MALACAÑAN PALACE
MANILA
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES
[ Administrative Order No. 106, August 11, 1964 ]
EXONERATING MR. FELIX P. AMANTE AS ACTING DIRECTOR OF PRISONS
This is an administrative case against Acting Director of Prisons Felix P. Amante arising from the privileged speech delivered by Representative Teodulo C. Natividad charging him as follows:
1. That during his incumbency, Director Amante issued passes to 665 hardened criminals to go out from the prison reservation to Manila and surrounding areas for the purposes of obtaining supplies and materials needed in the prison compound and for “political purposes” without adequate guards;
2. That the respondent Director purchased a P14,500 Willys Station Wagon and a Chevrolet Sedan worth P18,500 aside from a Chrysler car for his exclusive use and his family;
3. That the respondent Director caused the spending of P22,000 for the purchase of tierra tiles for the improvement of the Administration Building without attending first to the kitchen which is unsanitary and shabby;
4. That the respondent Director caused the barter of P35,000 worth of steel mattings with a battered jeep and 10 bicycles to the detriment of the Government;
5. That the respondent Director showed rampant favoritism both in the hiring of personnel and in the granting of living quarters at the expense of prison doctors and other officials entitled hereto;
6. That the respondent Director caused the stock-piling of perishable supplies like the P15,000 worth of “chicharon”;
7. That the respondent Director is accountable for the alleged faulty procedure in the classification of prisoners which caused the increase of escapes; and
8. That permanent passes were issued by the respondent Director to prisoners which had never been done before by any other officials of the New Bilibid Prisons.
An investigation was conducted by Acting Assistant Solicitor General Isidro C. Borromeo, but Representative Natividad did not appear therein and instead sent two representatives to witness the proceedings. Despite the fact that no one presented evidence in support of the aforesaid charges in the privileged speech of Representative Natividad, the investigator nevertheless summoned, and questioned several witnesses, including the respondent, to ascertain the veracity of the charges.
On the first charge, respondent admitted having issued passes to prisoners for the procurement of supplies and materials for the benefit of the Bureau of Prisons, but maintained that he did so in accordance with his discretionary powers as prison head. He cited specific cases of passes issued by some of his predecessors and other prison officials to show that it had been a long practice before he became Acting Director of the Bureau of Prisons. To prove that it was within his discretion to issue passe3, he cited section 28 of the general rules regulating the conduct and duties of officers and employees promulgated on August 30, 1950, which reads as follows:
“No prisoner shall be taken outside the walls of a prison or reservation of the colony for the purpose of labor unless under pass issued by the superintendent and for employment approved by the Director. No prisoner shall be taken beyond the proclaimed boundaries of the prison or colony except for purposes and under conditions specifically authorized by the Director or Superintendent.”
Moreover, it was established that the prisoners given passes were mostly living-out prisoners, that is, those who have been enjoying minimum security risk.1aшphi1 The records do not show that the prisoners were allowed to go out for political purposes and without adequate guards. Under the circumstances, there is no basis for finding-respondent liable under this charge.
The same thing can be said of the second charge, it appearing that, according to the supply officer and the chief of the General Services Division of the Bureau of Prisons, only the Chevrolet sedan was being used by respondent because the station wagon was turned over to said division for the use of other officials and the Chrysler car was no longer in use.
As to the third charge, the amount of P22,000 used in the purchase of tiles for the improvement of the administration building was suggested by the chief of the General Services Division, and the Budget Officer of the Bureau of Prisons certified that said amount could not have been spent for the kitchen because the latter needs an amount of over P150,000. Moreover, the program for the improvement of the kitchen had already been submitted to the Office of the Undersecretary of Justice for approval.
Concerning the fourth charge, the respondent explained that the barter of P25,000 worth of steel mattings with a battered jeep and ten bicycles was in accordance with law and duly approved by the proper authorities. There was no detriment to the government in the transaction, as the steel mattings were owned by the Board of Liquidators and they had been lying idle in the prison grounds. Hence, their nondisposal would have been prejudicial to the government. Moreover, the appraisal was made by the Board of Liquidators. The charge is therefore without merit.
Similarly devoid of merit are the fifth and sixth charges. Evidence was presented to show that a committee is in charge of screening requests for quarters and its recommendation is submitted to the Director for approval. No evidence was presented indicating that respondent discriminated against employees in making appointments and in the allocation of quarters. As regards the stockpiling of perishable supplies like, the P15,000 worth of “chicharon,” the records show that these food stuffs were delivered in installments and that they were distributed to the different colonies by the foodstuff committee.
With respect to the last two charges, it was established % that there are two offices classifying prisoners; namely, Reception and Diagnostic Center and the Classification Board. Each office has its own functions relative to the admission, classification, and discharge of prisoners. There is no basis for holding the Director responsible for such procedure, as there are rules to be followed concerning the matter. Finally, the records fail to show that the Director, Assistant Director, or Superintendent has been giving permanent passes to prisoners.
In view of the foregoing, and as recommended by the investigator, Mr. Felix Amante, Acting Director of Prisons, is hereby exonerated from the charges against him.
However, in the light of the findings of the Investigator, rules should be promulgated to limit the period of outside stay of prisoners on passes so that they would not stay outside overnight, the Reception and Diagnostic Center should have a separate and adequate building wherein the incoming prisoners could be given proper orientation before they are classified, and the practice of allowing prisoners themselves to procure materials needed by the Bureau of Prisons should be stopped.
Done in the City of Manila, this 11th day of August, in the year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and sixty-four.
(Sgd.) DIOSDADO MACAPAGAL
President of the Philippines
By the President:
(Sgd.) CALIXTO O. SALVIDAR
Acting Executive Secretary
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
