Is it time to revisit juvenile justice law?

Sen. Panfilo Lacson —FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines — The fatal school shooting in Tacloban City that left three students dead and 20 others injured has reignited a long-running debate over whether the country’s Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act should be amended, with lawmakers, rights advocates, and government officials sharply divided on the issue.

Sen. Panfilo Lacson on Wednesday said the law may need to be revisited following the tragedy, arguing that age should not automatically shield young offenders from criminal liability.

Article continues after this advertisement

Lacson cited the 1993 murder of 2-year-old James Bulger in Liverpool, England, by two 10-year-old boys, a case that sparked global debate on accountability and rehabilitation for juvenile offenders.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“Our Juvenile Justice Law may really need revisiting and further discussion,” Lacson said in a post on X. “Discernment to be proven beyond reasonable doubt by state prosecutors as per the latest Supreme Court ruling should be safeguard enough to serve justice to all concerned.”

READ: Tacloban school shooting a case of ‘bullying gone wrong’ – Remulla

His remarks came after two students, age 14 and 15, allegedly opened fire at San Jose National High School in Tacloban City on Monday.

Lowering age threshold

The incident has prompted renewed calls from some quarters to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR), currently set under the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, or Republic Act No. 9344.

Article continues after this advertisement

Under the law, children age 15 and below are exempt from criminal liability. Those above 15 but below 18 may still be held liable if prosecutors can prove they acted with discernment, or the capacity to distinguish right from wrong.

Malacañang said President Marcos is open to reviewing the age threshold, while the Philippine National Police has proposed reducing it to 12 years old. Sen. Robinhood Padilla has also renewed his push to lower the MACR to 10.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Police assures ‘airtight’ case vs Tacloban shooting suspect

But Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian opposed lowering the age of criminal responsibility, saying young offenders can still be reformed through proper intervention, education and rehabilitation.

“Children in conflict with the law, when given the right education, the right guidance, and even spiritual guidance, can be reformed and they can return to society,” Gatchalian said.

Instead, he renewed his call for restrictions on minors’ access to social media, citing concerns over the influence of violent online content and gaming on young people.

Gatchalian called for stronger implementation of the law and greater support for Bahay Pag-asa facilities, which are designed to rehabilitate children in conflict with the law.

Sen. Francis Pangilinan, one of the principal sponsors of the juvenile justice law, also opposed lowering the age of criminal liability, arguing that stricter enforcement of existing laws and stronger family and community support systems would be more effective in preventing youth crime.

Focus on rehabilitation

Similar views were expressed in the House of Representatives.

Manila Rep. Joel Chua said lowering the age of criminal responsibility would not address the underlying causes of juvenile crime.

“Whenever a crime involves minors, there are immediate calls to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility,” Chua said. “But where does this end?”

He argued that the focus should instead be on strengthening families, improving access to mental health services and providing positive role models for young people.

“The real answer lies in restoring proper values, the loving guidance of parents and teachers, affordable access to mental health professionals, and leaders and elders who can serve as good role models for the youth,” Chua said.

Kabataan Rep. Renee Co likewise opposed amending the law, saying it has never been fully implemented because of inadequate funding and a lack of rehabilitation facilities.

“We cannot say that the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act is wrong if it has not been fully implemented,” Co said, adding that she would seek increased funding for youth rehabilitation centers in the 2027 national budget.

Rights group opposed

Rights group Amnesty International Philippines also warned against what it described as “failed and dangerous” proposals to lower the MACR in the wake of the Tacloban tragedy.

“Such knee-jerk reactions fail to address the root causes of harm and place more children at risk,” said Ritz Lee Santos III, the organization’s section director.

Santos said the law already provides mechanisms to hold children accountable while prioritizing rehabilitation in accordance with international child rights standards.

According to Amnesty, the shooting highlights broader social problems, including weak child protection systems, inadequate psychosocial support, and the normalization of violence in homes, communities, and online spaces.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

“The appropriate response is not to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility, but to create stronger child protection systems and sustain efforts to build a culture of peace and respect for human rights,” Santos said. /cb