History of Juvenile Justice System
anywhere in the world. Kids didn't get
 Back before the American Revolution,
the colonies followed the Common Law
of England when it came it came to
criminal justice. This means that
children were held accountable as
adults.
 In 1646, Puritans in Massachusetts
enacted a statue called “the stubborn
child law”, this made child
disobedience a capital offense allowing
a death penalty an option, but then
things started to change
 19th century, the idea emerged that
children should be taken care of by the
state. This notion ultimately empowered
the state to serve as a guardian.
Reformers believed that there needed to
be special facilities to deal with troubled
juveniles who found themselves in
trouble with the law.
Chicago and New York became the first
two cities in the United States to house
juvenile offenders separate from adult
offenders.
 In 1868 ,30 years later the Illinois State
Supreme Court ruled that a young
juvenile who had committed no crime,
could not be held in a reform school.
The court concluded that the juvenile
whose name was David O'Connell was
being punished rather than help. The
court held that it was illegal to send poor
children to reform schools, unless, they
had committed a felony offense. It was
not long after this decision that
reformers went looking for a new basis
to control poor immigrant children.
Reformers always sought to expand
state power rather than limit it. So after
the O'Connell decisions declared that it
was illegal to confine juveniles who had
not committed a crime in houses of
refuge, social reformers created the first
juvenile court.
 1899 child savers push for the creation
of the first-ever juvenile court. This
wasn't like a regular court. There was no
jury. The judge didn't look down from a
bench, but sat at a desk.
 This court was the first of its kind,
prison time but instead were put in
institutions or programs like parents the
court tried to steer kids toward
becoming responsible adults. Within 25
years most states started to think the
same thing juvenile courts popped up
everywhere even in another country.
But for children of color, things were
different. They were sometimes banned
from houses of refuge or juvenile
detention centers and when convicted,
they were more likely to be placed in
adult prisons.
 Under Jim Crow laws, some cities like
Memphis established separate juvenile
courts for kids of color. A police officer
not a judge presided over this court
 Jim Crow laws were state and local
laws that enforced racial segregation in
the Southern United States
 In 1967, for instance, a 15 year-old
named Gerald was accused of making
an indecent phone call to a neighbor.
Gerald was arrested without anyone
informing his parents, no record was
made of his appearance before a judge
or the neighbor who complained. Gerald
was committed to a state school until he
was 21. An adult with the same charge
might have received the $50 fine and
two months incarceration. Gerald's
parents brought his case to the
Supreme Court in 1967 that August, the
body ruled that juveniles were entitled
to due process .
 Case of George Junius Stinney
 In 1978, New York City passed the
Juvenile Offender Act, a law that made
it possible to try kids as young as 13 and
adult court for murder charges, and as
young as 14 for other violent crimes like
assault and robbery. That law caused
states across the country to reinterpret
who could enter the prison system as an
adult. They were afraid that a new breed
of super predators would sweep over
the nation
 Super Predators – a  term used to refer
to dangerous youth
 which rehabilitation seemed
improbable.  As a first step to provide legal attention to young
PD 603 This code mentions in Chapter 3,
articles 189-204, the care and treatment of
youthful offenders from the time of apprehension
up to the termination of the case.
Before Marcos time the Juvenile and Domestic
Relations Courts provided a unique form of
adjudication to youthful offenders and disposal of
family cases. It was effective in administering justice,
because the methods were not adversarial, but it was
oriented to rehabilitation. It viewed the minor as a
victim not as an aggressor. It undertook the
reformation of the youth with the purpose of
integration of him or her into mainstream society.
January 17, 1980 the Judiciary Reorganization
Act or Batasang Pambansa 129 abolished the
Juvenile and Domestic Relations Courts. Section
23 of that law authorized the Supreme Court to
designate certain branches of the Regional and
Municipal Courts to act exclusively on juvenile and
domestic relations cases. However, these courts
functioned also as courts of general jurisdiction
which meant that separate proceedings for youthful
offenders were not possible. This in spite of the fact,
that the Philippines had signed all the International
Treaties concerning the rights of children.
Under Pilipino law, article 189 of Presidential
Decree 1179, a youthful offender is over nine but
under eighteen years of age of the time the offence is
committed. Children under the age of nine are
exempt from criminal responsibility and those
between nine and fifteen are liable only if they are
able to demonstrate discernment, which is a level of
intellectual maturity including the ability to
distinguish right from wrong.
AKAP
In 1993, there was no organization that provided
legal attention to young offenders who were
generally more vulnerable in an already corrupt
judicial system. All the NGOs for children were
concentrating on street children but no attention was
given at all to children in conflict with the law. Most
NGOs were unaware of the problem as it was
generally impossible to enter the jails and prisons to
identify the problems
At that time there were no juvenile courts, lawyers,
psychologists, probation officers available who were
specialized in dealing with youth offenders. Police
was totally untrained in how to deal with the young
ones.
 
offenders, a legal desk for children,  AKAP, was
established in November 1993 at the Human Rights
Center of the University of Ateneo.
 
PAYO (Philippine Action for Youth Offenders) It
is very hard for developing countries to improve a
juvenile justice system, when they are already
struggling with scarce resources. Therefore it is
important to do the networking and the coalition of
NGOs as each one of them has the money needed to
start and make changes. When the State has not the
authoritative power to change the status quo then,
maybe the individual or an NGO does. Among the
rich Filipinos there were always people with a golden
heart to help their poor fellowmen with continuous
fundraising. Some of these rich families were even
prepared to give land away for building houses for
the underprivileged of their society. Besides Filipinos
helping other Filipinos, many foreigners gave much
voluntary aid to develop the country.
 
During the time President Ramos was in office, a
group, of which I was a founder, called PAYO
(Philippine Action for Youthful Offenders) was
established on 9 December 1993 as a national
coalition of organizations, government agencies and
individuals working for the protection of the rights
and welfare of youthful offenders and children in
conflict with the law.
 
PAYO was set up to do the following:
 
-         Lobby for the improvement,
implementation and promulgation of
legislations/laws and other related measures
which would protect and benefit the youth
offenders.
 
-         Pursue and intensify a continuing public
information and education campaign to the
public on the rights and situation of the
young offenders.
 
-         Coordinate all efforts and services of non-
government organizations, government
agencies and individuals willing to work for
the rights of the youth offenders and work
for the improvement of their conditions.
 
The first action of PAYO was to ask for:
 
-         Legislation to create and restore the
defunct juvenile delinquent court which was
abolished by Batas Pambansa Blg.,
 otherwise known as the Judiciary 2005.Children were mixed with adults while
Reorganization Act of 1980 by President undergoing trial. They had to survive congested
Ferdinand Marcos. jails, eat sustainable foods, and be educated by
  adult inmates. After the law was enacted in
-         Reintroduction of the Juvenile Courts. 2006, the minimum age of criminal liability was
  moved up from 9 to 15 years old. The number of
-         Segregation of the children from the adults
children behind bars dramatically decreased to
in jails and prisons.
400 every year.
 
-         Education of police, correctional and As of today, we are a long way from
rehabilitation staff, especially guards, about properly implementing the current law.
the rights of children in conflict with the Amending it, by once again lowering the
law.
minimum age of criminal responsibility from 15
 
PAYO would primarily focus on assisting children years old to 9 years old can only put the child
below 18 years old who were in conflict with the law further risks to a lifetime criminality, injustice and
including those already detained or imprisoned. At misery.
the same time this organization would assist those
who were children when imprisoned but who reached
the age of 18 while in prison. Children had to be
ensured that when in jail they are informed and
educated about their Human Rights as children and as
individuals.
 
PAYO MADE A DIFFERENCE
 
NGOs that previously did not work together now
started to do so. Through the coordination of 30
NGOs together with the help of UNICEF, WHO and
the Social Welfare Department, Justice Department,
previous child judges, senators and other politicians
more legal aid for youth offenders was provided  and
PAYO succeeded in getting the Family Courts Act
enacted by Congress on 28 July 1997 and signed into
law by President Ramos as Republic Act 8369 on 28
October 1997.
 
On the basis of several research studies by the
different NGOs, PAYO made a difference and impact
on the general prevalence and types of crime. The
number of streetchildren declined from a high of
1,500,000 to around 20-40,000 (7). The number of
delinquents, which had risen from 3,817 in 1987 to
6778 in 1989 (1), has fallen to around 2000 since the
formation of PAYO

In 2006, the Philippines passed a landmark Law

called the juvenile Justice and Welfare Act
(R.A 9344). It aims to hold Children in conflict
with the law accountable using child sensitive
procedures.

Before enacting the law, children as young as 9

years old were put behind bars. There were
1,976 children imprisoned every year from 2000-