The Lack of Genuine Protection from Authorities Tampers the Future of Children
Written by Charlyn Caasi | Layout by Heart dela Cruz
Dr. Jose Protacio Rizal, our national hero, once said, “Kabataan ang pag-asa ng bayan”, claiming that children are the future generation who would be known as the next leaders and investors of the world. They are the next legacy builders and continue those that are made . That is why it is crucial that they should be nourished and be taken care of — in developing their minds, skills and abilities, for them to know and achieve their dreams. However, children today are at risk of being exposed to illegal activities, violence, for they are seen as gullible objects for exploitation and human trafficking. They are being used and abused by people who officiate them to commit to violence and crime. If this is the reality that children are living today, their future will become darker and far from what we hope them to have — that children being the sole hope for a better tomorrow are facing catastrophe.
The question is, where are the authorities? What are they doing about situations like these where children’s lives are in jeopardy? Is there a thorough plan in place to stop the abuses, and if so, what are the proposed solutions? Since these children are exploited and used in such crimes, their safety and environment are imperiled. But instead of giving protection and supervision, authorities are threatening and stepping on their rights and needs — because the state’s futile protection failed to see these children as victims too in this mad country.
In 2019, the House Bill that aims to amend the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, or Republic Act 9344, proposes to focus formally on processing the penalization of children who commit crimes by lowering the age of criminal liability from 15–18 years old to 12 years old and even down to 9 years old, in which puberty has not yet started. Kidnapping, murder, major illegal detention, parricide, and infanticide are among the acts for which children are deemed “criminally liable.” The minimum age of criminal liability under RA 9344 is 15 years old. This means that those between the ages of 15 and 18 may be detained in youth centers and subjected to rehabilitation programs, whereas those under the age of 15 are exempted from criminal liability but must undergo intervention.
It also stated that the “Child in Conflict with the Law” or CICL, are offered with diversion and intervention programs where their treatment will be determined on the basis of their social, cultural, economic, psychological or educational background without resorting to formal court proceedings. If the CICL is found to be responsible for an offence, the child in question will be required to undergo diversion programs without resorting to formal court proceedings. The Department of Social Welfare (DSWD) and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) would be responsible of fostering these youths in Bahay Pag-Asa Centers or Youth Care Facilities, where children will take part in a variety of activities aimed at addressing the causes of their criminal behavior, examples include: counseling, skill training, and education.
According to President Duterte, children must be taught responsibility, and because drug syndicates use children in their drug trade and criminal activities, lowering the age of criminal liability is critical, yet it serves as an extension of Duterte’s “anti-poor drug war.” Committee chairman Salvador Leachon, one of the authors of the said house measures, claimed that by lowering the age of criminal liability, children would be “shielded” from syndicates looking to exploit them. Meanwhile, in his explanatory note to HB 864, South Cotabato Rep. Ferdinand Hernandez stated that children aged 12 and under have been victimized by various syndicates who use their immunity from criminal responsibility as a shield from the law. Children who commit crimes will be released and placed in Bahay Pag-asa youth care facilities, also known as the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and Support Center.
Others, however, have condemned the bill as yet another way in which the war on drugs punishes the urban poor, as most children who become involved in the drug trade do so due to extreme poverty. Senator Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan, the principal author of RA 9344, stated that the root cause of the problem is the faulty implementation of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act. Solons from the Makabayan bloc have also filed a House resolution claiming that lowering the age of criminal liability to 12 years old or less is a warped and misguided attempt to reduce crime. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) has also urged Congress to preserve the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act, particularly its provision on the age of criminal liability. “The correct response, we believe, is vigilance on the part of parents and stiffer penalties for those who exploit the young in the perpetration of crime,” the CBCP stated. While UNICEF released a statement saying, “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.”
Given these points, the authorities who believed that lowering the criminal age liability means “protection” from drug syndicates have a wrong understanding of the matter. Because they are only pushing these children further on the ground because their solution is obviously against the children’s rights and needs. More importantly, the facilities they mentioned did not even cater to the needs of children. Parents and guardians shared their experiences about the difficulties in raising their children in centers like Bahay Pag-asa that are supposed to provide short-term residential care to CICL. Although official records show that 114 Bahay Pag-asa houses were constructed, only 63 of these establishments are built where only 58 are operational. Most are filthy, overcrowded, and lacking in basic furniture, including beds — even only five Bahay Pag Asa have met the government’s accreditation requirements.
According to a parent, whose 17 year-old child was detained in one of the juvenile facilities, her son said that he would rather be in a regular detention center than be in the juvenile center where facilities are unhygienic, foods were unbearable, and the treatment was harsh and lacks empathy among the detained children. Her child also claimed that younger detainees were bullied by the older ones and that no action was done about it. Aside from this, centers and facilities tend to be overcrowded, where most are transferred to a regular detention center and that these facilities lack personnel that have expertise in handling the detained children. This is the most unfortunate part because these centers’ goals and objectives are to reform and rehabilitate, something that would not be effective to children with the state that these facilities were in. In a word, the authorities were wearing false images of being concerned with the discipline, protection, and security of children when in fact they were the ones that did not care at all.
Moreover, to justify the underlying reason why children are exposed to committing crimes in a natural setting is because according to child psychology, environmental elements such as social interactions and the society in which the kid lives play an important role in child development. As kids grow and develop, they are being influenced by their cultural context, which includes a set of values, conventions, shared assumptions, and ways of life that influence how they form relationships with their parents, as well as the education and childcare they get. Children’s relationships with peers and adults influence how they think, learn, and develop in a social environment, whereas children raised in higher-income homes have more opportunities than those raised in lower-income homes in a socioeconomic context. As a result, the kids who have less options to obtain education and healthcare, both of which might have a negative impact on their development. This simply adds to the reality that they are more likely to seek out criminal acts in order to survive.
But these children, they are not to be blamed, for they did not act out of self interest, they were misguided and unprotected. The ones who would most likely suffer are the children coming from the marginalized sectors. The ones being seen as puppets of perpetrators for their hateful crimes. Being in an environment of violence, abuse and poverty, children are at risk of carrying out the same act as they see it around them normally in their lives. And with the aim to lower the age for criminal liability, the detention of children would affect their perception of themselves, being labelled as a criminal. Crime requires punishment because lawbreakers are held accountable for their actions, but children are held accountable for their actions when they are still developing at this age and do not yet have the capacity to make reasoned decisions.
There must be a comprehensive plan of action for children committing crimes rather than just threats and psychological abuse. Perpetrators such as groups involved in criminal activities, syndicates, and felonious individuals must be the ones to answer in court and be punished for exploiting children, and not the other way around. The goal of reform and rehabilitation in juvenile and other facilities must be improved, such as providing scholarship programs for children who have been denied an education as well as lodging and allowance, counseling sessions with the child’s parent or guardian, and screening to determine if they are fit to claim custody of the child. Above all, funding and improving facilities and centers must be prioritized over lowering the age of criminal liability, which may result in an increase in the population of juvenile centers, where there can be too many children for them to handle.
Consequently, the presence of authorities are legitimately there, but they are only wasting their time on pushing these unjust amendments for a superficial protection of children. The act that they are raising in the government is anti-poor, reflecting the current administration’s goal to further dig a hole for marginalized sectors. A real circus where the state is the one that is jeopardizing the future of the children by turning a blind eye that children in question are indeed victims of exploitations as well as victims of catastrophe caused by administration and authorities.
What children need is guidance and protection — they need saving rather than condemnation. It is our collective responsibility to ensure that children have a better future, a safe place where they can exercise their rights and have the opportunity to achieve their goals. Because children are not criminals, those who expose them to a violent environment and place them in a desperate situation are the true criminals, and those who convict the innocent are the ones who should be convicted.