Group 4 Legres Juvenile

GROUP NO.
4
GROUP MEMBERS: 11, 20, 23
Date Submitted: September 2, 2016
Legal Research | 1 Manresa
Research Title
Implications of the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility set by RA 9344 and RA 10630 and
of their Salient Features in the Curtailment of the Juvenile Delinquency Rate in the Philippines
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Legal Issue
Among the salient features of RA 9344 that aligned it with the provisions of the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child is the increase in the minimum age of criminal
responsibility from over nine to over 15 years of age, which has been the object of criticism of
lawmakers, government officials, and law enforcers for years. Some lawmakers have been
proposing that the minimum age of criminal responsibility be lowered back to nine. Some said
that criminal syndicates use juveniles in their illegal operations because they know that under the
law, minors can go scot-free even if they act as drug couriers and crime agents. Reports have
even shown the exemption being taken advantage of by parents who rob and hand over their loot
to their children. Media also reported the case of Batang Hamog, a group of children caught on
camera attacking vehicles in Makati City that were stuck in traffic during rush hours. The
groups modus operandi is for a member to knock on the window of the unsuspecting driver
while other members open the car door on the other side and snatch whatever valuables they
could take from the vehicle.
Furthermore, age of the minors involved in crimes is getting younger and according to
police intelligence reports, minors are getting bolder and braver in committing crimes because
they now know that they will not be punished for their acts but will only be turned over to the
DSWD. Former PNP chief Nicanor Bartolome has also urged Congress to amend the law. He
wanted the age of discernment lowered to 12 because at that age, the child is already in the right
mind and can already think about the consequences of his actions. He mentioned the cases of
the 13-year-old boy who shot his 16-year-old companion and then himself at the SM Mall in
Pampanga; the 12-year-old boy accused of raping a three-year-old girl in Sta. Mesa, Manila; and
the 15-year-old boy who admitted robbing, raping and nearly killing his employer in Sta. Rosa,
Laguna.
In an interview with GMA News Online in 2011, Senate Majority Leader Vicente Tito"
Sotto III, who used to chair the Dangerous Drugs Board, said he personally encountered
problems about the age exemption when he was still in the executive branch. According to him,
the drug dealers have been using couriers who are below 18 years old, whom they couldnt get
any information from when caught as they are provided for with lawyers by the drug dealers and
referred to DSWD right away. Sotto a few years ago filed Senate Bill No. 43 which seeks to
lower the age of exemption from 15 to 11 years old, but is also amicable to further lowering it
back to nine years old. At least two other bills seeking to introduce amendments to RA 9344 are
pending before the Senate.
Although the exact number of Filipino child offenders is unknown, data from the
Philippine National Police (PNP), as illustrated below, indicates an increase in reported incidents
on child offenses in the country from 2006 to 2012. Among the common offenses committed by
these offenders are crimes against property like theft and robbery; their usual reason, poverty.
Although many have rebutted that poverty is not an excuse in committing crimes especially by
these children, but despondently, it has always been the case (Sabangan, 2011).
Table 1.1 Top 5 reported offenses by children based on police incident reports (2006 2012)
Young offenders in the Philippines have proliferated in many areas of the country.
Recent studies revealed that the number of Children in Conflict with the Law (CICL) has
reached new heights. Statistics show that in Davao City alone, the Women and Children
Protection Desk has recorded 2,106 CICLs in 2013 which dramatically swelled up to 4,003 in
2014. This is an appalling situation considering the fact that despite the implementation of the
Juvenile Justice and Welfare Code of 2006 (RA 9344) the number of CICLs has continuously
risen.
It has been duly noted that syndicates have been taking advantage of the exemption of
children from criminal liability (Sec. 6 of RA 9344) by recruiting these children in their nefarious
activities (Defensor, 2008). This condition has somehow put the policy in question. There is a
problem somewhere in the policy, and the handling of the CICLs seemed problematic (Garcia,
2008).
In 2014, Amnesty International noted that 21 children were tortured by police officials.
Happenings such as these prompted the legislature to strengthen RA 9344 by amending it with
RA 10630, an act strengthening the juvenile justice system in the Philippines, amending for the
purpose Republic Act No. 9344, otherwise known as the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of
2006 and appropriating funds therefor and for other purposes.
Nevertheless, despite the amendments, the number of children in conflict with the law
continues to rise. As a matter of fact, there were over 4,000 CICLs that were recorded in 2014 by
Davao City Women and Children Protection Desk, and many more of these CICLs are spreading
in other places in the country (Rodriquez, 2015; Sabangan, 2011).
Is there a need to amend RA 9344 to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility?
Objectives
Given the concerns mentioned above, it is deemed fit to question whether amending RA
9344 to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) will indeed lower the
number of children in conflict with the law. Thus, this study attempted to examine the salient
features of the two juvenile justice laws and discuss the possible implications of lowering the
MACR.
Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to investigate the implications of the current MACR provided in RA
9344 and the possible implications of lowering the same. Specifically, this study sought to
answer the following questions:
1. What are the salient features of RA 9344 and RA 10630?
2. What are the implications of the changes in the policy?
Significance of the Study

This study which is not only centered on the comparison between RA 9344 and RA
10639 but also focused on the possible implications in amending it to lower the minimum age of
criminal liability may be vital to the following stakeholders:
Policy Makers. This study is important to the policy makers because they are integral in
the promulgation of policies. This will then give them a ground level view on the relevance of
the amendments to RA 9344 for efficient and effective juvenile justice system in the Philippines.
Children in Conflict with the Law. This study is essential to the CICLs because this
will give them the idea that despite their condition, the government has not given up on them,
and that the government is doing important steps in helping them have a good life.
Future Researchers. This study is likewise beneficial to the future researchers inasmuch
as this will give them basis for their investigation on the similar subject. Apart from that, this
study will give them a rich review of related literature and studies.
CHAPTER 2
Review of Related Literature
In this chapter, the researchers first defined the concept of children in conflict with the
law and discussed the history of the juvenile justice in the Philippines. After that, the researchers
tackled certain provisions in the RA 9344. Moreover, the researchers discussed the value of the
amendments and the new provisions in the RA 10630.
Who are the CICLs

According to RA 9344, the child in conflict with the law refers to a child alleged as,
accused of, or adjudged as, having committed an offense under the Philippine laws. The child, as
stated in Section 4, refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age. These children are
deemed to be at risk because of the environment they live in. Such risks could be in the form of
committing crimes because of the following circumstances: (1) being abused by any person; (2)
being exploited; (3) being abandoned or neglected; (4) coming from a dysfunctional family; (5)
being out of school; (6) being a street child; (7) being a member of a gang; (8) living in a
community with a high-level of criminality and/or drug abuse; and, (9) living in situations of
armed conflict (Section 4d, Chapter 1, Title 1 of RA 9344).
Prior to the creation of RA 9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act, the situation of
delinquent children were much connected to the situations of the street children. Having to live
in the streets pushes the child to do certain things to survive which results to delinquency. These
vulnerable children are exposed to criminal elements like prostitution, drug addiction/pushing,
and commission of different crimes. Most street children have become delinquent either by
necessity (because they are poor and the family cannot provide even the most basic needs), or
through force (because syndicates have coerced them into perpetrating a crime).
Young people were also criminalized and stigmatized for no obvious crime committed.
Most of the times the streets were cleaned up, like in the case of Pope Francis' arrival in the
Philippines, when most of the homeless were sent to a resort to spend the Pope's visitation days.
Some young people are jailed because of vagrancy (MurdochVerwijs, 2010). A large problem
arose from the treatment of the juveniles when they were placed in jails with the adult
delinquents. This led to another problem, which is the acquisition of more knowledge of different
crimes. This severely impeded the social integration of the youth offenders after they have left
prison. There would be high chances for these youth to become delinquents again in the future.
History of the Juvenile Justice in the Philippines

Before President Marcos's time, the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Courts provided a
unique form of adjudication for youth offenders. It was effective in administering cases because
instead of seeing the child as an offender, it sees the child as a victim, and thus the methods were
oriented to rehabilitation. It has reformed the youth with the purpose of reconnecting himself to
the community.
During the time of President Marcos, he signed into law the Presidential Decree No. 603
or The Child and Youth Welfare Code, protecting and promoting the rights of the child. Title
VIII, Chapter III of the law defines youth offenders and treatments of the youth offender.
However, on January 17, 1980, the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 or the Batasang
Pambansa 129 nullified the existence of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Courts. Section 23
of that law states that the Supreme Court may designate certain branches of the Regional Trial
Courts to handle exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases... These
courts also operate as courts of general jurisdiction which meant that separate proceedings of
juvenile cases would be impossible. This albeit the Philippines has signed international treaties
and conventions on the rights of children (MurdochVerwijs, 2010).
In the final years of the Marcos era, juvenile crimes have hardened on the street. Between
1976 and 1983 murder, robbery, theft, rape, and homicide rose from 37% to 58%. The statistics
of the delinquent youth doubled from 3,814 in 1987 to 6,778 in 1989. The majority of those
apprehended was between the ages 17 to 21 while the minority was between the ages 13 to 16
(Murdoch Verwijs, 2010).
RA 9344 or the 'Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act' was signed into a law by President
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. According to Section 8 of RA 9344, the Juvenile Justice and Welfare
Council (JJWC) is created and attached to the Department of Justice and placed under its
administrative supervision, chaired by an undersecretary from the Department of Social Welfare
and Development and a member coming from the DOJ. The JJWC has constructed the Rules and
Regulations Implementing the RA 9344 to promote advocacy efforts and information
dissemination to duty bearers (police officers, barangay officials, prosecutors, and the like).
RA 9344 aimed to rehabilitate the youth offenders, in the hope of reconnecting the youths
back to their community. The law also reiterated the role of different sectors in the community in
the prevention of juvenile delinquency (Title III, Chapter 1, Sections 12-17). The law
emphasized the role of the family as 'responsible for the primary nurturing and rearing of
children which is critical in delinquency prevention.' True enough, as many studies suggest, the
molding of a child's character starts at home (Bocar, Mercado, Macahis, Serad, 2012). Thus,
every family shall strive to make the home a wholesome and harmonious place for the child as
this will greatly influence and condition the child's development. In connection with this, studies
show that children who receive adequate care and attention from parents would less likely to
divulge in delinquent acts compared to children who does not receive adequate care and attention
from parents. Usually, dysfunctional family setting characterized by conflict, vices, inadequate
parental guidance, weak family connections, and premature autonomy would likely lead the child
to perform delinquent acts (Juvenile Delinquency, 2003, as cited by Bocar, 2012).
The law also emphasized the role of the education system, stating that educational
institutions shall work together in the prevention of juvenile delinquency and in the rehabilitation
and reintegration of child in conflict with the law. Schools shall provide adequate, necessary and
individualized educational schemes for children manifesting difficult behavior and children in
conflict with the law. The National Academies Press (2000), as cited by Bocar (2012), argues
that a student's commitment to school and learning can be instrumental to their academic
success. Nevertheless, schools operate in a complex social context with limited resources.
Schools located in urban, poor, disorganized communities experience more disturbances
compared to other schools. The availability of drugs, vices, or the weak administration
corresponds with disorders and school and could often lead to delinquency.
The role of the mass media was also pointed out, stating that the mass media shall play
an active role in the promotion of child rights, and delinquency prevention by relaying consistent
messages through a balanced approach. Media practitioners shall, therefore, have the duty to
maintain the highest critical and professional standards in reporting and covering cases of
children in conflict with the law. (RA 9344, Section 14) According to study conducted by
Roberts, Christenson, and Gentile (2003), as cited by Bocar (2012), they have found a positive
correlation between the amount of watching MTV (Music Television) and physical fights among
third grade pupils.
Chapter II of the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency discusses the Comprehensive
Juvenile Intervention Program. Section 18 discusses the Development of a Comprehensive
Juvenile Intervention Program, stating that a Comprehensive Juvenile Justice Intervention
Program covering at least a 3-years period shall be instituted in LGUs from the barangay to the
provincial level...The LGUs, in coordination with the Local Councils for the Protection of
Children (LCPC), shall call on all sectors concerned, particularly the child-focused institutions,
NGOs, people's organizations, educational institutions and government agencies involved in the
delinquency prevention to participate in the planning process and implementation of juvenile

intervention programs.
Despite the presence of the law, there are still problems that were encountered after its
implementation. According to PREDA Foundation, they have encountered the following
problems. First, barangay officials and other police officers continue to arrest minors and
temporarily detain them in their barangay halls or police stations for disciplinary actions.
According to the CBCP News Online, citing the Ateneo de Manila-based John J. Carroll Institute
on Church and Social Issues (JJCICSI, 2007), there are children still being detained with adult
criminals. Also, according to the study conducted by the Coalition to Stop Child Detention, as of
October 2008, the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) reported a total of 362
child prisoners all over the country. Also, according to PREDA, long periods of detention due to
the delays in the legal proceedings of the CICL result to their over-servicing of their imposable
penalty particularly that of victimless crimes.
Second, police authorities also deal with minors as if they were adults. According to the
statistics collected by Amnesty International (2014), there were 21 children tortured by the police
officials.
Third, there are no recovery centers in most cities and municipalities, and if there is, it is
usually crowded. Overcrowded detention centers like the Manila Youth Reception Center
(MYRC) has neither rehabilitation nor therapeutic programs. Sometimes, the quality of services
is not at par with the standards of the provisions of the law.
According to Dan Mariano (2006), minors are being recruited in syndicates and the
authors of RA 9344 extensively consulted with the Department of Social Welfare and
Development but hardly consulted with the officials in the local level. Also, according to Lakas
Rep. Mariano Defensor (2008), there is an urgent need to fine-tune several provisions of the law
as he noted that crime syndicates are taking advantage of the juvenile justice law in their
nefarious activities by utilizing minors 15 years old and younger.
Therefore, due to the problems encountered after the implementation of RA 9344, there
was a call on amending the present law. Thus, on 2012 RA 9344 was amended. In RA 10630, the
Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council were re-aligned from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to
the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). According to the position paper of
the Commission of Human Rights (2009), the re-alignment will cure the logistic difficulties in
the set-up presented by RA 9344. It is proper for the JJWC to be aligned with DSWD because
the latter has a wider scope when it comes to CICLs. Second, the minimum age of criminal
responsibility was also clarified, exempting children below 15 years old from criminal liability.
Third, Bahay Pag-asa replaced the Youth Detention Home, reiterating the restorative justice aims
of the said law. Fourth, RA 10630 also expanded the role of the parents in the rehabilitation of
the CICL. Fifth, RA 10630 included a provision on CICLs repeating offenses. These are some of
the changes in RA 9344 that would address the problems that rose after the implementation of
the law.
Chapter 3
DISCUSSION
I.
A Comparison of the Salient Features of the RA 9344 and RA 10630

Under this heading, 13 tables were presented. Table 2-A until Table 2-L shows the
comparison of the salient features of The Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act 2006 (RA 9344) and
The Act Strengthening the Juvenile Justice System in the Philippines (RA 10630). The first
column in the table provides for the Title and Chapter by which the salient features of the two
Republic Acts are found; the second column contains the salient features of RA 9344; while the
salient features of RA 10630 are written in the third column.
As could be seen in the table, some texts are written in bold letters which suggest
differences in the old and the new provisions. Also, only the portions with comparable features
are placed in the table for a brief and concise display of the comparable features of the RAs,
however, the complete texts/details of all the provisions cited in the table are found in the
appendices.
It should also be noted that the Republic Act 9344 which took effect in 2006 has
established a comprehensive juvenile justice and welfare system and created the juvenile justice
and welfare council under the department of justice. Funds have been appropriated for these
programs including funds for other purposes related to the said program. RA 9344 was known as
the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006. On the other hand, due to the insufficiencies of RA
9344 and the dissatisfaction of the populace, including law enforcers and politicians especially
on the issue of the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility (MACR) (Bordadora, 2013; Tulfo,
2011), RA 10630 was enacted to amend RA 9344, the purpose of which was to strengthen the
juvenile justice system in the Philippines. New provisions were added in the new law (RA
10630) where the old law (RA 9344) was found wanting. The amendment gave a new title to RA
9344 as An Act Establishing a Comprehensive Juvenile Justice and Welfare System, Creating
the Juvenile justice and Welfare Council under the Department of Social Welfare and
Development, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes.
RA 10630 has amended 13 provisions of RA 9344. In Section 1 of RA 10630 changed the
title of RA 9344 to the above-written; Section 2 amended Section 4 of the old law, changing
Youth Detention Center to Bahay Pag-asa; Section 3 amended Section 6 of RA 9344 by adding
birth anniversaries in determining the age of the child; Section 4 has amended Section 8 of the
old law, which attached Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC) to DSWD and created
RJJWC; Section 5 amended Section 9 by redefining the duties and functions of JJWC and adding
the duties and functions of the RJJWC; Section 6 amended Section 20 of the old law and has
added new provisions: Sections 20-A to 20-D; Section 7 amended Section 22 that defined the
duties of law enforcement officer during initial investigation; Section 8 amended Section 33, the
preliminary investigation and filing of information; Section 9 amended section 49, on the
establishment of Bahay-Pag-asa; Section 10 amended Section 50, on the care and maintenance of
the child in conflict with the law; Section 11 amended Section 57, status offenses and added
Section 57-A, violations of local ordinances; Section 12 was added in the amending law, the
mandatory registry of children in conflict with the law; Section 13 amended Section 63,
appropriations.
Table 2-A
Comparison of the Salient Features of RA 9344 and RA 10630
Section 1- Title
TITLE I
GOVERNING
PRINCIPLES
CHAPTER 1
TITLE, POLICY
AND
DEFINITION OF
TERMS
RA 9344
RA 10630
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.
An Act Strengthening the Juvenile

Justice System in the Philippines,
amending for the purpose Republic
Act No. 9344, otherwise known as
the Juvenile Justice and Welfare
Act of 2006 and Appropriating
Funds Therefor.
Section 1. Short Title and Scope.

This Act shall be known as the
Act of 2006. It shall cover the
different stages involving children
at risk and children in conflict with
the law from prevention to
rehabilitation and reintegration.
SECTION 1. The Title of Republic

Act No. 9344 is hereby amended to
read as follows: An Act
Establishing a Comprehensive
System, Creating the Juvenile
justice and Welfare Council
under the Department of Social
Welfare
and
Development,
Appropriating Funds Therefor,
and for Other Purposes.
In Table 2-B the comparison of Section 4 of RA 9344 and Section 2 of RA 10630 was
stipulated. The term YOUTH DETENTION HOME found in Section 4 par. (s) of RA 9344 was
changed to BAHAY PAG-ASA in Section 2 par. (s) in the new law, RA 10630. Both provisions
referred the two terms as a 24-hour child-caring institution managed by accredited local
government (LGUs) and licensed and/or accredited non-government organizations (NGOs)
providing short-term residential care for children in conflict with the law who are awaiting court
disposition of their cases or transfer to other agencies or jurisdiction.
While both terms/names carried the same meaning, it could be noted that the Bahay Pagasa has features which the Youth Detention Home did not have, such as; (1) An intensive juvenile
intervention support center designed for children who will undergo a more intensive multidisciplinary intervention program; (2) a multi-disciplinary team which is composed of a social
worker, a psychologist/mental health professional, a medical doctor, an educational/guidance
counsellor and a Barangay Council for the Protection of Children (BCPC) member that operate
the Bahay Pag-asa. The team works on the individualized intervention plan with the child and the
childs family. The Bahay Pag-asa gives a home-life structure for children in conflict with the
law, in accordance to the principle of the best interest of the child.
However, an insertion in the definition was made by the new law that only CICLs who
are above 15 but below 18 years of age who are awaiting court disposition of their cases or
transfer to other agencies or jurisdiction can be admitted to the said institution. This insertion is
relevant because it gave a precise guideline and specification for admission in the Bahay Pagasa. Moreover, the selective admission is also a way of decongesting Bahay Pag-asa, which
would imply a more effective and efficient delivery of services in said institution.
Table 2-B
Section 4 of RA 9344 and Section 2 of RA 10630
RA 9344
TITLE I
Section 4
GOVERNING
PRINCIPLES
Chapter 1
(s) Youth Detention Home

refers to a 24-hour child-caring
institution
managed
by
TITLE, POLICY
accredited local government
AND
units (LGUs) and licensed
DEFINITION OF
and/or
accredited
TERMS
nongovernment organizations
(NGOs) providing short-term
residential care for children in
conflict with the law who are
awaiting court disposition of
their cases or transfer to other
agencies or jurisdiction.
RA 10630
Section 2
(Section 4 of Republic Act No.
9344 is hereby amended to read
as follows)
(s) Bahay Pag-asa refers to

a
24-hour
child-caring
institution established, funded
and
managed
by
local
government units (LGUs) and
licensed
and/or
accredited
nongovernment organizations
(NGOs) providing short-term
residential care for children in
conflict with the law who are
above fifteen (15) but below
eighteen (18) years of age who
are awaiting court disposition of
their cases or transfer to other
agencies or jurisdiction.
Part of the features of a Bahay

Pag-asa is an intensive juvenile
intervention and support center.
This will cater to children in
conflict with the law in
accordance with Sections 20,
20-A and 20-B hereof.
A multi-disciplinary team
composed of a social worker, a
psychologist/mental
health
professional, a medical doctor,
an
educational/guidance
counselor and a Barangay
Council for the Protection of
Children (BCPC) member shall
operate the Bahay Pag-asa.
The team will work on the
individualized intervention plan
with the child and the childs
family.
Table 2-C presents the comparison between Section 6 of RA 9344 and Section 3 of RA
10630. It could be seen that both sections have the same title, Minimum Age of Criminal
Responsibility. More importantly, both provisions have exempted children who were fifteen (15)
years old or under at the time of the commission of the offense to criminal liability. However, the
child will be subjected to an intervention program as specified in Section 20 of RA 10630, which
states that If it has been determined that the child taken into custody is fifteen (15) years old or
below, the authority which will have an initial contact with the child, in consultation with the
local social welfare and development officer, has the duty to immediately release the child to the
custody of his/her parents or guardian, or in the absence thereof, the childs nearest relative. The
child shall be subjected to a community-based intervention program supervised by the local
social welfare and development officer, unless the best interest of the child requires the referral
of the child to a youth care facility or Bahay Pag-asa managed by LGUs or licensed and/or
accredited NGOs monitored by the DSWD.
Although RA 10630 did not lower the age of criminal responsibility which is 15 years
old, it maintained the provision in the old law that the exemption of CICLs from criminal
liability does not altogether exempt them from civil liability that arise as a consequence of their
act. It was stipulated therefore that the exemption from criminal liability herein established
does not include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced in accordance with
existing laws. The provision added the statement A child is deemed to be fifteen (15) years of
age on the day of the fifteenth anniversary of his/her birth date. This addition would guide
persons responsible in determining the age of the child in conflict with the law in cases where no
certificate of live birth could be obtained that could immediately specify the age of the child in
conflict with the law. The implication also is that the absence of the childs Certificate of Live
Birth is not a hindrance in determining whether the child can be held responsible for his/her act
either criminally or civilly or both.
Table 2-C

RA 9344
Title I
Section 6
PRINCIPLES IN
THE
ADMINISTRATI
ON OF
JUVENILE
JUSTICE AND
WELFARE
Section 3
as follows)
GOVERNING
PRINCIPLES
Chapter 2
RA 10630
SEC. 6. Minimum Age of

Criminal Responsibility. A
child fifteen (15) years of age or
under at the time of the
commission of the offense shall
be exempt from criminal
liability. However, the child
shall be subjected to an
intervention program pursuant
to Section 20 of this Act.
SEC. 6. Minimum Age of

Criminal Responsibility. A
child fifteen (15) years of age or
under at the time of the
commission of the offense shall
be exempt from criminal liability.
However, the child shall be
subjected to an intervention
program pursuant to Section 20
of this Act.
A child is deemed to be fifteen

(15) years of age on the day of
the fifteenth anniversary of
his/her birthdate.
A child above fifteen (15) years

but below eighteen (18) years of
age shall likewise be exempt
from criminal liability and be
program, unless he/she has acted
with discernment, in which case,
such child shall be subjected to
the appropriate proceedings in
accordance with this Act.
A child above fifteen (15) years

but below eighteen (18) years of
age shall likewise be exempt
from criminal liability and be
program, unless he/she has
acted with discernment, in
which case, such child shall be
subjected to the appropriate
proceedings in accordance with The exemption from criminal
this Act.
liability herein established does
not include exemption from civil
liability, which shall be enforced
The exemption from criminal in accordance with existing
liability herein established does laws.
not include exemption from
civil liability, which shall be
enforced in accordance with

existing laws.
Another comparable provision of the two Republic Acts was presented in Table 2-D.
Section 8 of RA 9344 which created the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC) and
attached it the Department of Justice (DOJ) which was assigned to take charge in the
administrative supervision, but the undersecretary of DSWD was assigned as chair of JJWC that
would coordinate with other agencies to ensure effective implementation of the Juvenile Justice
and Welfare Code of 2006. Likewise, in Section 4 of RA 10630, JJWC was already attached to
the Department of Social Welfare and Development and placed under its administrative
supervision instead of the DOJ. DSWD was mandated to coordinate with the similar agencies
enumerated in RA 9344 with the addition of the Department of Justice. In other words, in the
present law, the DOJ was only tasked to act as a coordinating agency unlike in the previous law
where it held the role of administrative supervisor of JJWC.
Under Section 8 of RA 9344, it was also mentioned that JJWC representatives from
different agencies were assigned to several ranks which are not lower than director while Section
4 of RA 10630 stated that aside from the rank of director, the members of the Juvenile Justice
and Welfare Council (JJWC) would also receive emoluments which were determined by the
representatives following the accounting rules and regulations.
Integrated in paragraph 8 of the same section of RA 10630, it was observed that the
secretary of DSWD was given the sole authority to designate two (2) representatives from the
NGOs, taking into account the criteria set by the JJWC in selecting representatives. Therefore,
the Secretary of the Department of Justice no longer have a hand in designating representatives
unlike in the old law where the Secretary of DOJ and the Secretary of the DSWD were hand-inhand in designating representatives from Non-Governmental Organization (NGOs). Moreover,
under the new law, the Department of Health (DOH) and the League of Provinces, League of
Cities, League of Municipalities and League of Barangays were integrated to form part of the
JJWC as representatives.
Table 2-D
RA 9344
TITLE II
Section 8
Section 4
as follows)
STRUCTURES
IN THE
ADMINISTRATION
OF JUVENILE
JUSTICE AND
WELFARE
RA 10630
SEC. 8. Juvenile Justice and

Welfare Council (JJWC). A
Council (JJWC) is hereby
created and attached to the
Department of Justice and
placed under its administrative
supervision. The JJWC shall be
chaired by an undersecretary of
the Department of Social
Welfare and Development. It
shall ensure the effective
implementation of this Act and
coordination
among
the
following agencies:
SEC. 8. Juvenile Justice and

Welfare Council (JJWC). A
Council (JJWC) is hereby created
and attached to the Department
of
Social
Welfare
and
Development and placed under
its administrative supervision.
The JJWC shall be chaired by an
Undersecretary
of
the
Department of Social Welfare
and Development. It shall ensure
the effective implementation of
this Act and coordination among
the following agencies:
(a) Department
(DOJ);
(h) Two (2) representatives

from NGOs, one to be
designated by the Secretary of
Justice and the other to be
designated by the Secretary of
Social
Welfare
and
Development.
of
Justice
(8) Two (2) representatives

from NGOs, to be designated
by the Secretary of Social
Welfare and Development, to
be selected based on the
criteria established by the
Council;
There shall be a Regional

Committee (RJJWC) in each
region. The RJJWCs will be
under the administration and
supervision of the JJWC. The
RJJWC shall be chaired by the
director of the regional office of
the DSWD. It shall ensure the
effective implementation of this
Act at the regional and LGU
levels and the coordination
among its member agencies.
Consequently, Section 4 of RA 10630 created a Regional Juvenile Justice and Welfare

Committee (RJJWC) in each of the regions in the Philippines which was administered and
supervised by the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC). The creation of RJJWC was
aimed for effective implementation of juvenile justice at the regional and LGU levels, and for
effective coordination among its member agencies.
Table 2-E shows the comparison between Section 9 of RA 9344 and Section 5 of RA
10630. The sections were both entitled Duties and Functions of the JJWC. The sections were
given the same provisions except that RA 10630 inculcated a new duty/function of the JJWC
which is to consult with the various leagues of local government officials in the formulation
and recommendation of policies and strategies for the prevention of juvenile delinquency and the
promotion of juvenile justice and welfare. The legislature saw the need for a viable linkage
between and among government agencies in devising and proposing policies that would prevent
acts of delinquency among the youth as well as to introduce reforms for the promotion of justice
and welfare insofar as the youth are concerned.
In the new provision, the JJWC was duty-bound to submit an annual report to the
Congress regarding status of implementation of the provisions in the new law, unlike in the old
law that the report should be submitted directly to the President of the Philippines.
Understandably, a new section was also added, SEC. 9-A. Duties and Functions of the RJJWC,
as a result of the creation of RJJWC.
Akin to the duty of Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council (JJWC) in submitting report to
Congress, the Regional Juvenile Justice and Welfare Committee (RJJWC) is also mandated to
collect relevant regional information and conduct continuing research and support evaluations
and studies on all matters relating to juvenile justice and welfare within the regions. The data
that will be gathered by RJJWC will be forwarded to the JJWC on an annual basis. The report of
RJJWC would also be the basis of JJWCs report to the Congress.
Table 2-E
RA 9344
RA 10630
TITLE II
Section 9
Section 5
STRUCTURES
SEC. 9. Duties and Functions of

the JJWC. The JJWC shall
have the following duties and
functions:
SEC. 9. Duties and Functions of

the JJWC. The JJWC shall have
the
following
duties
and
functions:
(g)
To
collect
relevant
information
and
conduct
continuing research and support
evaluations and studies on all
matters relating to juvenile
justice and welfare, such as but
not limited to:
(f) To consult with the various

leagues of local government
officials in the formulation and
recommendation of policies and
strategies for the prevention of
juvenile delinquency and the
promotion of juvenile justice and
welfare;
IN THE
ADMINISTRATI
ON
OF JUVENILE
JUSTICE AND
WELFARE
(h)
To
collect
relevant
information
and
conduct
continuing research and support
evaluations and studies on all
matters relating to juvenile justice
and welfare, such as, but not
limited to:
The JJWC shall submit an

annual report to Congress on
the implementation of the
(j) To submit an annual report provisions of this Act.
to the President on the
implementation of this Act
SEC.
9-A.
Duties
Functions of the RJJWC.
and
In addition, one of the most important duties of RJJWC was the conduct of regular
inspections in detention and rehabilitation facilities within the region. Aside from the regular
inspections, they were mandated to conduct spot inspections in order to check whether the
detention and rehabilitation centers have complied with the standards set by the law.
Table 2-F provides the comparison between Section 20 of RA 9344 and Section 6 of RA
10630. These sections have the same title: Children below the Age of Criminal Responsibility. In
the old law it was stated that if it has been determined that the child taken into custody is fifteen
(15) years old or below, the authority which will have an initial contact with the child has the
duty to immediately release the child to the custody of his/her parents or guardian, or in the
absence thereof, the childs nearest relative. In the new law, before the law enforcement officers
could release the child, s/he has to consult with the local social welfare and development officer
first, or should the child not be released, s/he should be subjected to a community-based
intervention program, unless the best interest of the child requires the referral of the child to a
youth care facility or Bahay Pag-asa managed by LGUs or licensed and/or accredited NGOs
monitored by the DSWD. It should also be taken into consideration that the minimum age that
the child could be committed to a youth care facility or Bahay Pag-asa was twelve (12) years
old.
There were additional provisions in Section 6 (Section 20) of the new law, such as;
Sec.20-A --Serious Crimes Committed by Children Who Are Exempt from Criminal
Responsibility. This section provides that children who have committed crimes punishable by
more than twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be mandatorily placed in a special facility
within the youth care faculty or Bahay Pag-asa called the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and
Support Center (IJISC). Sec.20-B --Repetition of Offenses. This section states that a child above
12 years old up to 15 years old that are repeat offenders, and have been previously subjected to a
community-based intervention program shall undergo an intensive intervention program
supervised by the local social welfare and development officer. Sec.20-C --Exploitation of
Children for Commission of Crimes where adults, including parents, who use children to commit
crimes, would be punished with a maximum term; Sec.20-D --Joint Parental Responsibility
where the court may require the parents of CICL to undergo counselling/intervention program
that would advance the welfare and best interest of the child; and Sec.20-E -- Assistance to
Victims of Offenses Committed by Children where the victim of the offense committed by a child
and the victims family shall be provided the appropriate assistance and psychological
intervention by the LSWDO, the DSWD and other concerned agencies. The congress deemed
these provisions relevant and necessary to respond to the emerging demands for an effective and
efficient juvenile justice system in the country, where the old law failed to address.
Table 2-F
RA 9344
TITLE IV
TREATMENT OF
CHILDREN
BELOW THE AGE
OF CRIMINAL
RESPONSIBILITY
Section 20
RA 10630
Section 6 (Section 20)
SEC. 6. Section 20 of Republic
Act No. 9344 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
SEC. 20. Children Below the

Age of Criminal Responsibility.
If it has been determined that
the child taken into custody is
SEC. 20. Children Below the

Age of Criminal Responsibility.
If it has been determined that
the child taken into custody is
fifteen (15) years old or below,

the authority which will have an
initial contact with the child has
the duty to immediately release
the child to the custody of
his/her parents or guardian, or
in the absence thereof, the
childs nearest relative.
fifteen (15) years old or below,

the authority which will have an
initial contact with the child, in
consultation with the local
social
welfare
and
development officer, has the
duty to immediately release the
child to the custody of his/her
parents or guardian, or in the
absence thereof, the childs
nearest relative. The child shall
be subjected to a communitybased intervention program
supervised by the local social
welfare and development
officer, unless the best interest
of the child requires the
referral of the child to a youth
care facility or Bahay Pagasa managed by LGUs or
licensed and/or accredited
NGOs monitored by the
DSWD.
Sec.20-ASerious
Crimes
Committed by Children Who
Are Exempt From Criminal
Responsibility
Sec.20-BOffenses
Repetition
of
Sec.20-CExploitation
of
Children for Commission of
Crimes
Sec.20-D-Joint Parental
Responsibility
Section 20-E -- Assistance to
Victims of Offenses Committed
by Children.
Section 22 of RA 9344 and Section 7 of RA 10630 are also compared in Table 2-G. Both
sections bear the same title, Duties during Initial Investigation and both provisions required
that the law enforcement officer will be the one to determine where the case of the CICL should
be referred. No change in the processes of investigation were noted in both sections, however, an
insertion was noted in the new provision that The social worker shall conduct an initial
assessment to determine the appropriate interventions and whether the child acted with
discernment, using the discernment assessment tools developed by the DSWD. The initial
assessment shall be without prejudice to the preparation of a more comprehensive case study
report. This addition is relevant in that it will help law enforcement officers in the effective and
efficient determination of whether or not the child acted with discernment so that proper
intervention program can be prescribed to the child following the principle of the best interest of
the child. Also, the law wants to be exact in its prescription by also conducting a more
comprehensive study of the overall condition of the child in conflict with the law.
Table 2-G
RA 9344
TITLE V
SECTION 22
JUVENILE
JUSTICE AND
WELFARE
SYSTEM
SEC. 22. Duties During Initial

Investigation.
The
law
enforcement officer shall, in
his/her investigation, determine
where the case involving the child
in conflict with the law should be
referred.
The taking of the statement of the

child shall be conducted in the
presence of the following: (1)
childs counsel of choice or in the
CHAPTER I
absence thereof, a lawyer from the
Public Attorneys Office; (2) the
childs parents, guardian, or nearest
INITIAL
CONTACT WITH relative, as the case may be; and
(3) the local social welfare and
THE CHILD
development officer. In the absence
of the childs parents, guardian, or
nearest relative, and the local
social welfare and development
officer, the investigation shall be
conducted in the presence of a
RA 10630
SECTION 7
SEC. 22. Duties During Initial

Investigation.
The
law
enforcement officer shall, in his/her
investigation, determine where the
case involving the child in conflict
with the law should be referred.
The taking of the statement of the

child shall be conducted in the
presence of the following: (1)
childs counsel of choice or in the
absence thereof, a lawyer from the
Public Attorneys Office; (2) the
childs parents, guardian, or nearest
relative, as the case may be; and (3)
the local social welfare and
development officer. In the absence
of the childs parents, guardian, or
nearest relative, and the local social
welfare and development officer,
the investigation shall be conducted
in the presence of a representative
of an NGO, religious group, or
representative of an NGO,
religious group, or member of the
BCPC.
After the initial investigation, the

local social worker conducting the
same may do either of the
following:
(a) Proceed in accordance with

Section 20 if the child is fifteen (15)
years or below or above fifteen (15)
but below eighteen (18) years old,
who acted without discernment; and
(b) If the child is above fifteen (15)

years old but below eighteen (18)
and who acted with discernment,
proceed to diversion under the
following chapter.
member of the BCPC.
The social worker shall conduct

an initial assessment to determine
the appropriate interventions and
whether the child acted with
discernment,
using
the
discernment assessment tools
developed by the DSWD. The
initial assessment shall be
without
prejudice
to
the
preparation
of
a
more
comprehensive case study report.
The local social worker shall do
either of the following:
(a) Proceed in accordance with
Section 20 if the child is fifteen
(15) years or below or above fifteen
(15) but below eighteen (18) years
old,
who
acted
without
discernment; and
(b) If the child is above fifteen (15)
years old but below eighteen (18)
and who acted with discernment,
proceed to diversion under the
following chapter.
Table 2-H shows the comparison of Section 33 of RA 9344 and Section 8 of RA 10630.
The two sections described the process of Preliminary Investigation and Filing of Information,
and both provisions required the prosecutor to conduct a preliminary investigation in instances
where: (a) when the child in conflict with the law does not qualify for diversion; (b) when the
child, his/her parents or guardian does not agree to diversion as specified in Sections 27 and 28;
and (c) when considering the assessment and recommendation of the social worker, the
prosecutor determines that diversion is not appropriate for the child in conflict with the law.
Both provisions demand that a subpoena and an affidavit of complaint shall be served to
the child. It is also the duty of the prosecutor to notify the Public Attorneys Office (PAO)
regarding the case of the child, as well as the personal information of the child and the place
where the child will be detained.
The purpose of preliminary investigation and filing of information is to determine the

probable cause for the act by which the child was accused of. As soon as probable cause has been
determined by the prosecutor, the filing of the information against the child will also be done
before the Family Court within forty-five (45) days from the start of the preliminary
investigation. The information must allege that the child acted with discernment.
Discernment means that the child or the minor has the mental capacity to completely
realize the consequences of his unlawful act. The capacity of the child to discern may be
recognized and should be determined by taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances
afforded by the records in each case. The surrounding circumstances must demonstrate that the
minor knew what he was doing and that it was wrong. Such circumstance includes the gruesome
nature of the crime and the minors cunning and shrewdness (Yu, 2015).
Table 2-H
RA 9344
TITLE V
SECTION 33
PROSECUTION
SECTION 8
9344 is hereby amended to read as
follows)
JUVENILE
JUSTICE AND
WELFARE
SYSTEM
CHAPTER 3
RA 10630
SEC. 33. Preliminary Investigation

and Filing of Information. The
prosecutor
shall
conduct
a
preliminary investigation in the
following instances: (a) when the
child in conflict with the law does
not qualify for diversion: (b) when
the child, his/her parents or guardian
does not agree to diversion as
SEC. 33. Preliminary Investigation

and Filing of Information. The
prosecutor
shall
conduct
a
preliminary investigation in the
following instances: (a) when the
child in conflict with the law does
not qualify for diversion; (b) when
the child, his/her parents or guardian
does not agree to diversion as
specified in Sections 27 and 28; and
specified in Sections 27 and 28; and

(c) when considering the assessment
and recommendation of the social
worker, the prosecutor determines
that diversion is not appropriate for
the child in conflict with the law.
Upon serving the subpoena and the

affidavit
of
complaint,
the
prosecutor shall notify the Public
Attorneys Office of such service, as
well as the personal information,
and place of detention of the child in
conflict with the law.
Upon determination of probable

cause by the prosecutor, the
information against the child shall
be filed before the Family Court
within forty-five (45) days from the
start
of
the
preliminary
investigation.
(c) when considering the assessment

and recommendation of the social
worker, the prosecutor determines
that diversion is not appropriate for
the child in conflict with the law.
Upon serving the subpoena and the

affidavit
of
complaint,
the
prosecutor shall notify the Public
Attorneys Office of such service, as
well as the personal information,
and place of detention of the child in
conflict with the law.
Upon determination of probable

cause by the prosecutor, the
information against the child shall
be filed before the Family Court
within forty-five (45) days from the
start
of
the
preliminary
investigation. The information
must allege that the child acted
with discernment.
Table 2-I reflects the comparison between Sec. 49 of RA 9344 and Sec. 9 of RA 10630.
The latter promulgated the establishment of Bahay Pag-asa in each province and highlyurbanized cities (the LGUs), which in RA 9344 was called Youth Detention Homes. Section 49
of RA 9344 mandated the Local Government Units (LGUs) to set aside an amount for them to
build youth detention homes pursuant to the mandate of the Family Courts Act. Also, that private
and NGOs that are licensed and accredited by DSWD and in consultation with the JJWC may
also establish youth detention homes.
However, the amendment (Section 9 of RA 10630) of the above-cited section stated that
the province shall be responsible for building, funding and operating a Bahay Pag-asa within
their jurisdiction following the standards set by the DSWD and adopted by the JJWC. There was
no more mention of the NGOs or private individuals allowing them to establish a Bahay Pag-
asa. The amendment also stated that Every Bahay Pag-asa will have a special facility called
the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and Support Center (IJISC).
Importantly, specific description was given for those who will be accommodated in the
IJISC. That, the IJISC will accommodate CICLs who are below the age of criminal responsibility
(Section 20); CICLs who have committed serious crimes but are exempted from criminal
liability (Section 20-A); CICLs who are repeat offenders with ages more than 12 years old and
up to fifteen (15) years old.
Children who will be placed in the IJISC will undergo a more intensive multi-disciplinary
intervention program. Multi-disciplinary in the sense that JJWC will work in partnership with the
DSWD, the DOH, DepED and the DILG in developing and setting the standards for the
implementation of the multi-disciplinary intervention program of the IJISC. These programs will
be institutionalized and will continuously be monitored by the JJWC, providing technical
assistance to the multi-disciplinary teams that operate the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and
Support Center (IJISC).
Table 2-I
RA 9344
TITLE VI
SECTION 49
RA 10630
SECTION 9
follows)
REHABILITATIO
N AND
REINTEGRATIO
N
Sec. 49. Establishment of Youth
Detention Homes the LGUs shall
set aside an amount to build youth
detention homes as mandated by the
Family Courts Act. Youth detention
homes may also be established by
SEC. 49. Establishment of Bahay

Pag-Asa. Each province and
highly-urbanized city (the LGUs)
shall be responsible for building,
funding and operating a Bahay
Pag-asa within their jurisdiction
following the standards that will
private and NGOs licensed and be set by the DSWD and adopted
accredited by the DSWD, in by the JJWC.
consultation with the JJWC.
Every Bahay Pag-asa will have

a special facility called the IJISC.
This Center will be allocated for
children in conflict with the law in
accordance with Sections 20, 20-A
and 20-B hereof. These children
will be required to undergo a
more intensive multi-disciplinary
intervention program. The JJWC
in partnership with, but not
limited to, the DSWD, the DOH,
the DepED and the DILG, will
develop and set the standards for
the implementation of the multidisciplinary intervention program
of
the
IJISC.
Upon
institutionalization of the IJISC
program, the JJWC will continue
to monitor and provide technical
assistance
to
the
multidisciplinary teams operating the
said centers.
The comparison between Section 50 of RA 9344 and Section 10 of RA 10630 was

presented in Table 2-J. The two sections dealt with the care and maintenance of the child in
conflict with the law (CICL). In Section 50 of the old law it stated that parents or those liable to
support the child shall pay for the care and maintenance of the CICL under the institutional care.
In case the parent/persons liable to support the child cannot pay in full or in part said expenses,
the municipality where the offense was committed shall pay one-third (1/3) of said expenses or
part thereof; the province to which the municipality belongs shall pay one-third (1/3) and the
remaining one-third (1/3) shall be borne by the national government. Chartered cities shall pay
two-thirds (2/3) of said expenses. The vital thing stipulated in the section was that the residence
of the child must be determined by the court because the city/municipality where the CICL is a
resident will be required to bear the cost of the care and maintenance. However under Section 10
of the new law it would be the LGU that would bear the expenditure, as included in their annual
budget for local juvenile intervention program not only for children in conflict with the law but
also for children at risk. The provision also stated that highly-urbanized cities and provincial
governments should include a separate budget for the construction and maintenance of the
Bahay Pag-asa including the operation of the IJISC within the Bahay Pag-asa.
Section 50 of RA 9344 urged all city and provincial governments to exert all efforts so
that local detention homes for children in conflict with the law could be established immediately,
and that CICLs could immediately be rehabilitated and reintegrated to mainstream society.
The implication was that there is no more reason left why Children in Conflict with the
Law could not be helped by giving intervention programs. In fact, various intervention programs
were already mandated by the State in order to help transform the lives of the CICLs. It is now
the government through its duly constituted agencies and instrumentalities to fully implement the
mandate on the care and maintenance of CICLs.
Table 2-J
RA 9344
TITLE VI
SECTION 50
REHABILITATIO
N AND
REINTEGRATIO
N
RA 10630
SECTION 10

follows)
SEC. 50. Care and Maintenance of

SEC. 50. Care and Maintenance of the Child in Conflict with the Law.
the Child in Conflict with the Law. x x x
The expenses for the care and

maintenance of a child in conflict
with the law under institutional care
shall be borne by his/her parents or
The LGUs expected expenditures

on the local juvenile intervention
program for children at risk and
children in conflict with the law
those persons liable to support

him/her: Provided, That in case
his/her parents or those persons
liable to support him/her cannot pay
all or part of said expenses, the
municipality where the offense was
committed shall pay one-third (1/3)
of said expenses or part thereof; the
province to which the municipality
belongs shall pay one-third (1/3)
and the remaining one-third (1/3)
shall be borne by the national
government. Chartered cities shall
pay two-thirds (2/3) of said
expenses; and in case a chartered
city cannot pay said expenses, part
of the internal revenue allotments
applicable to the unpaid portion
shall be withheld and applied to the
settlement of said obligations:
Provided, further, That in the event
that the child in conflict with the
law is not a resident of the
municipality/city where the offense
was committed, the court, upon its
determination, may require the
city/municipality where the child in
conflict with the law resides to
shoulder the cost.
shall be included in the LGUs

annual budget. Highly-urbanized
cities and provincial governments
should include a separate budget for
the construction and maintenance of
the Bahay Pag-asa including the
operation of the IJISC within the
Bahay Pag-asa.
All city and provincial governments

must exert effort for the immediate
establishment of local detention
homes for children in conflict with
the law.
Table 2-K illustrated the comparison between Section 57 of RA 9344 and Section 11 of
RA 10630. Both provisions described the status offenses that may be committed by the child and
both provisions defined status offense as any conduct not considered an offense or not
penalized if committed by an adult shall not be considered an offense and shall not be punished
if committed by a child.
Interestingly, Section 11-A (Sec. 57-A) was added in the new law, where parents of those
children who violated local ordinances will be required to attend parenting education seminars.
Children on the other hand will be required to attend counselling programs and other group
activities.
Section 57-A states, SEC. 57-A. Violations of Local Ordinances. Ordinances enacted
by local governments concerning juvenile status offenses such as, but not limited to, curfew
violations, truancy, parental disobedience, anti-smoking and anti-drinking laws, as well as light
offenses and misdemeanors against public order or safety such as, but not limited to, disorderly
conduct, public scandal, harassment, drunkenness, public intoxication, criminal nuisance,
vandalism, gambling, mendicancy, littering, public urination, and trespassing, shall be for the
protection of children. No penalty shall be imposed on children for said violations, and they shall
instead be brought to their residence or to any barangay official at the barangay hall to be
released to the custody of their parents. Appropriate intervention programs shall be provided for
in such ordinances. The child shall also be recorded as a child at risk and not as a child in
conflict with the law. The ordinance shall also provide for intervention programs, such as
counseling, attendance in group activities for children, and for the parents, attendance in
parenting education seminars.
The implication of adding Section 57-A was that the State wanted parents to be
responsible enough in rearing their children, as these children (youth) have their roles in nationbuilding (Section 13, Art. II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution).
Table 2-K
RA 9344
TITLE VII
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
SECTION 57
RA 10630
SECTION 11
follows)
CHAPTER 1
SEC. 57. Status Offenses. Any

conduct not considered an offense or
not penalized if committed by an
adult shall not be considered an
offense and shall not be punished if
committed by a child.
SEC. 57. Status Offenses. Any

conduct not considered an offense or
not penalized if committed by an
adult shall not be considered an
offense and shall not be punished if
committed by a child.
EXEMPTING
PROVISIONS
SEC. 57-A. Violations of Local
Ordinances. Ordinances enacted
by local governments concerning
juvenile status offenses such as, but
not limited to, curfew violations,
truancy, parental disobedience, antismoking and anti-drinking laws, as
well as light offenses and
misdemeanors against public order
or safety such as, but not limited to,
disorderly conduct, public scandal,
harassment, drunkenness, public
intoxication, criminal nuisance,
vandalism, gambling, mendicancy,
littering, public urination, and
trespassing, shall be for the
protection of children. No penalty
shall be imposed on children for
said violations, and they shall
instead be brought to their residence
or to any barangay official at the
barangay hall to be released to the
custody of their parents. Appropriate
intervention programs shall be
provided for in such ordinances. The
child shall also be recorded as a
child at risk and not as a child in
conflict with the law. The
ordinance shall also provide for
intervention programs, such as
counseling, attendance in group
activities for children, and for the
parents, attendance in parenting
education seminars.
Furthermore, Section 12 is added in Title VII, General Provisions; Chapter 1, Exempting

Provisions of RA 10630 which required a mandatory registry of children in conflict with the law,
without prejudice to Section 43 of the same Act. This section required all duty-bearers who will
receive report, handle or refer cases of children in conflict with the law, shall ensure a faithful
recordation of all pertinent information, such as age, residence, gender, crime committed or
accused of and the details of the intervention or diversion, as the case may be, under which they
will undergo or has undergone, of all children in conflict with the law to guarantee the correct
application of the provisions of this Act and other laws. The JJWC shall lead in the
establishment of a centralized information management system on children in conflict with the
law.
Table 2-L compared Section 63 of RA 9344 and Section 13 of RA 10630. Both sections
have the title, Appropriations. The old law stated that the amount needed to implement the law
in its first stage will be taken from the Office of the President. After that, monies needed to
continue the implementation of the said law (RA 9344) will be included in the General
Appropriations Act. Section 63 of RA 9344 also stated that an initial amount of Fifty million
pesos (P50,000,000.00) was taken from the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office which was
used to set-up the JJWC.
In the new law, however, the initial appropriation for the implementation of the new law
was charged against the appropriations of the JJWC under the budget of the DOJ. After that, the
appropriation for the continuance of the implementation of RA 9344, as amended, will be taken
the budget of the DSWD under the annual General Appropriations Act. In the new law Four
hundred million pesos (P400,000,000 Php) was appropriated for the construction of Bahay Pagasa rehabilitation centers in provinces or cities identified by DSWD and the JJWC as having
high incidence of children in conflict with the law. Moreover, LGUs are mandated by the new
law to give counterpart share equivalent to five million pesos (P5M) per rehabilitation center.
Table 2-L
TITLE VII
GENERAL
PROVISIONS
RA 9344
SECTION 63
RA 10630
SECTION 13
follows)
CHAPTER 4
SEC. 63. Appropriations. The
APPROPRIATION amount necessary to carry out the
PROVISION
initial implementation of this Act
shall be charged to the Office of
the President. Thereafter, such
sums as may be necessary for the
continued implementation of this
Act shall be included in the
succeeding General Appropriations
Act.
An initial amount of Fifty million
pesos (P50,000,000.00) for the
purpose of setting up the JJWC
shall be taken from the proceeds of
the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes
Office.
SEC. 63. Appropriations. The

amount necessary to carry out the
provisions of this Act shall be
charged against the current
years appropriations of the
JJWC under the budget of the
Department
of
Justice.
Thereafter, such sums as may be
necessary for the continued
implementation of this Act shall
be included in the budget of the
DSWD under the annual General
Appropriations Act: Provided,
That the amount of Four hundred
million pesos (P400,000,000.00)
shall be appropriated for the
construction of Bahay Pag-asa
rehabilitation centers in provinces
or cities with high incidence of
children in conflict with the law to
be determined and identified by
the DSWD and the JJWC on a
priority basis: Provided, further,
That the said amount shall be
coursed through the Department
of Public Works and Highways
(DPWH)
for
its
proper
implementation.
The LGUs concerned shall
make available, from its own
resources or assets, their
counterpart share equivalent to
the
national
government
contribution of Five million
pesos
(P5,000,000.00)
per
rehabilitation center.
In addition, the Council may
accept donations, grants and
contributions from various
sources, in cash or in kind, for
purposes
relevant
to
its
functions, subject to the usual
government accounting and
auditing rules and regulations.
Section 13 of RA 10630 also added that JJWC may accept donations, grants and
contributions from various sources, in cash or in kind, for purposes relevant to its functions,
subject to the usual government accounting and auditing rules and regulations.
It could be observed that the new law had more of the salient features compared to the
old law, as expectedly the case. The new law has added a lot of provisions which the legislators
found to be relevant for the effective and efficient juvenile justice system in the country. This is
where incrementalism has taken place. Legislators have formulated new policies from what has
already existed; they have amended RA 9344 by the many provisions (alternatives) which they
thought are politically, economically, and socially viable.
II.
Implications of the Changes in the Policy

The changes made in RA 9344 brought various implications. Foremost was the change of
from Youth Detention Home to Bahay Pag-asa. This implied a great deal of positivity of the
government to be able to successfully address the issues of Children in Conflict with the Law
(CICL). For the side of the CICL, the change implied hope, a positive transformation that they
could possibly experience while being taken care of at the Bahay Pag-asa. Although, Section 2 of
RA 10630 limits the short-term residential care to CICLs who are more than fifteen (15) years
old but less than eighteen (18) years old; CICLs who are awaiting disposition of their cases; and
CICLs who are awaiting transfer to other agencies. But the limitations imposed mean more
quality services that Bahay Pag-asa can give to the children in conflict with the law (CICL).
Moreover, the inclusion of a multi-disciplinary team for individualized intervention plan not just
for the CICL but alongside the childs family is an outstanding move of the government to mend
dysfunctional families and re-introduce responsible parenthood.
Incidentally, not much change was introduced to Section 3 of RA 10630. Only that in
determining the minimum age of responsibility, RA 10630 provided a clear guideline in deciding
whether or not the child is 15 years old at the time that he/she has committed the crime and that
the reckoning of the childs age is the anniversary of his/her birth date. Therefore, a child is
believed to be 15 years old on the day of his/her 15th birth date, until his/her next birth
anniversary. (Example: July 01 (birth date during the current year) to June 30 (the following
year). The implication for this amendment is that, in case the child does not have a certificate of
live birth to immediately determine his/her birthday, the reckoning therefore of the age of the
child will be guided by the number of times that the child has celebrated his/her birth
anniversary, especially pointing to the exact date that the child is celebrating it. This datum can
be extracted from the testimony of the child himself or from the testimony of a relative, either by
blood or by marriage, which has personal knowledge of the parentage of the child, and that such
relative could point to the exact age or birth date of the child.
Furthermore, the implication was that the absence of a birth certificate does not impede
the determination of the age of the child. This clear guideline in determining the minimum age of
criminal responsibility of a child implied care and exactitude on the part of the State. The
government sees to it that a child in conflict with the law shall always enjoy the presumption of
minority until proven otherwise, and that punishments are only given to those who truly deserve
them.
Apart from that, in Section 4 of RA 10630, the JJWC is now attached to the Department
of Social Welfare and Development. In RA 9344, JJWC was attached and placed under the
supervision of the Department of Justice. The attachment of JJWC to DSWD implied that the
whole responsibility toward CICL is given to DSWD. After all, this is what DSWD stands for,
which is anchored in social welfare and development. However, the law provides for
coordination between DSWD and other government agencies whenever situations so require
them. Besides, the JJWC was attached to the DSWD wherein the Secretary of the Social Welfare
and Development will designate two (2) representatives from NGOs to sit in the JJWC.
Moreover, one important feature in the 4th section of RA 10630 was that JJWC will be receiving
remunerations, which was absent in RA 9344. This action demands effectiveness and efficiency
on the part of the JJWC in addressing the problems of children in conflict with the law. These
representatives will not only be receiving remunerations but will be assigned ranks not lower
than director. Their position and salary imply accountability.
Alongside the attachment of JJWC to DSWD was the creation of Regional Juvenile
Justice and Welfare Committee (RJJWC). This implied for an effective discharge of duties in the
regional or provincial level that somehow anticipates for thoroughness in resolving the problems
of CICLs both in the regional and local government levels. In addition, it can be said that the
Congress is exercising good judgement in directing JJWC to involve local government units in
its consultations. After all, these local government officials are the front-line service providers
insofar as response, assistance and support of the CICL and their families are concerned. Given
these experiences of being in contact with CICLs and their families, LGUs can contribute in the
development of sound child-oriented policies. Importantly, the move of the legislature to involve
other agencies in resolving juvenile delinquency was outstanding. This means that these agencies
are indispensable if the government would want resolutions to the problem of juvenile
delinquency. With that, each agency is a contributor to the development of the well-being of the
child. The legislature sees the need for a viable linkage between and among government agencies
in devising and proposing policies that would prevent wrongdoings among youth, as well as
introduce reforms for the promotion of justice and welfare insofar as the youth are concerned.
Moreover, Section 5-A re-aligned logistics to JJWC that could result to a more
expeditious response to CICL problems. JJWC was given the whole responsibility of overseeing
the process of successfully implementing the law at the regional and LGU levels. One of the
duties of the JJWC is submission of an annual report to congress on the implementation of the
provisions stipulated in RA 10630. This meant that feedback mechanism was being upheld by the
Congress as it would help them determine whether or not the law was implemented as it should
be. Feedback from JJWC and other agencies concerned would help improve the rules in which
CICL was governed. Research data is one form of feedback that JJWC can use in improving their
mechanism in addressing the problems of CICLs. The implication is that for JJWC to assign
research personnel who have the knack for research in order to come up with valid and reliable
results, as these will become the basis of (future policies) decisions by the JJWC.
More importantly, the determination of whether the child will be referred to a youth care
facility or to be released to the duly recognized persons, organizations or institutions requires
expert valuation of the condition of the child. This implied that the child will be placed or
released to an environment that would channel for his/her positive growth and development.
Likewise, children who are exempt from criminal responsibility but have committed serious
crimes shall be mandatorily placed in a special facility within Bahay Pag-asa called as the
Intensive Juvenile Intervention and Support Center (IJISC). This means removing the child from
the community (where he could be a threat to others) and placing him in a facility that could
offer intervention in resolving psychosocial issues confronting him. This implies for additional
facility where a possible mix of CICLs who are exempted from criminal responsibility and those
who are not can be avoided.
Section 20-B of RA 10630 stipulated the repetition of offenses by the child. PD 603, as
amended, considered repeat offenders or recidivists as neglected children, and therefore shall
undergo an intensive intervention program supervised by DSWD. The implication was that these
12-year old children, recidivists or first-time offenders will be placed in the same special facility.
This further implies that expert handling of these minors is extremely required. On the other
hand, Section 20-C implied the responsibility and accountability of any person, including
parents, who are taking advantage of the minority and criminal exemption of the child by
exploiting the child to commit crimes for their own benefits. These persons should be meted
maximum penalties. The implication for the amendment was that, the law wants to be precise in
determining whether the child acted with discernment or not so that the child could be subjected
to a proper procedure of handling his case.
RA 10630 expressly mandated that the social worker shall conduct an initial assessment
of the child so that suitable interventions can be introduced. In assessing whether the child acted
with discernment, the standard tool developed by the DSWD for that purpose shall be used. The
law provided that even if the assessment was already made pertaining to the childs act, a
comprehensive case study about the child should still be conducted. As one would notice, the
statement the social worker shall conduct an initial assessment to determine the appropriate
interventions was not expressly stated in Section 22 of RA 9344 (but was only implied).
Also, the use of a standard discernment assessment tool in determining the act of the child
conveys fairness on the part of the child. Further, in directing the social worker to conduct a
comprehensive case study of the child, the law is sincere in understanding and helping the child.
This statement implied the necessity of recognizing that the child acted with discernment so that
he could be given a proper diversion program.
What is more, the law mandated the LGUs in provinces and cities to build, fund, and
operate a Bahay Pag-asa. It can be noticed that establishment of Bahay Pag-asa by private
individuals/entities and NGOs are no longer encouraged. The exclusion of private sectors and
NGOs in building, funding, and operating a Bahay Pag-asa implied government efforts in taking
full responsibility of helping the CICLs. The premise is that, most of the CICLs are coming from
poor families, and confining them in a private facility would entail payment which families could
not afford. Although, LGUs and Bahay Pag-asa can coordinate with other agencies in an effort to
help the CICL go back to living a normal life.
Republic Act 10630 has expanded the violations of local ordinances that could be
committed by juveniles. The implication however was that more juveniles will be placed under
intervention programs which entailed the construction of additional facilities, additional
personnel, and additional budget for operations. In other words, additional expenses and maybe
budget cuts from other sectors/programs in order to make way for CICL intervention programs.
SECTION 12 of RA 1063 required mandatory registry of children in conflict with the law. This
meant that persons, organizations, and institutions that have direct concern for CICLs shall
record all details pertaining to the child, without leaving any relevant information unlisted. The
records will serve as data base for CICLs.
Lastly, the Bahay-Pag-asa was a very expensive program of the government, but this is
indicative of the dedication on the part of the government in exercising its role as a good father
of the house. A good father monitors and evaluates every facet of his household and suggests
solutions for the best interest of the entire household. This law on juvenile justice and welfare
can be likened to a father disciplining his children so that they will follow a path to virtue.
Chapter 5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
A. Salient Features of the RA 9344 and RA 10630

Youth Detention Home was changed to Bahay Pag-asa in the new law and provision of a
short-term residential care for children in conflict with the law who are above 15 but below 18
years old; the determination of the age of the child using birth anniversaries, which was not
present in the old law; the assigning of ranks and giving of emoluments to the JJWC stipulated in
the new law was not found in the old law, also, in the old law the secretary of DOJ and the
secretary of DSWD were designated to assign representatives from NGOs to the JJWC, but in
the new law, only the secretary of DSWD was assigned to do it; in the new law, the creation of
RJJWC was provided as well as its composition, which not found in the old law. Also, in the new
law, the determination of the organizational structure and staffing was assigned to the secretary
of DSWD, which in the old law involved the secretary of the DOJ. Additional duties were
enumerated in the new law under the duties and functions of JJWC.
In the new law, the CICL below the age of criminal responsibility would be subjected to a
community-based intervention program supervised by the local SWDO, or the CICL would be
referred to Bahay Pag-asa. In comparison to the old law, CICLs below the age of criminal
responsibility would have to be released to the custody of his/her parents or guardian, or in the
absence thereof, the childs nearest relative. New provisions were also added in the new law
under Title 4: Section 20-A Serious Crimes Committed by Children Who Are Exempt from
Criminal Responsibility; Section 20-B Repetition of Offenses; Section 20-C Exploitation of
Children for Commission of Crimes; and Section 20-D Joint Parental Responsibility. In the
new law, the social worker shall conduct an initial assessment to determine the appropriate
interventions and whether the child acted with discernment, using the discernment assessment
tools developed by the DSWD, however I the old law the law enforcement officer would
determine where the case involving the child in conflict with the law should be referred. In the
new law, under preliminary investigation and filing of information, the information must allege
that the child acted with discernment, but this was not found in the old law. In the new law, each
province and highly-urbanized city (the LGUs) shall be responsible for building, funding and
operating a Bahay Pag-asa within their jurisdiction following the standards that will be set by
the DSWD and adopted by the JJWC, and that every Bahay Pag-asa will have a special facility
called the IJISC, but in the old law it said that youth detention homes may also be established by
private and NGOs licensed and accredited by the DSWD, in consultation with the JJWC. In the
new law, LGUs were required to fund local intervention program their annual budget, but in the
old law the expenses of the care and maintenance of a child in conflict with the law under
institutional care would be borne by his/her parents or those persons liable to support the child.
The new law also provided a new provision for violations of local ordinances, requiring
CILCs to attend group activities while their parents would attend parenting education seminars.
The new law also provided for the amount of four hundred million pesos (P400,000,000.00) to
be appropriated for the construction of Bahay Pag-asa rehabilitation centers in provinces or
cities with high incidence of children in conflict, but in the old law, an initial amount of Fifty
million Pesos (P50,000,000.00) for the purpose of setting up the JJWC was taken from the
proceeds of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office.
B. Implications of the Changes in the Policy

The change from Youth Detention Home to Bahay Pag-asa implied a great deal of
positivity of the government to be able to successfully address the issues of Children in Conflict
with the Law (CICL); the short-term residential care of CICLs implied declogging of the Bahay
Pag-asa; the inclusion of a multi-disciplinary team for individualized intervention plan for the
CICL and his/her family implied restoration dysfunctional families and reintroduce responsible
parenthood. The implication of the determination of the minimum age of responsibility of the
child is that the absence of a birth certificate does not impede the determination of the age of the
child. The attachment of JJWC to the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)
implied that the whole responsibility toward CICL was given to DSWD. The remuneration and
ranks of the JJWC implied responsibility and accountability.
Alongside the attachment of JJWC to DSWD is the creation of Regional Juvenile Justice and
Welfare Council implied for an effective discharge of duties in the regional or provincial level.
The submission of JJWC of an annual report to congress on the implementation of the provisions
stipulated in RA 10630 implied for JJWC to assign research personnel who have the knack for
research in order to come up with valid and reliable results, as these will become the basis of
(future policies) decisions by the JJWC. The determination of whether the child will be referred
to a youth care facility or to be released to the duly recognized persons, organizations or
institutions requires implied expert valuation of the condition of the child. The mandate that a
social worker should conduct an initial assessment of the child so that suitable interventions can
be introduced implied the necessity of recognizing that the child acted with discernment so that
he could be given a proper diversion program. The exclusion of private sectors and NGOs in
building, funding, and operating a Bahay Pag-asa implied government efforts in taking full
responsibility of helping the CICLs.
Republic Act 10630 has expanded the violations of local ordinances that could be committed
by juveniles. The implication however is that more juveniles will be placed under intervention
programs which entail construction of additional facilities, additional personnel, and additional
budget for operations. In other words, additional expenses and maybe budget cuts from other
sectors/programs in order to make way for CICL intervention programs. Also, Bahay Pag-asa
was a very expensive program of the government, but this implied that the government is
exercising its role as a good father in the house that monitors and evaluates every facet of his
household and suggests solutions for the best interest of the entire household. This law on
juvenile justice and welfare can be likened to a father disciplining his children so that they will
follow a path to virtue.
Conclusion
While it is true that after RA 9344 was amended and RA 10630 took effect on November
7, 2013, it can be said the juvenile system as a whole is in place, and all the legal bases are laid
down, gaps still exist in the implementation of the amended Act. Amending RA 9344,
specifically on lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility, is a short-sighted solution.
The first challenge is the lack of compliance with the various provisions of the law. In
particular, the provided mandates and duties of LGUs are still not fully observed. It is recognized
that the success of the law lies in the proactive involvement of local government units, starting
from the level of the barangay up to that of the provincial government. Secondly, the detention of
children pending trial is still reported to be prevalent. Children are continually committed by
Family Courts or Regional Trial Courts to BJMP-managed jails and worse, to the national
penitentiary, where they encounter overcrowded facilities in poor condition.
In addition, the lack of specialized courts, facilities, and personnel and conflicting
provisions are a significant issue. For example, the Supreme Court Revised Rule on Children in
Conflict with the Law allows children charged with non-serious offenses to be placed under the
care of a jail if there are no youth facilities available in their jurisdiction. Furthermore, there are
also many NGO-managed Youth Homes/BPAs that are still not accredited by DSWD. According
to the DSWD submission, there are only four accredited BPAs, as of the end of 2014.
Public support is also needed for the steadfast implementation of the law. Unfortunately,
public misconceptions about the Act still prevail. There is skepticism about the efficacy of the
Act, especially its inability to prevent recidivism among CICL..
The DSWD admits that while the ten-year-old law offers a lasting solution to the plight of
CICLs, the government needs to intensify its popularization, especially its basic provisions
for a better appreciation of the principles of restorative justice. For party-list Akap Bata, the
solution to the plight of CICLs does not lie in lowering the age of criminal responsibility but in
addressing the root cause of the problem: poverty that pushes children to commit criminal acts.
According to their spokesperson, these young people are victims of neglect, poverty, hunger,
malnutrition and so many other forms of social injustice. They are the very ones who have the
right to demand changes in how the country is run because they are the biggest victims along
with their parents. They come from the most exploited sectors of society.

Group 4 Legres Juvenile

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Group 4 Legres Juvenile

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

GROUP NO.

Statement of the Problem

Significance of the Study

Who are the CICLs

History of the Juvenile Justice in the Philippines

delinquency prevention to participate in the planning process and implementation of juvenile

A Comparison of the Salient Features of the RA 9344 and RA 10630

An Act Strengthening the Juvenile

Section 1. Short Title and Scope.

SECTION 1. The Title of Republic

(s) Youth Detention Home

(s) Bahay Pag-asa refers to

Part of the features of a Bahay

Comparison of the Salient Features of RA 9344 and RA 10630

SEC. 6. Minimum Age of

SEC. 6. Minimum Age of

A child is deemed to be fifteen

A child above fifteen (15) years

A child above fifteen (15) years

enforced in accordance with

SEC. 8. Juvenile Justice and

SEC. 8. Juvenile Justice and

(h) Two (2) representatives

(8) Two (2) representatives

There shall be a Regional

Juvenile Justice and Welfare

Consequently, Section 4 of RA 10630 created a Regional Juvenile Justice and Welfare

SEC. 9. Duties and Functions of

SEC. 9. Duties and Functions of

(f) To consult with the various

The JJWC shall submit an

SEC. 20. Children Below the

SEC. 20. Children Below the

fifteen (15) years old or below,

fifteen (15) years old or below,

SEC. 22. Duties During Initial

The taking of the statement of the

SEC. 22. Duties During Initial

The taking of the statement of the

After the initial investigation, the

(a) Proceed in accordance with

(b) If the child is above fifteen (15)

member of the BCPC.

The social worker shall conduct

The purpose of preliminary investigation and filing of information is to determine the

SEC. 33. Preliminary Investigation

SEC. 33. Preliminary Investigation

specified in Sections 27 and 28; and

Upon serving the subpoena and the

Upon determination of probable

(c) when considering the assessment

Upon serving the subpoena and the

Upon determination of probable

SEC. 49. Establishment of Bahay

Every Bahay Pag-asa will have

The comparison between Section 50 of RA 9344 and Section 10 of RA 10630 was

(Section 50 of Republic Act No.

SEC. 50. Care and Maintenance of

The expenses for the care and

The LGUs expected expenditures

those persons liable to support

shall be included in the LGUs

All city and provincial governments

SEC. 57. Status Offenses. Any