Position Paper
Position Paper
Position Paper
(ANTI)
Submitted by
Criminality nowadays, is in its crucial condition which needs prompt actions by the State for it
Criminal cases and violence permeate everywhere and the worst scenario is the involvement
of several minors. Adolescence as being distinguished from adults, are still influence by the stimuli
in their respective environment which enables them to develop certain characteristics and habits
which they may discern as right and wrong practices, or to abridge they aren’t as stable in every
aspect as much compared to people who are considered as adults. The involvement of minors in
criminality undermines the rights of children to be safe and grow up in a protective environment.
It is our well founded belief that minors who were involved in crimes, committed one, or
participated in some illegal doings were for the reason that they are precipitated by compulsive
The youth, as recognized to be the hope of the nation, are ought to be engaged with activities
and circumstances that will cultivate their whole-being which accordingly becomes their
contribution for the country’s continual progress. Our youth shall be protected and guided towards
One of the most contentious issues in the present, is the lowering of the minimum age of
criminal liability. Amidst the existence of an operative law known as “Juvenile Justice and Welfare
Act of 2006”, which states that children who commits crime at the age of 15 or under shall be
exempt from criminal liability, there is a new House Bill on lowering the minimum age of criminal
liability from 15 to 12. Consequently, the emergence of the issue pertaining to the lowering of age
of criminal responsibility implies diverse effects to children and will create commotion among
The significance of the minimum age of criminal responsibility is that it recognizes that a
child has attained the emotional, mental, and intellectual maturity to be held responsible for their
actions.
Anent thereto and encompassed with the belief that the proposed matter will undermine the
interest of children and not even considered a solution on the problem of children committing
crimes, we vehemently oppose the lowering of the minimum age of criminal responsibility. The
existing minimum age shall be maintained and this is our grave concern.
POINTS IN THE AFORESAID ISSUE
I.
II.
III.
This is to expressly elaborate the above stated points on the basis of our stance on the
subject matter:
I. On the first point, the existing laws of the Philippines gives protection and promotes the
best interest of the children. Legislation passed concerning the youth shall be in
concurrence with the various implemented laws, since these laws were formulated with
Such laws as, one’s marriage is null and void if contracted under the age of 18. In fact,
one must be at least at the age of 21 to be able to marry without parental consent.
Another is the right of suffrage which requires one to be at least at the age of 18 to
officially cast his/her vote. Lastly, in order to buy, sell, or consume alcohol products or
smoke tobacco, one must be at least 18 years old. Generally, the age of majority in the
Philippine context is 18 years of age. These laws imply that those that are below the age
of majority doesn’t have the judicial capacity to act and understood that minorities
Also, lowering the age of criminal liability is a breach of our entered international
wherein the Philippines is one of the signatories obliged to follow the rules specifically
under 1 General Comment No. 10, which states that the country should no longer lower
its MACR once it has been set; in our case, it is at age 15 and the age of 12 years is
In the same context, 2 Paragraph 32 Rule 4 of the Beijing Rules stipulates that “States
aforesaid laws.
II. On the second point, decisions made by minors are unreliable and insufficient due to
3
some factors which includes the neurological aspect of a person. Adolescence is a time of
physical, cognitive, social, and emotional growth and change. 4 The decision-making capacity
of a person is relied on the frontal cortex of the brain which is responsible for an individual’s
ability to plan, recognize consequences of actions, solve problems and control impulses.
5
A majority of the executive functions that we develop are via the prefrontal cortex.
This allows us to help assess risk, think ahead, evaluate ourselves, set goals, and regulate our
emotions.
There are a variety of functions for which the prefrontal cortex is responsible which
includes: 6 Attention- the ability to focus on one thing, while ignoring distractions is a function
of our prefrontal cortex; Complex planning- anytime you set a goal that requires some degree
of planning, your prefrontal region is at work. Planning out tasks in your day, developing a
business plan, etc. – this region is responsible. An underdeveloped prefrontal region means that
your planning capabilities haven’t been solidified; Logical thinking- justifying behaviors based
off of emotions rather than logic. When the prefrontal cortex fully develops, logical thinking
simultaneously improves. This means you will be better at rationalizing and making smarter
choices; Risk management- the ability to assess risky situations and determine whether they
will result in long-term benefit. Those who are poor at assessing risk may have underdeveloped
prefrontal regions. The ability to turn down immediate gratification for long-term rewards is a
7
In addition to neural development, there are major changes in hormones at puberty.
Significant neural development and hormonal changes are likely to influence social cognition.
Social cognition, then, may also be expected to change during this time period.
Adolescents judgment and their actual decisions are also affected by psychosocial
and decision making are (a) susceptibility to peer influence, (b) attitude toward and perception
immaturity can affect decision-making outcomes, because these psychosocial factors influence
adolescent values and preferences in ways that drive the cost–benefit calculus in the making of
choices.
10
First, teenagers are more responsive to peer influence than are adults. Peer influence
affects adolescent judgment both directly and indirectly. In some contexts, adolescents make
choices in response to direct peer pressure to act in certain ways. More indirectly, adolescents’
desire for peer approval—and fear of rejection—affect their choices, even without direct
coercion. Peers also provide models for behavior that adolescents believe will assist them in
11 Adolescence is not just a time for the increasing importance of peer relationships, but it is also
a time of increased susceptibility to peer pressure. Peers affect adolescents’ decisions to engage (or
not engage) in risky behaviors (Blakemore and Mills 2014; Miller 2009). Social acceptance
period in which youth are highly attuned to picking up on and responding to social cues from their
social environments (Blakemore and Mills 2014). Thus, to the degree that social conformity is
perceived as central to popularity among peers, early and middle adolescents are especially
vulnerable to peer pressure as they strive toward peer approval and acceptance (Gavin and
Because of the desire for approval and belonging at this stage, adolescents’ choices
reflect what they believe will merit the approval of their peers. Peers and adults serve as
models for behavior that adolescents believe will help them achieve their goals.
12 Second, it is well established that over an extended period between childhood and
young adulthood, individuals become more future-oriented. Studies in which individuals are
asked to envision themselves or their circumstances in the future find that adults project out
their visions over a significantly longer time frame than do adolescents (Greene, 1986; Nurmi,
1991). In addition, in studies in which individuals are queried about their perceptions of the
short-term and longer term pros and cons of various sorts of risk taking (e.g., the risk of having
unprotected sex, Gardner & Herman, 1990) or asked to give advice to others about risky
decisions (e.g., whether to have cosmetic surgery; Halpern-Felsher & Cauffman, 2001),
adolescents tend to discount the future more than adults do and to weigh more heavily short-
term consequences of decisions—both risks and benefits—in making choices. There are at least
two plausible explanations for this age difference in future orientation. First, owing to cognitive
limitations in their ability to think in hypothetical terms, adolescents simply may be less able
than adults to think about events that have not yet occurred (i.e., events that may occur
sometime in the future). Second, the weaker future orientation of adolescents may reflect their
more limited life experience. For adolescents, a consequence 5 years in the future may seem
very remote in relation to how long they have been alive; teens may simply attach more weight
to short-term consequences because they seem more salient to their lives (Gardner, 1993).
13 Third, adolescents differ from adults in their assessment of and attitude toward risk.
In general, adolescents use a risk–reward calculus that places relatively less weight on risk, in
relation to reward, than that used by adults. When asked to advise peers on making a potentially
risky decision, for example (e.g., whether to participate in a study of an experimental drug),
adults spontaneously mentioned more potential risks than did adolescents (Halpern Felsher &
Cauffman, 2001). In addition, experimental studies that use gambling tasks show that,
compared with those of adults, adolescents’ decisions are more driven by rewards and less by
risks (see Furby & Beyth-Marom, 1992). A number of explanations for this age difference have
been offered. First, youths’ relatively weaker risk aversion may be related to their more limited
time perspective, because taking risks is less costly for those with a smaller stake in the future
(Gardner & Herman, 1990). Second, adolescents may have different values and goals than do
adults, leading them to calculate risks and rewards differently (Furby & Beyth-Marom, 1992).
For example, the danger of some types of risk taking (e.g., driving well over the speed limit)
could constitute reward for an adolescent but a cost to an adult. In addition, considerable
evidence indicates that people generally make riskier decisions in groups than they do alone
(Vinokur, 1971); there is evidence both that adolescents spend more time in groups than do
adults and, as noted earlier, that adolescents are relatively more susceptible to the influence of
others.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/8968453_Less_Guilty_by_Reason_of_Adol
escence_Developmental_Immaturity_Diminished_Responsibility_and_the_Juvenile_
Death_Penalty
appreciate the consequences of his unlawful act as defined in the case PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES vs. HERMIE M. JACINTO. It is the act or process of exhibiting keen insight
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrar
and a professor at the Ateneo de Manila University, raised that the issue goes beyond a
“simplistic understanding of discernment” She added: "But the situation or question is more
complex [than] that sort of 'right versus wrong' notion of discernment. [It's] not just
knowing, but having [the] capacity to act on that knowledge." She also noted that a person's
She said, the slowest developing part of the brain is the part that governs higher-
order thinking capacities, the ability to plan, make long-term decision, control impulses,
regulate behaviors, and "all those capacities that make a person mature, responsible, and
accountable."
Although they may be able to discern right from wrong action, it is their capability
to act in ways consistent with that discernment that is undermined. They will find it more
difficult to act in accordance with what they may discern or know to be right versus wrong
action.
implies that minors rely on other part of the brain which is associated with emotions,
impulses, aggression and instructive behavior. This implication means that emotions are
unregulated because of the underdeveloped frontal lobe which in effect compromised the
As the connections between the emotional and reasoning part of the brain are still
developing, children do not yet have the ability to independently control their own thoughts
With this fact, it can be inferred that discernment requires well developed
intellectual, emotional and psychological aspect. As these aforementioned aspects are still
making of children.
Children would not be able to fully anticipate all the possible consequences of their
actions for themselves and society as a whole. Their inability to decide reasonably and the
psychosocial stimuli which in their level is still developing and hence, incapable of making
good judgments.
III. On the third point, lowering the age of criminal liability is against child’s rights.
The State recognizes the child as an important asset. Hence, it is the duty of the nation
to make sure that the rights of a child are protected- from the moment he/she becomes a fully-
Several laws protecting child’s right reiterates that everything be done in consideration
and satisfaction of the best interest of the child. These laws are (a) The Child and Youth Welfare
Code; (b) Republic Act No. 9344- An Act Establishing a Comprehensive Juvenile Justice and
Welfare System, Creating The Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council Under the Department of
Justice, Appropriating Funds Therefor And For Other Purposes (c) Republic Act No. 7610 -
An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection against Child Abuse,
http://www.chanrobles.com/childandyouthwelfarecodeofthephilippines.htm#.XYUVFCgza01
“Every child has the right to grow up as a free individual, in an atmosphere of peace,
understanding, tolerance, and universal brotherhood, and with the determination to contribute his
https://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1992/ra_7610_1992.html
The best interests of children shall be the paramount consideration in all actions concerning
them, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law,
administrative authorities, and legislative bodies, consistent with the principle of First Call for
Children as enunciated in the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child. Every
effort shall be exerted to promote the welfare of children and enhance their opportunities for a
https://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2006/ra_9344_2006.html
(a) The State recognizes the vital role of children and youth in nation building and shall
promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual and social well-being. It shall
inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement in public
(b) The State shall protect the best interests of the child through measures that will
ensure the observance of international standards of child protection, especially those to which
the Philippines is a party. Proceedings before any authority shall be conducted in the best
interest of the child and in a manner which allows the child to participate and to express
himself/herself freely. The participation of children in the program and policy formulation and
implementation related to juvenile justice and welfare shall be ensured by the concerned
government agency.
19 Article 40 (1&3) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx
1. States Parties recognize the right of every child alleged as, accused of, or recognized as
having infringed the penal law to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the
child's sense of dignity and worth, which reinforces the child's respect for the human rights and
fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account the child's age and the desirability
of promoting the child's reintegration and the child's assuming a constructive role in society.
3. States Parties shall seek to promote the establishment of laws, procedures, authorities and
institutions specifically applicable to children alleged as, accused of, or recognized as having
(b) Whenever appropriate and desirable, measures for dealing with such children without
resorting to judicial proceedings, providing that human rights and legal safeguards are fully
counselling; probation; foster care; education and vocational training programmes and
other alternatives to institutional care shall be available to ensure that children are dealt
All of these laws are for the purpose of upholding the efforts of the State to build a
child-friendly justice system. These aims for the full enjoyment of the right of every child
to live in a society that offers or guarantee him safety, health, good moral environment and
facilities for his wholesome growth and development. Children’s rights must be upheld for
contradicts the laws enacted for their survival, development, be protection and participation
Children in conflict with the law are already victims of circumstance, mostly because of
poverty and exploitation by adult crime syndicates. Children who are exploited and driven
by adults to commit crimes need to be protected, not further penalized. Instead they should
(https://www.unicef.org/philippines/press-releases/lowering-age-criminal-responsibility-
against-child-rights-unicef)
Unicef added, “Detaining children will not teach them accountability for their
This proposed action neither strengthens the country's juvenile justice system nor it
promotes the welfare of children and young people. If children who have been exploited by
criminal syndicates are penalized instead of the adults who abused them, we fail to uphold
They could have become a significant asset in our society only if they will be
efforts to build a child-friendly justice system. A child who violated the law needs
intervention in a rehabilitation center. The child should not be treated like an adult offender.
1. Youth offenders will increase, the jails will become crowded and we will have a generation
syndicates will become criminals. This punitive rather than reformative action of society
will deprive misguided youth the chance for a better or a reformed life.
2. Setting 12 as the minimum age for those who can be arrested will not lower crime rates
because criminal gang or syndicate will only hire children below 12 years old in their
3. Lowering the criminal responsibility will not solve the problem, instead putting children in
conflict with the law into cell will simply harden them further as criminals.
4. However, many opposed to the measure because it neither strengthens the country's juvenile
justice system nor it promotes the welfare of children and young people. It undermines
efforts to build a child-friendly justice system by lowering the minimum age of criminal
responsibility from 15 to 12. A grade six student who violated the law needs intervention
in a rehabilitation center. The child should not be treated like an adult offender.
5. Children’s rights advocates are unfavorable to lower the minimum age of criminal
responsibility. According to them, if we are going to put these children in conflict with the
law into cell, nobody will accept them in any job or if there is, very few after they served
their sentence. Their life will be wasted in an early age. They could have become a
significant asset in our society only if they will be reformed and be lead to the right path
again. Talents and skills that could have been nurtured will be simply thrown away because
they will be full of hatred once they are out in the cell. Statistical data reveals that lowering
the age for criminal liability does not lower the crime rates.
not select their families. Children are unable to choose where they live and what kind of
education they can afford. Children do not have the ability to decide on their socio-
economic status. But when they step inside a courtroom, the consequences from all of these
variables come weighing down on their shoulders with the swift stroke of a gavel. This is
the end result of a life with little-to-no options that many children in conflict with the law
confront.
children in a position that increases their tendencies of getting involved in, say, robbery or
substance abuse. “No one is born a thief, a murderer, a drug addict or a criminal”. It is
hunger and extreme poverty that pushes them to hijack a jeep and rob its passengers of their
drugs; it is the lack of education and opportunities that push them to look for “easy money”.
8. Moreover, some children are predisposed to get involved in criminal activities and
violence due to their social milieu. Since the police are in the forefront of the fight against
crime, they lead in the effort to seek an amendment to or repeal RA 9344. The law is a pain
in the neck, so to speak, of the police. Thus, the proposed amendment for a lower age of
criminal responsibility is a preventive measure that aims to make children realize the
9. Though the message of the Convention on the Rights of the Child is that
criminalization of children should be avoided, this does not mean that young offenders
young offenders are held responsible for their actions and, for instance, take part in
10. Detention of children should be used “only as a measure of last resort and for the
shortest appropriate period of time”, as the UN Convention says. Such detentions should
take place in specific and children-friendly establishments and be separated from adult
prisoners and, in particular, from hard-core criminals. Contact with the family should be