MANILA, Philippines – The Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA)

law has been at the center of controversy after initial news about the
possible early release of convicted murderer-rapist Antonio
Sanchez broke.

As government officials backtracked on cutting short the prison term

of Sanchez, the debate has now focused on whether or not those
convicted of heinous crimes should benefit from the GCTA.

But how did the law come to be? What are the arguments for
amendments?

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.

June 18, 2014

At least 13 Bilibid inmates, represented by lawyer Michael Evangelista,

file a petition for certiorari and prohibition against Roxas and De Lima,
contesting the prospective application of the GCTA Law.

The inmates include Venancio Roxas, Saturnino Paras, Edgardo

Manuel, Heminildo Cruz, Allan Tejada, Roberto Marquez, Julito
Mondejar, Armando Cabuang, Jonathan Crisanto, Edgar Echenique,
Janmark Saracho, Josenel Alvaran, and Crisencio Neri Jr.

July 14, 2014

Lawyer Rene Saguisag files a petition-in-intervention, saying that RA

10592’s legislative history shows no intent of being prospective in
character. The High Court grants the leave to intervene.

October 21, 2014

Three NBP inmates file another petition-in-intervention against the
provision. Inmates William Montinola, Fortunato Visto, and Arsenio
Cabanilla are represented by the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG).

The provision, FLAG said at the time, “discriminates, without any

reasonable basis, against those who would have been benefited from
the retroactive application of the law.”

October 24, 2014

Ten inmates at the NBP’s Maximum Security Compound file a petition

for certiorari and prohibition against the prospective application of
the law, saying that the IRR was “issued with grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.”

June 25, 2019

Voting unanimously, the Supreme Court grants the petition and makes
the GCTA law retroactive.

In his concurring opinion, SC Associate Justice Marvic Leonen says

that the prospective provision of the 2014 IRR “implies that all inmates
detained or convicted prior to its effectivity can no longer be
rehabilitated for a successful reintegration into society, effectively
trampling upon their dignity as human beings.”

August 20, 2019

Reporters receive unverified information that convicted rapist and

murderer Antonio Sanchez might soon be walking
free. (READ: TIMELINE: DOJ backtracks on possible early release of
Antonio Sanchez)