Key Takeaway: The Importance of Adhering to Legal Protocols in Detainee Release

Dominador G. Marzan v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 226167, October 11, 2021

Imagine a scenario where a detainee is released from jail without proper legal authorization. This not only undermines the justice system but can lead to serious legal repercussions for those involved. In the case of Dominador G. Marzan, a senior jail officer faced the consequences of releasing detainees based on an improperly issued document. This case highlights the critical importance of following legal procedures in the release of detainees, a lesson that resonates with both legal professionals and the general public.

Dominador G. Marzan, a senior jail officer, was convicted under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) for releasing two detainees without a court order. The central legal question was whether Marzan’s actions constituted a violation of the law by allowing himself to be influenced to release the detainees unlawfully.

Legal Context: Understanding RA 3019 and Detainee Release Protocols

The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) is a cornerstone of Philippine law aimed at combating corruption among public officials. Section 3(a) of RA 3019 specifically addresses the act of persuading, inducing, or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules and regulations or an offense in connection with their official duties.

Key Provision: “Section 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. — In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful: (a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules and regulations duly promulgated by competent authority or an offense in connection with the official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such violation or offense.”

Detainee release protocols are governed by the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) Manual, which mandates that no offender shall be released without a proper court order. This is to ensure that the release of detainees is conducted legally and with due process.

For instance, if a detainee is arrested for a crime and a commitment order is issued by a court, releasing that detainee without a subsequent court order for release would be a clear violation of the BJMP Manual. This case underscores the importance of understanding and adhering to these protocols to avoid legal pitfalls.

Case Breakdown: The Journey of Dominador G. Marzan

On May 21, 2001, Cyrus Dulay and Wendell Pascua were arrested following a public disturbance in Solano, Nueva Vizcaya. They were detained based on a commitment order issued by the Municipal Trial Court. However, later that day, they were released by Marzan, a senior jail officer, upon the presentation of a recognizance document signed by Atty. Basilio Pascual Rupisan, the Provincial Legal Officer.

The release was unauthorized as it lacked a court order, leading to charges against both Marzan and Atty. Rupisan for violating Section 3(a) of RA 3019. The Sandiganbayan, a special court dealing with graft and corruption cases, convicted both individuals.

Marzan appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that he was merely following instructions from his superior and was not influenced by Atty. Rupisan. However, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction, emphasizing that Marzan allowed himself to be influenced to release the detainees unlawfully.

Key Quotes from the Supreme Court:

• “The law is clear that the second mode merely requires that the offender who allowed himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced, is a public officer, such as Marzan.”
• “As a jail officer, Marzan was bound by the provisions of the BJMP Manual on the Manner of Releasing prisoners.”

The Supreme Court’s decision was based on the following procedural steps:

1. Arrest and detention of Cyrus Dulay and Wendell Pascua based on a valid commitment order.
2. Release of the detainees by Marzan without a court order, based on a recognizance document.
3. Charges filed against Marzan and Atty. Rupisan for violating RA 3019.
4. Conviction by the Sandiganbayan, followed by an appeal to the Supreme Court.
5. Supreme Court’s affirmation of the conviction, with a modification of Marzan’s penalty.

Practical Implications: Navigating Detainee Release and Legal Accountability

This ruling serves as a reminder to all public officials involved in the detention and release of individuals to strictly adhere to legal protocols. The consequences of failing to do so can be severe, including criminal charges and imprisonment.

For jail officers and other public servants, it is crucial to verify the legality of any document presented for the release of detainees. This includes ensuring that a court order is present and valid before proceeding with any release.

Key Lessons:

• Always verify the legality of documents before releasing detainees.
• Understand and follow the BJMP Manual and other relevant legal guidelines.
• Be aware of the potential legal consequences of unauthorized actions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019)?
RA 3019 is a Philippine law designed to combat corruption among public officials. It penalizes acts such as persuading or inducing another public officer to violate rules and regulations.

What are the elements of Section 3(a) of RA 3019?
The elements include: the offender being a public officer, the act of persuading, inducing, or influencing another public officer to perform a violation, and the act constituting a violation of rules and regulations.

What is a recognizance document?
A recognizance is a document that allows an accused person to be released from custody without bail, based on a promise to appear in court. It must be issued by a court to be valid.

Can a jail officer be held liable for releasing a detainee without a court order?
Yes, as seen in this case, a jail officer can be held criminally liable for releasing a detainee without a proper court order, especially if the release violates legal protocols.

What should a public official do if pressured to release a detainee unlawfully?
A public official should refuse to comply with any unlawful request and report the pressure to their superiors or relevant authorities to avoid legal repercussions.

How can this ruling impact future cases involving detainee release?
This ruling sets a precedent that public officials must strictly adhere to legal protocols for detainee release, reinforcing the importance of following the law to avoid criminal charges.

ASG Law specializes in criminal law and public accountability. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.