Republic Act No.9344 is “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” or otherwise known as the “Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006”. It covers the different stages involving children at risk and children in conflict with the law from prevention to rehabilitation and reintegration.
Republic Act No. 9344, includes the following:
1. Adopts the principle of restorative justice vis-à-vis retributive justice
2. Adopts the UN standards on juvenile justice
3. Prohibits the detention of children in jails
4. Enumerates the rights of children in conflict with the law
5. Raises the age of criminal responsibility to 15 from 9 years of age
6. Provides for juvenile delinquency prevention programmes at the local level
7. Introduces community-based diversion programmes for children who commit non- serious offenses
8. Provides for alternative disposition measures for children who commit serious
offenses and are found liable
9. Strengthens rehabilitation, reintegration and aftercare programmes
10. Creates the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council which will be responsible for ensuring the effective implementation of the new law and coordination of delivery of services by government agencies and institutions focused on juvenile justice and welfare, and
11. Provides for the retroactive application of the beneficial provisions of the law.
Restorative Justice is a principle which requires a process of resolving conflicts with the maximum involvement of the victim, offender, and the community. It seeks to obtain reparation for the victim; reconciliation of the offender, the offended and the community; and reassurance to the offender that he/she can be reintegrated into society. (Section
4(q))
Intervention refers to a series of activities which are designed to address issues that caused the child to commit an offense. It may take the form of an individualized treatment program which may include counseling, skills, training, education, and other activities that will enhance his/her psychological, emotional, and psycho-social well- being. (Section 4(l)) The intervention program will ensure careful and in-depth study of the case to ensure its proper handling and provisions of appropriate programs and services.
Diversion refers to an alternative process in determining the responsibility and treatment of children in conflict with the law without resorting to formal court proceedings. (Section
4(i))
Its mechanisms include conferencing, mediation and counseling.
The Diversion Program shall include adequate socio-cultural and psychological responses and services for the child. Diversion Programs may be agreed upon but are limited to: Restitution of Property, Reparation of the damage caused, Indemnification for consequential damages, Anger Management, Values Formation.
Diversion under the law should be done, if the child is above 15 years old, acted with discernment and committed an offense with a penalty of not more than six years imprisonment. Diversion proceedings in this case may be conducted at the Katarungang Pambarangay level, at the level of the police, or during inquest or preliminary investigation stage. If the penalty for the offense committed is not more than 12 years imprisonment, the court shall determine if diversion is appropriate.
Several years of experience shows that the process of going through the formal criminal justice system can be harmful to children in many ways and make them likely to remain criminals. To protect their physical and psychological well-being and their development to the maximum extent possible, the cases should be diverted away from the criminal justice system and to alternatives that benefit the child, the child’s family and society in a better way
No, contrary to the belief that it encourages crime, RA 9344 in fact institutionalizes a systematic approach to prevent children from being in conflict with the law. Children who are found to have committed offenses undergo intervention, diversion or rehabilitation, and reintegration programs. These programs if implemented should prevent children from committing offenses in the future. Also, RA 9344 provides for the implementation of comprehensive national and local juvenile intervention programs to prevent children from committing offenses.
Do children in conflict with law who are criminally exempt go scot free?
NO. Children who have done wrong are not cleared of liability. They do not go scot free for the crime they have committed. The Juvenile Justice system will hold them accountable, and subject them to child appropriate procedures that will see through their atonement.
Being exempt from criminal liability, a child in conflict with the law is considered “free of blame” in the sense that he/she cannot be subjected to court proceedings and later be punished with imprisonment. However, under the system of restorative justice, RA 9344 provides that children exempt from criminal liability shall undergo appropriate intervention programs, designed in consideration of several factors such as circumstances of the child, the needs of the child, the influence of the family and environment on the growth of the child, and the ability and willingness of the parents/guardians to guide and supervise the child.
The program will include activities and services that will help the child in conflict with the law gain insight into his behavior, attitude and values, and redirect counter-productive behavior patterns and anti-social attitudes into more productive and constructive ones.
The treatment given to the children in conflict with the law depends first on the age (if 15 years old or below or above 15 but below 18 years old); second on the act of discernment; and third on the penalty imposed on the offense committed.
If the children in conflict with the law are 15 years of age OR above 15 but below 18 years old at the time of commission of the offense, and found to have acted without discernment, the child is exempt from criminal responsibility regardless of the nature of the crime committed. However, if the child is above 15 but below 18 who acted with discernment committed an offense with an imposable penalty of more than six years imprisonment (as in cases of rape or murder), the law provides that the child shall undergo court proceedings. When brought to court, the child may be placed under suspended sentence and be subjected to rehabilitation programs.
The social worker prepares an assessment report on the absence or presence of discernment in the commitment of a crime. Using a set of tested and validated tools in assessing discernment, the social worker used the following as the bases for the report: (i) facts and circumstances surrounding the case (Rule 34 c.1); (ii) educational level and performance of the child in school (Rule 34 c.2); (iii) appearance, attitude and the child’s demeanor before, during and after the commission of the offense (Rule 34 c.3); and (iv)assessment of a psychologist or psychiatrist which the social worker may request.
The child in conflict with the law may even be confined, by court order, in a facility for minors, where children are made aware that inappropriate behavior on their part cannot go unpunished and that they must account for wrongful acts.
Children do not go scot-free but must account for their acts in a child appropriate process under the juvenile justice system. Justice is not denied to victims of wrongful acts committed by minors. The victims and their families can and shall obtain justice through the Juvenile Justice system.
NO. The Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act is a child protection measure. Children in conflict with the law and children at risk are victims of circumstances beyond their control. They are victims of abuse, of dysfunctional families and insensitive communities. They should be treated as individuals with problems who need help and need to be provided with appropriate assistance and services, to ensure the full protection of their rights for survival, protection, development and participation.
From a child protection standpoint, we should look at the maximum age in which many children stand to benefit. Studies in the past have also shown that 15 years old is within the stage of adolescence – the transition age which is being characterized by curiosity, try-outs and identity crisis. These circumstances expose them to risky and delinquent behavior. At this age, children are not yet emotionally stable and their social judgment has not yet matured.
NO. The Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act is a child protection measure. Children in conflict with the law and children at risk are victims of circumstances beyond their control. They are victims of abuse, of dysfunctional families and insensitive communities. They should be treated as individuals with problems who need help and need to be provided with appropriate assistance and services, to ensure the full protection of their rights for survival, protection, development and participation.
From a child protection standpoint, we should look at the maximum age in which many children stand to benefit. Studies in the past have also shown that 15 years old is within the stage of adolescence – the transition age which is being characterized by curiosity, try-outs and identity crisis. These circumstances expose them to risky and delinquent behavior. At this age, children are not yet emotionally stable and their social judgment has not yet matured.
According to the law, under Rules 30 and 34, any person contesting the age of the child in conflict with the law prior to the filing of the information in any appropriate court and the assessment of absence of discernment, may file the appropriate case before the family court and the prosecutor respectively.
There are other laws that protect the rights of the victims such as R.A. 7610 or the
Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act; R.A.
9208 or the Anti-Trafficking of Persons Act of 2003; R.A. 9262 or the Anti-Violence
Against Women and their Children Act of 2004.
Mere access to information does not equal discernment, wisdom or maturity. The Philippine legislature based its decision to establish the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility (MACR) at over 15 years old from medical and psycho-social research conducted on Filipino children. At age 15 and below children’s brains have not physiologically matured. Studies in the past have also shown that 15 years old is within the stage of adolescence – the transition age which is being characterized by curiosity, try-outs and identity crisis. These circumstances expose them to risky and delinquent behaviour. At this age, children are not yet emotionally stable and their social judgment has not yet matured.
If the law is given a chance to work, the coordination among concerned government agencies and local governments can begin. For example, the DILG could look into LGU compliance and ensure that 1% of internal revenue allotment supports the implementation of RA 9344. Also, community members have a role to play in ensuring that children are looked after. Children are everyone’s responsibility and it is not only up to the government to provide these interventions. The private sector, parents, etc also have a role to play.
YES. Many local government units who put children at the heart of their work are already benefiting from child-sensitive programs. This is important, as many of children in conflict with the law commit petty crimes, and could be diverted and immediately referred to community-based programs. These programmes, which include counseling services, reschooling and vocational training for children and parent education seminars and microfinancing services for their parents, have proven effective in the reintegration of these children into society, so that they can live out their maximum potential and make a worthwhile contribution to their families and communities. (Please see STORIES of HOPE)
NO. Five years after it was passed, the RA 9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act has not been fully implemented. The establishment of a child-sensitive justice system entails various government agencies and sectors to work together to ensure that funds are allocated, programs are developed and implemented, policies are reviewed and structures are in place to support proper handling of children who come into contact with the law.
The relevant government agencies should band together in the interest of children who come in conflict with the law. As the inter-agency body mandated to oversee the implementation of the law, the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council should be given enough resources to ensure the realization of its mandate and the proper discharge of its duties and functions.
The DSWD should continue to develop and conduct training programs for social workers and other service providers for the effective performance of their duties and functions under the JJWA. It should also establish and strengthen alternative placements of children below age of criminal responsibility in cases where parents, guardians or relatives of these children cannot be located.
The PNP should continue to conduct special training to its personnel in the management of children in conflict with the law and the proper observance of procedures as prescribed by the law.
The DOJ should continue to train the prosecutors with the assistance of the DSWD on child-sensitivity and gender-sensitivity. It should likewise continue to monitor the compliance of the Public Attorney’s Office, Bureau of Corrections, Parole and Probation Administration and National Bureau of Investigation with their respective duties and responsibilities under the law.
The LGUs should continue to develop and implement Local Intervention Program. It should continue to encourage the participation of all sectors concerned, particularly the child-focused institutions, NGOs, people’s organizations, educational institutions, and government agencies involved in delinquency prevention to participate in the planning process and implementation of juvenile intervention programs.
The media should continue to play an active role in the promotion of child rights, and delinquency prevention by relaying consistent messages through a balanced approach. Media practitioners should continue to maintain the highest critical and professional standards in reporting and covering cases of children in conflict with the law.
The private sector should continue to support programs and initiatives for the prevention of juvenile delinquency and the implementation of intervention and diversion programs for children in conflict with the law.
The NGO community should continue to work with the government and other stakeholders to develop and implement programs for children in conflict with the law and children at risk.
The educational system should continue to integrate in the curriculum programs and activities that serve as intervention to prevent children from being in conflict with the law in consideration of the social, cultural, economic and religious circumstances of the children.
The Sangguniang Kabataan should continue to initiate programs that complement the intervention and diversion programs initiated by the LGUs.
Parents are responsible for the primary nurturing and rearing of children, which are critical in delinquency prevention. As far as practicable and in accordance with the law, a child in conflict with the law shall be maintained in his/her family.