FUGATA, REGINE E.

FB1 – MAIN 9

REACTION PAPER: KENT VS. UNITED STATES

Morris Kent, when he was 16-years-old, was arrested for burglary, robbery, and rape. Given
that he was a juvenile, he was subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court. But,
the Juvenile Court could waive jurisdiction and have a juvenile tried as an adult after doing a
“full investigation” with regard to waiver.

Regarding this case, I believe that the jurisdiction waiver process was not done correctly. It
should not be that way since it leads to uncertainty between the offender. We all have the right
to a fair trial because, as human beings, we are entitled to one, regardless of our race, colou,
sex, language, religion, politics, or where they were born. Every citizen of this nation is entitled
to a thorough inquiry and due process. As stated in Section 1 of Article 3 of the Bill of Rights of
the Philippine Constitution of 1987, no one should be denied equal protection under the law or
have their life, liberty, or property taken away from them without due process. The United
States v. Kent case established the legal precedent for juvenile due process, guaranteeing that
minors under the authority of juvenile court shall have the same rights to due process as adults.
In addition, juvenile courts have to thoroughly investigate issues before relinquishing authority,
according to Kent v. United States.