University of Nueva Caceres

Naga City

RA 7610: When Both Victim and Offender are Minors

(In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in Legal Research)

Shane Beria-Imperial
Ervin J. Belano

1st Year, Block A

October 21, 2014

Introduction
Since time immemorial, Filipinos have regarded children as the future of
the nation and considered them as treasures or blessings. It is for this reason
that rights of the child are enshrined in the 1935 and 1987 Philippine
Constitution. However, for a lot of Filipino children, being a treasure has taken
a different meaning as their future came too early with them being forced to
share in the responsibilities of adults even at a young age. These circumstances
are often characterized by violence.1 Physical and emotional violence against
children is a fundamental breach of their rights. It completely disregards their
entitlement to respect, dignity and integrity. It undermines their development,
damages their self-esteem, and perpetuates the thinking that it is all right to
hit and hurt others.2
1 United Nations Study on Violence against Children, Response to the questionnaire
received from the Government of the Philippine,
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/CRC/docs/study/responses/Philippines.pdf

2 Save the Children UK, Philippine Laws related to the Discipline and Punishment of
Children,
http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/sites/default/files/documents/1399.pdf

Article XV (The Family), Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution explicitly

states the right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition,
and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation and
other conditions prejudicial to their development.3 Moreover, the Philippines is
a State Party in the ratification of a number of International Human Rights
instruments concerning children. After the ratification of the United Nations
Convention on the Right of the Child (UNCRC), efforts were undertaken to
harmonize domestic legislation in accordance with the standards of the
international convention. Relevant among these domestic legislations is
Republic Act No. 7610, known as the Special Protection of Children Against
Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act and Republic Act No. 9344 or
the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006.
RA 7610 declares that it shall be the policy of the state to provide special
protection to children from all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation and
discrimination, and other conditions prejudicial to their development. It serves
to punish the following acts: Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse (Art.
III, Section 5, pars. a and b and Section 6); Child Trafficking (Art. IV, Secs. 7
and 8); Obscene Publication and Indecent shows (Art. V, Sec. 9); Other Acts of
Abuse (Art. VI, Sec. 10, par. a, b, c, d & e); Sanctions for Establishments or
3 Art. XV, Sec. 3, 1987 Philippine Constitution

Enterprises (Art. VII, Sec. 11); Working Children (Section 16), Subjecting
Children of Indigenous Cultural Communities to any or all forms of
Discrimination (Art. IX, Sec. 20).4
In the Philippines, children who are victims of violence are categorized as
children needing special protection (CNSP). The CNSP are further grouped into
sub-sectors according to their circumstances or nature of violations/offenses
that they experienced rather than by the setting. Thus, CNSP includes child
labor; children-victims of sexual abuse and commercial sexual exploitation;
abandoned and neglected or children without primary caregivers; children of
indigenous cultural groups, child-victims of disasters; children in situations of
armed conflict; street children; and, children in conflict with the law.5
In consonance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, R.A. 9344
gives emphasis to the principles of the best interest of the child (Art 3), nondiscrimination (Art 2), the right to life and maximum survival and

4An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child
Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for other Purposes, RA 7610, June 17,
1992

5 United Nations Study on Violence against Children, Response to the questionnaire

received from the Government of the Philippine,
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/CRC/docs/study/responses/Philippines.pdf

development (Art 6) and respect for the childs evolving capacities (Art 5)
when setting the age of criminal liability.

Under R.A. No. 9344, juvenile justice and welfare system is defined as
a system dealing with children at risk and children in conflict with the law,
which provides child-appropriate proceedings, including programs and services
for prevention, diversion, rehabilitation, reintegration and aftercare to ensure
their normal growth and development.
This paper will delve in the two classifications of children needing special
protection, particularly children-victims and children in conflict with the law.
The discussions of this paper will explore the laws governing the cases wherein
both victim and delinquent are below 18 years of age.
Considering the abovecited laws which involve minor victims and juvenile
delinquents, a number of intriguing questions now arise: what will happen if in
such cases of child abuse, the offender is also a minor? What are its legal
implications given the fact that there is an apparent conflict between the two
laws

where

one

protects

minor

against

abuse,

exploitation,

and

discrimination (RA 7610) while the other, in a way, adheres to the principle of
restorative justice which exempts a minor offender from criminal liability (RA
9344)?

R.A. 7610: The Child Abuse Law

A long line of jurisprudence relative to the application of Republic Act

7610, otherwise known as the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse,
Exploitation and Discrimination Act, however, would show that most cases
involve adult offenders. It is on this note that the researchers will try to
expound on the salient provisions of the law (R.A. 7610) as applied in landmark
cases decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

For the readers of this paper to have a good grasp of the foregoing law,
herein researchers deemed it necessary to include some important terms as
defined in R.A. 7610, to wit:

(a) "Children" refers to person 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;

(b) "Child abuse" refers to the maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of

the child which includes any of the following:
(1) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual abuse
and emotional maltreatment;

(2) Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or demeans

the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being;
(3) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for survival, such
as food and shelter; or
(4) Failure to immediately give medical treatment to an injured
child

resulting

in

serious

impairment

of

his

growth

and

development or in his permanent incapacity or death.

(c) "Circumstances which gravely threaten or endanger the survival and

normal development of children" include, but are not limited to, the
following;
(1) Being in a community where there is armed conflict or being
affected by armed conflict-related activities;
(2) Working under conditions hazardous to life, safety and normal
which unduly interfere with their normal development;
(3) Living in or fending for themselves in the streets of urban or
rural areas without the care of parents or a guardian or basic
services needed for a good quality of life;
(4) Being a member of a indigenous cultural community and/or
living under conditions of extreme poverty or in an area which is

underdeveloped and/or lacks or has inadequate access to basic

services needed for a good quality of life;
(5) Being a victim of a man-made or natural disaster or calamity; or
(6) Circumstances analogous to those abovestated which endanger
the life, safety or normal development of children.

(d) "Comprehensive program against child abuse, exploitation and

discrimination" refers to the coordinated program of services and
facilities to protected children against:
(1) Child Prostitution and other sexual abuse;
(2) Child trafficking;
(3) Obscene publications and indecent shows;
(4) Other acts of abuses; and
(5) Circumstances which threaten or endanger the survival and
normal development of children.6

Violations in RA 7610

Articles III, IV, V, and VI of Republic Act 7610 provide for the violations which
may be committed under the latter. According to Article III, which contemplates
on child prostitution and other sexual abuse, children, whether male or
6 Section 3, R.A. 7610.

female, who for money, profit, or any other consideration or due to the coercion
or influence of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual intercourse
or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be children exploited in prostitution and
other sexual abuse.7

In the case of People vs. Nemesio Bon,8 the Court

provided the elements of the crime of acts lasciviousness: (1) that the offender
commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) that it is done: (a) by using
force and intimidation or (b) when the offended party is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the offended party is under 12 years of age;
and (3) that the offended party is another person of either sex. Moreover,
Section 32, Article XIII, of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7610
or the Child Abuse Law defines lascivious conduct, as follows:

"[T]he intentional touching, either directly or through clothing, of the

genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, or the
introduction of any object into the genitalia, anus or mouth, of any
person, whether of the same or opposite sex, with an intent to abuse,
humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any

7 Section 5, R.A. 7610.

8 People v. Bon, G.R. No. 149199, 28 January 2003.

person, bestiality, masturbation, lascivious exhibition of the genitals or

pubic area of a person."

In cases of acts of lasciviousness, the lone testimony of the offended

party, if credible, is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused. Such is the
testimony of victims under the Child Abuse Law who are young, immature, and
have no motive to falsely testify against the accused.9

At any rate, if the crime of acts of lasciviousness qualifies under the

purview of RA 7610 i.e., the victim is a minor, the Amployo case provides for
the elements of such sexual abuse under Section 5, Article III of R.A. 7610. The
elements of sexual abuse are:
1. The accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct.
2. The said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or
subjected to other sexual abuse.
3. The child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age.10

9 People v. Dichoson, 352 SCRA 56, 66 [2001]; citing People v. Acala, 307 SCRA 330
[1999]; People v. Abordo, 258 SCRA 571 [1996]; People v. Fraga, 330 SCRA 669
[2000]; People v. Molina, 53 SCRA 495 [1973].
10 Amployo v. People, G.R. No. 157718, 26 April 2005.

The first element contemplates of the intentional touching, either

directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or
buttocks, or the introduction of any object into the genitalia, anus or mouth, of
any person, whether of the same or opposite sex, with an intent to abuse,
humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person,
bestiality, masturbation, lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a
person. The second element which requires that the act be performed with a
child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse is succinctly
explained in People v. Larin11:

A child is deemed exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual

abuse, when the child indulges in sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct (a) for money, profit, or any other consideration; or (b) under the
coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group. ...

It must be noted that the law covers not only a situation in which a child
is abused for profit, but also one in which a child, through coercion or
intimidation, engages in lascivious conduct. Thus, a child is deemed subjected
to other sexual abuse when the child indulges in lascivious conduct under the
coercion or influence of any adult. Furthermore, it is inconsequential that the
11 357 Phil. 987 (1998).

sexual abuse occurred only once. As expressly provided in Section 3 (b) of R.A.
7610, the abuse may be habitual or not. It must be observed that Article III of
the said law is captioned as "Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse"
because Congress really intended to cover a situation where the minor may
have been coerced or intimidated into lascivious conduct, not necessarily for
money or profit.12

As regards to the age of the victim (third element), so long as he/she is

below 18 years old, R. A. 7610 applies, for children under this special law shall
refer to 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.13 It is interesting to note, however, that the law explicitly provides for
the age of the offender, the latter termed as adult in cases of child prostitution
and sexual abuse under the first paragraph of Section 5, Article III of the Child
Abuse Law. Ascendant, parent, guardian, stepparent or collateral relative
within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity are also liable in cases of
violations of any of the provision of the foregoing law.

12 Angara Amendment
13 Section 3 (a), R.A. 7610.

Other acts which constitute a violation of the Child Abuse Law include
(1) child trafficking (Article IV, Sections 7 and 8); (2) obscene publications and
indecent shows (Article V, Section 9); and (3) Section 10 which includes acts of
neglect, abuse, cruelty or exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to the
childs development.

Rape or Child Abuse?

There is a thin line which separates rape (Violation of Article 266-A par. 1
in relation to Article 266-B, 1st par. of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by
R.A. No. 8353) from Child Abuse as defined and penalized by Sec. 5, (b), R.A.
No. 7610 such that all the elements of both crime may be present in a
particular case. The case of People v. Abay,14 however, is enlightening and
instructional on this matter for it provides the rule on how to treat analogous
cases. In that case, if the victim is 12 years or older, the offender should be
charged with either sexual abuse under Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610 or rape
under Article 266-A (except paragraph 1[d]) of the Revised Penal Code.
However, the offender cannot be accused of both crimes for the same act
because his right against double jeopardy will be prejudiced. 15 Consequently, a
14 G.R. No. 177752, February 24, 2009, 580 SCRA 235.
15 People v. Optana, 404 Phil. 316, 351 (2001).

person cannot be subjected twice to criminal liability for a single criminal act. 16
Abay case provides:

Under Section 5(b), Article III of RA 7610 in relation to RA 8353, if the

victim of sexual abuse is below 12 years of age, the offender should not
be prosecuted for sexual abuse but for statutory rape under Article 266A(1)(d)

of

the

Revised

Penal

Code

and

penalized

with reclusion

perpetua. On the other hand, if the victim is 12 years or older, the

offender should be charged with either sexual abuse under Section 5(b)
of RA 7610 or rape under Article 266-A (except paragraph 1[d]) of the
Revised Penal Code. However, the offender cannot be accused of both
crimes for the same act because his right against double jeopardy will be
prejudiced. A person cannot be subjected twice to criminal liability for a
single criminal act. Likewise, rape cannot be complexed with a violation
of Section 5(b) of RA 7610. Under Section 48 of the Revised Penal Code
(on complex crimes), a felony under the Revised Penal Code (such as
rape) cannot be complexed with an offense penalized by a special law.

16 Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 21 which provides: Section 21. No person shall be put
twice in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act is punished by a law
and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to
another prosecution for the same act.

In the case of People v. Dahilig,17 the victim was more than 12 years old
when the crime was committed against her. The Information against appellant
stated that the victim was 13 years old at the time of the incident. Therefore,
appellant may be prosecuted either for violation of Section 5(b) of RA 7610 or
rape under Article 266-A (except paragraph 1[d]) of the Revised Penal Code.
While the Information may have alleged the elements of both crimes, the
prosecutions evidence only established that appellant sexually violated the
person of the victim through force and intimidation by threatening her with a
bladed instrument and forcing her to submit to his bestial designs. Thus, rape
was established.

Accordingly, the accused can indeed be charged with either Rape or

Child Abuse and be convicted therefor. Considering, however, that the
information correctly charged the accused with rape in violation of Article 266A par. 1 in relation to Article 266-B, 1st par. of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended by R.A. No. 8353, and that he was convicted therefor, the CA should
have merely affirmed the conviction.

Filing of Complaint

17 G.R. No. 187083, 13 June 2011.

Complaints on cases of violations of R.A. 7610 may be filed by the

following:
(a) Offended party;
(b) Parents or guardians;
(c)

Ascendant

or

collateral

relative

within

the

third

degree

of

consanguinity;
(d) Officer, social worker or representative of a licensed child-caring
institution;
(e) Officer or social worker of the Department of Social Welfare and
Development;
(f) Barangay chairman; or
(g) At least three (3) concerned responsible citizens where the violation
occurred.18

A complaint is sufficient if it states the name of the accused; the

designation of the offense given by the statute; the acts or omissions
complained of as constituting the offense; the name of the offended party; the
approximate date of the commission of the offense; and the place where the
offense was committed.19 The complaint or information shall state the
18 Section 27, R.A. 7610
19 Section 6, Rule 110, The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.

designation of the offense given by the statute, aver the acts or omissions
constituting

the

offense,

and

specify

its

qualifying

and

aggravating

circumstances. If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be made

to the section or subsection of the statute punishing it. 20 The acts or omissions
complained of as constituting the offense and the qualifying and aggravating
circumstances must be stated in ordinary and concise language and not
necessarily in the language used in the statute but in terms sufficient to
enable a person of common understanding to know what offense is being
charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating circumstances and for the
court to pronounce judgment.21

In cases of violation of the Child Abuse law, wherein the age of the
offended party is an indispensable element, it is sufficient that such age need
not be alleged in the information. Other documents relative to the case such as
the resolution of the investigating prosecutor and the sworn complaint of the
victim which alleges the essential element of age of the offended party shall be
consulted and given weight. In the case of People v. Rosare,22 the resolution of
the investigating prosecutor which formed the basis of the information, a copy
20 Section 8, id.
21 Section 9, id.
22 332 Phil. 435 (1996).

of which is attached thereto, stated that the offended party is suffering from
mental retardation. There was substantial compliance with the mandate that
an accused be informed of the nature of the charge against him. Thus,
appellant contends that he cannot be convicted of statutory rape because the
fact that the victim was a mental retardate was never alleged in the information
and, absent this element, the acts charged negate the commission of the
offense for which he was convicted by the lower court. As the Court puts it:

Pursuant to Section 8, Rule 112 of the Rules of Court, we have decided

to motu proprio take

cognizance

of

the

resolution

issued

by

the

investigating prosecutor in I.S. No. 92-0197 dated June 2, 1992, which

formed the basis of and a copy of which was attached to the information
for rape filed against herein appellant. Therein, it is clearly stated that
the offended party is suffering from mental retardation. We hold,
therefore, that this should be deemed a substantial compliance with the
constitutional mandate that an accused be informed of the nature of the
charge against him. 23

Clearly, if the information failed to allege the age of the offended party
BUT a copy of the order issued by the investigating judge was attached in the

23 People v. Rosare.

record of the preliminary investigation stating that the complainant was a

minor, there is in fact a substantial compliance with the mandate to inform the
accused of the nature of the accusation, as elucidated in People v. Villamor.24

Another instance wherein a filed information may be questioned by the

defense is the failure of the former to cite specific sections alleged to have been
violated by the offender, such that the information merely provides that the
offender is being charged for the crime of violation of R.A. 7610. Such
omission or lack of specificity however, according to the Court, does not
invalidate the information. It further held that the character of the crime is
not determined by the caption or preamble of the information nor from the
specification of the provision of the law alleged to have been violated, but by the
recital of the ultimate facts and circumstances in the complaint or
information.25 In other words, the sufficiency of the information is not negated
by an incomplete or defective designation of the crime in the caption but by the
narration of facts which adequately depicts a crime.

Prosecution versus Defense

24 357 Phil. 940 (1998).

25 Reyes v. Camilon, G.R. No. 46198, 20 December 1990, 192 SCRA 445, 453.

Since most of the cases which falls under R.A. 7610 involve sexual abuse
(Article III thereof), it is worth considering the common contention of the
offended party and the defense usually presented by the offender, and how the
Court weighs these conflicting arguments. Perhaps the most common defense
is the so called sweetheart defense which claims that the offender and the
offended party have a romantic relationship such that any act including carnal
knowledge is done with both parties consent.

The court however, in the case of People v. Madsali26 as cited in the case
of People v. Dahilig, for such defense to prosper, the existence of the supposed
relationship must be proven by convincing substantial evidence otherwise such
claim is to be considered as self-serving and of no probative value. It must be
corroborated by common friends or substantiated by tokens of such
relationship such as love letters, gifts, pictures and the like.

Attack on the information filed at times is also resorted to by the

offender. In such cases, the foregoing discussion on Filing of Complaint (on this
paper) shall apply.

In the case of uncorroborated alibis and/or denials, such defense is to

considered as inherently weak and cannot therefore prevail over the positive
26 G.R. No. 179570, 4 February 2010.

and categorical identification provided by eyewitnesses.27 Moreover, with

regards to the credibility of witnesses, the Court has ruled that in cases of acts
of lasciviousness, the lone testimony of the offended party, if credible, is
sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused. 28 Such is the testimony of
victims who are young, immature, and have no motive to falsely testify against
the accused. A minors testimony and his/her parents claim of child abuse
against an offender should not be considered as an incredible claim for at stake
is the reputation, dignity and identity of the minor; and no parent shall expose
him/her to such public trial if the charges were not true.

Penalties

Under R.A. 7610 (Article III, Section 5), various penalties on child
prostitution and other forms of sexual abuse are provided. Article V provides
for the penalties for obscene publications and indecent shows while Article VI
defines penalties for other acts or abuse. Article VII provides for sanctions for
establishments or enterprises which promote or facilitate various acts of child
abuse. Finally, Article VIII defines the penalties for violations of its provisions
on working children.
27 People v. Zamora, 343 Phil. 574, 590 (1997).
28 People v. Mendoza, 24 December 2008.

Article III, Section 5, of Republic Act No. 7610, provides:

Child Prostitution and other Sexual Abuse. Children, whether male or
female, who for money or profit, or any other consideration or due to the
coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct are deemed to be children exploited in
prostitution and other sexual abuse.

The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion

perpetua shall be imposed upon the following:

xxx

xxx

xxx

(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct
with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
abuse; Provided, That when the victim is under twelve (12) years of
age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article 335,
paragraphs 3, for rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended,
the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case
may be: Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct when the
victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion temporal
in its medium period; . . . . (Emphasis supplied)

In the absence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance, the penalty

shall be imposed in its medium period, which has a range of fifteen (15) years,
six (6) months and twenty (20) days to sixteen (16) years, five (5) months and
nine (9) days. Notwithstanding that R.A. 7610 is a special law, an offender may
enjoy the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. 29 Thus, he shall be
entitled to a minimum term to be taken within the range of the penalty next
lower to that prescribed by the Code. The penalty next lower in degree
is prision mayor, the range of which is from six (6) years and one (1) day to
twelve (12) years.30

Section 10 of R.A. 7610 provides:

(a) Any person who shall commit any other acts of child abuse, cruelty
or exploitation or to be responsible for other conditions prejudicial to the
child's development shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its
minimum period. (Six years and one day)
The penalty for the crimes of murder, homicide, other intentional
mutilation, and serious physical injuries, respectively, shall be reclusion
perpetua when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age. (Thirty years)
29 People v. Jalosjos.
30 People v. Bon.

R.A. 7610 also provides that where any violation is committed by an

ascendant, parent, guardian, stepparent or collateral relative within the
second degree of consanguinity or affinity, the applicable penalty shall be
imposed in its maximum period.31 Hence, when the victim is the child of the
perpetrator, the relationship is considered an aggravating circumstance enough
to warrant the imposition of the maximum penalty.

As to the award of damages, prevailing jurisprudence serves as guidepost

in the imposition of the fine. In People v. Abadies,32 and with respect
specifically to lascivious conduct amounting to child abuse under Section 5(b)
of Rep. Act No. 7610, there is an imposed fine of P30,000 for each count of
lascivious conduct in addition to the award of moral damages on the
justification that

It will be noted that Section 5, Article II of Republic Act No. 7610

provides for the penalty of imprisonment. Nevertheless, Section 31(f),
Article XII (Common Penal Provisions) thereof allows the imposition of a
fine subject to the discretion of the court, provided that the same is to be
administered as a cash fund by the Department of Social Welfare and
31 R A No 7610, Section 31
32 G.R. Nos. 139346-50. July 11, 2002

Development and disbursed for the rehabilitation of each child victim, or

any immediate member of his family if the latter is the perpetrator of the
offense. This provision is in accord with Article 39 of the Convention on
the Rights of the Child, to which the Philippines became a party on
August 21, 1990, which stresses the duty of states parties to ensure the
physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration of abused
and exploited children in an environment which fosters their self-respect
and human dignity.33

Republic Act 9344

In consonance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, RA 9344
gives emphasis to the principles of the best interest of the child (Art 3), nondiscrimination (Art 2), the right to life and maximum survival and
development (Art 6) and respect for the childs evolving capacities (Art 5)
when setting the age of criminal liability.

Under R.A. No. 9344, juvenile justice and welfare system is defined as
a system dealing with children at risk and children in conflict with the law,
which provides child-appropriate proceedings, including programs and services

33 Olivarez v. C.A. and People, 29 June 2005

for prevention, diversion, rehabilitation, reintegration and aftercare to ensure

their normal growth and development.
In addition to the basic human rights of a citizen under Art. III (Bill of
Rights) of the 1987 Constitution, as implemented by relevant laws, every child
in conflict with the law shall have the right to:
1. not to be imposed a sentence of capital punishment or life
imprisonment, without the possibility of release;
2. to be detained or imprisoned only as a last resort, which shall be for
the shortest appropriate period of time;
3. to be separated from adult offenders at all times, to be conveyed
separately to or from the court during court hearings, and to await the
hearing of his/her own case in a separate holding area.
4. to bail and recognizance, in appropriate cases;
5. to testify as a witness in his/her own behalf under the rule on
examination of a child witness;
6. to have his/her privacy respected fully at all stages of the proceedings;
7. to have restrictions on his/her personal liberty limited to the
minimum, and where discretion is given by law to the judge to determine

whether to impose fine or imprisonment, the imposition of fine being

preferred as the more appropriate penalty;
8. to automatic suspension of sentence;
9. to probation as an alternative to imprisonment, if qualified under the
probation law.
According to RA 9344, children 15 years of age and under are exempt
from criminal liability and those above 15 (plus one day) and below 18 years of
age are exempt unless they act with discernment -which is defined as the
mental capacity to understand the difference between right and wrong and its
consequences.34 A child in conflict with the law who is 15 years or younger may
be held civilly liable and has to undergo an intervention program, same as
children that are above 15 years and below 18 years and acted without
discernment.

Children above 15 and below 18 years old who have committed a crime
with discernment punishable with not more than 12 years of imprisonment
shall undergo diversion. Detention should only be considered as a last resort
and only for the shortest appropriate period. It should always be in youth
detention homes. If a child is under 18 years old during the time of commission
34 People vs. Doquena, 68 Phil. 580(1939)

and found guilty of the crime, the judgments will not be pronounced yet and
the sentence will be suspended but not without limits.

The exemption from criminal liability of children under the law does not
include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced in accordance
with existing laws. The presumption of minority rule under Sec. 7 of R.A. No.
9344 provides that the child in conflict with the law shall enjoy the
presumption of minority and all the rights of a child in conflict with the law
until he/she is proven to be eighteen (18) years old or older35.
Sec. 7 of R.A. No. 9344 gives any person contesting the age of the child
in conflict with the law prior to the filing of the information in any appropriate
court (the right) to file a case in a summary proceeding for the determination of
age before the Family Court which shall decide the case within twenty four (24)
hours from receipt of the appropriate pleadings of all interested parties. If a
case has been filed against the child in conflict with the law and is pending in
the appropriate court, the person shall file a motion to determine the age of
the child in the same court where the case is pending. Meanwhile, the
proceedings on the main case shall be suspended. In all proceedings, law
enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges and other government officials

35 RA 9344, Sec. 7

concerned shall exert all efforts at determining the age of the child in conflict
with the law.
In People v. Sarcia, the court said: when the minor is charged or
accused with, or may have committed a serious offense, and may have acted
with discernment, then the child could be recommended by the DSWD to go
through judicial proceeding; but the welfare, best interests, and restoration of
the child should still be a primordial consideration. Furthermore, the court
explained: Be that as it may, the suspension of sentence may no longer be
applied in the instant case given that the accused-appellant is now about 29
years of age and Section 40 of Republic Act No. 9344 puts a limit to the
application of a suspended sentence, namely, when the child reaches a
maximum age of 21. Thus the said provisions state:

Section 40. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court.
xxx If said child in conflict with the law has reached eighteen (18) years
of age while under suspended sentence, the court shall determine
whether to discharge the child in accordance with this Act, to order
execution of sentence, or to extend the suspended sentence for a certain
specified period or until the child reaches the maximum age of twentyone (21) years. xxx:

In the case at bar, the promotion of the welfare of a child in conflict with
the law should extend to one who has exceeded the age limit of twenty-one
years, so long as he/she committed the crime when he/she was still a child.
The offender shall be entitled to the right to restoration, rehabilitation and
reintegration in accordance with the Juvenile Justice Welfare Act in order that
he/she be given the chance to live a normal life and become a productive
member of the community. The age of the child in conflict with the law at the
time of promulgation of the judgment of conviction is not material. What
matters is that the offender committed the offense when he/she was still
tender age.
R.A. 9344 decriminalizes offences, which discriminates only against a
child as curfew violations, truancy and parental disobedience and exempts
children from crimes of vagrancy, prostitution, mendicancy and sniffing rugby.
The implementation of the law relies in many aspects on the local government
units. They also are mandated to formulate a Comprehensive Juvenile
Intervention Program.

The Revised Penal Code

The Revised Penal Code (RPC) establishes the basic principles affecting
criminal liability; explains penalties, including civil and criminal liability; and

defines crimes and provides the corresponding penalties for their commission. 36
Depending on the severity of the abuse or injury against children and the
corresponding effects on the child, the act may fall under the RPC and the
perpetrator correspondingly punished.
In the imposition of penalties when the offender is a minor under
eighteen years old, Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code provides for the
following rules to be observed:
a) Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of age, who is not
exempted from liability by reason of the court having declared that he
acted with discernment, a discretionary penalty shall be imposed, but
always lower by two degrees at least than that prescribed by law for the
crime which he committed.
b) Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age the penalty
next lower than the prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in the
proper period.
Analysis and Recommendations

36 Reyes, Luis B , The Revised Penal Code (Book One), Manila: Rex Bookstore, 2001,
p 22

RA 7610 is a landmark legislation which has greatly enhanced the

protective services for children. Specifically, the law provided clearer definition
of the forms or circumstances of violence against children which are indicative
of the broadened perspective about the rights of the child. R.A. 7610 expanded
the definition of abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation and discrimination and
other conditions prejudicial to their development.
By redefining the various forms of offenses/violence, there are stronger
legislative bases to seek redress for the victims.

For one, said definitions

established a common understanding of abuse/exploitation that led to more

unified action. However, the passage of this law does not seem to sufficiently
deter abuse and other forms of violence against children.
It is in this light that the researchers believe that this law has to be
coupled with the efficiency of the justice system, such that would-be
perpetrators would be scared of the high probability of being caught and
immediately penalized. Moreover, there is also a need to ensure full
implementation of the Comprehensive Program on Child Protection. For this
purpose, advocacy for adequate budgetary allocation has to be intensified.
Protecting our children, after all, should be a strong advocacy statement.

In a like manner, our justice system should also give equal emphasis in
facilitating the resolution of Child in Conflict with the Law (CICL) cases. Given
the slow resolution of their cases, most CICL are further victimized in
detention, making it more difficult to rehabilitate and reintegrate them into
their communities. This should supposedly be one of the focal concerns of the
amendment of RA 9344.
The concept of restorative justice guides the juvenile justice and welfare
system. It is a principle that requires a process of resolving conflicts with the
reassurance to the offender that he/she can be reintegrated into society and
enhancement of public safety by activating the offender, the victim and the
community in prevention strategies. Emphasis on the implementation of RA
9344 should be on the promotion of the well-being and rehabilitation of
juvenile offenders rather than on exacting retribution.
The prevention of delinquency requires identifying at-risk individuals and
their environments before delinquent activity and behavior occur, and then
removing such risk factors or strengthening resistance to the risk factors
already present. The most logical starting place for prevention efforts is the
family. Child management training may be provided by the government for
those parents who have problems with their children.

Furthermore, there should be a continuous monitoring by the police,

DSWD/CSWD and family courts of strict compliance in the implementation of RA
9344. Also, a rehabilitative program of continuous education for juvenile offenders
may be offered to parents. The education program may be under the supervision of DepEd
and the students (youth offenders) may have weekly, monthly, or annual counseling. This
program should be strictly confidential to maintain self-worth and dignity
of juvenile offenders.
Synthesis
In cases where the victim is a minor and the offender is also a minor, it
can be observed that the offender is given more consideration than the victim.
At first glance it can be noted that justice for the victim is not served since
he/she cannot seek redress for the violence committed against him/her since
the offender is also a minor and therefore protected with the principle of
restorative juvenile justice.
The ages that are frequently involved in issues concerning juvenile
offenses are the ones in the stage wherein they are neither a child nor adult.
This is a transition age where life is getting more complex, with experiences of
having identity crisis, caught in a fight back and effort with social interactions,

and involvement struggle with different ethical issues. These circumstances

transport them to an unsafe and delinquent behavior.
RA 9344 was enacted to promote the philosophy of uplifting justice. It
has the vision that the child involved in an unlawful conflict is considered as a
victim. However, children between the ages of 15 and below are not liable from
the criminal responsibility, even those aged 15-18 except when they are
engaged in an illegal action with full familiarity of the offense and its penalty.
While it is true that juvenile offenders are also victims in a way that they
may have had a bad start in life because of the negative circumstances they
were inevitably born with, it does not follow that all these offenders, 15 years
old and below, have no mental capacity to distinguish right from wrong,
therefore exonerating them from criminal liability. Some, if not all of them
already have the fundamental capacity to discern.
The child sensitive system has a very relevant insight in sheltering and
upholding the well- being of the young ones. This has, in fact, gained different
supports from different government sectors and NGOs. Nevertheless, this has
also contributed to the increased occurrence of juvenile crimes in the country.
Minors are getting bolder and braver in committing crimes because they now

know that they will not be punished for their acts but will only be turned over

to the DSWD. The law breaking criminals have utilized and exploited this
welfare act, as they are involving the children in cases pertaining to some
heinous criminal cases such as illegal drugs, rape and murder. Justice may be
attained by this young group (as referred to the act) but the person being
wronged would find it unfair, especially if the person being wronged is also a
minor. It basically defeats the focal purpose of RA 7610 which aims to protect
children from violence.
Being young is not an excuse. Moreover, it would be better that at an
early age, they would be able to take part in honing their self- responsibility, as
to be liable in every action they have made. It is for this reason that the
researchers believe that RA 9344 should be amended and that the minimum
age of criminal responsibility should be lowered. The children involved in
delinquent acts must be qualified in receiving the warranted consequence, just
like most of the criminals are up to. If this act would give them an excuse, it
would be inevitable that our future would be a world filled with criminals as we
leave them tolerating their unlawful acts being done during their childhood.