The polemics in both houses of Congress are now focused on children in conflict with the law.
Our legislators are more embroiled on the legal issues of children who have conflict with the law rather than focusing on the roots of the problem.
Children did not come about without parents producing them.
If this is an acceptable premise, then the root of the issue becomes the parents, right?
So, if we dig into the very root of this issue involving children committing criminal acts and legislators wanting them to be criminally responsible and penalized, are we hitting at the very root of the problem?
No. Sorry but we are not.
For me, let us remove the legalese and stare more on the psychology and physiology of the problem.
In these millennial times – compared to the past decades when people were more respectful and courteous of their elders – parents today have become negligent of their parental responsibility, having relaxed, if not totally ignored their filial relationships with their children. That is not to say of their godly remissions because children are blessings of God.
Without sounding too religious about the matter, I think that the proposal to lower children’s criminal responsibility to 12 years does not conform with the accepted morality and conservative outlook of our people.
While the majority age is recognized legally at 18, it goes without saying that children below 18 are required to have parental permission before they enter into legal agreements, contracts or take any action that requires only people 18 years or older to do alone or on their own volition.
The emphasis of the law, as PRRD emphasized, is to put the burden on the parents’ shoulders to which I very much agree. And that is why early on in this piece, I said the very root of the problem is traced back to the parents, the negligent and irresponsible parents.
So then, why not reform the law and primarily legislate a Code of Parental Responsibility, for example, instead of contentiously harping on the ignorance and innocence of children below the majority age, inasmuch as we all are perhaps in agreement that the root of the problem lies not with the kids but with the parents?
Which is, that when a child below 18 years commits a crime or a misdemeanor, his/her parents will have to answer for the liability and the consequence.
If we put more emphasis on this angle of the law, I am certain children will become more disciplined, juvenile delinquency will be minimized and their education is more certain.
I hear senators and congressmen debating no end and they never seem to agree that the root of the issue is parental in nature.
I think they are not listening to PRRD say it so.
I hastened to mix into this piece Benito Mussolini’s quote: “Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy.”
Somehow if you look at how scandals, malicious mischiefs and controversies have polluted Philippine life – and how scared we are in taking the bull by its horns – you might be inclined to believe Mussolini.
The late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, the father of Singapore, has said it eloquently before: “The Philippines has too much democracy…” or something to this effect.
In the end, we have to painfully accept the fact that the law is indeed harsh, but it is the law, nevertheless. This dogma is a jurisprudence that citizens need to accept being the governed in an existing state. But social reforms are integral ingredients of a civilized society who must conform or else. (Email your feedback to fredlumba@yahoo.com.) Romans 8:1: “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus…” GOD BLESS THE PHILIPPINES!
