1.

Effectivity of the current legal system in protecting the rights of

children

 There are enough legal measures in the Philippines in protecting the

children.

When children are in conflict with the laws, we have RA 9344 that will
help them to be rehabilitated. They are not called as “accused” in
ordinary legal term, instead, they are considered as “children in conflict
with the laws”, so that their reputation in the society will not be
tarnished.

 The RA 9344 proceeding (when a child is involved) is different from

an ordinary court proceeding. In the former, the child needs to undergo
a diversion program whenever he is found to be responsible for a
commission of an offense without resorting to a formal court
proceeding.
There will be series of interventions or activities which are designed to
address the issues that caused him to commit an offense. In this way, he
will be reformed and rehabilitated, and will be returned back to the
society as a changed person. The principle of “restorative justice” is the
goal of our lawmakers when RA 9344 was established.

 On the same way, children who are victims of abuses sought their
protection from RA 7610. Under this law, the term “child abuse”
encompasses physical, psychological, sexual, emotional and economic
kinds of abuses.

 For example, in cases when the rape victim is a child, the law
guarantees that capital punishment shall be meted out to the offender.

a. When the victim is a child under 12 years old, or is demented,

and the offender raped her against her will --- this is called
“statutory rape”, and the penalty imposed to the offender is
reclusion perpetua.

b. In statutory rape, even if the victim consented, the law

presumes that the victim aged 12 or below CANNOT give a
valid consent.

c. Also, Art. 266-B of RPC (5) specifically provides that: “When

the victim of rape is below 7 years of age, the imposable
penalty shall be the capital punishment of death”.

d. On the other hand, if the rape victim is above 12 years old,

since the law presumes that the child can give a valid consent,
the Information’s caption shall always be in relation to RA
7610 (ex: Rape by sexual assault in relation to RA 7610). It is
important to relate the crime in RA 7610 to increase the
penalty.
e. Example: In rape by sexual assault, the imposable penalty is
Prision Mayor. But when rape by sexual assault is related to RA
7610, the imposable penalty increases from Prision Mayor to
Reclusion Temporal in its medium period.

(RECALDE VS PEOPLE; G.R. No. 211002, January 21, 2015)

“In People v. Chingh, the accused was charged with rape “for

inserting his fingers and afterwards his penis into the private
part of his minor victim.” The Court of Appeals found the
accused guilty of two counts of rape: statutory rape and rape
through sexual assault. This court modified the penalty
imposed for rape through sexual assault to the penalty
provided in Article III, Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610,
discussing as follows.

It is undisputed that at the time of the commission of the

sexual abuse, VVV was ten (10) years old.  This calls for the
application of R.A. No. 7610, or “The Special Protection of
Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act,” which defines sexual abuse of children
and prescribes the penalty therefor in Section 5(b), Article
III, to wit:

In this case, the offended party was ten

years old at the time of the commission of the
offense.  Pursuant to the above-quoted
provision of law, Armando was aptly
prosecuted under paragraph 2, Article 266-A
of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A.
No. 8353, for Rape Through Sexual Assault. 
However, instead of applying the penalty
prescribed therein, which is prision
mayor, considering that VVV was below 12
years of age, and considering further that
Armando’s act of inserting his finger in VVV’s
private part undeniably amounted to
lascivious conduct, the appropriate imposable
penalty should be that provided in Section 5
(b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610, which
is reclusion temporal in its medium period.

The Court is not unmindful to the fact that

the accused who commits acts of
lasciviousness under Article 366, in relation
to Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610,
suffers the more severe penalty of reclusion
temporal in its medium period than the one
who commits Rape Through Sexual Assault,
which is merely punishable by prision
mayor.  This is undeniably unfair to the
 child victim. To be sure, it was not the
intention of the framers of R.A. No. 8353 to
have disallowed the applicability of R.A. No.
7610 to sexual abuses committed to children. 
Despite the passage of R.A. No. 8353, R.A. No.
7610 is still good law, which must be applied
when the victims are children or those
“persons below eighteen (18) years of age or
those over but are unable to fully take care of
themselves or protect themselves from abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination
because of a physical or mental disability or
condition.”

f. The following Articles from RPC specifically provides the

offenses committed against a minor:

1. Art. 267 (4) – Kidnapping and Serious Illegal detention of

a minor (penalty: reclusion perpetua to death) with
exception
2. Art. 270 – Kidnapping of Minors and failure to return a
minor (penalty: reclusion perpetua)
3. Art. 271 – Inducing a minor to abandon his home
(penalty: prision correccional) with qualifications
4. Art. 273 – Exploitation of child labor (penalty: prision
correccional)
5. Art. 276 – Abandoning a minor (penalty: arresto mayor
and fine not exceeding P500) with qualifications
6. Art. 277 – Abandonment of minor by person entrusted
with his custody; indifference of parents (penalty:
arresto mayor and fine not exceeding P500)
7. Art. 278- exploitation of minors (penalty: prision
correccional and fine not exceeding P500)

2. Lowering the age of criminal responsibility.

 Under Sec. 6 of RA 9344, the minimum age of criminal responsibility

is 15 years old and under, at the time of the commission of offense.
Hence, they shall be exempt from any criminal liability. Further, a child
above 15 years but below 18 shall likewise be exempt from criminal
liability and be subjected to an intervention program, unless he acted
with discernment, in which case, the child shall be subjected to the
appropriate proceedings.

a. 15 y/o and under – exempt

b. above 15 but under 18 – exempt UNLESS acted with discernment

 The proposed House Bill 8858 states that:

a. 9 is the new minimum age of criminal responsibility

b. 9 y/o and under - exempt
 c. Above 9 y/o who committed heinous crimes- shall be held liable
d. 9 and above, but below 18 – exempt UNLESS acted with discernment

 I am in favor of lowering the age of criminal responsibility (but: 12

y/o and under-exempt; above 12 and under 18 exempt unless acted
with discernment) on the following reasons:

a. Due to modern technologies, children ages 9-12 have the

equivalent maturity of 15-18 years old. They are more aware of
the social happenings and more liberated as compared to those
who born in the 90’s aged 15-18 y/o that time. But, 9 years old is
too young, and there are children who has slow maturity
processes.

b. Syndicates used children below 15 to commit crimes because they

know that these children are exempted from liabilities. (most
common problem)

c. Discernment is the ability of a person to distinguish right from

wrong. A child’s exposure to social and media factors advanced
his/her maturity and awareness. Because of this, the child easily
discerns right from wrong.

d. Punishment for serious crimes should be imposed because

children nowadays tend to be irresponsible for their actions if
they are aware that they can not be held liable for it. Thus, it is
necessary to amend RA 9344.

e. Sen. Trillanes’ contention is that: "It is anti-family, anti-poor and

simply unjust. Moreover, it will promote a heartless and ruthless
society that has no regard for its own people. Also, some NGOs
stated that lowering the age of criminal liability was not in the best
interest of children, as this will only push them to further
discrimination, abuse and eventually into more anti-social
behavior.
f. However, there will be no discrimination against the poor because
the law will be applicable to everyone, regardless of social status.

3. Law students’ contribution in the current debate (re: lowering the

age of children’s criminal responsibility)

Conduct thorough research on the advantages and

disadvantages of lowering the age of criminal responsibility.

 Participate in seminars and discussions concerning this matter.

 The conduct of theses and analytical researches are helpful to

the lawmakers.