In the case of US vs Pablo, the right of prosecution and punishment for a crime is one of

the attributes that by a natural law belongs to the sovereign power instinctively charged by the
common will of the members of society to look after, guard and defend the interests of the
community, the individual and social rights and the liberties of every citizen and the guaranty of
the exercise of his rights. Hence, our system of laws must not shy away from prosecuting criminal
offenders even if they are minors because notwithstanding the fact that we have already created
and developed institutions, programs and interventions, the juvenile delinquency is still on the rise.

Statistics manifests our stand. According to the Council for the Welfare of Children, more
than 52,000 Filipino children from 1995 to 2000 were in conflict with the law.

Who is a child in conflict with the law? This is a child who is alleged as accused of, or
adjudged as, having committed an offense under Philippine laws.

Another data from social-welfare said that, from 2001 to 2010, close to 64,000 child
offenders were detained by the government, the highest being in Western Visayas, the National
Capital Region and Region 11, or the Davao region, throughout the said period.

From the year 1995 to 2010, even with the incorporation of international juvenile justice
laws and the effectivity of RA 9344 during the said periods, we still see an increasing trend of
crimes committed by children.

Worse, current statistics show that not all child crimes are petty and juvenile. Children are
being convicted for crimes like rape and murder, even insurgency in which, cruelty, brutality,
visciousness, harshness and ruthlessness are attendant.

Let me cite you the case of People vs Madali. This is a case of murder as a result from a
so called gang initiation conducted by two minors, namely Raymund and Rodel Madali.
Raymund Madali, 14-years of age, who placed his handkerchief around the neck of the victim,
who obviously acted with discernment, resulted the suffocation of the victim. But because of RA
9344, Raymund Madali was just released to the custody of his parents. The victim in this case died
without justice.

However, we say your honor that crime is essentially a social and natural phenomenon,
and as such, it cannot be treated and checked by the application of abstract principles of law and
jurisprudence nor by the imposition of a punishment, fixed and determined a priori; but rather
through the enforcement of individual measures in each particular case after a thorough, personal
and individual investigation conducted by a competent body of psychiatrists and social scientists.

Laurence Kohlberg, a renounced psychologists said that in moral development, children

approach moral problems intent in maintaining social respect and accepting what society define as
right. It started at the age of 6 up to 12. But by the age of 9, they already know what is right or
wrong.

Ladies and gentlemen, having said all of these, we will prove to you that lowering the age
of criminal liability is more beneficial than maintaining the current age of criminal responsibility,
on two grounds:

1. The state can prosecute the minor offenders who committed an offense against it, without
however disregarding the basic rights of the minors as enshrine in our Constitution.

2. Lowering the age of criminal responsibility is not anti-poor and will reduce the incidence
and prevalence of juvenile delinquency.

On to my first point Your Honor, the state can prosecute the minor offenders who
committed an offense against it, without however disregarding the basic rights of the minors as
enshrine in our Constitution. Your Honor, we stand that minors above 9 years of age but below 15
years of age, who acted with discernment, shall be criminally liable, however, such minors shall
not be placed in the same detention facility than that of adult offenders. As provided in Article 80
of the Revised Penal Code, these minors shall be committed to the custody or care of a public or
private, benevolent or charitable institution, established under the law of the care, correction or
education of orphaned, homeless, defective, and delinquent children. This is a totally different
provision provided by RA 9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, in which a child
below 15 years of age, is exempted from criminal liability and shall be released to the custody of
his or her parents or guardians.

Aside from that, adult criminals use the children as an accomplice and as a tool to commit
a crime. With their knowledge and awareness that these children are exempted from criminal
liability as protected by RA 9344, adults coerce with these children to commit crimes such as drug
trafficking. Although the intent of RA 9344 is worthy of praise, this statute pampers youth
offenders to commit crimes knowing that they can get away with it.

Onto my second point, lowering the age of criminal responsibility is not anti-poor and will
reduce the incidence and prevalence of juvenile delinquency.

Your honors, we cannot allow poverty to be used as an excuse not to lower the minimum
age of responsibility. Poverty does not and cannot change the nature of a crime, much less, the
discernment of a person to distinguish and differentiate a right from a wrongful act. A violation of
the pertinent provisions of the Revised Penal Code by a minor who has acted with discernment
warrants the imposition of criminal penalty simply because he knows the full consequence of his
felonious acts as he has acted with discernment despite his being underprivileged. Because of
discernment, the mental capacity of a person to distinguish what is right or wrong, said minor shall
be criminally liable. Save certain exception, which is the doctrine of the state of necessity, in which
an offenders acts MAY be justified who, in order to avoid evil or injury thus an act provided that
the evil sought to be avoided actually exist, that the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid
it, that there will be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.

With all these Your Honor, I rest my case.