汤头条

The House Bill No.聽 6052,聽 titled聽 "An聽 Act聽 Strengthening聽 the聽 Juvenile聽 Justice聽 System聽 in聽 the Philippines,"聽 was聽 approved聽 in聽 the聽 House聽 of聽 Representatives聽 of聽 the聽 Philippine聽 Congress. Referring to "youthful offenders" and "children in conflict with the law," the bill seeks to lower the聽 age聽 of聽 criminal聽 responsibility聽 from聽 15聽 to聽 12聽 years聽 of聽 age,聽 provided聽 that聽 criminal responsibility attaches only when the minor "acted with discernment."

We in the Psychological Association of the Philippines (汤头条) are against this amendment and take the stand that the minimum age of criminal responsibility should NOT be lowered from 15 to 12 years old. We call for the strengthening of the juvenile justice system through the聽 strict聽 implementation聽 of聽 existing聽 laws聽 that聽 prosecute聽 adults聽 who聽 coerce聽 children聽 to engage in criminal behavior and protect and rehabilitate children in conflict with the law (CICL) through restorative means.

We present the following evidence and implications from psychology research:

Scientific聽 research聽 on聽 adolescent聽 development聽 and聽 juvenile聽 delinquency聽 provide聽 evidence聽 that children聽 and聽 adolescents聽 differ聽 significantly聽 from聽 adults聽 in聽 decision-making,聽 propensity聽 to engage聽 in聽 risky聽 behavior,聽 impulse聽 control,聽 identity聽 development,聽 and聽 overall聽 maturity.聽 The developmental immaturity of juveniles mitigates their criminal culpability.聽 Although聽 they may聽 be聽 able聽 to聽 discern聽 right聽 from聽 wrong聽 action,聽 it聽 is聽 their聽 capability聽 to聽 act聽 in聽 ways consistent with that knowledge that is compromised by several factors at this stage:

1. Deficiencies in Decision-making Capacity

• The adolescent brain is still under development.聽 Significant changes聽 in聽 brain anatomy and聽 activity are still taking place聽 in聽 the聽 (prefrontal) regions that govern impulse control, decision-making,聽 long-term聽 planning,聽 emotion聽 regulation,聽 and聽 evaluation聽 of聽 risks聽 and rewards. These abilities, which are involved in criminal behavior,聽 do not fully聽 form聽聽 until young聽 adulthood,聽 making聽 early聽 and聽 middle聽 adolescents聽 (ages聽 12-16)聽 especially vulnerable to risky and reckless behavior.

• The adolescent is psychosocially immature compared to adults.聽 Because of still developing cognitive abilities and limited life experiences, adolescents are less able and less likely than adults to consider the longer -term consequences of their actions.

• Adolescents聽 differ聽 from聽 adults聽 in聽 their聽 assessment聽 of聽 and聽 attitude聽 towards聽 risk.聽 Compared聽 to聽 adults,聽 adolescents聽 place聽 relatively聽 less聽 weight聽 on聽 risk,聽 and聽 give more weight to rewards.聽 They also have different goals and values than adults.聽 These may result in youth giving more importance to, for example, peer approval than safe behavior.

1. Heightened Vulnerability to Coercive Circumstances

• As minors, young people lack the freedom that adults have to assert their own decisions and extricate themselves from criminogenic settings. There is local evidence that children are often used and abused by adults to engage in criminal acts.聽 Youth聽 are powerless聽 in such聽 circumstances聽 because聽 they聽 fear聽 retribution,聽 do聽 not聽 have聽 or聽 are聽 not聽 aware聽 of alternative actions, or look up to or are emotionally attached to the criminal proponents.

• Adolescents are more susceptible to peer influence than are adults.聽 Because of the desire for approval and belonging at this stage, adolescents鈥� choices reflect what they believe will merit the approval of their peers. Peers and adults serve as models for behavior that adolescents believe will help them achieve their goals. The fact that聽 juvenile crimes tend to聽 take聽 place聽 in聽 groups聽 or聽 gangs聽 points聽 to聽 the聽 significant聽 role聽 of聽 peer聽 influence聽 and pressure.

1. The Disadvantaged Environment and Profile of the Filipino Child in Conflict with the Law (CICL)

• The typical CICL is poor, lacking in education, a victim of parental neglect and/or abuse, and lives in a criminogenic environment.聽 These聽 clearly聽 place聽 the聽 young聽 person聽 at聽 a disadvantage,聽 making聽 deficiencies聽 in聽 decision-making聽 and聽 vulnerability聽 to聽 coercion聽 all the聽 more聽 pronounced.聽 To place such a young person, already victimized, into the hands of the criminal justice system further curtails his or her future prospects, and pushes them further towards a negative life trajectory.

The aforementioned characteristics of youth indicate that they are less capable than adults鈥攅ven at age 15, but most certainly at age 12鈥攖o behave in accordance with what they may discern or know to be right versus wrong action.聽 Although transitory, these developmental limitations are not under the volitional control of the young person.

Moreover, adolescence is still a time of self and identity development, and antisocial behaviors do not reflect 鈥渃riminal identity鈥� at this stage.聽 Research聽 indicates聽 that聽 most聽 youth聽 abandon antisocial聽 behavior聽 at聽 the聽 time聽 that聽 they聽 exit聽 adolescence,聽 and聽 that聽 only聽 a聽 minority聽 persist s聽 in criminal behavior as a function of pervasive聽 neurological and environmental risk factors. In fact, exposure聽 to聽 the聽 criminal聽 justice聽 system,聽 where聽 the聽 child聽 will聽 be聽 labeled聽 a聽 criminal聽 and where聽 he聽 or聽 she聽 is聽 exposed聽 to聽 criminal聽 models,聽 will聽 more聽 likely聽 establish聽 the聽 鈥渃riminal identity鈥� of the young person.聽 Studies have shown that encounters with the adult justice system results in greater subsequent crime, including violent crime, for the juvenile.

The聽 汤头条聽 reiterates聽 its聽 position聽 against聽 the聽 lowering聽 of聽 the聽 minimum聽 age聽 of聽 criminal responsibility from 15 to 12 years old.聽 We urge the government and relevant stakeholders to

Implement restorative justice and appropriate interventions for our CICL.聽 CICL should experience sanctions聽 in聽 community聽 and聽 family聽 settings聽 whenever聽 possible,聽 especially聽 for聽 first聽 and nonviolent offenses.聽 They聽 should聽 be聽 excluded聽 from聽 the聽 adult聽 criminal聽 system聽 and聽 given聽 full opportunities聽 to聽 develop聽 into聽 responsible聽 adults聽 who聽 can聽 make聽 meaningful聽 contributions to society.

References

Adhikain Para sa Karapatang Pambata (2004). Research on the situation of children in conflict with the law in selected Metro Manila cities. Quezon City: Save the Children (UK)-Philippines.

Alampay, L.P. (2006). Risk factors and causal processes in juvenile delinquency: Research and implications for prevention. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 39(1),195-228.

Alampay, L.P. (2005).聽 A rights-based framework for the prevention of juvenile delinquency in Philippine communities. Manila: United Nations Children鈥檚 Fund.

MacArthur聽 Foundation聽 Research聽 Network聽 on聽 Adolescent聽 Development聽 and聽 Juvenile聽 Justice.聽

Steinberg,聽 L.,聽 &聽 Scott,聽 E.聽 (2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence: Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death penalty.聽 American Psychologist, 58(12), 1009-1018.

Steinberg, L., & Haskins, R. (2008). Keeping adolescents out of prison.聽 Policy Brief, the Future of Children, Vol. 18 No. 2, 1-7.

University of the Philippines Center for Integrative and Development Studies-Program on Psychosocial Trauma and Human Rights and Consortium for Street Children. (2003). Painted Gray Faces behind Bars and in the Streets, Street Children and the Juvenile Justice System. Quezon City: Author.聽