Lowering criminal age doesn’t stop youth crime, expert warns

Lowering age of criminal liability doesn’t deter youth from crime, says expert. INQUIRER.net file image

MANILA, Philippines — Lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility does not effectively deter the youth from committing crimes, according to a criminal justice expert.

Signed into law in 2006, Republic Act 9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act set the minimum age of criminal responsibility at 15 years old.

In the 20th Congress, Sen. Robin Padilla filed Senate Bill No. 372, seeking to lower that threshold to 10 years old for heinous crimes.

READ: A clean slate: For these ex-convicts, art is a chance to start over

However, criminal justice expert and Illinois-based Filipino criminology professor Raymund Narag said he believes the proposed measure would not prevent minors from criminal behavior.

“There’s no deterrence factor, even if the criminal age of responsibility is law and punitive,” Narag, speaking in Filipino, told the Inquirer in an interview.

“Children will only be led further astray because of their entanglement with the criminal justice system. At the same time, they won’t grasp the gravity, seriousness and severity of the punishments,” he added.

Narag is an associate professor at the Southern Illinois University Carbondale – School of Justice and Public Safety, where he has taught criminology and criminal justice since 2020.

He also once served as a consultant for the Bureau of Corrections, the Department of Justice, the Supreme Court and the Commission on Human Rights.

Narag stressed that holding children criminally responsible alongside hardened criminals may expose them to “criminogenic thinking,” defined as a set of thought patterns and belief systems that encourage criminal behavior.

For families seeking justice

RA 9344 states that children ages 15 and below shall be exempt from criminal liability but subjected to an intervention program.

Meanwhile, the law provides that children between the ages of 15 and 18 shall also be exempt from criminal liability and subjected to an intervention program – if they are proven not to have acted with discernment.

READ: Torre: PNP backs lower age of criminal liability in `scientific’ way

Discussions about lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility were sparked anew after a 21-year-old college student was found dead after being stabbed 38 times during a robbery in her home in Tagum City, Davao del Norte in July.

Four suspects were reportedly arrested by police over the case: an adult alleged to be the group leader, a 17-year-old, a 15-year-old and a 14-year-old.

Under RA 9344, the 14-year-old could not be held criminally liable while the three other suspects could be charged with robbery with homicide, the Davao del Norte Police Provincial Office previously said in a press briefing.

In a statement pushing for his bill to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility, Padilla said, “If it’s difficult to talk about it, it’s even more difficult to hear the cries of the victims and their families who are still seeking justice.”

For his part, Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief Gen. Nicolas Torre III said the law enforcement agency supported lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility.

However, Torre stressed during a press briefing in Camp Crame on August 22 that changing the policy for juvenile justice must be “scientific.”

“We have studies we need to consider whether the current age limits are still applicable. Perhaps, children’s consciousness is much higher now because of their access to information at an early age,” he said.

Reconciling

So, how can advocates seeking to keep the minimum age of responsibility reconcile their goal with calls for justice in response to crimes committed by minors?

Narag said, “I understand that, right? We’re human. Surely, if your child was hurt on the streets, as a dad myself, I have to protect my kid. It’s self-preservation.”

“And we rightfully understand the moral concerns of victims of violent crimes and especially the parents of victims of heinous crimes like rape and murder. We need to address that,” he added.

So what solution would Narag propose?

“What happened was very heavy and very heinous. But, the solution to prevent that in the future is to address the root causes of juvenile delinquency,” the criminal justice professor answered.

“We need improved families, improved labor codes, improved communities, improved social networks, improved schools to provide a way for our children to develop maturely in such a loving and caring environment,” he added.

Narag’s proposal echoed the sentiment of former Commission on Human Rights Chairperson and current Mamamayang Liberal party-list Rep. Leila de Lima, who said in July: “A child is not a criminal. A lost child should not be locked up but talked to, cared for, and given hope.”

In the same month, the Child Rights Network argued that the minimum age of criminal responsibility itself was not the issue but the implementation of RA 9344.

“We already have the mechanisms. What we need are more social workers, more funding and more support for community-based and rehabilitative programs,” the group said. /mr