem is not the law. It’s the lack of implementation.

To be effective, this jail monitoring scheme must involve regular coordination between jail authorities, prosecutors, judges, and public defenders. Every month, BJMP and provincial jails should submit a list of PDLs who are already eligible for release—or who are at risk of prolonged detention. This list must trigger case conferences among the courts, prosecutors, and defense counsel. Judges can then decide whether to release the PDLs under recognizance or to fast-track their hearings. Barangay authorities can be tapped to monitor those released while cases are pending.

This is not just about rights—it’s about economics too. Every day a PDL stays in jail is a cost to the government. Taxpayers foot the bill. And when courts are slow, not only are lives destroyed—so is public trust in the justice system.

The Supreme Court should start using case processing time as a metric of performance. It’s time to identify the slowest courts, understand why they are slow, and provide the resources or reforms necessary to speed them up. Jail data can help track this. It can show which courts take too long and which ones are doing their job.

Too often, PDLs plead guilty just to get out. They are not admitting guilt—they’re escaping a system that traps them in limbo. And when the innocent are punished, the credibility of the justice system collapses.

We don’t need another law. We don’t need another task force. What we need is a working, practical, and sustained jail monitoring scheme. I have been preaching this for years. I have trained jail officers on how to do it. Yet the jails remain full, the delays persist, and the poor continue to suffer.

This is a solvable problem. But first, we must act.