Reaction Paper in Juvenile Justice System

Delinquency has always been considered as a social problem over

and above the fact that it is a legal problem. It is also a psychological
problem. Hence to avoid this social evil one has to tackle the complex
problem of delinquency from the social psychological and to familial
angles.
Although laws regarding Juvenile delinquencies have been formed
long since, they are also being changed from time to time. Currently, in
all the progressive and civilized countries of the world the laws with
regard to the Juvenile delinquents have been changed.
As a signatory to the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for
the Administration of Juvenile Justice (The Beijing Rules), the United
Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (The
Riyadh Guidelines), the United Nations Rules for the Protection of
Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty and the most importantly the
Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Philippines guarantees the
protection of the best interests of the child in accordance with the
standards provided for by these international laws.
In the Philippines, members of Congress had passed bills intended
to make laws more consistent with the Philippines’ advocacy on juvenile
justice. As much as the Philippines should be concerned with a juvenile
justice system in harmony with international policies, the dominant goal
is to achieve standard national policy on CICL rather than an accurate
reproduction of an international model on CICL.
 Poverty as a person could be languishing in jail in perpetuity: It has
been blamed for many social ills. One such ills is why many children
commit crimes. However, the real challenge, according to advocates and
pundits, lies in the failure of the State to properly deal with the so-called
children in conflict with the law (CICL). Such failure, it has been said,
deprives children of the opportunity to better their lives or, at the least,
enjoy their childhood. Based on data provided by the Juvenile Justice
Welfare Council (JJWC), there were at least 11,000 CICL in 2009. The
government’s media agency has reported that, prior to the enactment of
the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, more than 52,000 Filipino
children are in detention or under custodial setting. They suffer from all
kinds of abuses, and some were meted out with capital punishment, the
Philippine Information Agency (PIA) said in a report on the 10th
anniversary of the JJWC in May.
The prevalence of juvenile delinquency is primarily due to poverty,
according to the Philippine National Police (PNP) considering that theft
is the common offense committed by children. About 60 percent of
juvenile crimes fall under crimes against property. These include theft,
robbery, malicious mischief and estafa, statistics by the PNP from 2012
to 2015 revealed. On the other hand, crimes against persons—which
include rape, attempted rape, acts of lasciviousness, physical injuries,
murder, attempted murder, seduction, grave threats, abduction and
homicide—constitute 36 percent of the crimes committed by children
covering the same period.
In addition, 4 percent of the juvenile crimes from 2012 to 2015
involved violations against special laws, such as Republic Act (RA)
9165 (prohibited drugs), Presidential Decree 1866 (illegal possession of
firearms) and Presidential Decree 1602 (illegal gambling). Theft cases
recorded last year reached 3,715, while physical-injury cases totaled
1,859. Rape cases involving child perpetrators reached 642. The total
number of theft cases from 2012 to 2015 reached 13,680. Staggering,
too, is the total number of physical-injury cases (6,062), robbery (2,446
cases), rape (1,973 cases reported) and cases involving prohibited drugs
(818). What is shocking is the number of murder cases involving
children 217.
The latter means there were at least 4.5 murder cases reported
every month in the past 48 months ending 2015 that involved children.
IN 2006 the Philippines enacted RA 9344, or the JJW Act of 2006,
aimed at addressing the plight of CICL. The JJW Act of 2006 was later
on amended by RA 10630, which took effect on November 7, 2013. RA
9344 was amended, according to the JJWC, to further strengthen the
Juvenile Justice and Welfare System and to ensure that the law is
effectively and fully implemented. The amendment focused on requiring
local government units to adapt, implement and manage intervention and
support centers called the Bagong Pag-asa.
The amended law also provides for juvenile-delinquency
prevention and intervention programs, as well as diversion programs.
The law also seeks to strengthen the rehabilitation, reintegration and
aftercare programs focused on CICL. RA 10630 also mandates the
transfer of the administrative supervision over JJWC from the
Department of Justice to the Department of Social Welfare and
Development (DSWD). The JJW Act, as amended, covers children at
risk and CICL.
The law provides that a person under the age of 18 is considered a
child. It also sets the minimum age of criminal responsibility at 15 years,
which means that a child of that age is exempt from criminal liability.
The law also provides that a child that is above 15 years but below 18,
who acted without discernment at the time of the commission of the
offense, is also exempt from criminal responsibility. However, children
exempt from criminal responsibility are not exempt from civil liability.
In the Philippines it is not the first time that a teenager has
committed heinous crimes.
Youth offenders are getting younger and bolder. From petty street
crimes, they are now figuring in heinous crimes that would send them to
jail for life, or worse, join the death row; the implementation of which is
now also being considered by some lawmakers to deter the commission
of drug-related heinous crimes.
But children at risk or children in conflict with the law are more
vulnerable to human-rights abuse. Hence, they need effective
intervention to correct their behavior.
The law, however, seemed to fail in curbing the number of
children getting involved in crimes.
Worse, those involved in petty and even serious crimes are getting
younger and younger, some committing crimes like robbery-holdup,
murder, illegal drug use and peddling, prompting some lawmaker to
think about lowering the age of criminal responsibility.
The proposal triggered howls of protest from child-welfare group
Akap Bata and human-rights watchdog Karapatan, apparently as they
see no need for such amendment in the current juvenile justice law.
Instead, they said there is a need to enhance measures that would
address juvenile delinquency without subjecting youth offenders to
consequences of incarceration.
 One weakness of the existing law to protect children in conflict
with the law is the rehabilitative and reformative aspects, which remain
wanting, Palabay said.
Not all rehabilitative and reformative aspect of the juvenile justice
law are implemented she said, citing that those in the custody of the
DSWD do not get adequate therapy and psychosocial support.
DSWD facilities for children in conflict with the law, she added,
need to be established while existing ones need improvement.
Children in conflict with the law, she said, often end up behind
bars like common criminals even inside facilities run by the DSWD or
LGUs.
Under the watch of Social Welfare Secretary Judy Taguiwalo,
Karapatan is confident that CICL would soon receive enhanced
protection by the agency, with social workers following her marching
orders.
Even minors arrested for petty crimes, she said, should be
protected against the consequence of incarceration, including the social
stigma of being, once in their life, put behind bars alongside adult
criminals, as mandated by law.
The ultimate problem, especially CICL, is poverty, Palabay told
the Business Mirror. If they belong to poor families, they would resort to
antisocial activities, turn to drugs or commit petty crimes, because they
are not in school where they belong.
WHILE saying the juvenile justice system is weak, Karapatan is
not jumping the gun in recommending a review of the existing juvenile
justice law.
 Lowering the age of criminal liability is very controversial as some
quarters are pushing, she said. We believe it would only subject children
in conflict with the law to criminal liability.
However, Palabay said Karapatan saw the need to revisit and
revise the law’s implementing rules and regulation, and ensure that the
law is implemented according to its intents and purposes.
The DSWD and LGUs, she added, should work together to ensure
that the law is protecting children in conflict with the law, through
measures that would give them a second chance.
Karapatan, she said, would be closely coordinating with the
DSWD to make things better.