REPORT TO THE NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION

Recommendations of Persons Restored of Liberty (PRLs) on Police Reform in the Philippines

Submitted to

HON. RAFAEL VICENTE R. CALINISANVice Chairman and Executive Officer National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM)

Based on the Proceedings of the National Conference of Persons Restored of Liberty

22 May 2026Manila Bayview Hotel

Submitted by

Raymund Narag, PhD

Lead Consultant

Preso Foundation

Executive Summary

On 22 May 2026, the National Conference of Persons Restored to Liberty (PRLs) convened approximately 120 participants composed of 40 Persons Restored to Liberty and 80 representatives from criminal justice agencies, local government units, civil society organizations, faith-based organizations, volunteer groups, academic institutions, and development partners. The conference was organized to provide a platform through which individuals who have directly experienced the criminal justice system could contribute to ongoing justice sector reform efforts.

Participants included individuals who experienced police arrest, custodial investigation, police detention, prolonged pretrial detention, incarceration, probation, parole, acquittal, dismissal of cases, and successful reintegration into society. Separate workshops were conducted on police arrest, police detention, custodial investigation, interactions with police officers, access to legal counsel, release procedures, and reintegration experiences.

Throughout the discussions, participants consistently emphasized that they were not advocating for weaker law enforcement. Rather, they expressed support for professional, effective, and accountable policing that promotes public safety while minimizing unnecessary detention, reducing court and jail congestion, strengthening procedural fairness, and improving community trust.

The recommendations contained in this report emerged from the collective experiences of Persons Restored to Liberty and are intended to support the continuing modernization and professionalization of the Philippine National Police under the leadership of the National Police Commission.

Background

The National Conference of Persons Restored of Liberty was founded on a simple principle: people who have lived through the criminal justice system possess valuable expertise regarding how criminal justice policies function in practice.

While criminal justice reforms are often informed by police officers, prosecutors, judges, lawyers, academics, and policymakers, the experiences of individuals who have undergone arrest, detention, incarceration, supervision, and reintegration are often underrepresented in policy discussions. The conference sought to address this gap.

Many participants had experienced prolonged detention before eventual acquittal, dismissal of charges, probation, parole, or release. Others had completed lengthy prison terms and successfully reintegrated into society. Their experiences reveal how decisions made at the earliest stages of the criminal justice process frequently shape outcomes throughout the entire justice system.

Participants repeatedly observed that police decisions often determine whether individuals enter lengthy cycles of court appearances, detention, incarceration, supervision, and social stigma. Consequently, many discussions focused on how policing practices influence not only public safety but also court congestion, jail overcrowding, prolonged detention, and reintegration outcomes.

The discussions were also informed by broader criminal justice findings presented during the conference. Participants noted that many accused persons remain detained primarily because of poverty and inability to post bail. Others spend extended periods in detention while awaiting court proceedings. Research presented during the conference further highlighted that many drug-related offenders spend approximately 300 days in detention before case resolution despite ultimately receiving relatively short sentences, plea bargaining dispositions, probation, or community-based sanctions.

Participants consistently emphasized that police agencies should be viewed not as isolated institutions but as the entry point into a broader criminal justice system whose efficiency and fairness are influenced by police decisions.

Summary of major themes raised By Persons Restored of Liberty

Four major themes emerged consistently across all workshop discussions.

First, participants expressed concern regarding unnecessary detention resulting from arrest decisions and limited consideration of alternatives to arrest and detention.

Second, participants highlighted delays in release resulting from fragmented criminal justice information systems, particularly the late discovery of pending cases in other jurisdictions.

Third, participants identified continuing stigma after release as a major barrier to successful reintegration, especially when police and barangay records are not updated following acquittal, dismissal of charges, probation discharge, parole discharge, or completion of sentence.

Fourth, participants emphasized that police effectiveness should be measured through public safety outcomes, community trust, and justice system efficiency rather than through arrest statistics alone.

The recommendations below seek to address these concerns.

Recommendation 1

Shift Police Performance Metrics from Arrest Outputs to Community Outcomes

One of the strongest themes emerging from the conference concerned police performance measurement.

Participants expressed concern that traditional measures of police productivity continue to emphasize arrests, case filings, and enforcement outputs. While participants acknowledged that arrests remain an important policing tool, many questioned whether arrest statistics accurately reflect police effectiveness.

Several participants described situations where arrests eventually resulted in acquittals, dismissals, probation grants, plea bargaining arrangements, or releases after lengthy detention periods. In these situations, substantial resources were consumed by prosecutors, public attorneys, courts, jails, and correctional institutions despite limited public safety benefits.

Participants emphasized that every arrest creates consequences beyond the police station. A police arrest becomes a prosecutor's case. A prosecutor's case becomes a court docket. A court docket often becomes a jail admission. A jail admission may result in months or years of detention while cases move through congested courts.

Participants therefore recommended that NAPOLCOM develop performance indicators focused on community satisfaction, victim assistance, procedural justice compliance, public trust, problem resolution, successful diversion outcomes, and improvements in quality of life.

Participants believed that these indicators better reflect the true purpose of policing: creating safer communities rather than generating larger numbers of arrests.

Recommendation 2

Require Documentation of Alternatives Prior to Arrest

Participants repeatedly observed that arrest often becomes the default response even when less restrictive alternatives may be available.

Many PRLs described low-level offenses, minor disputes, and community conflicts that might have been resolved through mediation, restorative justice, referral to social services, or other community-based interventions.

Participants emphasized that even short periods of detention frequently produce significant consequences including job loss, educational disruption, family separation, emotional distress, and financial hardship.

Participants therefore recommended requiring police officers to document whether alternatives to arrest were considered before custodial measures are initiated.

Participants believed that such documentation would encourage thoughtful exercise of police discretion while preserving public safety objectives.

Recommendation 3

Develop a Police Risk Assessment Framework for Custodial Decisions

Participants strongly supported the use of evidence-based decision-making in policing.

Many participants noted that correctional agencies have already begun utilizing structured risk assessment systems. The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology utilizes PACT. The Bureau of Corrections utilizes BRINE. The Parole and Probation Administration utilizes CARAT. These tools help identify risks, needs, and appropriate interventions.

Participants questioned why similar approaches are not systematically utilized at the earliest stages of the criminal justice process.

Many reported remaining in detention despite presenting minimal risks to public safety or flight. Others remained detained simply because they could not afford bail.

Participants therefore recommended developing structured risk assessment tools that evaluate public safety risk, flight risk, community ties, employment status, family support, and vulnerability factors.

Participants believed that risk-based approaches would reduce unnecessary detention while allowing police resources to focus on individuals who pose genuine threats to public safety.

Recommendation 4

Strengthen Procedural Justice and Human Rights Training

This recommendation generated some of the strongest consensus during the conference.

Participants consistently stated that they remembered how they were treated by police officers more vividly than the final outcomes of their cases.

Many participants described respectful police officers who explained procedures, listened to concerns, and treated individuals with dignity. Others described experiences involving humiliation, intimidation, ridicule, or unnecessary disrespect.

Participants repeatedly emphasized that dignity costs nothing yet significantly affects public perceptions of legitimacy.

Several participants noted that even when they eventually accepted responsibility for their actions, negative experiences during police encounters remained among their strongest memories of the criminal justice system.

Participants therefore recommended integrating procedural justice principles into police training, supervision, promotion systems, and performance evaluations.

Recommendation 5

Improve Safeguards During Custodial Investigation

Participants viewed custodial investigation as one of the most consequential stages of the criminal justice process.

Many reported confusion regarding their legal rights, access to counsel, and the implications of documents signed while in police custody.

Participants recommended expanded access to legal representation, strengthened monitoring mechanisms, enhanced documentation procedures, and mandatory audio-video recording of custodial interrogations.

Participants emphasized that these measures protect both citizens and police officers by providing accurate records of interactions and reducing disputes regarding investigative procedures.

Recommendation 6

Verify All Pending Cases Prior to Transfer from Police Custody to Jail

This recommendation emerged as one of the most practical and widely supported proposals discussed during the conference.

Participants repeatedly described situations in which they had already completed court proceedings, served sentences, secured acquittals, obtained probation, or otherwise qualified for release only to discover that another pending case existed in a different court.

Many participants described preparing for release only to have that release postponed because another case surfaced at the last moment.

Participants emphasized that the problem often stems not from the existence of the case itself but from the timing of its discovery.

Participants therefore recommended that police agencies conduct nationwide verification of pending criminal cases before transferring accused persons from police detention facilities to jails.

Participants noted that early identification would allow all pending cases to be heard simultaneously whenever legally feasible. Such coordination would reduce prolonged detention, improve case management, facilitate court scheduling, and prevent unnecessary delays in release.

Participants identified this recommendation as one of the most important reforms for reducing prolonged detention and improving justice sector efficiency.

Recommendation 7

Focus on Investigation Quality Rather than Investigation Quantity

Participants repeatedly emphasized that weak investigations contribute directly to court congestion and jail congestion.

Several PRLs described spending months or years in detention before charges were eventually dismissed or significantly reduced.

Participants noted that every weak case consumes resources throughout the justice system. Prosecutors must review evidence. Public attorneys must prepare defenses. Judges must schedule hearings. Jails must house detainees.

Participants therefore recommended that police agencies monitor prosecutorial acceptance rates, dismissal rates, acquittal rates, and other indicators of investigative quality.

Participants believed that fewer but stronger cases would improve efficiency throughout the criminal justice system while enhancing public confidence.

Recommendation 8

Update and Clean Police and Barangay Records Following Release

A recurring concern among PRLs involved continuing stigma after release.

Many participants reported that their names remained on police or barangay monitoring lists long after acquittal, dismissal of charges, probation discharge, parole discharge, or completion of sentence.

Several participants explained that whenever crimes occurred in their communities, they often became among the first individuals questioned despite years of law-abiding conduct.

Participants emphasized that successful reintegration requires reciprocal effort. Individuals must demonstrate change, but institutions must also recognize and acknowledge that change.

Participants therefore recommended establishing formal procedures for reviewing, updating, and validating police and barangay records to ensure that legal outcomes are accurately reflected.

Participants believed that such reforms would support reintegration, reduce stigma, strengthen community trust, and decrease unnecessary future police contact.

Recommendation 9

Institutionalize Consultations with Persons Restored to Liberty

Participants strongly supported establishing formal consultation mechanisms between NAPOLCOM and Persons Restored to Liberty.

The conference itself demonstrated that individuals with lived experience possess valuable knowledge regarding how criminal justice policies function in practice.

Participants observed that many reforms are developed without direct input from those who experienced arrest, detention, incarceration, supervision, and reintegration.

Participants recommended annual consultations and structured dialogue mechanisms to ensure that lived experience continues to inform police reform efforts.

Recommendation 10

Measure the Impact of Police Actions on Court and Jail Congestion

Participants repeatedly emphasized that police agencies should not be evaluated in isolation.

Every arrest affects prosecutors, courts, jails, prisons, probation offices, parole offices, families, and communities.

Many participants shared experiences involving prolonged detention, inability to post bail, repeated postponements of hearings, and lengthy incarceration before eventual acquittal or dismissal of charges.

Participants therefore recommended that police agencies monitor detention days generated by arrests, dismissal rates after detention, acquittal rates after detention, detention rates among indigent accused persons, and the impact of arrest practices on jail occupancy levels.

Participants believed that such indicators would encourage a more holistic understanding of police effectiveness and support national efforts to reduce court congestion, jail overcrowding, and prolonged detention.

The recommendations presented in this report reflect the collective voices of Persons Restored to Liberty who participated in the National Conference of Persons Restored to Liberty held on 22 May 2026.

Participants expressed appreciation for the role of the Philippine National Police in maintaining peace and public safety. Their recommendations are not intended to weaken law enforcement but to strengthen it through evidence-based, problem-oriented, and human rights-centered approaches.

The recommendations support broader national goals relating to public safety, justice sector efficiency, jail decongestion, rehabilitation, reintegration, and public trust. Most importantly, they reflect the experiences of individuals who have lived through the criminal justice system and who now seek to contribute constructively to its continued reform.

The participants respectfully submit these recommendations to the National Police Commission for consideration in future policy development, performance measurement, training, and organizational reform initiatives.