PNP Internal Affairs Administrative Rules

Legal basis and prior issuances

The circular is issued pursuant to Section 39 of Republic Act No. 8551 (Philippine National Police Reform and Reorganization Act of 1998), which creates the IAS in the PNP.
Memorandum Circular No. 99-006 (August 11, 1999) is recognized for the rule that the IAS is not a disciplinary authority and that its recommendations are submitted to the proper PNP Disciplinary Authority for disposition or adjudication.
The circular recognizes that pre-charge investigation on complaints brought directly to disciplinary authorities is undertaken at the national level by the Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management, and at the regional level by the regional intelligence and investigation division and through the investigation division at equivalent units.
The circular recognizes that any PNP disciplinary authority mentioned in Sections 41 and 42 of Republic Act No. 6975 may authorize the IAS to conduct summary hearing or reception of evidence, subject to final disposition by the appropriate Disciplinary Authority.
For cases involving certain senior officers, it recognizes Presidential Memorandum Order No. 41 (March 7, 2001) requiring prior clearance through the Office of the President via the Executive Secretary.

Policy, purpose, and due process

The circular requires uniformity in investigating complaints and strict adherence to administrative due process.
It recognizes Administrative Due Process as the right of an interested or affected party to notice and hearing to enable presentation of one’s side and submission of evidence.
It requires that even summary proceedings remain consistent with the requirements of administrative due process.

Core definitions and procedural terms

Administrative Due Process is the right of a party to notice and hearing to enable presentation of one’s side and submission of evidence; due process pertains to the opportunity to be heard.
Affidavit is a written declaration of facts made voluntarily under oath or affirmation before an officer authorized to administer the oath or affirmation.
Answer is a responsive pleading containing the respondent’s negative and affirmative defenses.
Breach of Internal Discipline is any offense committed by a PNP member involving and affecting order and discipline within the police organization.
Complaint is a written and sworn statement about a wrong, grievance, or injury sustained by a person.
Decision is a written disposition personally and directly prepared and signed by the deciding/disciplining authority, clearly stating findings of fact, the law applicable, culpability or innocence, and the imposable penalty (if any).
Exoneration is the deciding/disciplining authority’s finding that the respondent is not culpable of the charge.
Ex-Parte Investigation is a proceeding conducted without the presence of either the complainant or the respondent.
Forum-Shopping is filing several complaints arising from one and the same cause of action involving the same parties with different disciplinary authorities.
Jurisdiction is the authority vested by law to hear and decide a case.
Motu Proprio Investigation is an investigation conducted by the IAS out of its own initiative/accord.
Nominal Complaint is an officer who, by reason of office or position, is required or authorized to institute and file an administrative complaint.
Probable Cause exists when facts and circumstances would excite belief in a reasonable mind, based on the investigator’s knowledge, that the respondent is probably culpable.
Reglementary Period is the period required by law to perform a specific act, computed by excluding the first day and including the last day, unless the last day is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, in which case the period runs until the end of the next day that is neither Saturday, Sunday, nor a legal holiday.
Substantial Evidence is the amount of evidence sufficient to support a decision to an unprejudiced mind.
Summary Hearing is an abbreviated administrative proceeding conducted consistent with due process to determine culpability or innocence.
Summons is a written order informing the respondent he is charged and directing him to file an Answer and other responsive pleadings.
Venue is the place where the investigation is conducted.

Venue, forum-shopping, and pre-charge control

Section 2, Rule I requires venue for complaints cognizable by the IAS to be filed in the national, regional, or provincial/city office where the offenses were committed.
A request to transfer venue within the same region must be approved by the regional IAS office of that region.
A request to transfer venue outside the region must be referred to the national IAS office for approval.
Section 3, Rule I prohibits forum-shopping or multiple filing by requiring the complainant to certify under oath in the pleading, or in an affidavit annexed and simultaneously filed, to: (a) no other action in other disciplinary forum was filed/commenced; (b) to best knowledge, no such action is pending elsewhere; (c) any pending or terminated similar action’s status is stated; and (d) if a similar action is filed or is pending elsewhere, reporting within five (5) days to the disciplinary authority where the original complaint and sworn certification were filed.
Section 3, Rule I mandates dismissal of the complaint when there is willful and deliberate forum-shopping to secure favorable action or advantage, including inclusion of a false certification.

Pre-charge investigation procedure

Section 1, Rule III (A) requires that a complaint against a uniformed PNP member be in writing, subscribed, and sworn by the complainant.
Section 1, Rule III (A) requires the complaint to be accompanied by sworn statements or affidavits of witnesses and other documents, including an affidavit of non-forum shopping.
As much as possible, the complaint must contain: (a) full name and address of complainant; (b) full name, rank, and station/assignment of respondent; and (c) a narration of facts showing acts or omissions constituting the offense allegedly committed.
A complaint may be initiated motu proprio by the national, regional, provincial, district, or city IAS, or as directed by the Inspector General, and must be prosecuted under the heading “In Re Summary Proceedings Against ___________________ (Respondent)”.
Section 4, Rule I directs that a pre-charge investigation is conducted in all administrative complaints filed with the IAS except when a formal complaint is already prepared and duly accompanied by the affidavit and sworn statements of witnesses and documentary evidence; in that case, it must be immediately forwarded to the Legal Affairs Division of the regional or national IAS office for formal hearing.
Section 2, Rule III (A) requires that within three (3) days from receipt of the complaint (or submission of the investigation report in motu proprio investigations), the investigating IAS must notify the police officer complained of, attach the complaint and supporting documents, and direct filing of an Answer/counter-affidavit and other defense documents within five (5) days from receipt of notice.
Section 2, Rule III (A) requires evaluation of records within three (3) days from receipt of the Answer/counter-affidavit to determine probable cause, which shall not exceed five (5) working days, and allows clarificatory appearance of parties to be finished within the same period.
In Provincial/District/City IAS cases, the pre-charge investigation report and case records must be submitted to the Regional IAS for automatic review.
The Regional IAS must conduct an automatic review within three (3) days; if probable cause exists, it forwards the formal complaint and records to the designated Summary Hearing Officer, but if no probable cause exists, it dismisses the complaint with notice to the parties.
Section 2, Rule III (A) allows the complainant, within fifteen (15) days from receipt of dismissal notice, to appeal to the office of the National IAS, which must resolve within ten (10) days from receipt of the appeal; if reversed, the National IAS directs the Regional IAS to initiate filing of a formal complaint and referral to the designated Summary Hearing Officer.
Section 3, Rule III (A) provides that failure of the respondent to submit counter-affidavit and controverting evidence in pre-charge investigation is treated as a general denial, and the complaint is deemed submitted for resolution based on evidence on record.

Formal hearing rules and decision mechanics

Section 4, Rule III (B) requires that the hearing before the designated Summary Hearing Officer be summary in character and not governed by technical rules of evidence, while remaining consistent with administrative due process.
Section 5, Rule III (B) requires the Summary Hearing Officer, within three (3) days from receipt of the formal complaint and records, to issue summons with the complaint and documents, requiring filing of the Answer or other responsive pleadings within five (5) days from receipt.
Section 5, Rule III (B) provides that failure to file within the prescribed period is treated as a general denial.
Section 5, Rule III (B) prohibits motions to dismiss or motions for a bill of particulars.
Section 6, Rule III (B) requires an immediate pre-hearing conference after submission of the Answer or after lapse of time to file it, to define/simplify issues, enter admissions and stipulations of facts, mark documentary evidence, and resolve other relevant matters; the pre-hearing conference must be completed in one (1) day and its proceedings must be recorded and signed by parties and/or counsel.
Section 7, Rule III (B) allows the Summary Hearing Officer, within five (5) days from the pre-hearing conference, to set the case for formal hearing if material facts need clarification; otherwise the case is deemed submitted for resolution based on evidence on record and additional documents adduced during the proceeding.
If formal hearing is necessary, the Summary Hearing Officer must give notice to parties and witnesses, and it must be finished within thirty (30) days; the parties may submit position paper or memorandum within ten (10) days from termination, and the Summary Hearing Officer must submit the investigation report to the Regional IAS for resolution.
Section 8, Rule III (B) authorizes preventive suspension recommendations during the formal hearing: the national or regional IAS may recommend to the immediate superior officer/supervisor placement under preventive suspension when (a) the charge is serious and evidence of culpability is strong, or (b) there is evidence the respondent is harassing, intimidating, coercing, or unduly influencing complainant and/or witnesses.
Section 8, Rule III (B) limits preventive suspension to not more than ninety (90) days; if exceeded, the respondent must be automatically reinstated without prejudice to continuation of proceedings.
Section 9, Rule III (B) allows lifting of preventive suspension on any of these grounds: (a) exigency of the service with conformity by the national or regional IAS undertaking the hearing; (b) prosecution/complainant has rested upon certification by the national or regional IAS conducting the hearing; or (c) failure to resolve within the ninety (90) days period where the delay is not the respondent’s fault.
Section 10, Rule III (B) provides that failure of the complainant to appear for at least two (2) scheduled hearings despite due notice is a ground to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute, and requires the process server to certify under oath that due notice was received; if culpability can be proven by evidence other than complainant’s allegations, the hearing proceeds even in complainant’s absence.
Section 10, Rule III (B) provides that withdrawal of the complaint, or execution of an affidavit of desistance or retraction, does not result in outright dismissal of the case.
Section 11, Rule III (B) requires the Summary Hearing Officer to ask clarificatory questions of all witnesses when one or both parties are not represented by counsel.
Section 12, Rule III (B) prohibits postponement motions except for extremely meritorious grounds (such as illness or other similar unavoidable causes), and allows only one (1) motion for postponement regardless of grounds invoked.
Section 13, Rule III (B) provides that respondent’s failure to appear during scheduled hearing despite due notice waives presence and submission of evidence, and the hearing proceeds ex-parte.
Section 14, Rule III (B) requires the Inspector General or Director of the regional IAS office to forward his decision within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the Summary Hearing Officer’s investigation report to the PNP Disciplinary Authority for disposition and implementation.
Section 14, Rule III (B) requires the concerned PNP Disciplinary Authority to act within thirty (30) days from receipt; failure to act renders the decision final.
Section 15, Rule III (B) requires decisions to include: names of parties; the offense charged; brief statement of material and relevant facts; findings established; conclusion; applicable laws/rules/regulations; and disposition.
Section 16, Rule III (B) requires service of the decision within five (5) days from rendition to the respondent either personally or by registered mail at place of assignment or last known address; complainant must receive a copy at his address as appearing on record; a copy must be forwarded to the concerned PNP office for implementation, subject to Section 49 (b) of Republic Act No. 8551; proof of service must be attached to records; if parties are represented by counsel, service to counsel is deemed service to the parties.

Finality, review, and outcomes

Section 17, Rule III (B) provides that a decision of the national and regional IAS duly acted upon by the proper PNP Disciplinary Authority imposing dismissal is immediately executory, and filing of a motion for reconsideration or appeal does not stay the decision.
Section 17, Rule III (B) requires immediate reinstatement without loss of rank and seniority and entitlement to payment of back salaries, allowances, and other benefits if the respondent is exonerated on appeal.
Section 17, Rule III (B) provides that penalties of demotion, forced resignation, or suspension become final and executory after seven (7) regular working days from respondent’s receipt of the decision unless a timely motion for reconsideration or appeal is filed; if filed, the decision becomes final and executory only after receipt of the resolution.
Section 18, Rule III (B) allows any aggrieved party to file a Motion for Reconsideration within ten (10) days from receipt of the copy of the decision, which must be resolved within the same period; only one (1) motion for reconsideration is allowed.
Section 19, Rule III (B) provides that optional and compulsory retirement does not affect pendency of the administrative case, and payment of retirement benefits is subject to final adjudication.
Section 20, Rule III (B) provides that death of the respondent during pendency terminates administrative proceedings and has the effect of exoneration; a resolution dismissing the case must be issued by the proper disciplining authority upon presentation of a certified death certificate.
Section 21, Rule III (B) requires a record of proceedings containing a substantial account of the hearing, duly certified correct by the Summary Hearing Officer.

Appeals and timelines

Section 1, Rule IV allows appeal of: (a) regional IAS dismissal for lack of probable cause; (b) regional IAS decisions given due course by the PNP Regional Director in his capacity as disciplinary authority; and (c) national IAS decisions given due course by the Chief, PNP in his capacity as disciplining authority.
Section 2, Rule IV allows appeal on grounds of: (a) newly discovered evidence that would probably change the resolution/decision; (b) errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to substantial rights during investigation or hearing; (c) findings of fact not supported by the records or not supported by substantial evidence; or (d) penalty too harsh and not commensurate to the offense.
Section 3, Rule IV provides that appeals must be filed to: (a) the Office of the National IAS for regional IAS resolutions dismissing for lack of probable cause; (b) the Office of the Regional Appellate Board (RAB) Napolcom for regional IAS decisions given due course by the PNP Disciplinary Authority; and (c) the Office of the National Appellate Board (NAB) Napolcom for national IAS decisions given due course by the Chief, PNP as disciplinary authority.
Section 4, Rule IV requires perfection by filing a notice of appeal within ten (10) days from receipt of the decision or resolution; within three (3) days from receipt of the notice, the concerned regional or national IAS must transmit the entire records to the appropriate appellate body for final review and disposition.
Section 5, Rule IV requires the RAB or NAB to resolve and decide within sixty (60) days from receipt of complete records.
Section 6, Rule IV requires that decisions and resolutions issued by the NAB, RAB, and the National IAS be served in accordance with Section 16, Rule III.

Administrative offenses and penalty schedules

Section 1, Rule V lists administrative offenses for which a uniformed PNP member may be charged administratively:
- Neglect of Duty or Non-feasance as omission or refusal, without sufficient excuse, to perform an act/duty that is a peace officer’s legal obligation; it implies existence of a duty and its breach.
- Irregularity in the Performance of Duty as improper performance of an act which could be lawfully done.
- Misconduct or Malfeasance as doing, through ignorance, inattention, or malice, what the officer had no legal right to do; including acting without authority, or exceeding, ignoring, or abusing powers; misconduct generally means wrongful/improper/unlawful conduct motivated by premeditated, obstinate, or intentional purpose, typically transgressing established definite rule of action, without necessarily implying corruption or criminal intention but involving wrongful intention and not mere error of judgment.
- Incompetency as manifest lack of adequate ability and fitness for satisfactory police duty performance, including physical, moral, or intellectual quality whose lack substantially incapacitates one to perform duties of a peace officer.
- Oppression as acts of cruelty, severity, unlawful exaction, domination, or excessive use of authority.
- Dishonesty as concealment or distortion of truth in a matter relevant to one’s office or connected with performance of duties.
- Disloyalty to the Government as abandonment/renunciation of loyalty to the Government of the Philippines or advocating the overthrow of the government.
- Violation of Law as presupposing final conviction in court of any crime or offense penalized under the Revised Penal Code or any special law or ordinance.
Section 2, Rule V classifies offenses for penalty purposes as light, less grave, or grave depending on seriousness for neglect/irregularity/misconduct, and for violation of law depending on seriousness and gravity of the penalty imposed by courts.
Section 2, Rule V requires that the offenses of Dishonesty, Disloyalty to the Government, Oppression, and Incompetency always be considered grave or serious offenses.
Section 1, Rule IV (Administrative Penalties) provides that imposable penalties are: Suspension, Demotion of not more than one rank or Forced resignation, and Dismissal.
Section 2, Rule IV sets schedules:
- Light Offenses: minimum 1 to 10 days; medium 11 to 20 days; maximum 21 to 30 days.
- Less Grave Offense: minimum 31 to 45 days; medium 46 to 60 days; maximum 61 to 90 days.
- Grave Offense: minimum 91 to 180 days; medium Demotion/Forced Resignation; maximum Dismissal.
Section 3, Rule IV requires consideration of mitigating and aggravating circumstances in determining penalties, recognizing mitigating circumstances as: (a) physical illness; (b) good faith; (c) length of service in the government; and (d) analogous circumstances.
Section 3, Rule IV recognizes aggravating circumstances as: (a) taking advantage of official position; (b) taking undue advantage of subordinate; (c) undue disclosure of confidential information; (d) use of government property in the commission of the offense; (e) habituality; (f) offense committed during office hours and/or within the premises of the working office or building; (g) employment of fraudulent means to commit or conceal the offense; and (h) analogous circumstances.
Section 4, Rule IV mandates penalty application guidelines:
- Like penalties for like offenses and only one penalty per case.
- The minimum is imposed where only mitigating and no aggravating circumstances are present.
- The medium is imposed where no mitigating or aggravating circumstances are present.
- The maximum is imposed where only aggravating and no mitigating circumstances are present.
- Where both exist: apply minimum if more mitigating than aggravating; apply medium if equal; apply maximum if more aggravating.
- If found guilty of two (2) or more charges or counts, impose the penalty corresponding to the most serious charge/count, and treat the rest as aggravating circumstances.
- Mitigating/ aggravating circumstances must be invoked or pleaded by the concerned party; otherwise they are not considered in penalty determination.
- If penalty imposable is beyond the disciplinary authority’s jurisdiction, the case and entire records must be referred to the proper disciplinary authority for disposition.
Section 5, Rule IV provides administrative disabilities inherent in certain penalties:
- Dismissal carries cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of leave credits and retirement benefits, and disqualification for re-employment in the police service.
- Suspension carries disqualification for promotion corresponding to the period of suspension.

Disciplinary consequences, repeals, and penalty for violation

Section 3, Rule VII makes violation of the circular a ground for administrative disciplinary action in accordance with existing laws and regulations.
Section 1, Rule VII provides that all issuances contrary to or inconsistent with the circular are amended or repealed accordingly.

Special rules on high-ranking officers

Section 5, Rule I requires that administrative complaints/cases against police officers of the rank of Senior Superintendent and higher be investigated under these Rules after prior clearance from the Office of the President through the Executive Secretary pursuant to Presidential Memorandum Order No. 41 dated March 7, 2001.
Section 5, Rule I requires that for such cases, the Disciplinary Authority submit the entire records of the case with his Investigation report to the Office of the President, through the National Police Commission, for final disposition.
The required Presidential Clearance must be secured after the filing of the formal complaint but prior to the commencement of the formal hearing.

Automatic investigation by IAS

Section 3, Rule II requires the IAS to conduct automatic (motu proprio) investigations in these instances:
- incidents where a police personnel discharges a firearm;
- incidents where death, serious physical injury, or any violation of human rights occurred in the conduct of police operation;
- incidents where evidence was compromised, tampered with, obliterated, or lost while in the custody of police personnel;
- incidents where a suspect in the custody of the police was seriously injured;
- incidents where the established rules of engagement have been violated; and
- incidents where there is need to determine lapses in administration or supervision by an immediate superior or supervisor of the personnel being investigated.