research paper about lowering the age of criminal responsibility

Jump to navigation

My Bookmarks

Lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility in the philippines.

Currently, under President Duterte, there is a debate over whether or not to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility in the Philippines from 15 to nine years old. This debate has emerged in the context of a massive drug war, as government officials fear that children under nine - who do not face the risk of criminal liability - are increasingly being used by drug syndicates as mules. These officials argue that lowering the minimum age will protect children; however, activists fight to keep the minimum age at 15, pointing to the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 (R.A. 9344), and arguing that its full implementation would be a more effective reform to protect Filipino youth. Using interviews with key stakeholders in the Philippines and various literature regarding the subject, this paper aims to evaluate this debate from various angles, including neurological development, international context, and current status of R.A. 9344. Our analysis suggests that lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility would ultimately fail to protect children, and even create a multitude of problems that threaten the rights of Filipino youth and societal safety. Instead, the Philippines should fully implement R.A. 9344 - primarily through increasing its funding - thereby creating a rehabilitative system that prioritizes the rights of Filipino children.

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

Lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility: Consequences for juvenile crime and education

• Author & abstract
• 22 References
• 2 Citations
• Most related
• Related works & more

Corrections

(Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University, Denmark)

(The Danish Centre for Applied Social Science)

• Anna Piil Damm
• Helena Skyt Nielsen
• Marianne Simonsen

Suggested Citation

Download full text from publisher, references listed on ideas.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

The minimum age of criminal responsibility, international variation, and the Dual Systems Model in neurodevelopment

Affiliation.

• 1 Department of Behavioural Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
• PMID: 31805837
• DOI: 10.2989/17280583.2019.1692851

Considering the numbers of children and adolescents in conflict with the law, there is a concern about the ways in which they are being dealt with in the criminal justice system. This paper examines issues relating to the minimum age of criminal responsibility, the differences across countries, and the broad principles and international guidelines in this regard. Additionally, the rebuttable presumption of doli incapax , which is included in many legal systems, is discussed. This is done specifically with concerns regarding the psychological evaluation of criminal capacity, considering the lack of valid and reliable measures, as well as the vagueness of the concept of criminal capacity. An examination of the neurodevelopment evidence in relation to children's criminal behaviour, risk taking, and impulse control are discussed. The latest research evidence raises doubt about the extent to which adolescents can be held criminally responsible. The responsibility of expert witnesses to enlighten courts on this matter is crucial to avoid unnecessarily criminalising children and adolescents who may not have the requisite capacity to be held criminally liable.

• Adolescent Development
• Age Factors
• Brain / growth & development
• Child Development*
• Criminal Law / legislation & jurisprudence*
• Mental Competency / legislation & jurisprudence*
• Mental Competency / psychology

• High contrast
• OUR REPRESENTATIVE
• WORK FOR UNICEF
• NATIONAL AMBASSADORS
• PRESS CENTRE

Search UNICEF

Lowering the age of criminal responsibility is against child rights: unicef.

Statement attributable to Ms. Lotta Sylwander Representative, UNICEF Philippines 

MANILA, 18 January 2019  – UNICEF is deeply concerned about ongoing efforts in Congress to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility in the Philippines below 15 years of age. The proposed lowering vary from 9 and 12 years, and goes against the letter and spirit of child rights. 

There is a lack of evidence and data that children are responsible for the increase in crime rates committed in the Philippines. Lowering the age of criminal responsibility will not deter adult offenders from abusing children to commit crimes.

UNICEF supports the Philippine government, as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), to ensure that children grow up in a safe environment protected from crime and violence.

Sadly, lowering the age of criminal responsibility is an act of violence against children. Children in conflict with the law are already victims of circumstance, mostly because of poverty and exploitation by adult crime syndicates. Children who are exploited and driven by adults to commit crimes need to be protected, not further penalized. Instead they should be given a second chance to reform and to rehabilitate.

Scientific studies show that brain function reaches maturity only at around 16 years old, affecting children’s reasoning and impulse control. Proposals to lower the age of criminal responsibility argue that children as young as 9 years old are criminally mature and are already capable of discernment. If this was the case, then why is the legal age to enter marriage, legal contracts and employment in the Philippines at 18 years old? A 9-year old child has not yet even reached the age of puberty and their brains are not developed to understand the consequences of actions.

The current proposal is to delay sentence up to a maximum age of 25 years. If a child is jailed at 9 years old it means that they may have to waste away their life for 17 years under imprisonment until they can get a sentence for the crime committed. There is no mechanism to protect these children from cohabiting with hardened criminals and no guarantee that in detention they will be protected from violence and exploitation in jail.

Detaining children will not teach them accountability for their actions. In order to maximize their potential to contribute to nation-building, children must grow up in a caring, nurturing and protective environment. This requires strong parenting support programs and access to health, education and social services as well as to child-sensitive justice and social welfare systems.

The current Juvenile Justice and Welfare Law, which sets the minimum age of criminal responsibility at 15, already holds children in conflict with the law accountable for their actions. It provides them with rehabilitation programs using the framework of restorative, not punitive justice.

Noteworthy efforts from the judiciary and the executive agencies like the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council, Departments of Education and Social Welfare and Development deserve full support of Congress, particularly on increasing life skills of adolescent learners; establishing an evidence-based parenting program for babies all the way through adolescence; and decreasing use of detention and increase use of diversion and community-based mechanisms to address delinquency. UNICEF calls on the government and civil society to focus on strengthening the implementation of this law instead of amending it.

Branding children as criminals removes accountability from adults who are responsible for safeguarding them. If children who have been exploited by criminal syndicates are penalized instead of the adults who abused them, we fail to uphold the rights and well-being of children.

If we fail to understand the underlying reasons how and why children commit crimes, we as adults, fail our children.

Media contacts

About unicef.

UNICEF promotes the rights and wellbeing of every child, in everything we do. Together with our partners, we work in 190 countries and territories to translate that commitment into practical action, focusing special effort on reaching the most vulnerable and excluded children, to the benefit of all children, everywhere.

For more information about UNICEF and its work for children in the Philippines, visit www.unicef.ph .

Follow UNICEF Philippines on Facebook ,  Twitter and Instagram .

Related topics

More to explore, upholding the rights of every bangsamoro child.

UNICEF Philippines Chief of Advocacy and Communication Lely Djuhari meets children and families in Bangsamoro region

Samar & Leyte youth share their perspectives in improving

Young people call for a safer, inclusive and child-friendly society

Social media influencers take on challenge to be Creators #ForEveryChild to protect children from online abuse and exploitation

Ingat sa paggamit ng internet!

Paano magiging safe ang ating anak online

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Perception of Different Sectors on the Lowering of Age Imposed Criminality Liability THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING Republic of the Philippines Department of Education

Related Papers

Loren Delos Santos

The Philippines recognized the rights of the children and imposes upon itself the constitutional duty defend their rights to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to their development. 1 To perform this duty, the government enacted several laws which emphasize and provide specific measure to protect and safe guard the rights of the children. One of these enactments is the Republic Act No. 9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 which was passed on May 20, 2006. This law effectively repealed Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code which prescribes the penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen (18) years of age. Under the law, children fifteen years old and under is exempted from criminal responsibility, and a child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age is exempt from criminal liability unless he/she has acted with discernment. 2 This legislative enactment submits that the Philippine Justice System recognizes the restorative approach towards children in conflict with the law. This is in parallel with the Supreme Court pronouncement in the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. Robert Sierra, that R.A. No. 9344 "also drew its

Asian journal of management sciences & education

Marie Grace

This study identifies how children in conflict with the law detained in a youth rehabilitation center justify the crimes they have committed. Interviews conducted in Filipino were done to 40 participants. Poverty conditions of the participants, pressure from gangs and feelings of injustice given by the person who was victimized were given as justification for committing crimes. Feelings of remorse were felt if they perceive that the persons victimized were physically frail but were absent to those who have committed crimes against affluent people. The research findings support Gilligan’s (1988) differences in moral reasoning among males and females. In instances of murder for example, male participants justify their offenses by stating that it is justice to kill those who did them wrong or have hurt their ego. For female participants, murder is committed because they perceive their victims are perpetrators of crimes who would continue to do injustice to other people. Murdering them ...

Rommel Alim Abitria

International Journal of Advanced Research

nurini aprilianda

In the Act No. 11 of 2012 about the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, it explains the age limit for juvenile criminal responsibility for those who commit criminal acts, as regulated in Article 1 point 3. The children between 12 (twelve) years old and 18 (eighteen) years old are suspected of committing a crime. The purpose of this study was to analyze the construction of the regulation of children under the age of 12 in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Number 11 of 2021 on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System. This type of normative legal research uses a statute approach and a case approach through a literature study. The results of the research on the Construction of Regulations for Children under the Age of 12 in Act Number 11 of 2021 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System as Children in Conflict with the Law. There is a need for additional rules or amendments to the provisions of criminal sanctions for children, where criminal sanctions will be given to child...

Ananda Efnilianty Putri

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan nilai moral agama, nilai moral sosial, dannilai moral individu dalam novel Pulang Karya Tere Liye. Metode penelitian yang digunakanadalah deskriptif kualitatif, yaitu untuk mendeskripsikan data dari hasil penelitian. Dengan teknikanalisis data berupa membaca, menganalisis, dan menyimpulkan hasil.Hasil penelitian ini menemukan nilai moral dalam novel Pulang Karya Tere Liye, yaitu nilaimoral agama, nilai moral sosial, dan nilai moral individu. Dalam novel ini adanya nilai moralagama ditunjukkan dengan Bujang yang tidak pernah melanggar pesan Mamak yang melarangnyauntuk meminum minuman beralkohol. Selain itu, nilai moral sosial dalam novel ini ditunjukandengan adanya solidaritas, kerjasama, dan saling tolong menolong sesama, terutama di keluargaTong. Dan nilai moral individunya adalah bagaimana Bujang menghapus rasa takut yang ada padadirinya

Proceedings of the International Conference of Social Science

putu wisnu nugraha

In the Act No. 11 of 2012 about the Juvenile Criminal Justice System, it explains the age limit for juvenile criminal responsibility for those who commit criminal acts, as regulated in Article 1 point 3. The children between 12 (twelve) years old and 18 (eighteen) years old are suspected of committing a crime.. The purpose of this study was to determine and analyze the urgency of regulating teenager under the age of 12 in the constitution of Republic of Indonesia Number 11 of 2021 on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System as well as children in conflict with the law.This type of normative legal research uses a statute approach and a case approach through a literature study. The results of the research on the urgency of regulating children under the age of 12 in Act Number 11 of 2021 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System as well as children in conflict with the law. Many cases of crime that occur under the age of 12 years. So that special attention is needed regarding the min...

AT-TURAS: Jurnal Studi Keislaman

lahmudinur lahmudinur

The position of children as legal subjects will certainly become a problem that needs to be studied in more depth. Children who physically and psychologically still need care and guidance in order to achieve perfect growth, precisely when dealing with the law will certainly experience psychological and even physical changes in a bad direction. In the case of children as legal subjects, there is a difference between Islamic law and positive law in Indonesia because of the different objectives of establishing and enforcing the law itself. To examine this problem, qualitative research methods are used with a normative juridical approach. The data collection technique was carried out using the documentation method, in which data was collected from fiqh literature and laws related to juvenile crimes, then analyzed using the content analysis method. The results of the study show that children according to Islamic law are not subject to criminal punishment because punishment in Islam is im...

Perfecto “Boyet” Caparas

This human rights report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child presents the context wherein the jailing of children with adult crime suspects, extrajudicial execution, and rounding up of street children, takes place. It dissects the core issues bedeviling the phenomenon of police detention of children crime suspects with adult crime suspects in police prisons throughout the Philippines, with the exception of Cebu City. It examines the chain of command from the President of the Philippines to the officers of the Philippine National Police who carry out the locking up of children with adults in police stations. The paper invokes the principle of command responsibility in imputing culpability and liability on the part of the President for violation of the provision of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as well as of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on the segregation of children from adult detainees. This submission also presents comprehensive recommendations on how to stop police child detention with adult crime suspects, the roundup of street children, and extrajudicial execution. The recommendations include: • Strengthen Alternatives to Child Imprisonment pursuant to CRC Article 37(b) • For the Department of Social Welfare and Development to serve as the lead implementing agency of RA 9344 • Expand the scope of recognizance as one of the alternatives to detention pending trial of children accused of violating the law • Empower children’s human rights organizations, civil society groups, and responsible members of society to assume custody of children accused of violating the law pending trial to save them from the trauma of prolonged detention pending the hearing of their cases • For the Philippine Judicial Academy to reorient and train family court judges to deemphasize the Revised Penal Code and various criminal statutes and ordinances as points of reference in hearing and deciding cases and incidents involving children accused of violating the law • For the Supreme Court to enjoin family court judges to motu propio initiate, expand, and strengthen various forms of alternatives to detention pending the trial of cases involving children accused of violating the law pursuant to Article 37(b) of the CRC that detention should be used only as a measure of last resort • In lieu of so-called “rescue operation” that is a disguise for the arbitrary arrest and illegal detention and ill-treatment of street children, establish and develop, in consultation with the organized ranks of children, children’s human rights and welfare organizations, various street-based short-, medium, and long-term programs and services, with multilevel and multipronged service components, including family and community support, health, and education • Strengthen alternatives to detention from the point of arrest and during pre-trial detention • Develop a documentation and monitoring system to surface out the political nature of crimes attributed to children to develop appropriate intervention services • Develop a mechanism for data-gathering, disaggregation by sex and age, ethnicity of children prisoners, including those in immigration facilities for undocumented aliens • Establish a monitoring system in provincial jails controlled by LGUs how these jails are complying with the CRC and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (The Beijing Rules) • For the Commission on Human Rights to be empowered to investigate and prosecute in courts of law various forms of human rights violations in accordance with current international human rights norms and standards; specially vest the Commission on Human Rights with prosecutory power and authority to investigate and prosecute violators of children’s human rights • For the Philippines to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court • Investigate and prosecute Department of Justice and Department of Interior and Local Government officials and top ranking officials of the Philippine National Police for violating the Child Protection Act (RA 7610) for locking up children with adult crime suspects in police prisons by virtue of their command responsibility for being in a position to know or should have known about the children prisoners’ situation • For the Supreme Court to consider expanding the doctrine of locus standi in order to empower concerned citizens and members of children’s human rights organizations to institute criminal and civil suits for violation by state functionaries and agents of the human rights of children accused of violating the law under the CRC • Establish mechanisms to investigate and document cases of torture and ill-treatment amounting to torture of children accused of violating the law, taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances of their arrest, treatment, and conditions of detention • Repeal unjust criminal laws, including the anti-vagrancy law and the substance abuse law • Amend the provisions of the Comprehensive Drugs Act to conform with the provisions of the Comprehensive Juvenile Justice Act (RA 9344) and CRC, especially to allow children to be released on recognizance pending the trial of their case • Prioritize the Budget for Children’s Education • Realign budgetary appropriations in favor of children’s mandatory education pursuant to the mandate of the Philippine Constitution and the CRC’s best-interest-of-the-child principle • International financial institutions (IFIs) should be held to account for their obligation to respect, protect, and fulfill the human rights of children. These IFIs should be held accountable for imposing conditionalities whose social impact militates against the basic human rights of children • Combat impunity in extrajudicial executions • Establish a truth commission and inform the public about the facts and circumstances involving the extrajudicial execution of children • Establish and integrate the doctrine of command responsibility in the criminal investigation and prosecution of perpetrators at various levels of participation, including conceptualization and planning, preparation, and execution stages • For the Supreme Court and children’s human rights organizations to develop collaborative programs, involving the private sector, to develop and strengthen street-, family-, community-, and school-based diversion programs and services for children accused of violating the law • Etc.

RELATED PAPERS

Annals of Applied Biology

Patricia Cole

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety

Rhonda Bohn

International Journal of Cardiology

Cristiano Amarelli

Jean Terschuren

Veneranda Hajrulla

Emilio Pueyo

Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira

Robert Boddey

Activitat Parlamentària

Lali Sandiumenge

Revista de Letras Norte@mentos

NADIA AZEVEDO

Jurnal Pertanian Agros

Dinna juwita anggraini

International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences

Resat Ulusay

Revista Brasileira de Estudos Pedagógicos

Roselane Campos

Annals of King Edward Medical University

K. Siddique

Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences

Euis Sunarti

Infection and Immunity

Domínios de Lingu@gem

Maíra Candian

Journal of Clinical Medicine

Alberto Caro

Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science

Peter Batey

Ehsan Sarayloo

Nutrition Research

Carol L Cheatham, Ph.D.

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Paula Alvito

Daniel Zignale

Rob Weijers

Asian Journal of Neurosurgery

SHAH GUL ZAHRA

Journal of Mechanical Engineering

Jaswar Koto

See More Documents Like This

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Subscribe Now

Why experts strongly oppose lowering the age of criminal responsibility

Already have Rappler+? Sign in to listen to groundbreaking journalism.

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

AT A GLANCE

• Lawmakers push a proposal to lower the minimum age of responsibility (MACR) from 15 to 12 years old despite the obligation to protect what is in the best interest of children. 
• Experts are strongly opposed to lowering the MACR because years of scientific research and evidence show this will harm children.
• The juvenile justice system is already struggling to cope with children in conflict with the law and rehabilitation facilities are sorely lacking. 
• Lawmakers ignore this and are set to to approve the measure before Congress adjourns on February 9, 2019.

MANILA, Philippines – Lawmakers in Congress are set on lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) from 15 to 12 years old, a move that runs squarely against the obligation to protect the welfare of children.  

When the Philippines ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN CRC) in 1990, it meant the country committed to place the best interests of children as its primary concern when crafting policies that concern them. The UN CRC is the most widely accepted human rights treaty in history, according to the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef).  

Despite this, lawmakers in the Senate and House of Representatives have pushed for the hasty approval of a measure to lower the MACR, a pet measure of President Rodrigo Duterte.

It’s a move that experts from several fields, including medicine, economics, human rights, and education ,  have strongly opposed. Several groups have voiced grave concern over doing so, saying it could expose more children to the gaps of the juvenile justice system, which is already struggling to cope with children in conflict with the law (CICL).    

“Lowering the age of criminal responsibility is an act of violence against children. Children who are exploited and driven by adults to commit crimes need to be protected, not further penalized,” Unicef said. “They should be given a second chance to reform and to rehabilitate.”  

Armed with years spent treating and dealing with children, experts have said lowering the MACR goes against science and evidence, which proves there are detrimental risks CICLs face at every   moment they come in contact with the juvenile justice system.    

A review of position papers crafted by medical experts, economists, social workers, and childrens’ rights group showed there were risks posed to children at 3 stages:    

• Before a child may commit a crime.  
• During a child’s stay in a youth detention center – known as Bahay Pag-Asa (House of Hope) – or worse, a jail.
• After a child leaves a rehabilitation center or jail. 

These risks, they said, outweigh the other supposed benefits of the proposed measures.  

Before a child may commit a crime, s/he is is already vulnerable

The first and foremost proof experts cite is backed by decades of scientific research: children are still developing their decision-making capacity and therefore do not know how to fully discern by themselves yet.  

According to the Psychological Association of the Philippines (PAP), this means that changes in areas of the brain, which are responsible for impulse control, decision-making, regulating emotions, and evaluating risks and rewards are still taking place. Unlike adults, children are less able to consider and understand the long-term consequences of their actions.  

“These abilities, which are involved in criminal behavior, do not fully form until young adulthood, making young people especially vulnerable to engaging in risky behaviors,” the PAP said.  

This matters because it means that while children may know right from wrong, they are unable to fully understand the consequences of their actions. Lawmakers, including Senate justice committee chairperson Richard Gordon, have argued that children should be held accountable for offenses precisely because they can distinguish right from wrong.  

“Discernment between right and wrong requires intellectual, emotional, and psychological maturity. This is a tall order for children who are still in the process of developing in all aspects,” the Philippine Pediatric Society (PPS) said. “Younger children, therefore, need protection from the law and should not be held criminally responsible for their actions.”  

The Child Neurology Society, Philippines and Philippine Society for Developmental and Behavorial Pediatrics share the position of the PAP and PPS  as neuroscience research has proven that the brain does not fully develop until the age of 25.  

Because children are often unable to protect themselves, the state has the obligation to protect them.

CICLs are at a disadvantage even before even committing a crime

Experts also stressed that many CICLs are disadvantaged before committing a crime because they often come from poor, dysfunctional families. They are also vulnerable to coercion.  

According to the PAP, brain and moral development can be delayed by cultural and social disadvantages such as poverty, exposure to crime and violence, abuse, and neglect. These factors, which are beyond a child’s control, make it unfair to cast a child as a criminal.    

A situational analysis of CICLs completed by the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC) said that a majority of offenses where children were involved – theft and physical injury – were often related to poverty. The JJWC is tasked with overseeing the implementation of the Juvenile Justice Welfare Act (JJWA).  

The JJWC said CICLs were also often driven to commit crimes due to a failure to resolve conflict among family members or to properly manage emotions. (READ: Beyond juvenile delinquency: Why children break the law )

The PAP echoed this, saying it was “unreasonable” to hold a child exposed to an “impoverished and brutal” environment criminally responsible for his or her actions.    

“To hold a child criminally responsible for such is to put the entire community’s problems on the child’s shoulders,” the group said.  

About 73 alumni from the University of the Philippines School of Economics (UPSE) backed this. They said efforts targeted at the youth were misplaced. Data from the JJWC and Philippine National Police showed only 2% of crimes in the country were committed by children.  

“A sledgehammer is being used to crack a nut…[proposals] are fixated on an outlier in the system, but one which adversely affects mostly the poor,” they said.  

As young people, children are also vulnerable to coercion because they do not have full control over their freedom and decisions. This is where adults and criminal gangs come in.

While the JJWC and social workers have admitted there are syndicates using children for crimes, they said the adults should be punished, not the children, who are mere victims.  

UPSE alumni also said lowering the MACR will not stop adults from using children to commit crimes. A change in technique, they said, will merely been seen as a “change in rule.” Criminals will eventually “adapt and use a different strategy.”

In a letter to Gordon, Marta Pais, UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on violence against children, warned that lowering the MACR would also put more children at risk of violence.  

Doing so, she said, would further compromise the “fight against impunity of those responsible for exploiting children in the first place.”  

Not enough rehabilitation centers to help children

The proof against lowering the MACR becomes even clearer when reviewing the condition of majority of Bahay Pag-Asa centers.  

While lawmakers claimed that lowering the MACR from 15 to 12 was intended to protect children, they failed to listen to the JJWC itself.

The JJWC said the number rehabilitation houses was nowhere near the total 140 that needed to be built. Nor was the JJWA fully implemented before posing amendments. (READ: Children in conflict with the law: Cracks in Juvenile Justice Act )  

The JJWA also mandates LGUs to build and maintain a Bahay Pag-Asa in their areas. They should also appoint at least one social worker to assist CICLs. (READ:  When ‘Houses of Hope’ fail children in conflict with the law )

Data from the Ateneo de Manila University Human Rights Center showed only 4% of LGUs appointed licensed social workers. Meanwhile, only 53% of LGUs have allocated 1% of their internal revenue allotment to strengthen local councils to protect children.  

In a Senate hearing , JJWC executive director Tricia Oco said there are only 63 rehabilitation centers nationwide – 55 LGU-operated, 5 non-operational, and 3 operated by non-governmental organizations.    

But even if existing, not all youth detention facilities are ready to take care of children.  

According to Human Rights Watch , visits to a Bahay Pag-asa in Manila showed the facility was poorly run and maintained.

“Water from the toilet leaked to the floors where dozens of children were sleeping, rust covered fenced cages in which children were locked up throughout the day, ventilation was poor, and many of the children had clear signs of skin infections, suggesting poor diet and sanitation,” the group said in a statement. 

This lack of rehabilitation centers has led to many CICLs being detained in regular jails and detention centers along with adults.  While numbers have gone down through the years, more than 800 children were still in jails as of September 2018 – despite restrictions imposed by the JJWA.

For Pais, gaps in the rehabilitation of CICLs are too high a price to pay.

When jailed with adults, children in regular detention centers may be exposed to criminal networks. This could lead to an increased risk of being used for criminal activities at a phase when they are supposed to be rehabilitated.  

“It compromises completion of formal education and opportunities to obtain vocation skills; and, it exposes children to higher risk of stigmatization as criminals and to neglect and social exclusion,” Pais said.  

Stigmatizing CICLs

Experts strongly oppose the proposal to lower the MACR because it limits prospects for CICLs.  

Even after being detained, the PAP said exposing a child to the criminal justice system – or simply labeling a child a criminal – “will more likely establish the criminal identity of the young person.”  

Pais added that experiences from other countries coupled with research on criminilogy have showed that introducing children to the juvenile justice system earlier on does not deter crime.  

“Lowering the age of criminal responsibility has the effect of bringing more children into contact with the criminal justice system, increasing the rate of incarceration and aggravating the risk of recidivism,” Pais said.  

This is not to say that CICLs are not held accountable for their actions, as some lawmakers have claimed.    

JJWC policy and research officer Jackielou Bagadiong earlier denied that the current law lets children get away with crimes they committed.  

“The child still has this liability but we don’t detain [him or her] because given the current state of our jails, it wouldn’t be possible, it would harm our future generation if we do that,” Badiong said during the child protection summit in 2018.  

“Our jails in the Philippine setting [are] what we can call school(s) of crime. If a child enters jail, one can be assured that when he or she comes out, she will have had a network of criminals that can assist him or her later on,” she added.

Ignoring evidence

The factors that make a case against lowering the MACR seem to have fallen on deaf ears as a majority of lawmakers are still set on pushing a proposal at the expense of children.  

The House, after all, already  approved   its version of the controversial measure on third and final reading last Monday, January 28.   Meanwhile, Senate justice committee chairperson Richard Gordon is set to sponsor the chamber’s version of the measure on Monday, February 4.

But while legislators have put much attention on the minimum age of criminal responsibility, measures to care for children shift farther away from the best interests of young people themselves.   At the end of the day, lawmakers should be asked if they have done their best to protect children. – Rappler.com  

TOP PHOTO: PROTECT CHILDREN. Child rights defenders hold a protest action as the House of Representatives discussed proposed legislation to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility of children in conflict with the law. Photo by Maria Tan/Rappler

Add a comment

Please abide by Rappler's commenting guidelines .

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

How does this make you feel?

Related Topics

Sofia Tomacruz

Recommended stories, {{ item.sitename }}, {{ item.title }}.

Checking your Rappler+ subscription...

Upgrade to Rappler+ for exclusive content and unlimited access.

Why is it important to subscribe? Learn more

You are subscribed to Rappler+