Prosecutors, Do Your Job: Implement DOJ Circular 11

The law is clear. The Department of Justice is clear. The problem is the people who aren’t.

On February 20, 2023, the DOJ issued Circular No. 11 through the leadership of Sec Boying Remulla — a simple, humane directive meant to address a monstrous, decades-old problem: our jails are bursting at the seams. Overcrowding so bad, the cells resemble sardine cans without the benefit of tomato sauce. The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology have been shouting this from the rooftops for years. The Justice Sector Coordinating Council talked about it. The Supreme Court suggested revisiting the 2018 Bail Bond Guide. And so the DOJ acted. Promptly. Humanely. The Office of the Court Administrator of the Supreme Court reiterated this. See attached.

The rule is straightforward: if the accused is indigent, prosecutors must recommend only half of the bail in the 2018 guide — or ₱10,000, whichever is LOWER. Not ₱200,000. Not ₱50,000. Just half, or ten thousand. The intent is obvious: keep the poor from rotting in jail for years over petty charges they haven’t even been convicted of. Keep our jails from collapsing under their own weight. Keep justice from being a luxury for the rich.

And yet — as if in a masterclass on selective hearing — many prosecutors simply ignore it. I’ve spoken to some. Some say they “forgot.” Some say they “weren’t informed.” Others, more brazen, admit they deliberately set bail high, especially in cases with aggrieved victims, because "seeing the accused behind bars feels like a win." The accused is in jail, the victim is pleased, and the prosecutor’s conscience sleeps soundly. Never mind that the accused hasn’t been found guilty. Never mind that the Constitution presumes innocence until proven otherwise. Never mind that what they are doing is not justice — it’s vengeance on layaway.

Some justify it by saying, “But if they’re out on bail, they’ll just delay the trial.” As if that’s the accused’s monopoly. As if frivolous postponements don’t also come from prosecutors and even judges. The cure for delay is not keeping people in cages until their hair turns white. The cure is speedy trial, the very thing the Constitution promises. Don’t allow endless postponements. Don’t schedule hearings with geological timeframes (once in 3 months). I am all for the punishing the guilty.

If the accused is guilty, convict them quickly and let them serve their time — not before, not during, but after the verdict.

The DOJ circular even lays out the mechanics like an IKEA manual for justice: ask if the accused is indigent. Require proof — tax returns, barangay certificates, DSWD certifications. Make sure they’re not habitual offenders. Then immediately apply the reduced bail. It’s not rocket science. It’s barely high school algebra.

But here we are, still acting as if bail is a tool for punishment instead of a guarantee for appearance in court. Still treating pre-trial detention as a downpayment on guilt. Still filling our jails with the poor, the petty offenders, the ones who cannot pay. And then we wonder why rehabilitation programs fail, why recidivism stays high, why we keep manufacturing criminals out of the raw material of poverty.

It’s not complicated. If prosecutors follow the DOJ circular, fewer innocent people will languish in jail, the guilty will be punished after conviction, and justice will feel a little less like a privilege card. Until then, the problem isn’t the law. The problem is that those sworn to uphold it think they can do better by breaking it.

Justice delayed is justice denied. But justice distorted — that’s something else entirely. That’s injustice in a barong.

Implement DOJ Circular 11 now!