"The Commission on Human Rights should get its act together."
"The Commission on Human Rights should get its act together."
I just can’t imagine how the geniuses of the Commission on Human Rights can issue totally contradicting positions regarding one of its major advocacies—children’s rights.
Sometime last week, the CHR-National Capital Region issued a statement saying “children, like adults, have the right to join protests too, provided that the staging of rallies are lawful and peaceful.”
The CHR-NCR made the statement in reaction a photo which went viral in the social media showing a child “of tender years” with a placard in a protest action during President Rodrigo Duterte’s fourth State of the Nation Address last Monday.
The CHR-NCR said all persons, regardless of age, have the right to participate in public gatherings, rallies and demonstrations, “provided these are lawful and peaceful in character.”
Thr CHR-NCR stressed that children have the rights to expression, freedom of association and peaceful assembly. There is no law that prohibits them from participating from public gatherings or demonstrations, and as such they should be encouraged to express their thoughts and own opinions on various issues and matters of public concern.”
The only concern raised by CHR-NCR was protesters should ensure and prioritize the safety and security of children taking part in public demonstrations, and encouraged parents or guardians of minors to personally oversee their children.
Now, that was very clear. The CHR says children should be encouraged to express their thoughts and own opinions on various issues and matters of public concern. Hence, the CHR is acknowledging that children, even at very tender years just like the one shown in the viral photo (Anyway they have stated “all person regardless of age”), are already old enough to discern what is right or wrong, what is good and bad for them, that they are old enough to know their rights and fight for them.
However, it should be recalled that the CHR is at the forefront of the opposition to the lowering of the minimum age of criminal liability from 15 years old to nine years old.
And one of the major arguments raised in opposing the minimum age of criminal liability is that children are not yet in the position to discern what is right or wrong.
So, which is which? The children, regardless of their age, are old enough to know their rights and fight for them? Or are children aged nine to 14 are young enough to discern what is right and wrong?
To borrow Denzel Washington’s famous line in the movie Philadelphia: “Can the CHR explain this to me like I’m a six-year old?”
In a statement, the CHR even called on the government to stop using children as a cover-up in the inefficient implementation of the juvenile justice law.
According to CHR spokesperson lawyer Jacqueline de Guia, the government “must stop shifting the burden to children and start addressing lapses in the law’s implementation; providing better support and guidance to children; as well as stricter means to curb syndicates and individuals who feed on our children’s vulnerabilities,” adding that lowering the minimum age of criminal liability violates the government’s obligation to protect the rights of children.
So, is allowing children even toddlers to join protest actions part of the effort to protect the rights of children?
In last Friday’s news forum at the Nanka Japanese Latin Restaurant in Quezon City, the Minority Leader averred that while he is in favor of lowering the minimum age of criminal liability, their parents or guardians of the children should also be held responsible.
And that’s what the CHR should have made clear in its statement. Disregard the portion on the children supposedly knowing their rights and have the right to fight for them as it would abandon their position on the age of discernment. They should have just issued a stern warning, and not a reminder, to the parents or guardians of the children that they should be held responsible should any harm come in the children’s way during a protest action.
The CHR should get their act together and refrain from issuing totally contradicting positions. Their recent act betrays them. Either they are so stupid or they are just out to despise the administration.