jailing them to get them out of their faces.
The amendment stands to accomplish nothing more than jail even more minors as nine to fourteen year olds are now criminally responsible. Legislators ought to know that neither acceptable nor aberrant social behavior is a function of age but of family upbringing, school education and socio-cultural milieu. These children need a law that will ensure positive reinforcement from these social instit u t i on s.
Nothing is solved by jailing more minors. It even creates more problems than it solves. DSWD has voiced the need for additional jail facilities for minors who surely cannot be put in the same facilities as those holding hardened criminals. And what about more juvenile courts and judges to try cases against more minors now? More, because before you could only try fifteenyear olds but now, with the amendment, you are obliged by law to hail to court ninet en-el even-t w el ve-t hi r t eenfourteen-year olds. What exactly were legislators thinking when they proposed this so-off-the-mark amendment?
CICL need specialized socio-psychological help. Making them criminally responsible at an even younger age will simply make our jails overflow with minors. Our legislators should maybe come up with a law pinning the criminal responsibility on unqualified guardians and taking abandoned or otherwise uncared for children from the latter and make them wards of the state as many nations are doing that take the responsibility for their problem children seriously.
The amendment lowering the age of criminal responsibility from fifteen to nine is a cop-out. We can definitely do better with the hope of the fatherland. And indeed they are the future of this nation not just the well-cared for children of decent folks.
By Orlando P. Carvajal