i

PERCEPTIONS ON THE PROPOSED LOWERING OF THE MINIMUM AGE

OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

A Bachelor‟s Thesis
Presented to
The Committee of Oral Examiners
J. H. CERILLES STATE COLLEGE
MOLAVE OFFSITE CLASS
Molave, Zamboanga del Sur

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Science in Criminology

By

MARABABON, ARLICH R.
REMITAR, GLENN DON C.

December 2019
 ii

Table of Contents
Title......................................................
Approval Sheet.............................................
Abstract...................................................
Acknowledgement............................................
Dedication.................................................
List of Tables.............................................
List of Figures............................................
Chapter 1. Introduction................................... 1
Background of the Study ............................... 1
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework ...................... 5
Statement of the Problem .............................. 7
Hypothesis ............................................ 8
Importance of the Study ............................... 8
Scope and Delimitations of the Study .................. 9
Definition of Terms .................................. 10
Chapter 2. Review of Related Literature.................. 12
Review of Related Literature ......................... 12
Related Studies ...................................... 16
Chapter 3. Research Methodology.......................... 19
Research Design ...................................... 19
Research Setting ..................................... 19
Research Participants ................................ 20
Sampling Design ...................................... 21
Research Instrument .................................. 21
Data Gathering Procedure ............................. 22
Statistical Technique ................................ 23
Literature Cited......................................... 25
 1

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the background of the study,

theoretical and conceptual framework, statement of the

problem, importance of the study, scope and delimitations

of the study, and definition of terms.

Background of the Study

The issue of lowering the minimum age of criminal

responsibility (MACR) has surfaced into the arena of public

debate in recent years as lawmakers in the country authored

a number of house bills proposing to lower the MACR as part

of the current administration‟s drive to reduce criminality

nationwide. This has sparked a heated debate among

prominent organizations and individuals who promptly

presented their take on the issue, whether pro or against.

In the House of Representatives, there seems to be no

serious opposition to the proposal. Last January 28, the

House passed HB 8858, otherwise known as “An Act Expanding

the Scope of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare System and

Strengthening the Social Reintegration Programs for

Children in Conflict with the Law, Amending for the Purpose

Republic Act No. 9344, as Amended, Otherwise Known as the

 2

„Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006‟”, by a vote of

146-34-0. The bill was recommended for approval in lieu of

House Bill Nos. 2, 505, 935, 1609, 2009 and 3973. Among

other provisions, the bill proposes to lower the MACR from

15 to 9 years old.

Among other provisions, most notably the creation of

the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council, which hitherto

deals with the problem of children in conflict with the

law, as well as provisions for rehabilitating such child

offenders, RA 9344 set the MACR in the country to its

current level of 15 years old. Its most recent and only

amendment, Republic Act No. 10630, signed in 2013, only

reiterated and strengthened the former act‟s provision

about the MACR.

Various prominent groups have voiced their concern

over the proposal to lower the MACR. The Children‟s Rights

Network says the proposal “undermines the best interest of

the child and will not solve the problem of children

committing crimes” and urges the government to fully

implement the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 and

honor the country‟s commitment to international treaties

and obligations, notably to the United Nations Committee of

the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) (PAYO & CRC, 2019). The

Philippine Pediatric Society maintains that a child under

 3

the criminal age of responsibility lacks the capacity to

commit a crime, and thus cannot be prosecuted by the law in

the same way as adult offenders (PPS, 2019). Various

European civil society groups also wrote a letter to

congress expressing their opposition to “moves in the

Congress to amend RA 9344,” saying they undermine all

efforts to build a child-friendly juvenile justice system

that supports rehabilitation and reintegration (Hardillo-

Werning et al., 2019). Other organizations who have

consistently voiced opposition to the measure include the

Psychological Association of the Philippines (PAP),

Commission on Human Rights (CHR) and the Makabayan

Congressional Bloc.

Internationally, the age of 12 is considered as the

“absolute minimum age of criminal responsibility” by the

UNCRC. Any MACR below 12 is thus considered unacceptable to

international standards (UNCRC, 2007). However, a number of

countries still have an MACR of below 12 years old,

including the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and

Indonesia (10); Malaysia (8); and Afghanistan, India,

Thailand, Myanmar, Brunei & Singapore (7) (Nishimori,

2019). In the United States, the MACR is left to be decided

by individual states. Of the 50 states, 33 do not even have

a prescribed minimum. Of the remaining states that have an

 4

MACR, North Carolina has the lowest at 7 and Wisconsin has

the highest at 10 (Tan, 2019). However, the majority of

countries in the world continue to have an MACR of above

12. Therefore, should the Philippines lower its MACR to 9,

it would become an outlier to international standards and

trends. However, it would be at par with the majority of

countries in Southeast Asia.

The question regarding the appropriate MACR is one of

the most polarizing ones in criminal justice and law. It

transcends the fields of criminal justice and law and goes

on to involve questions of morality and human rights,

particularly children‟s rights.

As it stands, there is a dearth studies in the

Philippines that dealt on the perceptions and prevailing

opinions of the various sectors of society on the issue of

lowering the MACR. The current researchers seek to fill

this gap by conducting a local study on the perceptions

regarding the issue of various government and non-

government groups in the municipality of Mahayag, Zamboanga

del Sur.
 5

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

This study is anchored on the rational choice theory

of criminality and the deterrence theory of punishment.

The rational choice theory states that criminals are

rational decision makers who base their decisions to commit

crimes on an analysis of the risks of the venture compared

with the expected profits (Paternoster, 2017). Persons who

are deemed to be above the MACR are considered to be

capable of weighing the risks of any behavior and are thus

capable of rationally planning and committing a criminal

act.

The deterrence theory of punishment posits that any

punishment awarded to an offender should make him or her,

and others who witness the punishment to avoid committing

crime again after being punished based on fear. The former

is referred to as specific deterrence while the latter is a

general deterrence (Onyango, 2014). As the reasoning of the

authors of HB 8858 goes, the number of children in conflict

with the law should decrease as measures are adopted to

impose punishment on juvenile offenders for certain crimes.

Lowering the MACR should expand the scope of punishment,

and thus, the scope of deterrence as well, leading to a

decrease in the crime rate.

 6

GOVERNMENT SECTOR NON-GOVERNMENT

SECTOR
- law enforcers
- parents
- LGU - students
- religious personnel

LEVEL OF PERCEPTIONS ON
AWARENESS TO THE THE PROPOSED
PROPOSED LOWERING LOWERING OF MACR
OF MACR

Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the Study

 7

Statement of the Problem

This study seeks to determine the perceptions of the

various sectors of civil society in the municipality of

Mahayag, Zamboanga del Sur regarding the proposed lowering

of the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) in

Philippine law. In particular, it answers the following

queries:

1. What is the level of awareness of various civil

society sectors in Mahayag regarding the proposed

lowering of the minimum age of criminal

responsibility:

a. government; and

b. non-government?

2. What are the perceptions of the government and non-

government sectors regarding the proposed lowering of

the minimum age of responsibility?

3. Is there a significant difference between the levels

of awareness of the two sectors regarding the proposed

lowering of the minimum age of criminal

responsibility?
 8

Hypothesis

H0. There is no significant difference between the

levels of awareness of government and non-government

sectors regarding the proposed lowering of the minimum age

of criminal responsibility.

Importance of the Study

The proposed lowering of the MACR is one of the hotly-

debated issues in criminal justice in the Philippines in

the past few years. Although various prominent groups have

voiced their positions on the matter, there is a gap in the

literature concerning the perceptions and opinions of

different sectors of civil society, particularly in rural

areas. This study is significant because it will attempt to

fill this gap by conducting a study at the local level.

Moreover, it benefits the following stakeholders:

Criminology Students. Students of criminology,

political science and law benefit from the findings of this

study which will serve as a gauge of public opinion

concerning the issue. They will benefit from seeing how the

moral values of the different sectors stand in

juxtaposition to the prevailing laws in the country, as

well as the recent proposals to amend such laws.

 9

Lawmakers. The country‟s lawmakers benefit from this

study by seeing the issue from the perspective of their

constituents. While it would be presumptuous to assume that

this study will be representative of the prevailing opinion

on a wider scale, it will nevertheless present both sides

of the coin as expressed by the various sectors of civil

society.

Future Researchers. Researchers who will pursue

similar studies in the future benefit from the results of

this study as a basis and reference for their endeavors.

Scope and Delimitations of the Study

The current study is about the perceptions of the

different sectors of civil society in the municipality of

Mahayag, Zamboanga del Sur. In particular, it seeks to

gather the perceptions of religious groups, parents,

government employees, law enforcement personnel and

students.

The researchers delimit this study to 125 participants

from Barangay Poblacion of Mahayag, Zamboanga del Sur:

specifically, 25 local government employees, 25 law

enforcement personnel, 25 from the various religious

groups, 25 parents, and 25 students.

 10

Definition of Terms

The following terms are used extensively in this study

and shall be taken according to their operational

definitions given below.

Children in Conflict with the Law. This refers to

persons below the minimum age of criminal responsibility

who are facing criminal charges.

Defense of Infancy. Otherwise known as the doli

incapax doctrine, this refers to the form of defense in

which defendants who fall within the definition of “infant”

are excluded from criminal liability for their actions,

provided that they committed these actions before reaching

the minimum age of criminal responsibility as provided by

law.

House Bill No. 8858. Otherwise known as “An Act

Expanding the Scope of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare

System and Strengthening the Social Reintegration Programs

for Children in Conflict with the Law, Amending for the

Purpose Republic Act No. 9344, as Amended, Otherwise Known

as the „Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006‟”, this

house bill was recommended for approval in the House of

Representatives on January 21, 2019, in substitution of

House Bills Numbered 2, 505, 935, 1609, 2009 and 3973.

 11

Among other provisions, this bill proposes to lower the

minimum age of criminal responsibility from 15 to 9 years

old.

Juvenile. This refers to a person below a certain age,

provided by law, who is subject to special provisions,

including exemption from certain aspects of criminal

responsibility and incarceration.

Juvenile Justice. This refers to the branch of

criminal justice that deals with cases of children below

the minimum age of criminal responsibility who are accused

of criminal acts.

Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility (MACR). This

refers to the minimum age in which a person may be legally

prosecuted for crimes as provided for by existing laws.

Republic Act No. 9344. Otherwise known as “An Act

Establishing a Comprehensive Juvenile Justice and Welfare

System, Creating the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council

under the Department of Justice, Appropriating Funds

Therefor and for Other Purposes” or its short title,

“Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006”, this act was

signed into law by then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

 12

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter reviews previous studies and works

related to the issue of minimum age of criminal

responsibility (MACR) and citizens‟ perceptions about

lowering the MACR.

Review of Related Literature

The concept of MACR hinges on the assumption that

children below a certain age do not have the capacity to

infringe penal laws based on the assumptions of cognition

i.e. whether a child understands what is required and not

required in law and the consequences of the breach, and

volition, which refers to the child‟s competence to

exercise full control over their behavior (Dwyer &

McAlister, 2017).

While the United Nations Convention on the Rights of

the Child has expressed that children should be presumed

not to have the capacity to infringe the penal law, it has

not specified an MACR (Bateman, 2012). However certain

provisions have been taken to imply that an absolute

minimum should be instituted. Age 12 is considered as the

“absolute minimum age of criminal responsibility” by the

 13

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. Any

MACR below 12 is thus considered unacceptable to

international standards (UNCRC, 2007).

However, a number of countries still have an MACR of

below 12 years old, including the United Kingdom,

Australia, New Zealand and Indonesia (10); Malaysia (8);

and Afghanistan, India, Thailand, Myanmar, Brunei &

Singapore (7) (Nishimori, 2019). In the United States, the

MACR is left to be decided by individual states. Of the 50

states, 33 do not even have a prescribed minimum. Of the

remaining states that have an MACR, North Carolina has the

lowest at 7 and Wisconsin has the highest at 10 (Tan,

2019). However, the majority of countries in the world

continue to have an MACR of above 12. A survey of 90

countries found that the most common age (adopted by around

a quarter of the sample) was 14 years (Hazel, 2008).

Supporters of lowering the MACR have adopted the

reasoning that for certain crimes, even children cannot be

justifiably exempted. Crimes characterized by extreme

cruelty or a sexual element, for instance, should be

categorized as „adult‟ since such behavior is not

„childish‟ (McDiarmid, 2013).

Bateman (2012), speaking for the National Association

for Youth Justice (NAYJ), said that the government‟s

 14

rejection of calls to review the MACR in the United Kingdom

is ideologically motivated by the desire to appear tough on

youth crime rather than an objective review of existing

evidence.

Evidence from psychology and neuroscience has

frequently been cited to support the argument against the

lowering of MACR. According to The Royal Society (2011),

the pre-frontal cortex, which is particularly important for

decision-making and impulse control, is one of the slowest

areas of the brain to mature. There is accordingly an

imbalance between the onset of heightened emotional

stimulus during early adolescence and the later development

of a capacity to control impulsiveness. This appears to

play a role in explaining the propensity of teenagers to

engage in various forms of risk-taking. According to

neuroscientists, the frontal lobe matures at approximately

14 years old. The development of important neural circuits

underpinning behavior continues until at least 20 years old

(The Royal Society, 2011).

According to Farmer (2011), adolescents additionally

have less ability for engaging in skilled social

interaction may explain, in part, why much adolescent

activity occurs in group settings and why young people‟s

decision-making is strongly influenced by how it will play

 15

out with the peer group, rather than by other cost-benefit

considerations.

According to Janes (2008), the difficulty of setting

international standards for the MACR stems partly from the

lack thereof in countries such as the UK and US, where the

MACR is increasingly being seen as a political issue.

Alongside Somalia, the US is the only country in the world

that has not signed the UNCRC, and thus, to this day, has

no national standard MACR.

Various groups and sectors of society have expressed

diverging opinions regarding the proposed lowering of the

MACR. Justifications for the lowering of MACR frequently go

along the line that children are already aware of what is

right and wrong. In the explanatory note of HB No 505, Rep.

Yap said that children in conflict with the law have

recently increased in numbers. Accordingly, these youths

have “emboldened themselves” and are being used by criminal

syndicates who take advantage of the 15 years old MACR.

According to the Commission on Human Rights (2014),

lowering the MACR will only punish the children without

addressing the root causes of youth offending and risks

arising from the lack of a protective and caring

environment.
 16

Moreover, the vast majority of children in conflict

with the law come from poor and low-income families. Almost

50% of the reported crimes allegedly perpetrated by

children are petty crimes of theft, robbery and other

crimes against property. These children were either

motivated to commit the crime because of their desire to

survive or forced to engage in such activities (CHR, 2014).

The Children‟s Rights Network says the proposal

“undermines the best interest of the child and will not

solve the problem of children committing crimes” and urges

the government to fully implement the Juvenile Justice and

Welfare Act of 2006 and honor the country‟s commitment to

international treaties and obligations, notably to the

United Nations Committee of the Rights of the Child (UNCRC)

(PAYO & CRC, 2019).

Despite the widespread debate there is a gap in the

literature: What do the people think? What are the

perceptions of stakeholders regarding the lowering of MACR?

These questions shall guide the researchers to fill this

gap.

Related Studies

There is a dearth of recent local studies on the topic

of lowering the MACR in the Philippines, mainly because the

 17

debate on the issue is fairly recent, only surfacing on the

first half of 2019. The studies presented here are mostly

from other countries that have also experienced debates

regarding the MACR, involving attempts to either lower or

raise it. Studies at the local level are included here

whenever available.

Although most countries have an MACR, they differ

widely in actual implementation of juvenile justice. A

study by Abswoude and Assen (2017) observed that the

although the MACR in the Philippines has not been lowered

yet, it has been set de facto at a lower level in some

jurisdictions where, according to informants, children

younger than 15 years old are regularly imprisoned for a

variety of minor offenses.

Meanwhile, Insight Iran (2015) found that for reasons

related to Shari‟a law, there is a gender disparity between

the MACR for boys (15 lunar years) and girls (9 lunar

years) in Iran.

Fagan (2008) demonstrated that states where it is more

common to prosecute juveniles as adults do not have lower

rates of juvenile offending. In fact, the study found that

these adolescents are more likely to re-offend sooner and

commit more serious offences after being sentenced as

adults.
 18

In a comparison between the juvenile justice systems

of Hungary and Spain, Bory (2016) found that in Spain 80%

of juvenile offenders do not commit crimes again after

release. In contrast, Hungary registered an 80% recidivism

rate, which is the exact opposite of that of Spain. What is

interesting in this comparison is that Spain‟s MACR is

lower than Hungary‟s and the former‟s juvenile justice

system is focused more on the amelioration of the social

causes of juvenile delinquency and crime.

As a result of these and other findings, calls to

lower the MACR have intensified in recent years. For

instance, in 2016, the government of Scotland conducted a

consultation among young people in the country regarding

the issues related to the juvenile justice system. With

regards to the MACR, a whopping 86.2% agreed that should it

be raised to 12 years old, the existing welfare-centered

provisions in the country are enough to deal with harmful

behaviors of children 8-11 years old.

 19

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design,

research setting, research participants, sampling design,

research instrument, data gathering procedure, and

statistical technique used in the study.

Research Design

The researchers shall use a mixed methods approach to

achieve the specific objectives set in the study. For the

quantitative aspect, i. e. research questions number 1 and

3, descriptive research design shall be used. Descriptive

research is used to describe characteristics of a

population or phenomenon being studied. It does not answer

questions about how/when/why the characteristics occurred.

Rather it addresses the "what" question (Shields, et al.,

2013). Meanwhile, qualitative method shall be used for

research questions number 2 and 4.

Research Setting

The study shall be conducted in the municipality of

Mahayag, Zamboanga del Sur. Mahayag is a 3rd class

municipality in the northern part of the province of

 20

Zamboanga del Sur. According to the 2015 census, it has a

population of 46,516 people.

The municipality of Mahayag was officially created on

March 9, 1960, pursuant to Executive Order No. 393 by

former President Carlos P. Garcia, with Saturnino Mendoza

as its first appointed and subsequently elected municipal

mayor. Hon. Manuel T. Saladaga, the incumbent municipal

mayor, is the 10th mayor of the municipality of Mahayag.

Past mayors include Hon. Lorna S. Espina; Hon. Paulino P.

Fanilag; Hon. Carlito A. Lumacang as OIC-Mayor following

the EDSA I Revolution; and Hon. Perpetua C. Apale, the

appointed OIC-Mayor during the first election after the

ratification of the 1987 Constitution.

Research Participants

The participants for this study shall be residents of

Barangay Poblacion, Mahayag, Zamboanga del Sur. There shall

be 125 research participants for this study, out of these

50 will come from the government sector, specifically, 25

law enforcement officers and 25 local government employees.

The other 75 will form the non-government sector and shall

be composed of 25 representatives of religious groups, 25

parents, and 25 students.

 21

Sampling Design

The participants shall be chosen through the purposive

sampling design. In this design, samples are chosen on the

basis of set criteria that make them qualified as research

participants (Creswell, 2012). For this study, the

participants shall be chosen based on their knowledge and

familiarity with the issue of the proposed lowering of the

MACR. This is to ensure that their positions on the

controversy are informed by prior knowledge on the subject.

Research Instrument

The research instrument that will be used in this

study shall be a survey-questionnaire with two parts.

Part 1 shall be about the socio-demographic profile of

the participants, including indicators such as gender, age

and sector represented.

Part 2 shall be about the participants‟ level of

awareness to the proposed lowering of the MACR. The

questions in this part were adopted and modified from a

consultation conducted by the Scottish Government in 2016.

The questionnaire shall be answered using a 4-point

Likert scale as follows: (5) strongly agree; (4) agree; (3)

neutral; (2) disagree; (1) strongly disagree.

 22

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers will send a letter of request to Dr.

Candelario P. Suganob. After obtaining the approval from

the Academic Head, the researchers shall start the

gathering of data. A letter shall be sent to the municipal

mayor, Hon. Manuel T. Saladaga, to request for permission

to conduct the study among the selected participants. A

letter shall also be sent to the chief of the Mahayag

Municipal Police Station (MPS) requesting some of their

personnel to be allowed to participate as participants in

the study.

First, the research participants shall be identified.

Specifically for the research participants coming from

religious organizations, considerations shall be taken to

ensure that the sample will be adequately representative of

the dominant religious denominations in the research

setting.

After identifying the participants, the researchers

shall administer the survey questionnaires. All of the

participants shall participate on the basis of informed

consent and care shall be taken to avoid divulging any

personal and sensitive information from the participants.

The data gathered from the survey shall then be

tabulated and prepared for statistical analysis.

 23

Statistical Technique

To describe the distribution of the data, frequency

and percentage shall be used. Percentage shall be used to

determine the proportion of the responses out of the total

number of participants. Frequency, on the other hand, shall

be used to determine the distribution of participants of

each category.

Where:

Px = percentage of subset x

f = frequency

n = number of participants

x = subset of n

To determine the central tendency of the responses,

weighted arithmetic mean (WAM) shall be used, with the

following formula:

Where:

WAM = weighted arithmetic mean

 24

f = frequency

w = assigned weight

Σ = summation sign

N = no. of participants

To test for significant difference between the levels

of awareness of government and non-government participants,

z-test will be utilized.

Formula:

̅ ̅

Where,

z = z-test computed value

̅ and ̅ = the means of the two samples

and = the standard deviations of the two samples

n1 and n2 = the number of respondents in each sample

 25

LITERATURE CITED

Abswoude, R., Assen, M. (2017). Commit the offense, get the

consequence: Juvenile delinquency in the Philippines.

Utrecht University.

Bateman, T. (2012). Criminalizing children for no good

purpose: The age of criminal responsibility in England

and Wales. National Association for Youth Justice.

Retrieved from http://www.thenayj.org.uk.

Bory, N. (2016). Juvenile offenders in criminal justice and

the sanction system in Spain and in Hungary. Budapest:

Pazmany Peter Catholic University.

Commission on Human Rights (2014). Position paper on

sections 8 & 9 of House Bill No. 2300 which lowers the

minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) and

would try children as adult if charged with a crime

punishable by level 4. Quezon City: Government

Linkages Office.

Creswell, J. (2012). Educational research: Planning,

conducting, and evaluating quantitative and

qualitative research, 4th Edition. Boston, MA: Pearson

Education, Inc.
 26

Dwyer, C., McAlister, S. (2017). Raising the age of

criminal responsibility: Endless debate, limited

progress. ARK Future (3).

Fagan, Jeffrey. 2008. Juvenile crime and criminal justice:

Resolving border disputes. The Future of Children

18(2).

Farmer, E. (2011). The age of criminal responsibility:

Developmental science and human rights perspectives.

Journal of Children’s Services, 6(2).

Hardillo-Werning, M. L., Wilde, M., Sacher, D., Wieser, J.,

Montag, C., Sterlini, P., Overhoff, M., Mertens, S.,

Schlicher, M. (2019). Philippine Congress – MACR bill

on lowering the age of criminal responsibility.

Hazel, N. (2008). Cross national comparison of youth

justice. London: Youth Justice Board and Howard League

for Penal Reform. London: Howard League.

House Bill No. 505

House Bill No. 8858

Insight Iran (2015). Age of criminal responsibility under

Iranian law. Briefing Paper Series: Rights of the

Child. London: Insight Iran.

Janes, L. (2008). Criminal liability of minors and severity

of penalties: European trends and developments. The

Howard League for Penal Reform (England and Wales).

 27

McDiarmid, C. (2013). An age of complexity: Children and

criminal responsibility in law. Youth Justice, 0(0).

Retrieved from sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.

Onyango, O. J. (2014). The capital offenders‟ punishment

and death dentence dilemma in Kenya. International

Journal of Research in Social Sciences.

Paternoster, R., Jaynes, C. M., Wilson, T. (2017). Rational

choice theory and interest in the “fortune of others”.

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency.

Retrieved from sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav.

Philippine Action for Youth Offenders, Children Rights

Network (2019). Position paper on the lowering of the

minimum age of criminal responsibility.

Philippine Pediatric Society (2019). Position paper on

House Bill No. 002 or “The Minimum Age of Criminal

Responsibility Act”.

Shields, Patricia, Rangarajan, N. (2013). A Playbook for

Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks

and Project Management. Stillwater, OK: New Forums

Press.

Tan, M. (2019). Child, criminal. Philippine Daily Inquirer

25 January 2019.

The Royal Society (2011). Brain waves 4: neuroscience and

the law. London: Royal Society.

 28

The Scottish Government (2016). Minimum age of criminal

responsibility: Analysis of consultation responses and

engagement with children and young people. Edinburgh:

The Scottish Government, APS Group Scotland.

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (2007).

General Comment No. 10. Children’s rights in juvenile

justice. Geneva: United Nations.