Juvenile Delinquency Negative Side

7/28/2019 Juvenile Delinquency Negative Side

1/7

IV. Lowering Age of Discernment Controversy

A.NEGATIVE SIDE

Children in conflict with the law should not be

perceived as criminals because they are victims,

victims who should be helped to correct his/her

mistakes.

According to Melissa San Miguel of Salinlahi Alliance for

Childrens Concern, Lowering age discernment wont solve juvenile

delinquency. Children in conflict with the law should not be

perceived as criminals because they are victims, victims who should

be helped to correct his/her mistakes. It is absurd to judge the law as

a failure when in fact it has not been implemented as it should be.

We are dismayed that one of the more progressive laws concerning

the welfare of children is now being considered for amendments or

even suspension. The governments failure to address the deplorable

situation of Filipino children extreme poverty, hunger and lack of

educational opportunities make them vulnerable to involvement in

crime and violence. As of 2008, about 35 percent of children aged six

to 11 and 54 percent of 12 to 15 year-olds are out of school youths.Their exposure to life in the streets makes them more accessible to

criminal syndicate groups.


2/7

Childrens rights advocates said, Lowering the age of

discernment and the suspension of the law will not solve the

problem.

In the same vein, Ma. Victoria S. Diaz of John J. Carroll Institute on

Church and Social Issues said, Jail is not a place for a child. Diaz said

putting youth offenders in prison will not resolve the root causes of juvenile

delinquency. She added that the increasing number of juvenile delinquents

only reflect the failure of the government to respond to these problems.

Gerry Bernabe, secretary general of Payo said putting youth offenders

in jail will only aggravate juvenile delinquency. Justice system for children

in conflict with the law should be different, they should not be included in a

jail with adult prisoners. The Juvenile Justice Welfare Act is supposed to

design a new set-up intended for the best interest of the child, however, the

law is not being fully implemented. A child who commits a crime shouldnot be sent to jail. It is not their fault, they did that because the

government is not giving them what they needed.

Lawyer Rommel Alim Abitria of Humanitarian Legal Assistance

Foundation (HLAF), a non-profit and non-government organization assisting

indigent prisoners including CICL, pointed out that children should notundergo the same procedures as that of adult offenders. Even adults

who present themselves in court are frightened, how much more for

a twelve year old kid? Prisoners here in our country are not treated


3/7

humanely. In one prison cell where the capacity is only 20 prisoners,

100 prisoners are locked up. While the RA 9344 states that all city and

provincial government units must establish youth detention homes, it

was never implemented. Most child delinquents belong to poor

families. These minors are committing these crimes because of

poverty and because these minors belong to poor families, only a few

of them can afford to post bail. A child who cannot post bail stays in

prison with little chance to rebuild his/her future.

The problems of street children and juvenile delinquents are

much related social problems. To survive in the street you almost

have to become delinquent. Exposed to criminal elements these

children are vulnerable to prostitution, drug addiction and pushing

and commission of crimes. Most street children have become juvenile

delinquents either out of necessity (because they are poor) or through

force (because of the syndicates). Young people in the streets are also

criminalized and stigmatized for no obvious crime committed. So

many times the streets were cleaned up at the start of the tourist

season and as a consequence many street children were jailed

because of vagrancy laws.

A large problem arose from the treatment accorded to the

juveniles when they were placed in jails. Most juvenile delinquents

were not segregated from the hardened adult criminals in the biggest

jails in the Philippines, such as in the Muntinlupa jail outside Manila,


4/7

so that after their release they went back in the street with more

knowledge of crime. This severely hampered the social integration of

the youth offenders after they left prison. Chances were high that

these young offenders would become chronic delinquents and

eventually hardened criminals

The criminal justice system provides inadequate rehabilitation

and mostly punishes criminal behaviour of youth. However the

international treaties, for which the Philippines was a signatory, put

emphasis on the fact that children should not be detained in jails and

in exceptional cases, if they are detained, then only for a very short

time. Because of lack of funds there are still not enough programs for

education, vocational training and rehabilitation centres.

Young offenders, many of them first offenders were mixed with

professional, hardened criminals, thereby turning jails and prisons

into schools of criminality. This non-segregation can be one reason

why the numbers of street children and crimes were rising.

Inadequate health care (often totally absent) and subhuman

conditions in the jails and prisons condemned many a young inmate

to an early death or to inflict irreparable harm to their physical andmental health (4).

While the State as Parents Patriae was expected to offer and to

give special care to its young offenders, it instead negligently allowed


5/7

a number of young people to enter the gates of jails and prisons with

the least amount of legal protection during the litigation process.

There were no juvenile courts, lawyers, psychologists, probation

officers who were specialized in dealing with the youth.

Children in conflict with the law were serving stiff sentences,

doing time over and above their sentence, awaiting action on their

appeal for too long a time with no hope of being attended to soon.

Often they were unable to avail themselves of the benefits of pardon

or parole due to lack of knowledge about these options. The

resolution of cases in the courts was extremely slow and often

unfinished. As most young detainees had no money to obtain bail

this contributed to overcrowding in the prisons. Another contributing

factor to the congestion of jails and detention centres was the lack of

the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court as it had been abolished

which increased the backlog of untried cases.

A danger at that time was also the reintroduction of the death

penalty. Some of the young inmates could get this sentence if they

had reached the adult age when on trial (5)

In the case of Padua vs. People of the Philippines, the accused,

Michael Padua, a minor, seventeen (17) years old was charged before the

RTC, Branch 168, Pasig City of violating Section 5, Article II of RepublicAct No. 9165, otherwise known as the "Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs


6/7


7/7

The Supreme Court ruled that suspension of sentence under

Section 38of Rep. Act No. 9344 could no longer be retroactively applied for

petitioners benefit.

Section 38 of Rep. Act No. 9344 provides that once

a child under 18 years of age is found guilty of the offense

charged, instead of pronouncing the judgment of

conviction, the court shall place the child in conflict with

the law under suspended sentence. Section 40 of Rep. Act

No. 9344, however, provides that once the child reaches

18 years of age, the court shall determine whether to

discharge the child, order execution of sentence, or extend

the suspended sentence for a certain specified period or

until the child reaches the maximum age of 21 years .

Petitioner has already reached 21 years of age or over and

thus, could no longer be considered a childfor purposes of

applying Rep. Act 9344. Thus, the application of Sections

38 and 40 appears moot and academic as far as his case is

concerned. WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The

assailed Decision dated April 19, 2005 and the Resolution

dated June 14, 2005 of the Court of Appeals are

AFFIRMED.

Juvenile Delinquency Negative Side

Documents

Transcript of Juvenile Delinquency Negative Side