21/08/2025
WHO SAYS CHILDREN ARE NOT ACCOUNTABLE? Understanding the Implementation of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act (Republic Act 9344, as amended by RA 10630)
No law had been so misunderstood and probably mis-implemented than the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006. Following the principles of restorative justice, RA 9344 attempts to humanize us as we shape our children into responsible and disciplined adults. However, various online materials have been spreading misinformation about Juvenile Justice, betraying what little knowledge those who attack it have on what the law actually provides.
Indeed, doesnβt RA 9344 make children accountable for their actions when they committed various offenses β from statutory offenses to heinous crimes?
Is it true that children, under the law, do not go to jail should the commit murder, arson, r**e, robbery, etc?
Can we not do anything about children who are otherwise criminally liable if only they are not 15 years old and below, or over 15 but had acted without discernment?
To simplify the answers to these questions, the Childrenβs Legal Bureau is sharing its Juvenile Justice Referral Flow to guide the public and the service providers alike. We hope this enlighten who misunderstood the law and who spark hatred among the public, especially among victims, against children at risk and children in conflict with the law.
1. Children who have committed serious crimes and the seemingly incorrigible ones go scot-free. NOT TRUE. Children who have committed parricide, murder, infanticide, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, where the victim is killed or r**e, robbery or homicide or r**e, destructive arson, r**e or carnapping where the driver or occupant is killed or r**ed and offenses under RA 9165 punishable with more than twelve (12) years of imprisonment WILL BE COMMITTED TO THE BAHAY PAG-ASA while awaiting trial if they are more than 15 years old (15 years and 1 day or more) and with discernment, or undergo the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and Support program if they are 12-15 years old. While there is absolutely no criminal responsibility for the latter, children (and their parents) under these programs have civil liabilities. Note that Bahay Pag-asaβs are mandatory juvenile homes (like jail, but following international standards) for youthful offenders).
Repeat offenders as well as abandoned, neglected, dependent and abused children, who are 12-15 years old, when their best interest so require, will also go to Bahay Pag-asa. Parents can be compelled to have their children committed through a Petition for Involuntary Commitment filed by the social worker.
Children who have committed (with discernment) crimes punishable with more than 6 years imprisonment are not qualified for diversion (i.e., they are committed if they cannot post bail,) and will undergo trial, and may be convicted, but their sentence may be suspended and disposition measures will be made instead.
Qualified children will also be institutionalized if they or their parents do not want them to undergo diversion.
Children with failed diversion programs will also be filed cases against and will undergo trial, and may be convicted with sufficient evidence. They can be committed to an institution restricting liberty.
2. We cannot do anything about children who disobey their parents, violate curfew, or commit truancy (absence in school for more than 20 school days)? NOT TRUE. Children who commit status offenses and certain violations of ordinances shall likewise be subjected to intervention programs. Local government units are also enjoined by law to have preventive programs for children at risk. While these are not penalties, these are measures of protection for both the children and the community.
What are status offenses? These are offenses that are penalized if committed by adults. Children committing such will not be penalized. Afterall, if adults are not penalized, why make it a burden for children?
Children violating certain local ordinances such as curfew, truancy, parental disobedience, anti-smoking and anti-drinking laws, as well as light offenses and misdemeanors against public order or safety (eg. disorderly conduct, public scandal, harassment, drunkenness, public intoxication, criminal nuisance, vandalism, gambling, mendicancy, littering, public urination, and trespassing) shall undergo appropriate intervention programs provided for under the ordinance, These intervention programs could include counseling and attendance in group activities for children, and attendance in parenting education seminars for parents.
Children go back to their communities because they acted without discernment or for 15 years old and below, are first time offenders of non-serious crimes, or if they are below 12 years old but have committed serious offenses. Nonetheless, under all circumstance, they should undergo community-based intervention programs, which means they will have activities to follow to make them realize what they did wrong.
Republic Act 9344, as amended by RA 10630, clearly makes children accountable for what they did, only that the law makes institutionalization a last resort. Not only does it make children realize their mistakes through alternative means within the framework of restorative justice, it makes us more responsible adults as we make parents equally accountable and the community (through the service providers) more actively involved in the molding of the child through intervention and diversion programs.
Now who says there is no accountability in our juvenile justice law?
